Help desk
< January 30	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	February 1 >

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 31[edit]

Redirection[edit]

Hello, I have just created a page on Chrysostomos Dimitriou, who was, among other bishop positions, Archbishop of Zakynthos during WW2, and a page called "Chrysostomos of Zakynthos" exists, but redirects to "Rescue of the Jews of Zakynthos" . Can someone teach me how to have it forwarded to "Chrysostomos Dimitriou" instead? (Knowing that the article in question has a link to "Rescue of the Jews of Zakynthos" already) AgisdeSparte (talk) 00:02, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AgisdeSparte Click on Chrysostomos of Zakynthos, which opens Rescue of the Jews of Zakynthos

The article will say (Redirected from Chrysostomos of Zakynthos) at the top: click on that link.

You will then open the redirect and be able to edit it. TSventon (talk) 00:10, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ! @TSventon AgisdeSparte (talk) 00:11, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

provincial-level cities vs province-level cities[edit]

Hello, everyone. I am weak in English. For instance, List of provincial-level governors in South Korea and List of province-level administrative divisions of Vietnam with Hán-Nôm characters. Which is right? Thank you. Sawol (talk) 05:30, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sawol. English is my first language and provincial-level sounds best to me. That's what most online sources use, including UNESCO. Cullen328 (talk) 19:11, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright and drafts[edit]

I am not very good English speaker. I cannot copy paste content from sources. But also cannot change the meaning.

In what English, was I supposed to write from this source? The source says, eunuchs (Hijra (South Asia))extort money from train passengers.

https://indianexpress.com/article/india/over-73000-eunuchs-held-for-extorting-money-from-railway-passengers-in-past-4-years-5694645/

Then another editor TrangaBellam comes and says, I should be topic-banned for writing that line. I can see that there is lots of anger in what he/she wrote. And also moved another article which nobody else said should be drafted. I think targeting the second article was done to harass me. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics&diff=prev&oldid=1136514566

If my grammar is not perfect, then I did not prevent anybody to edit that articlres, and I have seen other editor's who tried to improve the article not threaten with anger.

I think drafts are places where, you can write, edit, modify before publishing articles. Does lines written in drafts, are taken so seriously? Rambo XTerminator (talk) 07:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Draft:Extortion by eunuchs in India Maproom (talk) 08:20, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's currently the opening sentence of the draft, and it surprised me when I first read the draft (and before I read that comment about it). I'd never encountered the word hijra until a few minutes ago, and of course Wikipedia is not a reliable source, but the article Hijra (South Asia) says that hijra "are eunuchs, intersex people, or transgender people who live in communities that follow a kinship system known as guru-chela system". It does not say that they are extortionists. Meanwhile (and perhaps just because you made a slip in English), the draft says that they are extortionists. Are they all (or even mostly) extortionists? If you want to say this, you're going to have to present very compelling evidence for doing so. I'll err on the side of caution, assume that most are not extortionists, and make an interim edit accordingly. -- Hoary (talk) 09:26, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Rambo XTerminator: It is extremely easy to patch together multiple news stories about group X and make it seem that X is a badly-behaving group - here is a well-written essay that makes the point by writing a well-sourced scare story about cardiologists. That sort of writing, where the writer takes individual sources to patch together a narrative that none of the sources make (the most glaring example is the section "deaths") is known on Wikipedia as synthesis and is not allowed. You need a reliable source that would specifically link hijras to organized crime (if I had to guess, it is likely to be some group of hijras in some area of India rather than a subcontinent-wide issue).

Another issue is that the draft mixes many different things:

incidents of aggressive panhandling on the Indian railways (and that itself may be a rather mixed bag going from "someone asked for money loud enough that I could not read a book" to "he pulled a knife on me")
an organized protection racket in Bathinda, by hijras
another protection racket in Hyderabad, against hijras
protests by "real hijras" against "fake hijras" (which is not extortion by any reasonable definition of the term)

Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 13:26, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Very dubious reference, with pseudoscience in first sentence[edit]

I'm very concerned by this, but I don't want to just delete the sentence. Proper steps to take?

Have a look at reference no. 14 from the Desalination article. From the outset it has a grammar mistake in the body, and it's hosted on MDPI, a controversial publisher.

