Wikipedia:Help desk

Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)

• For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
• Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
• Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
• For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
• New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners (but please don't ask in both places).

Ask a question

August 26

Creating a new page for family member

I would like to create a wikipedia page for a family member, Samuel Krimm, professor emeritus at University of Michigan in physics (researcher in biophysics).

I understand there are conflict-of-interest issues, and it may not be best for me to create the page. I'm wondering how best to proceed.

It is possible to create a robust page using published sources such as the following:

• https://lsa.umich.edu/physics/people/emeritus/skrimm.html
• https://apps.lib.umich.edu/faculty-memoir/apps.lib.umich.edu/faculty-memoir/faculty/samuel-krimm.html
• https://lsa.umich.edu/biophysics/people/emeritus/skrimm.html
• https://macro.engin.umich.edu/profile/krimm-samuel/
• https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/Samuel-Krimm-15083197
• https://pubs.aip.org/physicstoday/article/75/9/30/2845466/The-trailblazing-career-of-Willie-Hobbs-MooreThe

If I were to limit myself to these sources, would that be sufficient to ameliorate perceptions of bias?

If not, who would be a better source to create the page? (Could some administrator at the University of Michigan do so?) Philscijazz (talk) 02:45, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't matter who writes it: they should not, and it will be deleted.

There's just not enough to hang an article on, by our standards. And I googled for anything else on him, got nothing. What you'd need is a biographical article in at least two reasonably notable independent publications. Couple-few meaty paragraphs about him in an article or section of an article in say the Detroit Free Press or a book or something. Where he came from, how come he got interested in the field, that sort of thing; not just a list of works, not just citations of his work, not just passing mentions.. University biographies don't count, they are not independent.

Doesn't have to be as big as the Free Press, but it can't be some very obscure venue. Ann Arbor paper -- maybe, if that's considered independent of having a special interest. I can't guarantee it. And, oddly, interviews probably won't be counted as a valid. So unless there are a couple of biographical articles hiding from google, it's not enough. Sorry. Herostratus (talk) 04:03, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

So, here is an article with a couple paragraphs involving Krimm. Benton Harbor, Michigan paper. Population 9,000. If it was about Krimm it'd help some. But its just him talking about someone else. It doesn't help. Herostratus (talk) 04:12, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, this helps clarify a great deal. The specifically biographical component required is probably a tough find, though maybe not impossible.

If I can find something in Ann Arbor News (or something comparable) I'll come back and ask for a judgment. If there is any bio from a professional society like American Physical Society (he won an award in High Polymer Physics in 1986), is that still too close? Philscijazz (talk) 04:20, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't know. It might be for me, but I'm pretty liberal. You should probably go to Wikipedia:Articles for creation and follow that process. And those people are pretty strict on bios. Anybody else know if the American Physical Society would be an independent source? Herostratus (talk) 05:06, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Correction: the APS/HPP prize was 1977. 1986 was a different milestone. Philscijazz (talk) 05:14, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Philscijazz, the requirements for an article for a professor such as Krimm are a bit different. They are covered in Wikipedia:Notability (academics). He is definitely notable enough for an article since he was elected a fellow of the American Physical Society in 1959. His name is already in Wikipedia on the list of fellows here. A reference for that award is the database at the APS website. That same database reports that he received the Polymer Physics Prize in 1977 for "his outstanding experimental studies and theoretical developments in infrared and Ra-man spectroscopy and X-ray scattering from natural and synthetic polymers". Material published on the University website, including his curriculum vitae is fine for facts about him. Biographical coverage in newspapers is not expected but can be very helpful. StarryGrandma (talk) 05:25, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Now, who can create the article? If a family member does, is that acceptable as long as there is an explicit disclaimer of the family relationship and all content is cited properly?

If I would be eligible to do it, I will set about doing it. If not, I'd need to look for a properly eligible creator. Philscijazz (talk) 05:32, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Philscijazz: If you think you're capable of writing a WP:NPOV article about this person that reflects the WP:SIGCOV they've received in WP:RELIABLE WP:SECONDARY sources or otherwise that meets the criteria listed in WP:NACADEMIC, then you can try. However, given your personal connection to the subject, you should first create a WP:DRAFT and then submit it to WP:AFC for review when you think it's ready. You should also follow the guidance given in WP:COI, particularly with respect to WP:DECLARECOI. Before you do start working on a draft though, you might want to take a look at WP:LUC, WP:NOTMEMORIAL, WP:PROUD and WP:OWN because once an article about this person is created, you won't have any type of final editorial control over it and won't be able to prevent others from editing it. In fact, you will for the most part be expected not to directly edit it yourself, but rather follow the guidance given in WP:PSCOI#Steps for engagement. So, it's quite possible that the article may subsequently move in a different direction from the one you originally intended or perhaps even include content that you rather it doesn't. So, if your primary intent is to highlight all the great things this person has done while perhaps overlooking some of their not so great moments, you might find WP:ALTERNATIVES to Wikipedia to be more to suited to such a thing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:08, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks very much.

I have direct knowledge of the subject, and there aren't any skeletons in the closet to worry about, no controversies. Not concerned about things "moving in a different direction" once independent editors take over, just aiming to establish some posterity for his work, which is considered important by the academy. But I appreciate the warning just in case.

He meets criteria 2 and 3 in the academic notability page (APS fellow 1959 and APS prize 1977).

If indeed university materials and CV are significant enough and secondary/reliable enough to qualify the article, then I think I can put this together and hand it off for evaluation. I'll do the best I can, and hopefully there will be enough to warrant an article. Philscijazz (talk) 06:33, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Part of what you will need to do as a family member is to essentially forget absolutely everything you know about him, and write only what you can find in published sources - this can be difficult to do. ColinFine (talk) 09:01, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, yes, I totally get that! Journo hat on, here. If it isn't in a legitimate/independent web source, it ain't in the article.

One thing I'm going to try to get right is when something very technical would benefit from translation/paraphrasing from jargon into a more vernacular expression for broader accessibility.

