Help desk
< August 5	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 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.

August 6

Brazilian municipalities

Hello everyone. I am working on articles about Brazilian municipalities these days, and I found that few pages have provided the source of the dates when they are founded. I believe that I have visited a website that listed every municipalities' foundation date, but I just can't find it. In my memory, I found that website through an article of Brazilian state in Portuguese Wikipedia. Thanks a lot! TongcyDai (talk) 04:42, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TongcyDai; Your post seems more like a comment than a question. Do you have any specific thing you want know or ask? – Ammarpad (talk) 06:12, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ammarpad: Sorry for not making myself understood. I would like to ask for help, if someone can find that website. And maybe my question is kind of weird, and the clue is unclear, but it would help a lot if the source can be found. TongcyDai (talk) 06:18, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I think I didn't read very well too :). So you knew a website that lists founding date of Brazilian municipalities, but now you can no longer remember the address? Is that right? – Ammarpad (talk) 06:27, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ammarpad: Yes, that's what I mean. Since I can't speak Portuguese, I decided to ask for assistance here.TongcyDai (talk) 06:55, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

the best I could find was this: [1] 2804:14C:482:72FD:75A6:E0B2:C264:687 (talk) 20:49, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have been editing my content still its not approved? whats the main reason?

I have been editing my content still its not approved? whats the main reason? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prasmita (talk • contribs) 05:02, 6 August 2019 05:02 (UTC)

@Prasmita: The main reason, per the declinature notices at Draft:Subash Karki (journalist), is that the subject does not pass notability guidelines. Please also see the posts at your talk page. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 05:14, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Prasmita, please see No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. --ColinFine (talk) 09:39, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pinewood_Iskandar_Malaysia_Studios

Hi,

The stated company in the website link above has recently changed its name. Thus, it is now called Iskandar Malaysia Studios. I was trying to edit its title but I couldn't seem to do it. May I know where am I wrong at? Or it is unchangeable?

Also, I would like to inform that there is another page which is being created by a colleague of mine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jon Liaw (talk • contribs)

Hello! Firstly, if you work for this company, you must declare that you are being paid to edit. Also, you need to familiarise yourself with our policy on conflicts of interest. Once you have done that, you can rename a title by moving the page by requesting a move. I advise you tell your colleague to about our policy on being paid to edit if they are creating a page related to the company (this is a must) or you can direct them to the Help Desk. Regards, Willbb234 (talk) 07:16, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~) or clicking the signature button above the edit box which looks like this:

, but do not sign in articles. Willbb234 (talk) 07:21, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How to create Autobiography

What link can I click to create autobiography, upload photo of the subject and come back to edit same? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Docb330 (talk • contribs) 09:54, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The link which tells you not to is at WP:Autobiography. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:58, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How Wikipedia check the authentication of writing

Hello

I want to ask help desk on how Wikipedia check the authentication of writing. I see edit work of articles and that too about leaders are done by own choice no reference no evidences of any write up.

I strongly put my words here to help that please provide me details on how Wikipedia is used to verify content.. as i seen one of Indian leader article are written without any evidence and this is not accepted..

if no proper response is received then i will be forced to take legal actions and will ask government to block this site in India..— Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.170.27.180 (talk)

To other users, I have blocked for the legal threat with the following message: If you see uncited information in an article, you should bring up your concerns on the article talk page. We have a strict policy about how living people are written about, and are interested in knowing if there is uncited information in any article. However, legal threats are not permitted. You can pursue any grievances you have in the courts of your country or on Wikipedia, but not both at the same time. You can be unblocked if you clearly withdraw your threat of legal action. If you don't wish to do that, you cannot be unblocked. 331dot (talk) 10:36, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Glen Affric

Ref number 32 is all wrong. Please fix and I am so sorry. 175.33.248.139 (talk) 12:43, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you managed to fix any issues yourself with your second edit, or do you have additional concerns? ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 12:50, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove the long quote from ref number 28 (not necessary) - I cannot do this on this device I do not think Please help Thanks 175.33.248.139 (talk) 13:11, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've done that for you, but all it needed was a backspace (delete) key, and I'm sure you have one on your device. I clicked "edit" for the section containing ref 28, found "Glenaffric and Guisachan", moved to the end of the quote before the closing </ref> then just repeatedly pressed the delete key (well, actually, I held it down, but that needs careful watching to make sure you don't delete too much). You could have done the same. Dbfirs 13:36, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CITEREF with no content?

