Help desk
< February 8	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 10 >

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.

February 9[edit]

How best to handle sentences with lots of dates?[edit]

Here's an example footnote from List of governors of Arizona:

McCormick was nominated on March 14, 1866, confirmed by the Senate on April 10, 1866, and he took office in Arizona on July 9, 1866.

That feels like too many 1866s, y'know? Is there a proper style guidance on when and when not to repeat years like this? For example, would this be acceptable:

McCormick was nominated on March 14, 1866, confirmed by the Senate on April 10, and he took office in Arizona on July 9.

It certainly looks cleaner, but I can understand if there were some guidance saying we should always include the year, especially? perhaps in a footnote, which this is. Prose, it makes more sense to omit years, but maybe not for a footnote? --Golbez (talk) 06:07, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's anything in the Manual of Style with clear guidance on this. I think it's fair to expect readers to follow your second example without the repeated years. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 06:10, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps "McCormick was nominated on March 14, 1866, confirmed by the Senate on April 10, and he took office in Arizona on July 9 later that year"? Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:20, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Martin of Sheffield: Would it be correct to use "the same year" at the end? (Just trying to learn, as a User:en-3.) --CiaPan (talk) 09:51, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@CiaPan I would use MoS's sentence but without the "he" or the "later". Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:11, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The ambiguity of the MoS acronym in this context makes me

--CiaPan (talk) 10:20, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) "McCormick was nominated on March 14, 1866, confirmed by the Senate on April 10, and he took office in Arizona on July 9 later the same year" sounds fine. It's marginally less idiomatic but there's nothing there that marks you out as a non-native speaker. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:18, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@U:MoS Oh, thank you! :) Almost twenty years at enwiki would be enough to learn some of the language, even with no prior knowledge. But, TBH, I'm a non-native English writer rather than speaker due to little experience in a face-to-face use. --CiaPan (talk) 10:26, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello[edit]

Hello, we have a website [Promotional URL removed.] we would like to tell about it on your resource, is it possible? Айдар Кашаев (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No. This isn't an advertising site for promotion; it is an encyclopedia. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:54, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Айдар Кашаев: Welcome to Wikipedia!

The answer to your question is: No.

At least, not as you first step here – and there are multiple reasons for it.

Wikipedia is not a directory, its purpose is not just to tell people about your business.
Wikipedia is not means of promotion – if you want to advertise your business, there is plenty of other sites in the Web to do so.
Your use of the 'we' pronoun may suggest several people are using a single User:Айдар Кашаев account, which is disallowed at Wikipedia – see WP:SHAREDACCOUNT and make sure it's not your case.
The pronoun may also indicate an owner-like attitude towards the subject, which in turn may lead to an owner-like attitude to an intended article – please see WP:OWN to make sure you know what you may or may not expect from publishing your info at Wikipedia.
If the service in question is actually yours, you're in a clear WP:COI position and you should not write or expand the article yourself.
Additionally, if it is yours, meaning an actual ownership, employment or other financial connection, then much stronger limitations apply, requiring you to explicitly declare you COI, and to refrain from editing the article. See the WP:PAID policy for details.
Please be also aware Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Frankly speaking, Wikipedia is not interested in what one wants to say about themself, their business, their family, their community, their lifestyle, etc. Wikipedia strives to deliver information about notable subjects (in its own sense of notability, defined in the WP:N policy). This means we do not write 'how fantastic' something is, but rather 'how important' it is. It requires an objective style and, most important, WP:Verifiability of published contents. The latter is based on references to thorough information, not just passing mentions; made about the subject, not coming from the subject; collected and edited by independent entities; published in WP:Reliable sources.

That's lots of warnings, but please take them seriously to avoid risking your article being deleted right after creation due to breaking Wikipedia policies.

Finally, you may also want to read the essay Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing before any further steps.

