Help desk
< May 22	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 24 >

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.

May 23[edit]

Categories for navigation boxes such as "Template:Utah Tech University"?[edit]

Should navigation boxes such as Template:Utah Tech University have categories such as Category:Dixie State University that are not a category full of templates? On a side note, I am trying to use refill to fix Death of Chad Oulson, but I get the message saying "Pending Waiting for an available worker". Please {{ping}} me when you respond. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:04, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jax 0677: May I move your query under the "May 23" heading? Thank you. NotReallySoroka (talk) 05:01, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reply -@NotReallySoroka:, yes. --Jax 0677 (talk) 11:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Moved. --NotReallySoroka (talk) 20:12, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To answer the question, no. See WP:CAT#T. Izno (talk) 23:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pizza Express[edit]

The English Wikipedia was sorely missing an article about pizzerias, so I translated the Finnish article. The Finnish article says that one well-known pizza chain is Pizza Express. Now the Finnish article links to fi:Pizza Express, a Finnish pizzeria chain, while the English article Pizza Express is about an unrelated British pizzeria chain. However, as both are well-known pizzeria chains, I figure it doesn't matter that they are not actually the same pizzeria chain? JIP | Talk 01:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@JIP: Translated articles don't have to follow the original article and it's sometimes best to avoid it. Pizza Express redirects to PizzaExpress. Use the article title if you want to include that chain. Pizzeria claims "Famous pizzeria chains include ..." I think all Finnish pizzeria chains should be removed unless they have somehow become famous in other countries. Finland only has 5.5 million people and isn't known for pizza. Category:Pizza chains by country has plenty of others to choose from. Large American/multinational chains are probably best known. I would at least list the three with own subcategories in Category:Pizza chains of the United States. Page views can be a crude estimator of fame. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:54, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would also be cautious about using the word "famous". See WP:FAME. Use "notable" or "popular" if that's what they are, which is more objective. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:03, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How to change the invalid external link in one of the references for this page Daniel_Hillel ?[edit]

Courtesy link: Daniel Hillel

Hi, I would like to change the invalid external link in one of the references -> from https://doi.org/10.1142%2Fnews20210322.282560 to https://www.worldscientific.com/do/10.1142/news20210322.282560/full/. Please kindly advise me on how to amend that. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikewspc (talk • contribs) 02:05, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mikewspc I made the minor change, which just involved removing the broken DOI and leaving the working URL. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:43, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hi Mikewspc. Is there a reason the url needs to be changed? The doi.org link appears to be a WP:DEADREF, but it's not always necessary to remove or replace a reference just because it's no longer accessible. If the two links lead to the same identical source, then it would make sense to replace the one that's no longer working; if not, then perhaps you should add the worldscientific source as a separate citation. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:48, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikewspc: Another editor fixed the problem and if you'd like to see what they did, just look at the WP:DIFF for their edit in the page's history. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:52, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for a bot, tool, or script for converting Twitter citations to Cite tweet[edit]

Is there any bot, tool, or user script with such feature? --Mann Mann (talk) 03:36, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:TweetCiteBot, operated by User:TheSandDoctor does this in theory, but it hasn't run since February. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery: Thanks for the reminder. I was getting datasets from BrownHairedGirl to run, but haven't gotten any recently. With everything going on in my life off-wiki lately, this sort of slipped my radar...apologies. Do you have any datasets, BHG? --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 05:27, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops! Sorry, @TheSandDoctor. It slipped off my radar too.

My set of scans of the database dumps expanded so much that the whole set takes over a day to run, and I kept on meaning to get around to the tweets, but didn't.

Facepalm

I have just run the Twitter-ref scans on the latest 20220520 database dump, and have email them to you a few seconds ago.

For future reference, this insource search finds most of them (currently over 1,200). However, the full search times out, and this slightly-simplified version misses some. However, this supplementary search gets most of the rest.

