Help desk
< April 24	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 26 >

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 25

ban policy

if someone were to be disruptive on english wikipedia, do we have the authority to ban their account on other wikipedias like spanish wikipedia? Blitzfan51 (talk) 00:22, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Blitzfan51. English Wikipedia administrators do not have the power to block anyone on another language version. Global bans are possible when there has been ongoing disruption on several Wikimedia projects. That decision is not made here on the English Wikipedia, but rather at Meta-Wiki, which is the central coordinating site for all Wikimedia projects. You can learn about the details here. Cullen328 (talk) 01:24, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

James Seaton (bishop)

Rererence number 6 is all wrong. Please fix if you can. Thanks. 2405:6E00:2ED1:5500:3181:4B26:C58A:6B7E (talk) 01:14, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to have been added by you in this edit. What was that reference supposed to point to? – bradv 01:42, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reference is in red - the reference indicates the High Church aspects of the college. But it is in red - is there a problem?

Ref number 6 should be linked in with the source at the bottom of the page - author is Chisholm. I cannot do this skill. Thanks so much 2405:6E00:2ED1:5500:3181:4B26:C58A:6B7E (talk) 01:56, 25 April 2023 (UTC) Thanks 2405:6E00:2ED1:5500:3181:4B26:C58A:6B7E (talk) 01:53, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it to use the same format as the other reference to EB1911 - does that work for you? – bradv 01:59, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bradv, per WP:CUSTOMSIG/P, please consider adding a link to your talkpage to your signature. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:06, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

website is TOO zoomed-in

your website is TOO zoomed-in, how to fix, thx 2601:8D:700:1B00:A4D6:E8BC:FDEF:7E43 (talk) 02:18, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In most Windows browsers, zoom in with Ctrl++, zoom out with Ctrl+-, choose default size with Ctrl+0. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:03, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto for most Linux browsers. With macOS, I imagine that it's the same, except that you use the Command key rather than the Control key. -- Hoary (talk) 06:36, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Problem

On any foreign food page that has words that are not common in the English language, italics are never present, when in fact they should be. I've done everything I can, even more (and I'm still not finished). Could someone give me a hand? It is very demotivating to work for something and find out that all the pages in this topic are wrong. JackkBrown (talk) 02:51, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JackkBrown. Are you aware of MOS:FOREIGNITALICS? In some cases, the common practice might actually be to not italicize such words. As for asking for help, you might want to try posting something on the talk page of a relevant WikiProject like Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:00, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JackkBrown. What procedure are you using to determine whether or not a foreign food term is not common in the English language? If you say that it is uncommon and I reply, yes, it is common, how would you resolve that contradiction? Who are you to determine what is right or wrong? Such decisions should be made by consensus, not by a single editor on a campaign to italicize. Cullen328 (talk) 07:16, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For example, you have italicized capellini, a word for a style of pasta that is in commonplace usage in the English language. If you go to Google Books and search for "capellini pasta", you will find many books, including some by famous chefs writing in English, that discuss capellini without italics and without explaining that it is an Italian word. A trip to the pasta section of any American grocery store confirms the same thing. The word is now commonly used in English, and should not be italicized. Cullen328 (talk) 07:27, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Cullen328: WP:AGF. You might need to qualify your references to "English" above with "American English". "Capellini" is not in commonplace usage here. I am not disputing your argument, merely pointing out that some loanwords have not made it to into common usage in all parts of the English-speaking world.

@JackkBrown: @Marchjuly's advice above is sensible. Bazza (talk) 09:29, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Side discussion of capellini. If you want to continue, do it at Talk:Capellini or Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink, not here.

I have never heard of Capellini, it is not a common word. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 17:01, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

British chefs like Nigella Lawson and American chefs like Martha Stewart do not italicize capellini. The New York Times does not italicize capellini. Major pasta manufacturers do not italicize capellini in their English language content. The Food Network does not italicize capellini. Why on earth should Wikipedia? Cullen328 (talk) 19:26, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

because although those companies/people do, the vast majority of Wikipedia users would not know what those words are. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 21:48, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PaulGamerBoy360: I don't think you should be trying to speak on behalf of the vast majority of Wikipedia users, especially since you seem to be relatively new to Wikipedia editing based upon some of your previous attempts to answer questions here at the Help Desk. I think Cullen328's point is valid in that the best we can do is to try and assess how reliable sources treat words like "capellini". There are many words in English that originally started out as loanwords, but no longer are seen as such. The use of italics for such words in similiar to how Wikipedia determines the WP:COMMONNAME of article titles. It should reflect what the majority of reliable sources are doing, and not our personal opinion on what we think the vast majority of Wikipedia users do not know. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:55, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Thomas Molyneux, 1st Baronet