Take a look at the Patents section near the bottom of Telechrome. I have the tool turned on that indicates cites with nothing pointing to them, and it's displaying its off-brown error on this line. Does anyone know why? There is nothing in the template that gives it a CITEREF, so I suspect the underlying template is doing this? Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:11, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Maury Markowitz, yes, the anchor is apparently always included in Template:Cite patent/core – Thjarkur (talk) 11:32, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite. |ref=harv is always set in {{cite patent}} when |ref= is omitted from the template. If you include an empty |ref=, the {{cite patent}} does not add the id=CITEREF... attribute to the citation's <span>...</span> tag so your tool (User:Ucucha/HarvErrors?) won't show the error.

For the same kind of issue when it occurs with any of the cs1|2 templates, you must write |ref=none because cs1|2 ignores empty parameters.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:49, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That did indeed fix it. Perhaps the template should default to having a |ref=harv line so that the user knows about this and can easily edit it? Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:04, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

writing a bio on a living person

I am writing an about page about an author and I am having difficulty because it is being flagged as promotional. All I want to do is have two paragraphs and a photo of the author. I'm using a photo from Wikimedia Commons that is allowed and I'm still getting flagged even though I'm not saying buy this book. I do spend a sentence describing what the book is, is that my problem?This is the red flag I have. "It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information." I have read those links and I'm still confused. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoshuaLewis24! (talk • contribs) 6 August 2019 14:33 (UTC)

@JoshuaLewis24!: answered at User talk:JoshuaLewis24!/sandbox. -Arch dude (talk) 15:47, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also see the discussion at ~~WP:Teahouse#Determining that my article is Notable~~Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_993#Determining_that_my_article_is_Notable. --ColinFine (talk) 16:51, 6 August 2019 (UTC) Archived.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:55, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

trying to create a new article!

Hi! I'm trying to create a new article on Delphi Economic Forum. I've tried to follow the instructions on How to create a Wikipedia article Right to science and culture, but there on my draft there is no "save page" button so I've already lost my draft twice. Can you help me? Thanks! Antigone Zogka (talk) 15:08, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some bright spark in the WMF decided to change the "save page" button and call it "publish changes" in order to cause endless confusion. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:13, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)@Antigone Zogka: the "save" button is now called "publish changes". it's the same button you used when you posted this request for help. I think your "How to create" is a older document. Please look at WP:YFA for our current guidance. come back here if needed. -Arch dude (talk) 15:16, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding update of information an previous infortion as well.

Hi To Wikipedia team,

This is Nitin Kumar from India and frequent reader of Wikipedia i'm only asking and want to know who is responsible of updating information n how you judge that updated information is 100% correct and we can trust on it. Is Wikipedia operated by each country or Wikipedia has a separate body who collect and evalute the information than update. Please i want to know on it.

Thanks with Regards Nitin Kumar— Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.205.50.82 (talk)

This is the English version of Wikipedia, which is intended for English-speaking people from around the world and not any single country. There are different language versions of Wikipedia, but they are all able to be edited by anyone in the world who can understand the language.

Any user is welcome to add or change information in an article, as long as they have an independent reliable source for the information. Providing a reliable source is required so that readers can see the source and judge its accuracy for themselves. Wikipedia only summarizes what independent sources say. Do you have a concern about a certain article? 331dot (talk) 15:48, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Reliability of Wikipedia. The "editorial board" consists of all Wikipedia all editors: more than 82 million of us over the last 18 years and over 110,000 of us active in the last 30 days. We all have the same editorial rights and responsibilities. based on outside objective studies, this chaotic non-directed, crowdsourced approach surprisingly leads to accuracy and reliability that is better than other approaches. Wikipedia is not "100% accurate" and does not claim to be, but it seems to be at least as good as other approaches. You cannot trust Wikipedia, but you can trust it more than you can trust most other sources of information. -Arch dude (talk) 16:38, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confused:

Hope all is well,

     I am confused & somewhat discouraged in regards to utilizing this type of format […] I thought I had followed the guidelines & assumed that my page was approved (if you will), only to later log in & find that it is missing! I'm extremely puzzled as too why my page does not exist, can someone please share their thoughts as to what may have happened? Please, & thank you.

