Help desk
< April 5	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 7 >

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.

April 6

Adding an adjective to a talk page post after posting

Could anyone please tell me if it would be more appropriate to add a strikethrough over the noun, then write the adjective and noun? I did a lot of this earlier today in conversation with TSventon when I was adding new sentences (but not new adjectives). I just added an adjective to a post I made on a talk page without a strikethrough, and I feel hypocritical about it, which inspired me to post this here.--Thylacine24 (talk) 00:40, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Thylacine24: If no one had yet responded, there is no need for strikeout. If someone else did respond, then you should add the strikeout and/or underline to indicate what was deleted or added. See the guidance at Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Editing_own_comments RudolfRed (talk) 01:07, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@RudolfRed: I know, and thanks for adding a link to that page, which I both forgot and was too lazy to do. I just posted this here because I felt guilty.--Thylacine24 (talk) 01:21, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Area J Elementary School (ARJES)

Is this related to a Wikipedia article, and if so, which one? What help do you want, Clejanajr? -- Hoary (talk) 12:12, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Good Day! I saw the above message, but I don't know how to reply to it. Anyway, the above subject is a new article. I want to open a new Wikipedia article. How will I be able to do that? Thank you and best regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clejanajr (talk • contribs) 08:10, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is advice at Wikipedia:Your first article. I will add some further useful advice links to your user talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:20, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note, Clejanajr, the notability requirements for a school. "Notability" in English-language Wikipedia is very different from "notability" as generally understood. Only a tiny percentage of elementary schools are "notable" in Wikipedia's terms. (The one I went to was/is non-notable.) First check that this school you hope to write about meets one of the criteria for "notability"; and only if it does, consider creating an article about it. -- Hoary (talk) 09:37, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There was a similar mystifying contribution to the Helpdesk the other day, now archived at WP:Help_desk/Archives/2021_March_28#Area_J_Elementary_School_(ARJES). Is Clejanajr trying to use the Helpdesk to advertise the place, hoping search engines will pick it up, or are they planning an article? The latter seems unlikely since these two edits are the only ones the account has made. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:16, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the help! I'll try to read all the guidelines and try to comply. We actually would like to create a new article about the subject. Thanks again for the guidance! Best regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clejanajr (talk • contribs) 07:06, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clejanajr, I'm intrigued by the "we" in your "we actually would like to...". Are you perhaps planning to write this on behalf of the school? -- Hoary (talk) 07:45, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"We" because I am trying to form a team to help with the article since I'm not a writer myself. This is actually a voluntary effort, to make a factual article about ARJES, one of the public schools in the Philippines to which I am an alumnus, and thus, not writing on behalf of the school. Thank you and best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clejanajr (talk • contribs) 07:52, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Convert inch by inch to cm

Is there a way to make the 3.5 by 3.5 inches (8.9 cm × 8.9 cm) template show instead 3.5 inch by 3.5 inch (8.9 cm × 8.9 cm) because I believe inch would be better grammar for a future edit I would like to do. Can you give me the modified template - thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:47, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Area units are really square inches and square centimetres etc. The current template suggests {{convert|12.25|sqin|cm2}}, which gives 12.25 square inches (79.0 cm²). If you need to specify the 3.5 by 3.5 you are multiplying together you may just need to stick with the full text you used in your question. Other experts may have better ideas than me! Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:06, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In my case the object in mind is NOT square, but has two sides only that are 3.5 inches. So, that's why I am looking for a Convert Template that will say - 3.5 inch by 3.5 inch (8.9 cm × 8.9 cm) - thanks!--Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:22, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So write this: {{Convert|3.5|x|3.5|in|cm|abbr=out|adj=on}} → 3.5-by-3.5-inch (8.9 cm × 8.9 cm)

Not exactly what you want but at least the unit is singular. Editors at Template talk:Convert might have a better suggestion.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:16, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Trappist the monk: I do believe you have solved my problem. I can use that which you gave me. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:49, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Trappist the monk: is there any way to lose that first "cm" in the converted figure? Mjroots (talk) 08:00, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. Best to ask at Template talk:Convert.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:03, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion

Dear Wikipedia, please help me I have an assessment and my teacher is gonna receive it tomorrow and am truly trusting you to help me . So this is my question, A description of a kind of person that would enjoy being make up artist(10 examples) please the whole assessment is 50 marks and am struggling understanding it HELP! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.115.41.255 (talk) 12:43, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do your own homework.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misinterpretation, but it is our aim here not to do people's homework for them, but to merely aid them in doing it themselves. Letting someone else do your homework does not help you learn nearly as much as doing it yourself. Please attempt to solve the problem or answer the question yourself first. If you need help with a specific part of your homework, feel free to tell us where you are stuck and ask for help. If you need help grasping the concept of a problem, by all means let us know. Chaheel Riens (talk) 12:46, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Make-up artists may help...GrahamHardy (talk) 12:55, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re-submission of Central Boiler Wikipedia Article

Hello, In February 2019, our Wikipedia page/article was deleted (here was the URL:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Boiler). This deletion was approved by a then admin Ad Orientem (who looks to have retired in November 2020). We are hoping to do a resubmission. What are the next steps in doing this?