Also, in order to convey some particular aspect of his work, is it acceptable to cite a couple of his peer-reviewed journal articles? (This is where the paraphrasing might really come in handy.) Philscijazz (talk) 19:55, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Philscijazz WP:Technical gives good assessment on technical accessibility but please avoid WP:OR. Do check out something like {{Scholia}} which is useful to display all of his past writings in a visually compelling well including word bubbles using Wikidata. I’ve done similarly for Paul Brombacher which is my own WP:COI. My utter lack of knowledge of chemistry has prevented me from synthesising. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:24, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

This [1] is a passing mention but it hints there might be better sources out there. Assuming it's the droid we're looking for. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:56, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that's exactly the droid, thanks.

This is a related link (see original post above):

https://pubs.aip.org/physicstoday/article/75/9/30/2845466/The-trailblazing-career-of-Willie-Hobbs-MooreThe

But there aren't really personal bios along the lines that seem to be required of non-academics.

The original post here has a number of sources at the university that seem to be sufficient according to StarryGrandma. CV is found secondarily at the first link:

https://lsa.umich.edu/content/dam/physics-assets/physics-documents/Krimm_CV.pdf

So the only remaining question seems to be whether an immediate family member can create this article. Philscijazz (talk) 06:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Philscijazz All a family member need do is read WP:COIEDIT and comply with 1) the disclosure requirements and 2) use the articles for creation process. A more relevant issue in your case is your inexperience: writing articles is quite difficult for newcomers, even without a COI. So I suggest you contribute to existing articles for a while, to get used to our policies and guidelines before tackling the larger task. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:45, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I've gotten some tremendous start-up assistance from the Help Desk folks here, really appreciate it. Especially the process map from @Marchjuly, and I've seen the policies and guidelines. It makes me bold enough to try it in one shot, with a draft.

I do have a good deal of writing experience in various contexts, and I've been a frequent user of Wikipedia for many years. I'll compare with comparable existing articles for story format. I'm taking all the various cautions very much to heart, but I'm a pretty quick study on things like this, and I'm going to take considerable care with it - I totally understand it's not just a casual thing like a social media post or even business email. It's essentially a journalistic enterprise. I've been involved in enough formal writing to know the difference, and to adhere to policies. Thanks much. Philscijazz (talk) 20:05, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't really the journalistic enterprise many seem to think it is, and often users who approach it as such (including some say they're professional journalists with lots of formal writing experience) find themselves having a hard type getting articles created. My suggestion to you is to focus your draft's content on clearly establishing the subject's Wikipedia notability and keep that content as minimal as possible. Trying to do too much might allow whatever COI bias you have to start to creep in, and this, in turn, could start to make things a bit cloudy and harder to assess. You don't need really need to create anything more than a WP:STUB which has a clear claim of Wikipedia notability. Once the draft has been approved by AfC, you can then use the article talk page to make edit requests using Template:Edit COI regarding future expansion of the article, or (ideally) you can just leave it to others to build on what you've started. Everything you've posted above so far sounds great, but pretty much everyone wanting to create an article about a family member says the same thing. Many people in a similar situation as you think everything is great until their draft is declined the first time or things don't otherwise go as they want. At that point, some people get really frustrated and give up, lash out or do some combination of the two. I'm not trying to discourage you; I'm only suggesting you temper your expectations and think small. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:42, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks and understood. My approach will indeed be minimalistic, in the sense of ensuring everything is directly citable and relevant. And if I make a mistake, I'll be looking to the editorial authorities for continuing guidance (I know I'm a newbie, but I do have some amount of transferrable skills).

I'm approaching this with the mission of doing what's possible, and learning the Wiki Way along the way. I'm going to make my best effort to get it as close to right the first time, but I'm also prepared to be alerted to mistakes. My mission then will be to explore how to correct the mistake, if possible.

A good model for my approach is to observe my initial response to the suggestion that without a couple of conventional bio sources the article would be deleted (or really, the draft would be rejected - the draft process makes a whole lot more sense to me). I basically accepted that, and set my mission to see if any such thing existed in citable form on the web. When it was noted that the academic notability criteria were different, that gave me a new round of hope, and redirected my efforts. Philscijazz (talk) 22:37, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

One specific question about legitimate sources. The following link is a mixed source:

https://apps.lib.umich.edu/faculty-memoir/apps.lib.umich.edu/faculty-memoir/faculty/samuel-krimm.html

There is an official bio, and links to CV and a list of publications. May I presume that would be treated as authoritative? Is it acceptable to draw from this bio for the draft article I'm going to write? (Details are pretty much covered in the CV, but I can cross-check to be certain. He may have written the bio himself, but I presume it would have been verified by the university for publication.)

Following that is a Memoir section, written by him as author, and mentioning many other relevant figures in the history of biophysics at UMich (he is included in passing). I presume that this is not considered a source for his own article, but perhaps it might be a legitimate source for articles about others mentioned in the history. He had a particularly close and comprehensive view of the introduction development of biophysics research at the university. Philscijazz (talk) 20:28, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Philscijazz The main problem with that source and several others you are using is that they are not independent. We need about three sources which fully meet these criteria. I would advise you to focus on the awards, with proper citations: not external links in the body text but properly formatted as we do them, explained at this Help article. You can wikilink the Humboldt Prize, which helps show it is of significance. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:15, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I've been working on the draft.

I have a link to APS (the election as fellow, and the Polymer Prize), and I have a link to the Humboldt Prize website where he is listed by name. But thanks for the Humboldt wikilink, I'll reformat that so the body text goes to the wikilink, and I'll add the Humboldt website link as a reference. The link to APS is currently in the body text (I also have a wikilink to APS), but I can make that a reference instead as well.

I have a direct link in references to the CV on the university website (as @StarryGrandma suggested would be acceptable for an academic, and I'm using that as a source for birthdate, area of research, education, and career academic/administrative positions. Pretty cut and dry factual information. FWIW, he was a muck-a-muck in the biophysics programs in multiple schools at the university (LSA/undergrad, IST, Engineering, graduate program), which has one of the more prestigious physics departments around. But my approach was to let his actual appointments speak for him in that regard, without further editorial comment.

I also added a direct reference link to the list of his peer-reviewed publications published at the university website. If this is inappropriate I can remove it, I wasn't sure.

I am not using the memoir article as a source here, per se.

Would it be appropriate to link to his faculty pages at the university? I haven't included those at this point, but two of the three do include more detailed (technical, jargony) descriptions of his research program.