Hi ! Thomas is said to have married first a sister of the first Earl of Wicklow. It's impossible : the firts "earl" was... a countess ! Alice (1736-1807). The second earl, Robert Howard was born in 1757, when Thomas Molyneux was born in 1661 and died in 1733. Even the first VISCOUNT of Wicklow, Ralph Howard, was born in 1727. This first wife Margaret is thus a puzzle. However, the second wife, Catherine Howard, was the aunt of the first viscount of Wicklow... Who would have relevant infos about this alleged first wife ? Thanks a lot ! Jagellon (talk) 11:07, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jagellon: Please raise these issues at the article talk page. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 11:14, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for that. I'm French, and in the french Wikipedia, this sort of question is discussed on the community pages... I've just copied my remarks on the talk page of this article, as you told me. Thank you for your answer. Jagellon (talk) 11:41, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Order

In the page Brighton, the current order within the first caption, in my opinion, is not good, because there is an image ("Royal Pavilion") in the middle of the other images; I don't know which order to propose. Anybody got an idea? JackkBrown (talk) 11:41, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Top: Pier; middle (left to right): observation tower, pavilion, clock tower; bottom (left to right): marina, promenade? Clarityfiend (talk) 12:56, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Clarityfiend: thanks a lot! JackkBrown (talk) 17:33, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Submit the draft for review!"

When i click the bottom "Submit the draft for review!" and I compile correctly all the parameter in "Submitting your draft ..." "Short description" and "WikiProject classification tags" at the end i click, i see the red error message: "An error occurred (blocked: You have been blocked from editing.). Please try again or refer to the help desk.An error occurred (blocked: You have been blocked from editing.)." I didn't do anything wrong.37.159.116.13 (talk) 11:50, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The IP you are editing from currently (37.159.116.13) is not blocked. Neither is User:Orfiammax. Neither has ever been blocked. See WP:BLOCK for the block policy. You may have accidentally been blocked if other people were using your IP address and got blocked on it. This is why it is recommended to create an account, Special:CreateAccount. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 12:01, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See the screenshot https://ibb.co/jzHbqWf . Maybe I made a mistake in compiling the parameters and maybe some filter or automatic block in false positive was triggered, I don't know what happened, however after several attempts I succeeded. I risolved, thanks. 37.159.116.13 (talk) 12:10, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can I make my wikpedia user page work on all wikimedia pages???

Can I make my wikpedia user page work on all wikimedia pages??? PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 15:20, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PaulGamerBoy360: Hello Paul! The answer is yes, however you can't do it on the English Wikipedia. To create a global userpage you have to create a userpage on Meta Wiki and it will automatically display that userpage across all other WMF managed Wikis unless a local one has already been created. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:24, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @PaulGamerBoy360: If you want to display the same user page at all Wikimedia wikis then see Wikipedia:Global user page. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:24, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Counter-vandalism utilities

Hi all. I am just curious if there is anything out there that can help me more efficiently spot and revert vandalism on Wikipedia? I am trying to work my way towards rollbacker rights and I acknowledge that I have a long way to go, but in the meantime I am wondering if there is anything substantial or not to help me speed up the process. If my userpage topicons are any indicator most of my work is done on the recent changes page. I sort by the likely have problems, unregistered user, newcomer, human (not bot), and page edits filter, along with using the gadget(?) that allows you to view a page by hovering over its hyperlink (the older one, not the more modern one currently in use; it allows me to see diffs quickly). There have been some hiccups along the way but so far this is all how I work and it is the best option I can think of. However, with all the tools available out there created to assist in doing this more quickly and efficiently, I'm wondering if there are any recommended ones that would make my job a lot easier. I should note that I already use Twinkle and infrequently use RedWarn (I am still trying to figure out how to work with it). If there are any tools for extended-confirmed/autoconfirmed/regular editors with no rollback permissions that could speed up my process—or if there is just a better method, please let me know. - Cheers, KoolKidz112 (hit me up) 16:26, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KoolKidz112: Welcome, and thanks for fighting vandalism. Have you seen WP:CVU and WP:CVUA? Lots of good resources and training and a way to connect to other users also interested in fighting vandalism. RudolfRed (talk) 16:46, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@RudolfRed: Thank you for the pointers! I'd no idea there was an IRC channel for that, I'll have to check it out. have been looking around on the list of academy instructors for a while now and the two that have been there for a while are unfortunately very distant from my timezone and the most manageable one there (the one in GMT) has no slots open—are there alternatives and is there a way to "subscribe" to this page so that when an instructor chooses to add themselves to the list, I am notified? I am aware of the watchlist, but I want to know if there is anything similar to the subscription feature on talk pages that can notify me directly (email, top bar notification, etc.) rather than me having to go to my watchlist first. - Cheers, KoolKidz112 (hit me up) 00:23, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Information on me on Wikipedia has been deleted by unauthorised agent