Central84 (talk) 13:21, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Central84 It is not "your Wikipedia page", it was a Wikipedia article about your company. As the article was deleted per the results of a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Central Boiler, you must first address the reasons for the deletion. Any article about your company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Staff interviews, press releases, announcements of routine business activities, brief mentions, and other primary sources do not establish notability.

You will need to change your username immediately. Please see your user talk page for important information on how to do so, as well as other policies you must comply with. 331dot (talk) 13:28, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Five

Hi,

I'd like to report problems on the page The Five (talk show).

Thanks.

I took a first pass at fixing the info box. It is showing correctly now, but may need some additional work. RudolfRed (talk) 15:27, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UN Member States lists Mohammad Ajam

I was just looking at the list of UN Member States: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Member_states_of_the_United_Nations

It lists Mohammad Ajam as a Member State. But that's a person, not a state.

I'd like to fix this, but it's a category page and I don't see how edits work on a category page.

Can someone with more editing expertise look into this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erikamit (talk • contribs) 15:21, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The category pages are auto-populated from the tags put on individual pages. I just removed a bunch of wrong categories on the Mohammad Ajam page (which has other issues as well; the chronology does not make any sense, I wonder whether that is not a hoax page to be honest). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:37, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Erikamit Fixed [1] by Tigraan. Categories are removed from articles, not category-pages. Happy editing! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:38, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cannot edit user talk pages?

I can't seem to be able to edit user talk pages anymore? Partway through page load all the text is deleted so the edit box is completely empty, which means if I try to publish anything I'll be deleting other people's messages. Any ideas as to what could be causing this? Thattransgirl (talk) 15:27, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, it suddenly started working again? Maybe this was a wikipedia bug Thattransgirl (talk) 15:34, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thattransgirl Someone broke the tool that converts dates to local time, and has now fixed it again. Anyone interested, more details are at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Editing a talk page blanks the entire discussion. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:42, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph2302 ah, thank you!! Thattransgirl (talk) 15:54, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Search recent changes by edit summary?

Is it possible to search through recent changes by keywords in the edit summary to find certain types of edits? Thanks! Thattransgirl (talk) 19:54, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Thattransgirl: What types of edits are you looking for? Some are tagged and can be filtered by using the tag name as criteria. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:14, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CTRL + F works looking for certain words when checking article histories etc. Mjroots (talk) 08:03, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You could request a Quarry query, or write it yourself if you know SQL (hint: join recentchanges to comment). Certes (talk) 12:16, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Certes! I know SQL so quarry looks incredibly useful! Thattransgirl (talk) 14:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How does Wikipedia review my article?

Hello,

I finished writing my article and I have a few questions.

How do I get my article reviewed by Wikipedia?

How long does it take?

When do you know if it was excepted or not?

Thanks for your help!

Mike— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mshinas (talk • contribs)

Mshinas I assume this is about the content you wrote on User:Mshinas, which is your userpage, and not an appropriate place for draft articles. Your userpage is a space to tell other people a little bit about yourself in the context of your Wikipedia activities. Draft articles should either be in draft space or your sandbox. If you would like, I can move the text on your userpage to draft space. Regarding getting your draft article submitted; I have added a box to the top of the draft. Once you are ready to have it reviewed, click the button that says, "Submit the draft for review!". It will then join a long list of articles awaiting review. It may take quite some time (think months) before someone reviews it. You will know if it is accepted or not because they will leave a note on your talk page (where I have just left a welcome message with useful links). I doubt it will be accepted in the state it is currently in however; the material seems technical, and Wikipedia is written for a general audience. You also only cite two sources, which appear to be primary research papers, rather than review articles (see here). So the sourcing needs work as well as the style. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 21:14, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I just noticed your username bears a striking resemblance to the name of the author of the papers cited. Please review our policy on conflicts of interest and original research. In short, it is a bad idea to try to write about your own research on Wikipedia for several reasons. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 21:19, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mshinas: besides the issues noted by ONUnicorn above, I think there could be a useful article entitled Time Of Arrival Diagnostic. You’ll want to add application info, such as is found in this introduction.[[2]] I read Your article draft and didn’t understand the significance. And by including the research of others, you’ll demonstrate that it’s a more commonly used term than just in your papers. It will take a little longer, but you’ll want to follow the Wikipedia:Article wizard TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:11, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Entry for Power Line blog

Why is the purveyor of the Wikipedia page for the "Power Line" blog allowed to perpetrate a continuing fraud? Power Line is not a "conservative" site; it is a far right, often fascistic and white supremacist and radical domestic terrorist insurrection supporting site. Its contributors might have impressive pedigrees, but they are deeply steeped in the farthest right wing fringes of American politics, and peddle dangerous conspiracy theories (about the COVID pandemic, elections, Democrats, elected officials, judges that rule against Trump, etc.) that would be just as welcome on Info Wars. The fact that John Hinderaker, Scott Johnson, Paul Mirengoff and Steven Hayward are so well connected to the Republican Party apparatus, the Koch Brothers 9from whom they receive content) and hard right "think tanks' should not be a license for them to lie to the public about what thay are.