Finally, I'm adding references to his final two peer-reviewed journal articles where he and his colleague have proposed a new paradigm in the area of protein folding ("milieu folding"), and a generic description of that in the body text. That seems particularly notable from a scientific perspective.

I'm currently working to get the HTML formatting of the references correct (I was working in visual editor, and it seems like refs ultimately need to go deep into the source editing?), and I need to figure out the best method to declare COI (I'm a direct descendant, i.e., he is my father).

When I have a draft that seems ready to submit, is it appropriate to link that here in the Help Desk section for a "pre-review" as to technicalities? Or does that only happen once it's submitted, by the reviewing editors? Philscijazz (talk) 14:33, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Ideally, declare your COI both on your userpage (click on what is currently the redlink to your name to create that) and on the Talk Page of the draft. Best not to expand any more here in this thread: either comment on the Talk Page of the article or at the top of the draft using the {{AfC comment}} template. And yes, best to submit to get a review from those who are most experienced at doing these and who can accept/decline the draft. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:43, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I've done the declaration of COI in both places now (userpage and draft talk page).

Last question here: if I can't get the references HTML jump-formatting to work (I think that's my last pending tweak), can I just submit the draft and let the editors whip it into shape, or is that just too newbie to fly? Philscijazz (talk) 15:07, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Duh. I found the citation icon in the visual editor menu, and converted all my citations/references to correct form. Will be submitting the draft soon. Philscijazz (talk) 22:27, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, there seems to be disagreement on the CV point. The article was declined, due to the CV being considered not independent enough for factual information. (I thank them for the prompt response! Didn't have to wait months)

I don't think I have a way forward at this point. Philscijazz (talk) 02:39, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Jack Churchill (1880–1947)

Reference 6 is in red - please repair - I cannot work it put at all, thank you 175.38.37.197 (talk) 08:31, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 08:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

UK copyright query

Hello. I would like to use a photo from British newspaper from 1908. I have looked at the "image use policy" and the "when Does copyright expire" page but this kind of thing isn't my forte and I am struggling to grasp it. I believe the photo is relevant and beneficial for the article but would appreciate some guidance in normal English please! Thanks BJCHK (talk) 09:59, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@BJCHK: It's impossible to answer without knowing which image, from which paper, and/ or the identity of the photographer if known. Please provide a link, or details, or both. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:38, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@BJCHK My understanding is that if the photographer is unknown, the photo is in the public domain and you can upload it on Commons as such. Otherwise [2] it may be PD depending on when the photographer died, life+70 years is the line. If this is about a leadimage for a WP-bio, you can use it locally on en-WP if it's not in PD. Probably. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:45, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

BJCHK, if the newspaper was published before 1923, any copyright in it has expired, and you can upload an image to Commons and use it in any Wikipedia. (I also disagree with Gråbergs Gråa Sång's statement about unknown photographers: if you don't know who the photographer was, you won't be able to establish their date of death, and so won't be able to use the "after date of death" calculation.) Maproom (talk) 15:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

That's not what the Commons Help says, which is: Anonymous works: Photographs created before 30 June 1957: 70 years after creation if unpublished, 70 years after publication if published within 70 years of creation (so fine in this case) but Standard copyright term: Life + 70 years if the photographer is known. GGS is therefore correct. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:37, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Same minute. WE ARE BORG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:39, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom That, according to Commons, is the British part of the equation.

"If the work is a photograph with an unknown author taken before 1 June 1957 then copyright expires 70 years after creation or, if during that period the work is made available to the public, 70 years after that. "

I agree that the US part of it is fine, but Commons need both US and country-of-origin-if-other rules to be cleared. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:37, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom, @Gråbergs Gråa Sång @Pigsonthewing @Michael D. Turnbull - thank you for all your input. I will take Maproom's approach and upload it as it is over 110 years old now. For clarity, the article is Week of Self-Denial and the photo is of two of the central women standing outside a tube station collecting money for the cause. BJCHK (talk) 14:56, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Publishing My Work Entirely

How can I publish the entire page publicly? Masierra2008 (talk) 16:44, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Masierra2008: Assuming you're talking about Draft:Medusa Film, you'd use {{subst:submit}}, which you've apparently learned to use at User:Masierra2008/sandbox. Your draft does not have any inline citations that establish any wikinotability, so it definitely won't be considered as it is. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:56, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Appreciate it! Means to me! Masierra2008 (talk) 18:00, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Quack...Do you have another account by any chance? Theroadislong (talk) 18:02, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Harvey milk

Harvey Milk's wiki page has a random, uneditable section on Lithuania for some reason. Should be removed, but is a protected wiki. 2A02:C7E:300B:3A00:9935:E255:90AF:77D5 (talk) 18:32, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Done, thanks for pointing this out.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:42, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix! 2A02:C7E:300B:3A00:9935:E255:90AF:77D5 (talk) 18:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

why is this 2A00:23C4:C303:A901:586B:BD3B:C364:F081 (talk) 18:58, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

There was a random section because an editor thought it was an improvement. If you are curious you can look at the article history. TSventon (talk) 19:10, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Membership in a diffusing subcategory and also in its supercategory

Claude Jorda was both a judge of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (a UN tribunal) and a judge of the International Criminal Court (a non-UN international court). The article was included both in Category:French judges of international courts and tribunals and in its (usually) diffusing subcategory Category:French judges of United Nations courts and tribunals. (It was the only article included in both categories.) Not realizing the subtlety involved, I removed the supercategory. Now I'm wondering whether that was correct. If he'd only been an ICC judge, he should only be in the supercategory; and if he'd only been an ICTY judge, he should only be in the subcategory. There's a somewhat irritating asymmetry in the fact that his role at the ICTY is now explicitly reflected in the subcategory, whereas his role at the ICC is only implicitly reflected in that he's in the supercategory by virtue of being in the subcategory. Perhaps it was appropriate to put him in both categories after all? I couldn’t find anything about a case like this in WP:Categorization. Joriki (talk) 21:31, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Trying to set an account and create a wikipedia page

Is there a number to call to guide me as to how I can set up a wikipedia page? I have tried but it will not go thru. 45.49.230.182 (talk) 22:19, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

No, there is no phone number to call. There should be a link to create an account on your screen, or you may use WP:ACC. We write articles here, not "set up pages", and writing an article is the most difficult task to attempt here. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 22:27, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

There is no number, but there is a live chat. Look for the line at the top of this page that says "For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help." Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:55, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Okay. Let me know what you think before you speak. All I need to do is go do my thing. Masierra2008 (talk) 22:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps you meant to put this comment in the earlier section #Publishing My Work Entirely, @Masierra2008? (Not that I can make any sense of what you've said wherever it goes). ColinFine (talk) 22:59, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

August 27

reliable sources about computer games.

