Help desk
< January 28	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 30 >

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 29[edit]

Ravioli; pisarei e faśö[edit]

In these two pages the "Etymology" paragraph was positioned after the "History" paragraph; on the ravioli page I think I solved it, but I don't know about the pisarei e faśö page (I don't know where the "Preparation" paragraph should be placed). Thanks in advance. JackkBrown (talk) 00:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JackkBrown: The Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Tools/guidelines don't specify the order for such sections. Be bold, and discuss on the talk page if anyone reverts your edits. GoingBatty (talk) 01:44, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What to do with draft[edit]

I've run into a few cases where there will be a small article in mainspace, and then a draft article on a related topic that has more content, but is not independently notable from the main article so would not get past AfC. (usually with my field of interests, on the perpetrator of a crime apart from the article on the crime)

Can I just move it into article space myself as a redirect and then merge the content into the existing page? (providing attribution of course) PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:12, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PARAKANYAA I think, in the hypothetical you describe, that it can be ok to do something like that. If I know article X, and then find related draft Y with some useful content, it could be reasonable to improve the article with some of the draft content, WP:COPYWITHIN may apply depending on what I do. If the draft has a useful title, I could also make a redirect from that title. Before I did this, I would check if the draft creator is active, and if they are, I'd probably try to discuss it with them first, to see if they object. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:53, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

company account[edit]

This our company account but someone else has ownership of it. we would request you to transfer the ownership. thank you.

please return my account as soon as possible Ahemad mi (talk) 13:31, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ahemad mi Are you referring to the MYBYK article? It is not an account, but an encyclopedia article. The article is not owned by any particular individual, it belongs to Wikipedia. Are you associated with this company? 331dot (talk) 13:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Company accounts" are forbidden: all Wikipedia accounts must be used by one individual only. As 331dot says, nobody owns any article: almost all articles may be edited by almost anybody. One major exception is that people are strongly discouraged from editing articles on subjects with which they have a connection.

If you wish changes to be made in Wikipedia's article about your company you should

If there are more than one of you working on this, each create an individual account.
Each of you make the mandatory declaration of your status as a paid editor (see that link for details).
Do not edit the article directly, but instead make formal edit requests for changes you wish to see. Make sure that any information you wish to introduce is cited to a reliable source, and (unless it is uncontroversial factual information like places, dates, or names of officers) to a independent source.

Note that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 17:53, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MYBYK PAGE[edit]

I was created mybyk page but that page is not shown on google Nikhilmakwana598 (talk) 13:34, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is currently in your sandbox so it is not an official Wikipedia article. Wikipedia has no control over how external search engines index and display their results. It is also completely unsourced, see WP:YFA for help.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 13:38, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MYBYK already exists. I recommend working on that article rather than writing it again. Recon rabbit 13:46, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikhilmakwana598: Is this related to the sub-section above, also about MYBYK? Please note the comments there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:02, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SAVE AN UNPUBLISHED PAGE[edit]

will my unpublished page be saved in the drafts or userpage if i go offline so i can come back to it next time to continue creating before publishing? Okwudili Nwakobi (talk) 15:30, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @Okwudili Nwakobi: Do you have a link to that page, it can be userfied. - FlightTime (open channel) 15:41, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Okwudili Nwakobi: No it will not. you must click on the button whose name is "publish": That button is deceptively named. It performs the "save" function. It does NOT put your work into the main namespace. To "publish" into a user subpage, just create that page (e.g., User:Okwudili Nwakobi/my workspace). To "publish" into a draft, just create it in draft space (e.g., Draft:foobar). "Publish" is a legal term in copyright law. When you save anything on a Wikimedia server, you "publish" it in the copyright sense, and you license it under CC-BY-SA, even in user space or draft space. -Arch dude (talk) 15:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your other alternative (using the source editor) is to copy out the wikicode from your not-yet-saved draft or userpage and paste it into a local text editor on your device, so that you only store the content locally and not on a Wikipedia server. Later, you would copy/paste the material back into a Wikipedia editing window to continue writing. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Building materials[edit]