Hope this helps. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:22, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"The" and stadiums[edit]

Should stadiums be prefixed with the word "the" on Wikipedia? For example:

The Kaufmann Stadium is the home of the Kansas City Royals…
Kauffman Stadium is the home of the Kansas City Royals…

Thank you, NotReallySoroka (talk) 03:44, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It depends. In Britain, Wembley Stadium is always referred to as Wembley Stadium or Wembley, not "The Wembley Stadium". The Millennium Stadium in Cardiff does have "the" in front of it. It's best to look at how RS describe the stadium to get a feel for the correct version.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:22, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. NotReallySoroka (talk) 06:42, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Empty thumbnail[edit]

How to use invisible thumbnail image in article which means when I searching index on Wikipedia, there are images appeared within the article because they are put in the lede section. Thumbnail like this emblem in Foreign relations of Ethiopia does not exist in the page. I want to implement the emblem to the article Ethiopia under federal republic. The Supermind (talk) 06:19, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@The Supermind: You apparently refer to searches in the mobile version of Wikipedia. The page image is shown there, an image picked by mw:Extension:PageImages. A page image must be displayed in the lede and not tiny so you cannot effectively hide it in the article by making it tiny. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:00, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand correctly, you are asking how File:Emblem of Ethiopia.svg shows up in the article Foreign relations of Ethiopia without being added directly to the article. The Emblem of Ethiopia is part of {{Politics of Ethiopia}}, which is the little box that appears at the top of most articles related to politics in Ethiopia, including Government of Ethiopia, Federal Parliamentary Assembly, Elections in Ethiopia, and more. The image is part of that template, and the template is transcluded in each of those articles. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 14:34, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RSN (lack of) feedback[edit]

Hello, I tried opening a discussion on the reliable sources noticeboard twice for Thomas de Waal [1][2], but on both occasions there were no replies and the discussions were archived without anyone commenting. What could the next course of action be to assure somebody will review the concerns? ZaniGiovanni (talk) 10:06, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ZaniGiovanni. Just from looking at what you've posted at RSN, I'm going to guess the probably one of the reasons you didn't get any replies had to do with WP:WALLOFTEXT. Your posts were so dense and filled with information that it would've probably taken quite a bit of effort to just read through them, yet alone try to assess them. Try to remember that all editors are WP:VOLUNTEERs which means that many respond to things they're interested in or that they think they can help resolve, and they may avoid things that look as if they're going to take lots of time and effort to figure out.

Perhaps if you try reposting once more but only this time keeping things much simpler, you might get some responses. Try to provide some specific examples from Wikipedia articles where this person is being cited as a reliable source and why you think that's problematic. Try not resolve so many issues in a single post, but just pick the one example which best represents why this person shouldn't be considered a reliable source without all of the extra interpretation or commentary. Once the discussion gets started, you can then start to go into more detail as needed.

Please understand, though, that all sources are WP:BIASED to some degree and a source isn't necessarily not reliable just because it presents or represents a viewpoint that you may not agree with. As long as the source isn't WP:UNDUE (i.e. given more weight than other equally reliable sources), then it might be acceptable for Wikipedia's purposes.

I'm posting this after only briefly scanning over your two RSN posts because I'm simply not familiar enough with the subject matter to make a good assessment. You can also seek input from the members of relevant WikiProjects (e.g. WP:ARMENIA or WP:AZERBAIJAN) to see if others might be aware of this person and be able to help assess his reliablity as a source. Once you start a discussion at RSN, use the template {{Please see}} to let the members of those two WikiProjects know about the discussion. Just make sure that by doing so, you don't fun afoul of WP:CANVAS. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:34, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for posting my own WALLOFTEXT above, but hopefully you'll understand what I'm trying to suggest. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Marchjuly No worries, thanks for your comment. I'll work on a shorter RSN thread. Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 12:23, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly How meta! It gave me a chuckle. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 02:48, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image help?[edit]

Template:Unsigned -->— Preceding unsigned comment added by MDmulwa (talk • contribs) 11:57, 23 May 2022 (UTC) Please, help me on how to fix images on my Wikipedia articles.[reply]

@MDmulwa What sort of help do you need with images? I've taken a look at your edits to your userpage and your sandbox, and I don't see where you have tried to add images. Perhaps looking at Help:image tutorial will help? ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 14:25, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please help with changing DOB[edit]

Is anyone able to help me change Connor Evans date of birth? It keeps on changing back to 24th January 2001.