What are some reliable sources about modern computer games? Redstone catman (talk) 00:26, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:38, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Jack Churchill (1880–1947)

Ref number 6 is all wrong - I cannot work it all out, please repair. Thank you in advance. 115.70.23.77 (talk) 01:02, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

The access date on the source read: "27 August 20024". Please be more careful next time. Regards. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 01:07, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Articles citing sources allegedly published in the two-hundredth-plus century continue to have quite an overlap with articles eagerly mentioning tangential Middletons. -- Hoary (talk) 06:26, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Organization as author in website citation template

In the website citation template, how do I add the author when it's the name of a group or organization, like "Editorial board" or "XYZ Research Project"?

I get an error if I fill in Last name only, and if I add a "author" parameter in source.

Thanks! Tsavage (talk) 01:32, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

The parameters "author" and "author1" are aliases for "last" or "last1". Only one of these should be used. Jc3s5h (talk) 01:37, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Citations in headers?

I stumbled upon this article Silver thiocyanate that has citations in some headers. Should citations be in headers? Sorry, I couldn't find anything on the MoS. SecretSpectre (talk) 03:14, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

WP:CITEFOOT said: "Citations should not be placed within, or on the same line as, section headings." So no citations are allowed on the headers. You can move the citations to the body of the said section. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 03:28, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks SecretSpectre (talk) 03:52, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Want to know about new biography page

how i can make new biography page where is editor Tbz Fertilizer (talk) 05:21, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

The editor, for you, is wherever you found it in order to ask the question immediately above. Improve existing edits, always citing reliable sources. Once you've become adept at that, read and digest Help:Your first article. -- Hoary (talk) 06:19, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Tbz Fertilizer.

Since it appears likely that you represent the Pakistani fertiliser company TBZ, there are some things that it is very important for you to understand. (If you are not connected with them, then I apologise for my assumption: but you should still change your user name).

First, user names which suggest that they represent a company or organisation are forbidden. You will need to Change username (or abandon that one and create a new one, which must be personal to the individual who is editing).

Next, Promotion of any kind is forbidden anywhere on Wikipedia. If your purpose here is to promote (i.e. "tell the world about") your company, please find another outlet to do so. If your company meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability (and only in that case) then there can be an article about the company. The article will not belong to the company, will not be controlled by the company, could be edited by almost anybody in the world except people associated with the company, and will not be in any way for the benefit of the company, except incidentally. Please read WP:PROUD and WP:BOSS

If your company is notable in Wikipedia's sense, then eventually somebody will write and article about it: you are discouraged from doing so.

If you decided to go ahead with an article about your company (or anything closely associated with it, such as its founder, or a product) then please note the following:

- If you intend to work on any article connected with your company, you must read and understand our policy on editing with a conflict of interest, and should make a declaration of this status. If you are in any way employed or remunerated by the company, you must make a formal declaration of your status as a paid editor.

- Whoever creates an article, 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.

- Creating a Wikipedia article is extremely difficult for new editors, even where they haven't a conflict of interest. My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 10:15, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Notability for royal titles?

A question has come up with the article Amina Sabri. I tagged it for Notability because the article does not really talk about the subject herself: it is nearly all about her husband and her (royal) family instead. I also mentioned this on the original author's User Talk page (here), and he/she replied "Amina received the title of Her gloriness Al Nabila & the title of Princess. Would that make her notable?" WP:ANYBIO says that a person is likely to be notable if they have "received a well-known and significant award or honor". So the question is - do those royal titles satisfy the criteria of a "significant award or honor"? Gronk Oz (talk) 14:04, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Those "titles" sound pretty dubious given that Egypt is a republic, and I notice that there is no article about her husband. This looks very marginal to me. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:10, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Sabri married in 1924 and died in 1925 in the Kingdom of Egypt, but I agree notability is not obvious and the article is now at AfD. TSventon (talk) 14:48, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Gronk Oz, the "significant award or honor" criterion was debated at length in April, see Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#WP:ANYBIO at AfD. I don't believe that it covers royal titles, you could follow the AfD to see what other editors think. TSventon (talk) 15:01, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Wow, you weren't kidding when you said it was "debated at length"! Thanks for that link - it makes me feel a lot better that I did not know the answer. Apparently nobody else does, either (or everybody does, but they are all different). I read through the first few pages, but it's 4:30 am here and my pillow is calling me. I will be intrigued to see what comes from the AfD.--Gronk Oz (talk) 18:45, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

how to keep line breaks, in pasted text??

how do i display the line breaks, when pasting a lot of text from another source? below is the page where i need some help with this. please ping me, when you reply. thanks!

• User:Sm8900/nyc_services#formatted_list

Sm8900 (talk) 15:33, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Sm8900: You need to put additional line breaks to make an empty lines between paragraphs. --CiaPan (talk) 15:37, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

If you want to make separate indented lines, you needn't put additional lines between them, just prepend a colon : to each of them. See my reply here (on edit mide) for an example.. --CiaPan (talk) 15:41, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

You can use {{pre}} to surpress normal HTML formatting.