Good luck! --CiaPan (talk) 12:27, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removed a promotional URL. --CiaPan (talk) 12:35, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Plz read all info which are posted on your site carefully. Thanks Zahidzaidi1122 (talk) 12:05, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Need updating my company's wiki page[edit]

Need updating my company's wiki page Nitish Kumar09 (talk) 11:58, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Nitish Kumar09 Please read carefully the information that has been placed on your Talk Page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:00, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:PAID and WP:COI, also note the message above. -- StarryNightSky11 ☎ 21:54, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ответ[edit]

We want to tell about this site in encyclopedic form, we do not want to tell about our partners and not to advertise [Promotional URL removed.] Айдар Кашаев (talk) 12:04, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Айдар Кашаев I assume that you have a WP:PAID relationship with that casino website, which under Wikipedia's Terms and Conditions you must disclose on your User Page (see the paid link). Then you may use the WP:AFC process to draft an article, showing how the company meets the notability guidelines. If the article is accepted, you will not be able subsequently to edit it because of your conflict of interest and you might not like how it evolves. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:14, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Айдар Кашаев: in addition to the above, here are the steps to draft an article:

search sources that are simultaneously (1) reliable (i.e. not random blog posts), (2) independent of the subject (i.e. not written by you, not interviews of your CEO, etc.) and (3) deal with the subject at length (i.e.: not a phonebook entry).
if you do not find such sources, abandon the idea entirely
forget what you know from personal knowledge, and write a dry, facts-only article, based purely of what the sources say

Trying to write the article backwards, by first writing text and then searching for supporting references, is likely to lead to lots wasted work and a deleted article. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:18, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Айдар Кашаев: Placing an explicit URL to your site here, at Wikipedia Help desk, is already a promotion. And you did it twice. Please stop. --CiaPan (talk) 12:30, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removed a promotional URL. --CiaPan (talk) 12:35, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did a web search, it is way short of WP:GNG. Very few online casinos have their own articles [1] and they cannot be included simply to give them a plug via Wikipedia.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 12:40, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you wanted such an article to be made, it would have to be written by a neutral uninvolved 3rd party, if an article is merited based on notability. -- StarryNightSky11 ☎ 21:52, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When does a someone become a world leader?[edit]

If someone is elected as the next head of state would the page be updated after the election ends or after they are shown in. Also if someone was to die, how would it change? Basically when would you add the “46th President of the United States“ to the info box? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LuxembourgLover (talk • contribs) 16:05, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

LuxembourgLover In the case of the US President, once reliable sources have said there is a winner, the article about the winner is updated to call them "president-elect". They would not actually be president until they are sworn in(on January 20th after their election). If the president passes away, the vice president is sworn in as president as soon as possible, and then called the president. 331dot (talk) 16:11, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on the polity and its rules and conventions. Charles III became King the instant his mother died, and a few weeks later, Rishi Sunak became Prime Minister when he accepted the King's invitation to do so. ColinFine (talk) 17:14, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per all of the above, it depends on the local rules of succession for the country in question. Different countries have different rules for how one leader replaces another, and articles reflect whatever rules determine the situation locally. A person becomes U.S. President at noon on 20 January in the calendar year after they won the election; a person becomes Prime Minister of the UK when the monarch appoints them Prime Minister. Each country has their own way of determining these things. --Jayron 32 17:32, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

what just happened?[edit]

is it just me, or do all articles now have a huge gap between the left side of the page, and the text of the article? is anyone else having this problem? Sm8900 (talk) 22:43, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

something seems to be making the table of contents shift to the left of the text, creating a major visual gap as a result. is anyone else seeing this? Sm8900 (talk) 22:44, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is WP:THURSDAY. I can't say I notice any obvious difference, though. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 23:05, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are you asking about a sudden change to Wikipedia's appearance? It is because the default skin has changed from the to the new Vector (2022) skin. If you would like to change back to the old one, you can, as a registered user, click on the

in the top-right corner and choose

Preferences. Once there, go to Preferences → Appearance → Skins →

Vector legacy (2010).
If you would like to leave feedback, you can do so at Wikipedia talk:Vector 2022. RudolfRed (talk) 23:38, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]