But click through and read the abstract and keywords. Barely in the first sentence we get a reference to an unscientific concept. Then reading the article, it turns out the claim laid in the reference, is entirely about this nonexistent substance (see figure 1). At least the organization running the conference it's in the proceedings of appears to exist. 177.226.224.215 (talk) 09:17, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Looks like woo. Or at minimum, a single primary source being cited for an extremely dubious claim. I've removed the paragraph. AndyTheGrump (talk) 09:30, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Grr, Andy beat me to it whilst I was checking it out! Total agreement. Thanks for bringing this to our attention "177.226.224.215", have you ever thought of setting up an account? WP needs good constructive editors. Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:43, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! And yes, I do some edits now and then, and every time I do I remember I should make a proper account. 177.226.224.215 (talk) 10:05, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Account made! Again thanks for the help and I'll be back here if I need any more assistance NotAnAstronaut (talk) 10:12, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome! And you're always free to ask if you need help, thanks for your contributions thusfar! BhamBoi (talk) 17:56, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian Wikipedia[edit]

Added section header Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:53, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[[کس ]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.114.77.70 (talk) 11:47, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the Hungarian Wikipedia, 2-3 administrators are systematically suppressing and deleting articles about the Hungarian Libertarian Party (https://www.facebook.com/lahetvenot), ignoring objectivity and doing so solely based on personal offense and/or the media's circulating prejudices. Despite the party having Facebook pages with 11,000 and 20,000 followers (https://www.facebook.com/uzletnyitas) and videos that are viewed by many people. They held two protests, one of which was reported by numerous media outlets on January 31, 2021, and the organizers received hefty fines. A video of their other protest, held on August 20, 2022, was watched by more than 1 million people, and one of the party's leaders, Szilárd Ecsenyi, was also fined. His twin brother, the party's founder, Áron Ecsenyi, has been a topic of the media several times, had a public debate with public figures, and currently has 11,000 followers on TikTok. Although the Hungarian Wikipedia claims to have no central leadership, it is openly known that no one dared to disagree with Peter Gervai, even though it was revealed several times that he had no idea about libertarianism and considered the party a joke because of its name, and he is not charged with political impartiality, which has been revealed in several debates on the so-called tavern wall, where one can beg to restore an article if he feels like it. The reality is that if he deletes something, nobody dares to restore it or question his authority. That is why I see the only solution to report this to the American side, that political impartiality is not met in Hungary at all. Peter Gervai has permanently banned all Wikipedia editors who had anything to do with the constant restoration of the party's article over the past 2 years, obviously doing so in the heat of the battle, and he no longer maintains the appearance of objectivity, and he cites that many people insulted his personality during the already poisoned debate. If this is true, it should not have anything to do with an encyclopedia dedicating an article to a clearly notable party or not. Please take this matter into consideration and take appropriate action.

Ecsenyi Szilárd (talk) 12:12, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We at the English Wikipedia cannot take action regarding the Hungarian Wikipedia. Any complaints you have should be made there. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:24, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When Wikipedia was started, the American founders invited the first non-American admins. Since I have exhausted all legal remedies in Hungary, and Péter Gervai literally banned me and my party members from the Hungarian Wikipedia, I would see it as expedient for his American colleagues to make a scandal. That alone would convince the local petty king that his behavior reflects very poorly on the encyclopedia's reputation. Ecsenyi Szilárd (talk) 15:43, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ecsenyi Szilárd: Each language Wikipedia is a separate and independent project of the Wikimedia foundation (WMF). You can attempt to contact WMF about this: WMF is not the English Wikipedia. We volunteers here at en.Wikipedia have no say in how our sister projects operate. We at the help desk have no charter and no interest in off-wiki issues: we are here to help you and others use and edit the English Wikipedia. -Arch dude (talk) 15:55, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ecsenyi Szilárd: the next place up the chain of command if you have a complaint about a specific admin that is not being dealt with by the normal dispute resolution process on your local Wikipedia is to contact your local Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee, which I believe is This at hu.wikipedia. As noted, literally no one at English Wikipedia can help you; every individual language Wikipedia runs its own affairs. If you have greater concerns that are not being addressed at your language Wikipedia, and after you have tried resolution via your local ArbCom, the next option is to contact the WMF directly; though they tend to take a hands-off approach towards meddling in the local affairs of each Wikipedia. --Jayron 32 17:48, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help Ecsenyi Szilárd (talk) 09:52, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Layout ...[edit]