Please note that user space may be used for activity relating to Wikipedia only. The fact that you have no citations on that page inclines me to think that you are not developing something for Wikipedia. Please see WP:UPNO and WP:NOTWEBHOST. ColinFine (talk) 15:44, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

i am trying to determine which public resources might have enough published data to be worth noting in an overview article on services for that general region, or else alternately to make an article of their own for these items. Sm8900 (talk) 15:46, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

ok, yes {{pre}} works. thanks! Sm8900 (talk) 15:55, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. In that case, it looks as if you are working BACKWARDS, which is a very inefficient way of writing articles. ColinFine (talk) 16:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

true, but it's not just the content of the list, it is also the placement, visilbility, and overall role and structure. fyi, this seems to be posted at an official court website. i'm not sure why, or the basis for this. i'm just trying to see what's out there, overall. thanks. Sm8900 (talk) 16:55, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Sm8900, it appears that you have copied that material from New York City websites that are labeled "all rights reserved". Accordingly, that content is a copyright violation and it must be removed from Wikipedia. Am I misunderstanding anything here? Cullen328 (talk) 18:56, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

it is a public service, provided to the public to assist those in need. there is absolutely no copyright issue if i have not pasted it into an article. and furthermore this is public information that is meant to be disseminated to those in need. new york city also posts severe weather alerts. would it be a copyright violation if i disseminated that text, to the local communities affected? Sm8900 (talk) 15:00, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

here is the url for the website which provided that material. it is the official website of the federal US Probation Office, for the Eastern District of New York. it is not related to the city government of New York City in any official or structural way whatsoever,

• url: https://www.nyep.uscourts.gov/

Sm8900 (talk) 15:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Requested Citation

Citations are requested for living persons. I don't know what is needed but would be happy to supply any appropriate information to the editors. DBBorenstein (talk) 15:48, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, DBBorenstein. I'm assuming from the messages on your user talk page that this relates to the article Daniel B. Borenstein, and that that is about you.

The only thing that can render that article acceptable is to add citations to sources that are reliably published, wholly independent of your and your associates, and contain significant coverage of you specifically - see WP:42 for more detail - and to remove everything from the text which is not supported by a reliable source. (Not all sources have to be independent for this purpose - uncontroversial factual information such as the dates of your presidency can come from the Psychiatry Online article, for example - but most must be: see WP:IS). No other information from you will be relevant to the article, as a Wikipedia article should be based 100% on published sources.

Normally I would suggest that you find such sources, and edit the article to insert them and remove unsourced information; but because of your conflict of interest, that is strongly discouraged. Instead, what you would need to do is to make edit requests on the talk page Talk:Daniel B. Borenstein, making them as specific as possible, and being sure to cite a source for any information you wanted to add.

Alternatively, if you can find several sources that meet the criteria above, if you just put the citations on the talk page, it may be that somebody would be willing to edit the article then. ColinFine (talk) 19:35, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Notability template guidelines

Hi, so an editor commented that once an article had been previously AfDed and was kept, the article can not be tagged with a notability maintenance template. Special:Diff/1242561008. I think that's a fair interpretation for something that was fairly recent, but in the article in question, that AfD was years ago and the argument provided in AfD from four years ago leaves plenty of questions, such as claim that it's notable because it's listed in something and being in that list is not an indication of notability per the applicable WP:SNG. I know there's a guideline in place that precludes the use of PROD once it's been PRODded in the past, but is there such a guideline on maintenance template? Courtesy ping to @Alalch E.: Graywalls (talk) 16:56, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. The template instructions are not WP:PAG but this tag's instructions specifically request not to put it on on an article that has already survived a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion as "keep". That is because maintenance templates are for problems noticed by one editor and not resolved by that one editor... for a variety of reasons depending on the tag and the situation, but with this tag it's always approximately: "seems non-notable but I do not want to start a deletion process because I am not sure, as I have not done a thorough WP:BEFORE, and/or can not access some of the sources (etc.), but someone else who is sure either way should start the deletion process--or--remove the tag." And after a whole AfD, when multiple editors have been introduced to the problem and still supported keeping, it's no longer a maintenance issue, it's a consensus issue. A new consensus can be reached in the corresponding process. The tag does not help to notify someone of an issue anymore, people had already been notified, and a particular decision was made.

WP:WTRMT is about this: After an AfD, the issue has been adequately addressed (via AfD), and the maintenance template is not supported anymore given a "keep" outcome. Point 9 is especially illuminating. Some problems can never be resolved. An article on a non-notable topic which was kept in an AfD can only benefit from a new AfD as it's beyond the power of editors to resolve lack of notability. What a prospective notability tagger should do under those circumstances is refer to past discussions (which in the case of a keep outcome exist and provide informative clues), form better deletion arguments, and nominate again, following WP:RENOM. —Alalch E. 17:12, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

RENOM doesn't specifically forbids tagging article for notability. Also, the article in question is currently under discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#User:Macgirl and there's no indication of tagging previously AfD'd article with notability template. Graywalls (talk) 18:26, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I mentioned that essay because I suggested renominating, but renominating shouldn't be done either if it would be too soon, per the essay. What do you think about the other things I said? —Alalch E. 18:54, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Alalch E.:, If it was nominated for notability failure five years ago, but it was kept, because one person said "it's in the list of top 30 places in the city to go eat and it's listed in the state heritage listing" followed by two "keep per nom", there's a cause for tagging notability, absent guideline prohibiting it, as in the case of PROD. Once PRODded, it can't be prodded again. There's no such thing as this for notability and I find the tagging for questionable notability perfectly reasonable. You've not cited policy disallowing it, as in the case of PROD. WP:ESSAY is not a policy. Graywalls (talk) 21:37, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I feel like you're disregarding around 90% of what I wrote and are basing yourself on my non-essential mention of WP:RENOM which I retract as entirely not the point. How about the other things I said, including references to the template's documentation and WP:WTRMT? —Alalch E. 21:54, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

As the editor who originally added this tag, I'd just like to comment as follows:

1) As Graywalls has noted, the tag was added because there is an ongoing discussion at WP:COIN on the notability of the building in question (and several other related articles). A new consensus seemed to be forming, contrary to the old AfD, and it seemed very likely that the article would be going to AfD for a second time.

2) I added the tag (with a link to the relevant COIN discussion in the edit summary) in the hope that new eyes would be brought to the issue and perhaps would provide either new notability sources or a new interpretation of GNG that would satisfy all parties.

3) Two new editors did indeed find their way to COIN as a result of that tagging, which can only be a good thing. Given the circumstances I'm not sure that I can see any genuine problem in trying to get as many eyes on the issue as possible.

4) The addition of the tag could only have been of benefit to those in favour of retaining the previous consensus, even though I am personally in favour of deletion.

