Help desk
< September 27	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 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.

September 28[edit]

Reference quoting[edit]

Hi There,

I want to add a reference to a publishing or an article or newspaper article in my new page. But I don't have the web reference to it however I have a pdf version of it with me. What needs to be done in these cases? Can I still use that as a reference in the article? Can I create a web item using the pdf I have and quote it? Vamsy Alapati (talk) 01:26, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing a page does not generally involve quoting it. You would only need to provide enough information to look the source up in a library or archive, using {{cite news}} (we need the publication name, publication date, source title, source byline (i.e. who wrote it), and page(s) the source's on). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 01:30, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So I just have some softcopy of the item or scanned copy of an old publication in newspaper. What can I do to use that in the reference? Can I use the archive or such to create a web item and reference to that? If yes, Can you help me on how to do that? Vamsy Alapati (talk) 01:43, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I invite you to re-read what I just wrote. None of it involves what you're intending to do. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 01:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The source for a citation doesn't need to be currently available online as explained in WP:PUBLISHED as long as it's considered to be a reliable source, published and reasonably accessible and used in proper context. Being available online of course typically makes assessing source reliability and context much easier, but it's not required. So, if the soft copies you have are from an old newspaper that is considered to be a reliable source for which archived copies exist in some form (e.g. microfilm) that someone can go and check (even if they have to travel at their own expense to do so), then it can still possibly be cited as a source. If the soft copies that you possess are the only copies of the old paper in existence anywhere in the world and access is granted to only certain people determined by you (e.g. a private collection), then the source probably isn't OK for Wikipedia's purposes. In the case of old newspapers, there may be old archived versions found online via sites like Newspapers.com and you may have to pay to access the source, but that's still OK per WP:PAYWALL as long as the source is considered reliable for Wikipedia's purposes. Quoting a source often can be helpful when dealing with offline sources because it can aid in establish the context in which the source is used; you don't need to quote the entire source, but rather only the sentence which directly relates to why the source is being used. You don't need to do this, but you should be ready to clarify the source if querried about it by another user. I wouldn't recommended uploading your copies of the source to some website and then linking to that because there could be copyright related matters involved per WP:CONVENIENCE that are separate from whether the source is reliable in the first place. There could also be concerns raised as to whether your version is a true version or has been modified in some way. Finally, content is not automatically OK to add to articles just because it can be supported by a citation to a reliable source as explained in WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Often its encyclopedic relevance and weight need to be separately assessed even when reliably sourced; an extraordinary claim or some kind may be much easier to discuss and sort out when it can be readily assessed by viewing online sources, and some editors may be opposed to using offline sources in such situations unless the source itself is really quite extraordinary. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:09, 28 September 2022 (UTC); [Note: Posted edited by Marchjuly to add the missing "not" referred to below. -- 13:54, 28 September 2022 (UTC)][reply]

I think there's a "not" missing in your sentence Finally, content is automatically OK to add to articles..., Marchjuly. ColinFine (talk) 11:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there was. Thank you for catching that ColinFine. My apologies for any confusion the missing "not" may have caused anyone. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:54, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rosamund Pike[edit]

Rosamund Pike is originally born on January 27, 1979. 31.208.229.217 (talk) 09:11, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly. But we need a reliable source (see WP:V) before it can be added to the article. - X201 (talk) 09:18, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Was she also born at other times after that? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:55, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did a quick search but didn't find anything that looked original that sourced the date. If the date is wrong in one place, it's sometimes lazily copied to other crowdsourced sites and takes on a life of its own. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:06, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

According to Rosamund Pike § Notes reference [1] that is not her actual birthday, just her 'internet birthday'??? -- Verbarson ^talk_edits 08:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

According to Birth, Death and Marriage records, her birth was registered in the first quarter of 1979. Which brings in the possibility of "Internet birthday" being a double bluff. - X201 (talk) 10:05, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No. 31.208.229.217 (talk) 09:42, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Leeds School of Medicine[edit]

Ref number 1 is all wrong - please fix if able. Thank you 175.38.42.62 (talk) 11:16, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done Sungodtemple (talk) 12:18, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

can i merge accounts[edit]

i have 3 accounts ( intercity225, 2006toyotacorrola and northamptontown) and i want to merege them so i'm not accused of sockpuppeting is this possible 2006toyotacorrola (talk) 11:19, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, merging accounts is not possible. Tropicalkitty (talk) 11:20, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2006toyotacorrola To avoid accusations of sock puppetry, you may either abandon your other accounts and stick to your current one, or clearly identify the other accounts as yours on their user pages(and on your current user page identify the other accounts you have). 331dot (talk) 11:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

i've forgotten the passwords for the other two so i might do so 2006toyotacorrola (talk) 11:25, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are sandbox pages public?[edit]

Hi, I'm using my sandbox page to write a draft for a wiki page I might upload later, I just wanted to know if sandbox pages were public? - Reeealllkeyyss — Preceding undated comment added 21:56, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Reeealllkeyyss, yes, they are, though they're obviously less visible than other areas of Wikipedia. They are invisible to search engines by default. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:09, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reeealllkeyyss There are no completely private areas on Wikipedia, though some areas are harder to find than others. If you don't want anyone to see what you write, don't put it on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 22:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thank you! - Reeealllkeyyss — Preceding undated comment added 22:23, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reply with a bullet point to things like AfDs with Discussion Tools[edit]

I'd like to be able to reply to an afd with the reply in discussion tools. Is there a way to do this? Aaron Liu (talk) 22:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aaron Liu: as far as i know, you cannot. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみ, ping me when replying 03:49, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They're working on it. See T259865. It's a bit difficult from a technical perspective, unfortunately. Enterprisey (talk!) 05:36, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I had been contemplating filing a phab ticket for just this. Thanks Enterprisey for linking the phab ticket. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 06:02, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have included a proposal at the phab ticket, feel free to comment on it if you wish to. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 23:16, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]