I wanted to add some information on the entry on me (Ishtiaq Ahmed political scientist with user name Billumian47) and to my very great surprise found that some unauthorised person had entered as editor and wiped out all the information on me. The entry on me is more than 20 years old and I have from time to time updated it. In Febrary 2023, someone entered as editor and has deleted all the information on me. I am greatly saddened and angry. How can you help me? Billumian47 (talk) 16:48, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Go to page history & revert to an older version. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 16:59, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:COI and the article history for why the content was removed, this is bad advice. The content appears to have been removed for a valid reason, not vandalism. And editing an article about yourself is strongly advised against by the COI behavioural guideline. Sideswipe9th (talk) 17:08, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Billumian47 This edit by @TrangaBellam with an edit summary of "Not a CV" removed the information. The article up to that point was reliant on a single source (http://www.dailytimes.com.pk) for its references and did indeed look like an advert for its subject. Bazza (talk) 17:06, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's generally considered bad practice to directly edit an article about yourself, your family, friends, company/work, or anything else that is directly connected to you. Looking at history of the article about you, it looks like the content was removed in January 2023 with the edit summary "Not a CV". Not a CV is a valid reason to delete content, and I can see from the state of the article prior to the removal that there was a heavy reliance on sources that you had written, rather than sources other people had written about you.

If you wish to challenge this, you should first make a comment on the article's talk page asking why the content was removed, and suggesting what content can be restored when appropriately sourced. Sideswipe9th (talk) 17:06, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @Billumian47: The Wikipedia article Ishtiaq Ahmed (political scientist) may be an article about you, but it is not owned by you (see WP:OWN). Anyone is free to edit the article to improve it, which can include removing unreferenced information. Because of your conflict of interest, you should not be directly editing the article about you. Instead, you may submit an edit request on the article's talk page, or use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard if you like.

You may edit other Wikipedia articles where you do not have a conflict of interest, by adding/improving information along with published reliable sources. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:10, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but this article was not created by him, he just helped edit it someone else created the article. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 17:14, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why is that relevant, @PaulGamerBoy360? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:15, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How is that relevant here? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:15, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you are assuming he was the one who created the article and referenced it but multiple people have done that, it is not completely on him that the references are for books he wrote. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 17:16, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PaulGamerBoy360: No... no one is suggesting he created the article. We are simply suggesting that just because he is the subject of the article doesn't mean he owns it. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:17, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ok, I just understood you guys wrong, sorry. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 17:18, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter who created the article, nor who added or removed the content. Per the COI behavioural guideline, Billumian47 should not be directly editing the article, except under very limited circumstances. Sideswipe9th (talk) 17:20, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PaulGamerBoy360 Have you read WP:COI, linked above? It doesn't say "create", it says "contribute", which he has done. The article in question's main problem is its complete lack of references. Bazza (talk) 17:18, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I jus misunderstood the meaning of what you guys were saying, & yes I know it has only one reference. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 17:21, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Billumian47. I'm afraid that you have it exactly backwards. Almost anybody in the world is "authorised" to edit Wikipedia's article about you (provided they do so in accordance with Wikipedia's policies) except you and people associated with you. You should not edit the article directly, but should confine yourself to making edit requests. ColinFine (talk) 22:56, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But I mean, jeepers creepers, the article has been there since 2006, and has had at least some of this info since then... stable version, much? WP:BRD is very much in play here. Revert, and technically its up to User:TrangaBellam to make their case on the talk page, but,User:Billumian47, you could do this yourself. Revert, and open a thread on the talk page with a short neutral statement to the effect of "An editor has deleted a lot of info with this edit, and I don't agree, so let them make their case here ad see how it goes" (As the subject, you pretty much ought to not participate).