Hopefully it's clear that I added the tag in good faith. However, if I added the tag contrary to policy (which doesn't seem clear from the thread here) then I'm perfectly happy to take instruction on that point. Axad12 (talk) 18:37, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, while I disagree with your reasoning, there is no doubt that you added the tag in good faith, and while there isn't a "green checkmark" policy about the use of such templates, such use is contrary to template instructions which request not to put the tag on an article that has already survived a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion as "keep", and the how-to guide about maintenance template removal also suggests removing and not readding the notability tag during and after an AfD. It's because an AfD always addresses the issue of notability. If it failed to address the issue of notability and resulted in the article being kept, it was defective and should undergo either a deletion review or the article should be renominated (like Graywalls did after I removed the tag). A new consensus about deletion on notability grounds can only form in an AfD. Deletion discussions are conducted through a formal process, and for a discussion about notability to create a consensus to delete it needs to happen within the process. The notability tag is not for inviting editors to COIN. To alert more editors to a COIN discussion that also has to do with sourcing it would have been better to notify relevant wikiprojects like Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture and Wikipedia:WikiProject Protected areas (Tribeca West Historic District is a protected area broadly construed). —Alalch E. 13:07, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

From a practical standpoint I can see that having a discussion about notability at COIN and then having a separate discussion about notability at AfD is simply an unnecessary duplication.

However, that was just how the issue developed at COIN. I don't advise anyone to read the COIN thread because it is very long, but basically some articles were found to be very promotional and the question arose of whether (a) they needed to be significantly re-written immediately or (b) if referral to AfD would be desirable in the first instance to avoid spending time on reworking content which might be deleted in the near future on notability grounds. The notability tags were thus just a very short-term pragmatic expedient while that discussion was ongoing (and evidence to that effect was clear in the thread that was linked in the edit summary for the original tag).

If you have an issue with that then, to be honest, I think you are being overly doctrinaire. Axad12 (talk) 13:35, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I think you're doing great at COIN and it's good that you've put the notability tag on the concerning articles in general, as you were unsure about starting the AfDs yourself. However, one of the articles underwent an AfD before, was kept, and it is only with respect to that article that I disagree that it should have received the notability tag. It should have been nominated for deletion again. And that is what happened, and it's good that it did. So overall I don't have an issue, and thank you for what you are doing, but with this minor aspect, I do have an issue. —Alalch E. 13:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Rule and guidelines (both on Wikipedia and elsewhere) are generally there to serve a specific purpose. If the manner in which something was done was clearly in tune with the general thrust of that purpose, but the specifics may have been ever so slightly sketchy, I’d suggest that sweating over the specifics, as you seem intent on doing, is a waste of time. In the case in point, absolutely no harm was going to be done by a notability tag being in place for a few days. Far more harm has resulted from the waste of time caused by those who persisted in removing it, and arguing about overly doctrinaire application of rules. Axad12 (talk) 14:05, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

No, harm has resulted from putting the notability tag in a situation for which there is a preexisting general sense that it should not have been put, leading to unnecessary friction. Would have been better to choose a non-controversial method to do the same thing. Was not already kept in AfD—great; was kept in an AfD—not great. —Alalch E. 14:08, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Apologies but I take no responsibility for any loss of time incurred by editors performing pointless acts. If you want to waste your time edit warring over a good faith very short-term notability tag, and then waste further time arguing about it here, then that is on you. Axad12 (talk) 15:07, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

You're unnecessarily agitated about this. You're also accusing me of edit warring, which is simply untrue and that's not very collegial of you. I am not criticizing you specifically. What I saw is a notability tag on an article kept in an AfD, I removed the tag, wrote to the tagger that notability tags don't belong on articles kept in an AfD, I was pinged here, and here I explained my view. What else am I supposed to do? Who's to say it's short-term? You know how it goes with tags. A notability tag on any article kept in an AfD should be removed. You think that it can be in tune with the general thrust of [some legitimate] purpose, and I do not think that it can. That is what I have been explaining, but it's fine to disagree. —Alalch E. 15:23, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Changing a profile photo

Hello,

I am working with a musician who wants there picture changed on their Wikipedia page. However I haven't got confirmed status.

Can anyone help me? Richard.Scotts (talk) 21:46, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

We don't have profiles here, we have articles. You may work with other editors to upload an image at Files For Upload. You will need to formally disclose your connection, I will post information on your user talk page as to how. 331dot (talk) 21:52, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Richard.Scotts. You might also want to take a look at c:Commons:Licensing and Wikipedia:Image use policy for reference. Uploading an image and then adding it to an article is technically not really a difficult thing to do, but only certain types of images can be uploaded and used. It's the latter part that most people have trouble with because it mainly has to do with Wikipedia:Copyrights and what types of images Wikipedia's licensing policy allows it to host. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Richard.Scotts: Please see WP:A picture of you, which simplifies and explains all the points made above. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

How to get article on de.wikipedia.org to be posted on wikipedia.org?

de:Sean Smith (Bassist) – Wikipedia Ssmithbasscomp (talk) 22:19, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

By translating it. I did it just now: Sean Smith (bassist). If you wish changes to be made to the article, please suggest specific changes on the talk page, and please read the guideline on managing a conflict of interest on Wikipedia. —Alalch E. 22:49, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Alalch E. for completeness, articles from other Wikipedias should only be translated if they are WP:Notable in English Wikipedia and many foreign language articles do not meet the levels of WP:verifiability that is expected in English Wikipedia. TSventon (talk) 23:19, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Alalch E.: It also seems a bit odd (at least to me) that you translated the article and then added {{More citations needed}} with your very next edit. It would seem better (at least in my opinion) to find the citations first or leave out any unsupported content. In addition, you translated that article within 30 minutes of the OP asking their question. So, you're either fluent in German and a really good translator, or perhaps used AI or some other kind of software. If it's a case of the latter, be careful of WP:MACHINETRANSLATION and WP:LLM. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:25, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up but I have contributed 59.6% of edits to the LLM essay, and there probably isn't a single sentence in it (maybe a few) that I didn't either write or change. The article I translated is short with like 30% proper names. When translating, it's impractical to copy over bit by bit and provide attribution for each edit. The claims are supported by references already in the article, they are non-contentious, and it's just about adding the citations, which is not the same as finding and adding references. This is not unverifiable material. The topic is a biography of an eminent bassist, it's a topic I'm familiar with, and I was surprised that there wasn't an article. A minor glitch in the fabric. —Alalch E. 08:44, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Bot Request: Numb3rs Cleanup

I'm not sure how to do this. There may be a bot that can do the legwork. I've noticed that the TV series Numb3rs/Numbers lists the show as named "Numbers", stylized "Numb3rs". The various pages that refer to the show are inconsistent, with some saying "Numbers", others saying "Numb3rs", and still others saying both. See David Krumholtz, Peter MacNicol, and Sabrina Lloyd for examples of the inconsistency. Of course, in-line and footnote citations should refer back to whatever a published article actually used, so matters are much more complex. It looks like this hasn't been discussed in a decade, and a lot of new links have been added.