Sincerely,

Yumi4us (talk) 15:35, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Yumi4us: As an administrator, I can see deleted posts. The only deleted posts I see from you are to your user page, which is not article space. Article space does not have "User:" in the title. That's why it was deleted. Your user page is for introducing yourself to the Wikipedia community in the context of your Wikipedia editing or use. If you want to create an article, you will need to use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft for review; you can't directly create articles yet as you are not what is called autoconfirmed(you don't have at least 10 edits). 331dot (talk) 15:41, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See the answer to your previous question at WP:Help desk/Archives/2019 July 15#Overwhelmed, & Confused:. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:44, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you go ahead with creating an article in draft space or in your own sandbox, and you have some connection with the subject, then you first need to declare your WP:Conflict of interest. Dbfirs 17:29, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

South Azerbaijani Wikipedia, 4321bot

When editing an article in the English Wikipedia, I found an image was in use on the South Azerbaijani Wikipedia (azb.wikipedia.org) that was unrelated to the article there - a bridge in Somerset in their article on Newport, Wales. I removed it, and the rest of the gallery, but looking at other articles on UK cities I found others with galleries of unrelated images of UK places and people. These were created by User:4321bot (operated by User:Aymara93) and have no edits other than bots. The infoboxes look valid, probably copied from English or another language, but South Azerbaijani is not avaliable in Google Translate so I don't know about the rest of the content. Looking at the bot's recent contributions they have been creating empty categories. There are very few active editors there, and I don't know if they already know about this. Is anyone here able to check the bot's contributions? If not, is there somewhere to request assistance with this? Peter James (talk) 16:28, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Since this is not about English Wikipedia, you have to raise the issue at Meta. Not sure of the right place, but maybe you should try Meta:Steward requests/Miscellaneous. – Ammarpad (talk) 16:57, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That page says it's for wikis with no active administrators; azb.wikipedia has, so I asked one of their admins about it. Peter James (talk) 18:55, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Custom UBX

Are there any active users that make custom userboxes on request? James-the-Charizard (talk) 19:33, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@James-the-Charizard: See Wikipedia:Userboxes#Users who make userboxes upon request. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:37, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: Thank you. James-the-Charizard (talk) 19:38, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cite format.

Is using the sfnp template to change "Gordon, p. 116" (which does not meet my standards for an SFN) and "Gordon, Yefim; Rigmant, Vladimir; Sergey Komissarov (2005). OKB Tupolev (1st ed.). Hinkley: Midland Publishing. pp. 114–116. ISBN 1-85780-214-4." (which is incorrect, the third author is erroneous) to "Gordon & Rigmant (2005), p. 116." and "Gordon & Rigmant (2005), pp. 114–116." a unilateral change to the cite format? The complete cite of the source is in the Bibliography. (It currently contains a typo because of the revert.) I am very tired of edits like this being reverted because of WP:CITEVAR. The examples are from Tupolev Tu-85. -- User-duck (talk) 20:59, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I also do not consider using or changing cite templates a unilateral change to the cite format, I consider it a change in method. This may reorder the information, change text attributes, add/delete quotes, etc. I do it to make the citations more consistent and often add information: author, dates, etc. Am I wrong? -- User-duck (talk) 20:59, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly the reverting editor disagrees with you. It was a unilateral change because you made it on your own without consultation with other interested editors at the article's talk page. Editors at en.wiki are sometimes particular about citation formats which is why WP:CITEVAR exists. If you think that there is a better method for citing Tupolev Tu-85, discuss at the article's talk page.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:26, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Guidelines on linking to Wikipedia books

Hi, I was wondering if there are (MoS) guidelines/rules about linking to Book-space articles. I find these links to marginally relevant books to be overkill, but I am not comfortable removing them without MoS-based arguments. --HyperGaruda (talk) 21:24, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Considering they don't work and haven't in years with no light in the tunnel for any fixes...they should not be added at all especially in a spamming manner. Help:Books.--Moxy 🍁 21:33, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am working on removing the wikbook spam....in many cases 10 books were added to the leads of articles.--Moxy 🍁 22:09, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@HyperGaruda: Interesting question. Moxy is removing "wikbook spam". Maybe you should ask your question in the Teahouse. I am hoping for an answer to my question above. -- User-duck (talk) 22:29, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]