No mention of ferrock 2600:1700:8661:E350:C5D9:7D5C:796C:671F (talk) 15:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is likely because it is a relatively new material. You are welcome to discuss this on the talk page of Building material. Recon rabbit 15:41, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There was a brief discussion about Ferrock and Carbicrete in March 2021 here, but this was not pursued - possibly because there were insufficient reliable sources giving extensive, Independent coverage at that time. This may well have changed, but, with many new products, most of the information is, either directly, or indirectly, from the manufacturers, so is not independent. - Arjayay (talk) 15:51, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like the user interested in the conversation is no longer active, but they had a start to an article to be split from Cement at User:Nellas Galadhon/sandbox that mentions Ferrock. Recon rabbit 16:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to change the User Page title?[edit]

I have created a new user talk page for me in Wikipedia. But I am unable to change the title of User Page talk. I am not eligible to "Move" the page with new page. Please suggest me how can I achieve this? Here is my Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mdmuhtasimfuadfahim

Thanks in advance. Mdmuhtasimfuadfahim (talk) 16:17, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mdmuhtasimfuadfahim: Hi there! It appears you were creating a draft article on your user page, so I moved it to Draft:Muhtasim Fuad Fahim for you. WP:AUTO explains that Wikipedia strongly discourages autobiographies, which are a conflict of interest (COI). You must declare your COI on your user page. I added a welcome message at your user talk page, User talk:Mdmuhtasimfuadfahim. Hope this is what you were looking for. Please reply here if you were asking for something else. GoingBatty (talk) 16:40, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @GoingBatty. Yes, I was looking for it. Please change the name to "Md. Muhtasim Fuad Fahim" from "Muhtasim Fuad Fahim". That would be a great help for me. Mdmuhtasimfuadfahim (talk) 16:45, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mdmuhtasimfuadfahim: If you want to change your username so it doesn't include "Md" (and therefore your user page and user talk page do not contain "Md"), see WP:RENAME. GoingBatty (talk) 16:53, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And, @Mdmuhtasimfuadfahim, if you want to change the draft title so that it includes Md. - please don't, honorifics are not normally included in article titles. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 17:13, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) GoingBatty, as the IP above implies, it sounds more like it's the other way round: Mdmuhtasimfuadfahim seems to want change the draft article name so that it does contain the "Md". It appears to be used as a title (Doctor of Medicine sounds less likely, but what do I know - maybe the user is both a software engineer and a doctor). Compare the draft text, where Mdmuhtasimfuadfahim's father is named as "Md. Abdur Rashid". Mdmuhtasimfuadfahim, it's against Wikipedia's house style to have titles such as "MD" in article names, so we won't make that change. Moreover, I'm afraid your draft is much too promotional to become an article any time soon, and it severely lacks reliable sources. Bishonen | tålk 17:24, 29 January 2024 (UTC).[reply]