He was born 24th January 2002.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connor_Evans

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Treehouse1234 (talk • contribs) 14:13, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reliable source that his birth year is 2002? This clearly lists his birth date as 2001. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping: Treehouse1234 —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:27, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I am his mother and I gave birth to him on the 24th January 2002. I have his birth certificate but not sure how to upload it. Treehouse1234 (talk) 17:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a bit of a poser, Treehouse1234. To be a little technical, Wikipedia (like many other encyclopedias) is a Tertiary source based mostly on published, independent, well-edited Secondary sources. It prefers not to rely on Primary sources (of which a birth certificate is a classic example) unless they've been checked and their relevant details published by a Reliable Secondary source, and does not accept uploads of copied original documents, because such things are easily faked online and some mischievous actors do so. For this reason, a Birth certificate would (bizzarely) not be acceptable.

Where articles about living persons are involved, Wikipedia has particularly strict rules governing what can be included and what rules must be followed, in order to protect those subjects and their families, etc. (see WP:BLP). Bear in mind that as of now, Wikipedia has no proof that you are who you say you are (though I am not actually doubting it). If the current, referenced date is disputed (and it is, by you), and cannot be contradicted by one or more "better", published sources, it would be preferable to remove it until such sources are available.

Tedious though it may seem, your ultimately best option would be to persuade the currently-used source to correct itself (thus obviating future disputes) and/or to get the correct date published in a (more) Reliable source as described above. However, if you can find some already-published (Reliable) sources (such as newspaper articles) that corroborate your date, and can link to or give bibliographical details of them in the Talk page of the article so that others can check them and make the correction (you should really not be editing the article yourself, as you have an obvious Conflict of interest), someone will doubtless do so.

I'm sorry if this seems annoyingly bureaucratic, but Wikipedia's rules in this regard are designed to protect subjects from misrepresentation. Incidentally, I'm a Rugby fan in the UK, and I look forward to seeing Connor play in future competitions :-). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.235.54 (talk) 19:16, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining the process to me.I now understand and will 102.65.63.196 (talk) 07:18, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

do as suggested Treehouse1234 (talk) 07:21, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism help request from SarahTHunter[edit]