Is there a way to make this cleanup happen, without doing so manually? Just as a proactive note, I'm dropping the ball now; I just wanted to put this in the hands of someone more experienced. Thanks! 100.19.66.49 (talk) 22:38, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

August 28

Accessibility question

Greetings! I had a question and I really have no clue where to ask it -- so please feel free to point me in the right direction if this isn't the place.

A lot of SpaceX related articles (List of Falcon 9 first-stage boosters, Vandenberg Space Launch Complex 4, SpaceX Dragon 2) use the "chasing arrows/recycling symbol" (♺) in tables to denote that a piece of hardware has been reused from a previous launch.

My question is this... is using the ♺ symbol problematic from an accessibility perspective? Do screen readers properly parse these symbols? Does it matter if they don't?

Some guidance from experienced editors/admins would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance. -- RickyCourtney (talk) 00:22, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello. That is a good question. I am not an expert in this area but my understanding is that is a Unicode symbol. And Steve Faulkner, who is an accessibility expert has made a list of which Unicode characters two of the major screen readers can view. JAWS supports 5400 symbols including that symbol. NVDA supports 3400 symbols and does not include that symbol. I am not sure if those pages are up to date but they do seem to imply that there is uneven support. I am not working in a Windows environment but someone who was could download the latest version of NVDA and see if this still holds true. I've reached out to Steve and will see if he has feedback. Jessamyn (my talk page) 00:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@RickyCourtney The symbol is used in a data table. Its meaning can only be determined by opening a note in the table's header row. I don't regard that as accessible. If the information is seen to be important then it should be in its own column where it can be represented by a standard {{yes}} template or similar, and marked sortable. I may be WP:BRD and implement that myself to gauge reaction. Bazza 7 (talk) 08:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@RickyCourtney and Bazza 7: I'm here from a pointer at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Accessibility where this was brought up. As a screen reader user I agree the solution in the above message be a good idea. I can reproduce those results with JAWS and NVDA. Graham87 (talk) 14:58, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bazza 7 I would support you suggesting whatever bold changes you think are necessary. -- RickyCourtney (talk) 15:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Pushpin map

Hi, is there anyone who knows how to create pushpin maps? If so, can someone please tell me how I can make one for my draft Draft:Malmsbury Youth Justice Centre, same as the one used on Melbourne Youth Justice Centre. TYIA — MaxnaCarta  ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:10, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi MaxnaCarta. Sometimes the best thing to do in a case like this is to go and check to see how the pushpin map was created in the other article. So, go to Melbourne Youth Justice Centre and click on "Edit" at the very top of the page. In the editing window that opens up, you should see the syntax that's being used to create the map. It looks like it's being done using parameters for the template {{Infobox prison}}. Copy-and-paste that infobox syntax into your WP:USERSANDBOX and play around with the parameters by replacing the information for Melbourne with the corresponding information for Maimsbury. Once things look the way you think they should look, you can then copy-and-paste what you did into your draft. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:37, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Banner shell format

What does "1=" do at the end of banner shell on Talk pages? e.g. WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|1= Orygun (talk) 05:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Orygun. If this is not explained in the documentation for Template:WikiProject banner shell, then I think it's just a way of telling the template that everything following the parameter |1= is just an embedded Wikiproject banner template. It might not even be needed for the banner shell template to work, but some people just add it out of habit since such a parameter is sometimes needed in other templates. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Orygun: |1= can be placed anywhere in a template call and specifies the value of the first unnamed parameter. It's necessary if the value contains an equals sign. See the second bullet at Help:Template#Hints and workarounds. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:19, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I read referenced section, but still don’t understand what this code does. Here’s what I was looking at … Talk:Hillsboro Health District station … Does this need a 1= to link banner class with project importance?Orygun (talk) 21:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Orygun: Simple test: add the |1=, click "Show Preview" and see what happened. If nothing appears to have changed, then it probably doesn't matter whether it's used; if, however, a whole new world suddenly appears, then perhaps it does. Please note I'm neither a template expert in real life nor do I play one on TV.

All joking aside, though, templates seem to essentially work based on what their parameters are and how information is entered for these paramater; so, I think PrimeHunter's answer above hit the nail on the head. Since templates tend to have multiple parameters, the paramters are often given specific names like |class=, |importance=, |listas=, etc., or are "unnamed" and use integers like |1=, |2=, |3=, etc. The {{WikiProject banner shell}} template doesn't have have a parameter named |Individual WikiProject banners go here= but instead uses |1=, and it's documentation says that's where to add the individual WikiProject banner templates.

Problems seem to happen when you try to use a combination of the pipe character | and just an ordinary equal sign in a template like {{Wikiproject banner shell|=}}. The pipes divide the templates into parameters and when all the parameters have specific names, it matters not which order they're added because the template will always display them in their intended order. Problems happen, however, when the template doesn't know what information belongs to which parameter, and it has no way of figuring that out itself. In the case of the banner shell template, the template which of its parameters have specific names and which one is unnamed. It also knows the "unnamed" parameter is where the individual Wikiproject banner templates go; therefore, when the template sees an empty pipe, it just assumes that's supposed to be |1= and treats it as such. It's probably more correct to use |1=, but it doesn't seem to matter because the template is able figure out that's what you mean. Now, if you add something else beside WikiProject banner template after that empty pipe (e.g. a string of text), then the template will just display that string of text where you'd expect to find WikiProject banners.