@Bishonen: Ah, he wrote "to...from" and I was incorrectly reading it as "from...to". Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 17:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GoingBatty. Can you please let me know how to start with my user page again and which rules should be strictly followed? Please let me know in details. Mdmuhtasimfuadfahim (talk) 17:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mdmuhtasimfuadfahim: To learn how to edit and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, I suggest you start at Help:Introduction. I suggest spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. When you're ready to create an article, you would gather multiple published independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of you, and determine whether they demonstrate that you meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you would declare your COI on your user page. Then follow the instructions at Help:Your first article and summarize what the sources have published, and be prepared for a process that may include months of waiting for review, declines, and rewrites, before an article is accepted. If you are successful, then you could never edit the article directly due to your COI, but could submit edit requests on the article talk page. Hope this helps. GoingBatty (talk) 18:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. I would like to be connected with you for further help. Thanks again. Mdmuhtasimfuadfahim (talk) 18:06, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply @GoingBatty. Bit I am not using the Honorfics. It's "Md." by which it defines "Mohammad". Not any honorfics. Shouldn’t I use it? Please suggest me as I am new here. 103.72.212.137 (talk) 17:32, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply @Bishonen. I am using this "Md." which defines Mohammad not any honorifics or designation ans same for my father. Shouldn’t I use those before names? Please let me know as I am new here. 103.72.212.137 (talk) 17:35, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, you shouldn't use those abbreviations either. Use the whole name if you want to. Please log in to your account to post. Bishonen | tålk 17:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Huh, we do actually have a few articles using that abbreviation - Md. Hafizur Rahman, for instance. Not sure if it's worth moving them to a non-abbreviated title. Seems to be a thing in Bangladesh. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 18:24, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mdmuhtasimfuadfahim / IP editor. Please log in before adding more comments, so we are sure that your contributions are logged to your account. Your draft has been deleted by an administrator because it was too promotional, which is not in line with Wikipedia's purposes. You can start again using the WP:AfC process but I suggest you leave your username as it is. You might be better to focus on improving some of our existing articles on topics that interest you, to learn how things work here. Writing articles of an acceptable standard is difficult to do straight off. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:46, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tuscany; https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toscana[edit]

Why, despite the two pages being very close in terms of references (the Italian article has 47, while this one has 39), this article is "only" 58,039 bytes long, while the Italian article has 159,035? JackkBrown (talk) 18:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link Tuscany. Why should they? They have been written by different people to (probably) different requirements in different languages. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 18:48, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speculation:There may be more interested people on it-WP, that article has 620 "authors" compared to en-WP 332. Also, the average it-editor probably knows more about it, and feels different about it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Martin of Sheffield: @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: no, I mean that since the English language article has more or less the same sources as the Italian language article, the English language article should be quite long. However, one thing I appreciate about the English language edition is that it gives a lot of importance to sources, so I assume that in the Italian language article there are numerous lines without sources. JackkBrown (talk) 00:42, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I meant by "different requirements". I thought that you were an Italian speaker and therefore should be able to answer this yourself. For myself, the languages that I speak other than English have names like FORTRAN or COBOL so I'll leave this query to you. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 15:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replying to a user's email[edit]

How do I reply to a user's email without inadvertantly exposing my email? I'm using Gmail if that matters. Thanks in advance! Cessaune [talk] 18:51, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like the best way is to go to their userpage and click the "Email this User" button. More info about email replies here. - AquilaFasciata (talk | contribs) 18:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm still kind of confused. So is there no way to reply to the email directly without showing my email? Do I have to send another email? Cessaune [talk] 18:58, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to the link you will reveal your email if you go to their userpage and click the "Email this User" button. You can reply to their message on Wikipedia, e.g. by visiting the editor's user talk page, without revealing your email. TSventon (talk) 19:03, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I guess I'll make a Wikipedia-specific email then. Cessaune [talk] 19:09, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to return what was edited ?[edit]

How to return what was edited ? Mrs. lyly (talk) 19:12, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you go to the page history and click on your edit, there is an "Undo" button you can press. You can then make edits or just press "Publish" and it'll be undone. - AquilaFasciata (talk | contribs) 19:22, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing errors on Dave Pirner[edit]

Reference help requested. Need help fixing reference. Thanks, 135.134.236.224 (talk) 19:38, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! One way to source the video would be to use...

{{Cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kY7J_Ffq7Fo|title=Dave Pirner of Soul Asylum Talks About Joey's Song, Butch Vig and the Green Bay Packers|date=January 6, 2024|publisher=Fox Cities Core|via=YouTube}}

which generates...

"Dave Pirner of Soul Asylum Talks About Joey's Song, Butch Vig and the Green Bay Packers". Fox Cities Core. January 6, 2024 – via YouTube.

However, although at the 2:27 mark he says he was NOT born in Green Bay, Wisconsin (despite what the Wikipedia article says), I didn't hear him state where he WAS born. Therefore, I don't think this video is a good source for his birth place. I suggest discussing on Talk:Dave Pirner to find a better source. GoingBatty (talk) 20:06, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Biased tampering on Wiki pages[edit]

This Wikipedia page is being tampered with by internet trolls and is being infused with speculation, biased language, and gossip-blog style writing.