I have noticed some vandalism at Anderson High School, Lerwick. Namely, this page has been repeatedly vandalised due to "controversies" section being uploaded again and again, this is the third time that I've had to take this down and I'd like to request for semi-protection to prevent this happening again. Would an editor please assist me with fixing it? Thank you, SarahTHunter (talk) 15:53, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On the surface they look like good factual references to a crime that happened at the school. It's not vandalism to add that information. Wikipedia is not here to manage the school's reputation as you seem to imply on the talk page. - X201 (talk) 16:05, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I understand but the problem is that it gives the school a really bad reputation and I've been made aware of this section by a close friend who works in this school. I've been a pupil at this school too and having this plastered about my old high school is disgusting. SarahTHunter (talk) 17:34, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SarahTHunter: Wikipedia articles do not intentionally lionise or demonise their subjects. An article isn't always a good thing, and Wikipedia is not censored. If something is notable via reports from reliable secondary sources, it can be added onto the page and is difficult to take off. If you want to argue for its removal you might want to study some of Wikipedia's guidelines and policies like WP:BLP and WP:DUE and see if those are applicable to the situation. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:21, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SarahTHunter As you say, that info certainly might detract from the school's reputation. But, to be blunt, that's just too bad. Negative, factual information can appear in an article, and you cannot force the info out, no matter how much you would like to. You keep saying the info is detrimental; we know that. It won't be removed just because it's detrimental. Hope this clarifies things a bit. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 03:00, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Please see WP:NOTVAND. That's not vandalism. While there may be other issues with including such information, such as WP:UNDUE, I see no evidence that the information you removed is vandalism. It looks like you object to including that information, which is your right per WP:BRD, but the fact that you want it removed doesn't make it vandalism. --Jayron 32 16:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I believe it does make sense now. Like I said above, the controversies section has been deleted by me three times and it's getting on my nerves when it keeps reappearing. I've asked for semi-protection a while but I didn't get any success (the edits have been done by new users and I believe that they are school pupils who are misbehaving). I have a very close friend who works at this school and said that she'd like this section to be taken down because it gives the school a bad reputation. Okay there are news stories about the controversies but I honestly feel it is really inappropriate to put it up! Anyway, I'm stuck in the middle with this as it has been plaguing on my mind for months since this all started. SarahTHunter (talk) 17:59, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So much to unpack. First WP:3RR, read it, and then I would advise you getting a mug of tea and stepping away from WP for the rest of the day (or at least the article). Next, the article does not belong to your friend or the school. It is Wikipedia's article, the school has no control over it apart from requesting inaccuracies are fixed. This is not an inaccuracy. By your own admission, you are WP:COI editing for your friend by proxy. I'd advise another mug of tea and stepping away from the article. The only question to be raised about this content is how noteworthy it is. Personally, I think a school failing in it's safeguarding procedures twice in nine years, and failing in one of the worst ways possible, IS noteworthy. - X201 (talk) 18:50, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I don't think that can be counted as vandalism. The information has several reliable sources, and is probably noteworthy. Bazza (talk) 16:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do you apply for page protection? Can someone show me a link for this. SarahTHunter (talk) 18:10, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SarahTHunter: page protection will not help. You are engaged in a content dispute, and page protection if for vandalism and/or edit warring. When there are two legitimate sides to a dispute, then an admin is not supposed to pick one or the other, so protection might freeze on the one you think is "wrong". Instead, you must engage with the other editor(s) on the article's talk page and reach a consensus as to what should be in the article. If you keep reverting, you will be administratively in the wrong even if you feel you are morally in the right, and you will be blocked. -Arch dude (talk) 18:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Take note of X201's comments above. They succinctly summarise your misapprehension about what Wikipedia is and how its content is written. I agree with the comment on noteworthiness: the article has several reliable sources, stretching over a reasonable amount of time, on the euphemistically-named "controversy". Bazza (talk) 19:23, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The section heading is indeed a problem. The miscreant was reported to the police, charged, found guilty, and sent to prison. There is no controversy, unlike say this. Maproom (talk) 21:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Daryl McCormack birthday change date[edit]

How do I change Daryl McCormacks birthday to the 20th of January? - which is his correct DOB not December. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tillyjames123 (talk • contribs) 16:44, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to Daryl McCormack or Darryl McCormack? Because neither list a birth date in January and the first doesn't list a birth date and won't unless a source can be provided. PRAXIDICAE💕 16:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Short citation usage[edit]

This is a question about the circumstances when short citations are an appropriate citation style in an article that uses more than one style (also uses standard inline citations). The question concerns the article Michael Gove and the format of its references for The Price of Peace, Unleashing Demons and Dods Parliamentary Companion. These three books are cited once, using standard citations, whereas many different pages of the book Michael Gove: A Man in a Hurry are cited, using short citations. Should a short citation or standard citation be used for the books that are only cited once? Or is it more appropriate to use short citations for all the books? Thank you in advance. Andysmith248 (talk) 16:58, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding of WP:CITESTYLE is that style citation should be consistent, so picking one style and sticking with it is WP-good. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, thank you for your reply. The use of short citations for Michael Gove: A Man in a Hurry allows for many different pages of the source to be cited without having to copy the entire citation. I would like to keep this as it is, but I am unsure of the ideal citation style for the first books I mentioned. Andysmith248 (talk) 17:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Andysmith248, I think it's a bit eye-of-the-beholder. Personally I'd prefer turning the book into a named "reftoolbar" style cite and then add Template:Rp as appropriate in-text. Re-using named refs is nice and easy. And all the "Benetts" under references get merged into one. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:58, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

...and now I've learnt from WP that Gove was trapped in a lift for 30 min. I wish I hadn't. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:05, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, thank you for your suggestion, which I'll be sure to investigate further. Andysmith248 (talk) 22:12, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]