I'm a HUGE Wikipedia fan ... and one of these days when I am able I promise to make a nice contribution to help keep you going. My first and only comment is that I like the new layout. I believe a nice addition to it would be to have your logo at the conclusion of the articles (or somewhere) with a link back to the homepage. It's an unnecessary scroll back to the copy and yet another click to get back there now when one if finished reading the article. Anywho ... great job. My name is Lee Cooke. Thanks for listening ... 2600:6C5E:2900:576:1559:462A:EB9E:7606 (talk) 16:15, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment. On my PC, the article contents are now in a "sticky" column on the left of the browser window and there is always a "Top" link in view. So clicking that jumps right up to the top of the article, only one more click away from the Mainpage (and bringing other useful menu links into view). I guess you are using a mobile view, so the menus will be different. You can make suggestions at WP:Village pump (proposals) Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:33, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editing O.R. Melling Page (mine)[edit]

Tried to register under O.R. Melling, my more known pen-name, but was unable. Registered with new pen-name I will be using for my entry into literary non-fiction. I've read online it's against Wiki etiquette to edit your own page. Mine has been up since B.C.E. & is slim pickings. I managed at least to add new publications some years ago. The more famous writers I know, whose entire lives are on their pages, simply paid someone to do it. Sad tale: I'm an aging writer & artist living on an old folk's pension. I can't afford to hire any of the Wiki edit services offered online. Ah, it's an unfair world. (And I contribute €20 to Wiki every year since I use it a lot.) I would, of course, provide media & online citations to prove what I would like to add. Would appreciate any advice from you young ones. Val Decraney aka O.R. Melling www.ormelling.com Val Decraney (talk) 17:48, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: O. R. Melling - 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:56, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Val, and welcome. First, please, please, please don't pay any money to anybody to edit Wikipedia. If they are honest, they will tell you that they must declare their status as a paid contributor, and that they cannot guarantee any particular result for you. (If the people that other writers hired did not declare their status, then they were violating Wikipedia's terms of use).

I suggest you read WP:AUTOPROB. Then you can make edit requests on the talk page Talk:O. R. Melling, preferably with citation to sources that are independent of you. Remember that a Wikipedia page about you should be based on what other people, wholly unconnected with you, have published about you in reliable sources - something that the article currently lacks entirely. If you have some such sources - reviews of your work, published in reliable places, or studies in books from reputable publishers (especially if these contain anything about you as opposed to your work) this will assist editors in improving the article from its current dire state. What the article should not be is promotional in any way. ColinFine (talk) 18:01, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the real professional writers I know don't come anywhere near the "services" who claim to make the articles about them more to their liking, because they know that most of those operations are either merely shady or actively in violation of our Terms and Conditions. Chip Delany doesn't pay anybody to update the article about him; nor do Jodi Piccoult or James Patterson or Noam Chomsky. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:20, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Val Decraney: As a separate issue, please do not feel obligated to donate to Wikipedia (actually, to WMF) even though you use it a lot. We have lots and lots of money and do not need a piece of your pension. What we do need and that you may wish to contribute is some expertise and some time. Pick articles in areas you know about and improve them (include references), or (since you are a writer) pick articles that are in need of copyediting. -Arch dude (talk) 18:34, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Val Decraney: The account User:O.R. Melling was created 1 April 2018. If it's you then the old password will still work but you cannot get a new password because the account has not stored an email address. The account has no edits so you can probably usurp if with a request. See Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations. If you are fine with your current username then just keep it. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

THANK YOU EVERYONE for your replies and advice. I hope you don't mind that I'm responding this way rather than individually. As recommended, I will collect what I wish to have posted and provide sources, citations etc for same. Meanwhile I'm honestly happy to contribute a small amount to wiki annually in gratitude for such a major free resource tool that doesn't inflict me with ads (unlike the otherwise brilliant Trecanni.it et al). It's also easier for me than contributing time which I seem to have less and less of these days. Not ready to retire yet! Best wishes to all. I'll be back with a load of data in coming days. PS But am I jinxed? Wiki login refusing both my password & now temporary password sent for reset. So this can only be posted via IP address Val aka O.R. 109.78.16.41 (talk) 14:36, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is accounting[edit]

What is accounting — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.140.0.40 (talk) 22:36, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See accounting. -Arch dude (talk) 22:44, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]