We need to lock this until further investigation:

Big Foot (Nicki Minaj song) - Wikipedia Essie the Great (talk) 20:12, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Issues with an article should be discussed on its associated talk page. You may request page protection at WP:RFPP. 331dot (talk) 20:15, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Essie the Great (and Pickersgill-Cunliffe) please do not Wikipedia:Edit war. TSventon (talk) 20:24, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The editor in question has been blocked for vandalism. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 20:29, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What does this mean? I've spent days building an article and now this.[edit]

Something went wrong

No stashed content found for 0/6ed2f3d8-b317-11ee-b613-4cd98faf2bd5 Petertcook75 (talk) 20:18, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Petertcook75, that is an error which often occurs when the Visual Editor is kept open for too long. You can find some discussion and workarounds here. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 20:42, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Peter. Are you the Peter T Cook who founded the nonprofit about which you have written a draft in User:Petertcook75/sandbox? If so, you should disclose your Conflict of Interest on your user page. This will draw people's attention to the fact that you have a connection with your subject.

I am not a reviewer, but I doubt that your draft will be accepted in its present form. First it is promotional: no Wikipedia article should ever use evaluative language like "innovative", "revolutionary" or "stands as a beacon", unless it is directly quoting a reliable published source wholly unconnected with the subject. Basically, Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

Your references are not very helpful, because most of them are bare url's, which make it difficult for a reader or reviewer to evaluate how significant they are likely to be. You should certainly convert all the references to Wikipedia into wikilinks: Wikipedia, like other user-generated sources, may not be used as a reference.

Note also that a reference which does not mention Largest Heart Corporation is almost always useless. The purpose of a citation in a Wikipedia article is to provide the reader with a way to verify a claim in the article, nothing more. Many of your references are just noise, and should be removed.

My advice (which is what I always advise new editors who try the challenging task of creating an article before they have learnt the skills they need) is to put this draft aside completely for a few months, while you learn about Wikipedia by making improvements to some of our six million existing articles, particularly learning about verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view and notability. Then when you have more understanding, read your first article. At that point, you will probably want to discard the whole of what you have written, and begin again, by finding independent sources about the Corporation and, if you can find them, forgetting everything you know about it, and writing a summary of what they say. (And don't forget to include any criticism, if some of them have made any). ColinFine (talk) 22:40, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have rejected the draft and tagged it for deletion. You are seriously deluded if you think the content was suitable for an encyclopaedia Theroadislong (talk) 22:56, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does this tool exist[edit]

Is there a tool that shows a view of the article but highlights exactly what text you contributed? 21:49, 29 January 2024 (UTC) Prhartcom (talk) 21:49, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Prhartcom: This might be what you're looking for. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 22:21, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This works, thanks, now I can click any word in the article and it tells me who wrote that word. But I still don't have a view of the article showing which text was written by a given user. I will keep a look out for any such tool! Prhartcom (talk) 22:35, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Prhartcom: The Who Wrote That?" page says, "When you hover over content, the tool highlights all content by the same author." Is that not what you want? Deor (talk) 22:47, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why but mine doesn't have the hover feature. I have the latest version of Chrome and I have to click a word for anything to happen; a speech bubble opens to say who wrote that word. Hovering doesn't do anything. Hopefully I'll figure it out. Thanks again. Prhartcom (talk) 00:12, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Got it to work after a restart. Now it's brilliant! Prhartcom (talk) 03:20, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox Issue[edit]

Hi Wiki Publishers,

I have created article and try to publish it but my post just showing Sandbox..How Can I publish it successfully? Md Leon Mia (talk) 22:16, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a header which will allow you to submit your draft for review when it is ready.

You have started well, by finding sources, which is a lot better than many editors do when they try to create an article. Not all your sources are independent of the company: Remember that the article should be a summary of what independent reliable sources have published about the company. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 22:44, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]