On the merits, well.... "not a CV" is news to me (I suppose there's a rule about it somewhere, but so what). What the heck else is an article on an academic supposed to have? I've written a couple-few articles on academics (nobody I know, they just came across my desk) and I mean they're pretty much "She went to school here, she taught this there, she wrote that, she got this award, and here's some of her stuff". If she was a baseball player I'd describe her teams and batting average instead, and so forth. Right? I mean, this is what we do here, kind of?

And its straightforward. It's not like it says "he wrote this excellent book" and so forth.

As far as references, I believe that, at least for writings, the work itself is the reference. This goes for books and records I think but maybe not for hard-to-get articles etc. In that case, ref it, and if you don't have time, tag.

You could trim it some maybe, or rewrite it, and work that out on the talk page. I can see the point that the subject himself shouldn't participate in that, altho I guess you can't stop him. And if the subject overall is not notable, then WP:AFD is where you want to go. But assuming the article should exist, I would suppose a reader -- who, after all, has searched for this precise article, for info on this precise person -- might be interested in some of this info? Some readers anyway (nobody is required to read the whole article)? And the articles not to long. So why delete info that we already have? WP:BRD and talk. Herostratus (talk) 04:04, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help correct the reference of President Roh Tae-woo

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Summer_Olympics_opening_ceremony I need help to fix and correct the reference I make is for President Rob Tae-woo in attendance of the Opening Ceremony of the Games of the XXIV Olympiad, Seoul 1988, in Seoul, South Korea. 100.2.149.243 (talk) 19:12, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I made some tweaks to the references. Do the references look OK to you now, or do have a more specific suggestion? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 20:16, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New article about Artificial Intelligence

Hello, Im a designer with 30+ years in the industry. I want to write an article about the history of my start up that I was fortunate to found in 1994, Creativa World Communications, being the first interactive advertising firms in Central America. Some of the earliest known interactive design companies include R/GA, which was founded in New York City in 1977 and initially focused on motion graphics and special effects for film and television, but later expanded into digital and interactive design; and Razorfish, which was founded in New York City in 1995 and was one of the first companies to specialise in website design and development. Also Organic, which was founded in 1993 in San Francisco and was one of the first companies to offer web design services; and Agency.com, which was founded in 1995 in New York City and focused on developing interactive marketing campaigns for clients. Between 2020 and 2021 became the worlds first AI-powered Multidisciplinary Design Company. I want to be able to claim this through the article not because of my ego, but more because has been a difficult journey to get to this point and I don't want others to take the credit for it.Design is everything to me. I want to know if there's somebody that could help me writing this article in a way that would be accepted by Wikipedia.

Thank you very much! haimeluna (aris) Arisluna (talk) 20:08, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Arisluna: Hi there! Creating a new Wikipedia article can be challenging, especially when you have a conflict of interest (COI). To learn how to edit, I suggest you start at Help:Introduction. I suggest spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. Once you're ready to create an article, you would gather multiple independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of the company, and determine whether it meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you must declare your COI on your user page. Then you could follow the instructions at Help:Your first article, and be prepared for a process that will include waiting for review, rejections, and rewrites before an article is created. 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, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:20, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH! I guess it's going be very difficult that my claim will be accepted because of the COI . Arisluna (talk) 21:06, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Arisluna: It is a very difficult process when people write about their first hand experience with a company, and then struggle to find independent reliable sources for what they've written (see WP:BACKWARD). If you throw out everything you know and just paraphrase what the independent reliable sources state, you have a chance. GoingBatty (talk) 02:06, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Arisluna Thank you for your inquiry. Writing a new article from scratch is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, and I do not recommend that anyone start with that. Writing about a subject where you have a substatial conflict of interest, such as an article about yourself or your company, is strongly discouraged by our content guidelines. I also do not recommend paying someone to write the article for you, as most of the companies that claim to provide such services are scams, and even those that are not have a lot of hoops to jump through.

All of that said, the guidelines for what kinds of companies can have Wikipedia articles are spelled out here. The key is to have 3-5 reliable sources that were not produced by or in collaboration with the company, and that cover the company in some detail. If you can find 3-5 such sources, I suggest you add the company, along with links or citation information for the sources, to Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics and wait to see if a volunteer comes along who is interested in writing the article. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:23, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH! I guess it's going be very difficult that my claim will be accepted because of the COI . Arisluna (talk) 21:07, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]