Read their posts and the comments of their "Top Commenters" over a given day, and I defy you to disagree with me. I've been reading the blog for years, but every time I edit the Wiki page to make it truthful -- not more truthful, truthful -- its creator blocks the edits from taking effect. And he/she gets support from Wikipedia to do it.

Wikipedia should not be a vehicle for propaganda and self-promotion.

John S. Birke Attorney at Law Woodland Hills, California — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8000:2500:380F:81DB:7572:950C:DC5 (talk) 21:01, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link:Power Line

Thank you for your comment. First of all, might I suggest registering for an account? That would make it easier to communicate with you. You say you have tried to edit the page to make it truthful, however this helpdesk post is the only edit ever made from your IP address. IP addresses change frequently, so I can't tell which edits to the article are yours and which are not. I do notice this edit by an IP which was reverted by User:ClueBot NG, an automated computer program built to find and revert vandalism. If that was your edit, it was reverted because it looks like vandalism. It removes all sources from the article, and uses very non-neutral language to describe living people in a way that does not comply with policy (I linked the applicable policies - they are the blue text in my comment). All information in Wikipedia must be verifiable - attributed to reliable sources. If there are news articles or sources that describe the blog as "a white supremacist, radical right wing extremist" blog, they need to be cited in the article in order for us to describe it as such. If there are no sources describing it in those terms, we cannot use those terms to describe it. As a lawyer, I'm sure you are familiar with the concept of libel, and can understand why we cannot describe it as such in Wikivoice without strong sourcing. You are more than welcome to edit the page to make it truthful, so long as you cite reliable sources and try to maintain a neutral point of view. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 21:32, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can also share your concerns and comments on the article's talk page, Talk:Power Line, and collaborate with other interested editors to improve the article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:40, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Remove image from a page

Hi Everyone, im new and still finding m feet ! I posted a few photograohs on a Musicians page, however he has told me he doesnt like them. I was able to remove the main one in the top right side box but the other two iv not been able to remove. Can someone tell me how to remove them please?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gary Hodge (talk • contribs)

Gary Hodge Is this about Mike Walker (jazz guitarist)? I see you use the visual editor, I'm not sure how to remove the photos using that, so I'll give you instructions for the source editor - which sounds intimidating, but isn't bad. Click on "Edit source", then look for text that starts with "[[File:". Remove everything from that to the closing brackets (]]). Save the edit. That will remove the photo. If you prefer, I'll do it for you if you confirm which article. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 21:57, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ONUnicorn, where is the edit source button please? I can only see an edit tab .

Hello, Gary Hodge. Please note that Wikipedia's article about Mike Walker does not belong to Walker, and is for Wikipedia's benefit, not for his. While adding and removing photos is probably uncontroversial, (and adding free pictures to an article about a person is generally a good thing for Wikipedia), he should not be editing that article directly, and nor should you since you appear to know him; but should instead make edit requests on the article's talk page, so that uninvolved editors can decide whether the requested change is appropriate within Wikipedia's policies. Please read WP:PSCOI. --ColinFine (talk) 22:40, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gary Hodge: I suggest you don't remove all the images unless you have a better image to use in the article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gary Hodge: If you took those pictures yourself, you own the copyright. When you uploaded them, you licensed them to us irrevocably. You have no control over how we use them and no more authority to delete them from our repository than does any other editor. You also have no more authority than any other editor to remove them from the article. The subject of the article also has no particular rights or control with respect to the article. It's not his article, and it's not your article. It's Wikipedia's article. As it happens, we do try to consider and accommodate the wishes of the subject within reason (see WP:BLP) so all this "authority" and "control" stuff is not as absolute as it sounds, but it's very real. -Arch dude (talk) 04:44, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gary Hodge: Pictures of living people are very important enhancements to articles, but copyright law can make it quite hard to get them. We cannot simply copy a publicity shot, because those are copyrighted. If the subject (Mr. Walker) can provide us with a better picture that he owns the copyright to, or if the photographer can provide such a picture, and jump through all the hoops of granting permission as they upload the picture to Commons, then we can replace your picture. -Arch dude (talk) 04:53, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

From Draft to Permenant

I am fairly new to editing. I created a draft and got some great feedback from the editors. I incorporated all those recommendations and suggestions into the latest draft. But I am not sure what happens to the draft or how an editor knows to look at it and move it to permanent if OK. Can someone advise.

Thank you, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Harold_Lloyd_Schwartz Ringsidemd1961 (talk) 21:16, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ringsidemd1961 It looks like Draft:Harold Lloyd Schwartz is awaiting a new review. I see you removed the previous review; please don't do that. It's helpful for new reviewers to see the history of prior reviews. I have restored the prior review.~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 22:02, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]