Help desk
< October 6	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 8 >

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.

October 7

Martineau family

Please help again - sorry - ref number 17 is also in the red and I don't have the wherewithal to fix it - I always appreciate your help. 00:20, 7 October 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.38.42.62 (talk)

Fixed: I added the specific date for when the source was accessed. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 00:24, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adding TMDB links to articles

I have tried the last few years to add links for TMDB to various articles here but get an error or spam message. The website has been around since 2008 & is a legitimate site for researching & discussing movies, television, actors, etc. Beccib23 (talk) 03:06, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hi Beccib23! the issue with The Movie Database is that it is user-generated, and thus not really usable in Wikipedia as whatever data is in there can be changed easily by anyone and is not subject to rigorous editorial oversight which is required for reliable sources. I presume it's blacklisted and added to the sitewide filter because many people have misused this as a source, not because the site itself is illegitimate or spam. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 03:56, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't a lot of Wikipedia 'user-generated'? It can be changed, added to by users! Tell what the difference is? Beccib23 (talk) 04:54, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, that should be: Tell ME what the difference is. Beccib23 (talk) 04:54, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no difference. Wikipedia (all language versions of Wikipedia) is also an unacceptable source. Maproom (talk) 08:06, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, Beccib23, one Wikipedia article is never acceptable as a reference in another Wikipedia article. For a broader overview of the issue. see WP:CIRCULAR. Similarly, see WP:IMDB. Cullen328 (talk) 08:16, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"The use of IMDb as an external link is generally considered appropriate"

So then why not TMDB? Also, where do Wiki 'editors' get there info? From somewhere else, it just didn't create itself from a vacuum. Beccib23 (talk) 01:11, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia gets information from reliable sources. See WP:RS for what constitutes a reliable source. A source that takes its data from the general public is, as has been noted, "user-generated content" and is not considered reliable (see WP:UGC). Both IMDb and TMDb are UGC and therefore in almost all cases cannot be used as sources here. Sources like books, newspapers, and magazines, which have editorial oversight and don't just publish anything that any random person feels like writing, may be reliable. There is a list of frequently used sources, both reliable and unreliable, at WP:RSP. CodeTalker (talk) 01:29, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move Article from my sandbox to Wiki public

Hi, I've written and edited an article in the sandbox facility. How do I move it from there so it is available to the public on Wiki, please? Tiddlerwriggler (talk) 10:40, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tiddlerwriggler I have added a template which willl allow you submit the article for review. Do not do so yet or it will rapidly be declined. The only source you quote is the author's own website. To show that she is notable as an author you will need at least three quality sources meeting these criteria. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:21, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: User:Tiddlerwriggler/sandbox

Also, if C.L. Monaghan is a person not a million miles from yourself, please see WP:COI.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 11:38, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Repair needed to Jim Reeves article

[Header added to unconceal request hidden inside previous query.] {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.212.210.36 (talk) 20:59, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. I've messed up the Jim Reeves page, attempting to make a correction which was in fact wrong (my mistake). He died in a plane crash in 1964, so aged 40. I wrongly guessed 1963 (i.e. aged 39). Sorry for the problem / glaring error that I've caused. 2A00:23C4:B841:BE01:B805:801:77CB:B5E9 (talk) 12:50, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like this has been fixed. RudolfRed (talk) 00:01, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Special characters at Undecimal

Recent edits to the article Undecimal have introduced an unusual (at least to me) Unicode (I think) character, which does not display correctly in my browser (a very recent Firefox). It doesn't bother me personally. I'm just concerned that a wide swathe of our readership might have the same issue and be put off.

What is the ideal fix? Help:Special characters suggests that I should tag all of the relevant paragraphs, tables, etc. with HTML markup specifying Unicode. Another solution is to avoid using the character. Another solution is to wait a few years and hope that default browser font support improves. Mgnbar (talk) 14:59, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Duodecimal#Transdecimal_symbols also includes the dek character (along with el) but wisely says "After the Pitman digits were added to Unicode, the DSA took a vote and then began publishing content using the Pitman digits instead. They still use the letters X and E in ASCII text. As the Unicode characters are poorly supported, this page uses A and B", perhaps Undecimal should follow suit? Martin of Sheffield (talk) 15:21, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

...in today's money

Hi all

I sometimes see in articles references to historical costings with an attempt to express their approximate modern value, like "X cost £10,000 (£120,000 in 2019 terms)". Is there a consensus view on whether such "in 2019 terms" comments are useful, or unhelpful/undesirable? I have searched in vain. Thanks! Tobyhoward (talk) 15:47, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tobyhoward. As far as I'm aware, it's up to editor discretion. MOS:MONEY just says "In some cases, it may be appropriate to provide a conversion accounting for inflation or deflation over time." Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:54, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See {{Inflation}}. Generally I would always include it unless we are only talking about the last few years. Even 20 years ago will be outside the experience of some of our readers. Do look closely though at the table under "Usage", for some countries there is a very short history whereas for others there are centuries. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:00, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As an example, consider the following from the article Bridgewater Canal. It opened in 1760: "From Worsley to Manchester its construction cost £168,000 (equivalent to £27,543,120 in 2021)". Without the comparison it would seem to be less than the price of a house today! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:09, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That example should be fixed to remove the fake precision though. The two significant digits of "28 million" might already be slightly questionable; seven digits are clearly nonsensical. —Kusma (talk) 18:45, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OT, but a fair point. The editor who inserted that probably should have used r=-6. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 20:28, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

These are usually generated by {{inflation}}. They are reasonably popular at WP:GAN and WP:FAC, so I'd say they are generally considered useful (if you search for links to the template (not transclusions!) you will find many mentions where people suggest to use them). Sometimes other comparisons (like, what was a typical income for a skilled craftsman at the time, what was a typical annual rent for a house, how much was a loaf of bread) may be more helpful, especially when comparing across several centuries. —Kusma (talk) 16:00, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the further back in time you go the less helpful {{inflation}} becomes. For instance, in Geoffrey Chaucer we are told that Richard II granted him an annual pension of 20 pounds in 1394 (equivalent to £18,558 in 2021), which doesn't sound that generous (it's pretty much exactly minimum wage, assuming you are working a 35-hour week), but compared to the 14th century peasant who wouldn't have earned 3 pounds in that year (most of which would have been in a grain allowance rather than liquid cash) it suddenly seems a much better deal! Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 15:59, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I created {{USDCY}} a couple years ago, which makes this much easier (at least for US dollars). The way the inflation templates work, it's automatically updated whenever new figures are available; this prevents a situation where "in today's money" means 2013 and has to be adjusted later. I think it's basically always an improvement, and I add it whenever I see specific cash amounts being mentioned. jp×g 20:00, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]