Anyway, that's how I understand things. I'm sure someone more experienced in templates will correct me if I'm wrong, but often messing around with templates in your user sandbox is a good way to see how the work. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:51, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Orygun: |1= is usually only needed if the value has a "free" equals sign. That's rarely a problem with {{WikiProject banner shell}} but often with some other templates which can for example have url's in parameters. Try previewing Talk:Hillsboro Health District station with this where I inserted a url with an equals sign which counts as free by MediaWiki:

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|
{{WikiProject Oregon|importance=Low}}
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hillsboro_Health_District_station&action=history
{{WikiProject Trains|Stations=yes|importance=low}}
}}

It fails badly with a very confusing preview warning about an unknown parameter with a bizarre name. MediaWiki locates the first free equals sign (which happens to be inside a url) and thinks that everything to the left of the equals sign is a parameter name which is assigned the value to the right of the equals sign. In this case the parameter name becomes {{WikiProject Oregon|importance=Low}} https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title, and the value becomes Talk:Hillsboro_Health_District_station&action=history {{WikiProject Trains|Stations=yes|importance=low}}. Mediawiki allows parameter names to be the result of template calls so {{WikiProject Oregon|importance=Low}} is evaluated before MediaWiki decides what the parameter name is, causing the bizarre name in the preview warning. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:47, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Coding problem

Hello. I can't figure out why the second navbox on the user page won't format. The coding works on both (I tested the reverse order and the same thing, the first one shows and the second one doesn't). Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 09:49, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Randy Kryn: The page is in Category:Pages where post-expand include size is exceeded - there are so many sub-templates in each navbox that the software is not prepared to process them all. See the category description for more detail. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks John of Reading. The first navbox works even though it contains many navboxes, so is there anyway of including all the navboxes in collapsible parent navboxes? The topic seems like an all or nothing deal. An idea, can there be a White House subpage which can contain all of the navboxes and then link to it in the navbox section? This would work around the software restriction:

Randy Kryn (talk) 10:42, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Randy Kryn: I'm not sure what the MOS has to say about mainspace sub-pages like that one. I see that at {{Navboxes}} there's a warning about the post-expand include size, and a suggestion about using {{Navboxes top}} and {{Navboxes bottom}} instead, which may help you to squeeze the original collapse list into the article. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:23, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for taking so much time to check details. I'll look at the links and hope I understand them (my tech understanding is in the negatives). Randy Kryn (talk) 11:27, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Tried the coding as I understood it and nothing showed when the 'open' tab was pushed, so lost the links using that coding. Taking my coding sense into account I probably did it wrong. Someone marked the 'White House/Residents' subpage for speedy deletion, saying it was a duplicate of the 'List of United States presidents' page, so I removed the speedy. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:40, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Randy Kryn: Please always save your broken code somewhere if you request help with it. You didn't save it so I cannot say what you did wrong but this works. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:18, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

PrimeHunter, if I do coding it's usually wrong, but thank you! That looks good and may solve the problem (I'll try it on the White House page). Much appreciated. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:23, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Many W's

Hello. On the articles

• 2000 NCAA Division I Outdoor Track and Field Championships
• 2007 NCAA Division I Indoor Track and Field Championships
• 2008 NCAA Division I Indoor Track and Field Championships
• 2014 NCAA Division I Indoor Track and Field Championships
• 2017 NCAA Division I Indoor Track and Field Championships

there are a bunch of section headers that start with a "w" for the women's events. I do not see the point, is that a convention I am unaware of? Polygnotus (talk) 14:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Trackinfo: pinging Trackinfo who made these changes here with the mysterious editsummary "sorting". Polygnotus (talk) 14:11, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

If this is a workaround for a problem I do not know about, perhaps a better workaround can be found? Polygnotus (talk) 14:13, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

It would make more sense to simply describe each as "men's..." and "women's..." in my opinion, but I don't know if there was a reason for this formatting. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:18, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah if you look at, for example, 2001 NCAA Division I Outdoor Track and Field Championships then its just "men's..." and "women's...". It seems like these specific years are different, for some reason beyond my understanding. Polygnotus (talk) 21:38, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Polygnotus and Trackinfo: The guideline MOS:HEADINGS says section headings should be unique within a page, so that section links lead to the right place. I guess it was done to satisfy that, but the implementation looks bad. Adding "Men's" or "Women's" to every heading would be better but give a lot of redundancy. I sometimes just ignore this guideline when there is no good way to implement it. If there are two sections called "100 meters" then 2000 NCAA Division I Outdoor Track and Field Championships#100 meters links the first, and the second can be linked with 2000 NCAA Division I Outdoor Track and Field Championships#100 meters 2. Few editors will realize that and it's not done in automatic edit summaries for section edits but I still think it's the best option here. The table of contents will work correctly by adding "_2" to the section link. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:21, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

It was produced as a means to force locating when linking results from other articles by making the women results uniquely titled from men's results in the same article. At the time, and still now, the "_2" does not function frequently, taking a link to the wrong place, confusing readers.Trackinfo (talk) 17:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Does anyone know the Phabricator ticket number? Polygnotus (talk) 18:22, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I think ideally, that including headings above it in the structure should work, so something like [[2017 NCAA Division I Indoor Track and Field Championships#Women's#100m]] would be useful.Naraht (talk) 18:43, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

question re category role

hi. could someone please tell me, what is the purpose of Category:Wikipedia categories named after English musical groups? my head is spinning, in trying to figure this out.

isn't it better to simply use the actual category, namely Category:English musical groups? could someone please help me out here? please ping me if you reply. thanks! Sm8900 (talk) 14:34, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Sm8900:

I guess Category:English musical groups contains English musical groups.

And Category:Wikipedia categories named after English musical groups contains Wikipedia categories that contain articles about English musical groups.

So once a band gets really big and multiple articles have been written about them, for example The Beatles, then a category is made.

Category:The Beatles is then listed in Category:Wikipedia categories named after English musical groups

Hope that helps.

Polygnotus (talk) 14:40, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

ok yes, i can see how that would make sense. so the main category is for articles on bands, and the category "wikipdia categories named after..." is for categories named after bands. ok, yes that helps. thanks! Sm8900 (talk) 14:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia inaccuracies

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Nothing is going to happen here. The original post is a rant, and we don't need to spend more time or attention on this one. Cremastra (talk) 23:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

---

I have seen hours of videos from a large number of sources, and they refute nearly all discussions from Wikipedia and its sources. Thus I have declared that Wikipedia is not a viable source of accurate information, and is being removed from my information sources. If Wikipedia wants to call the Jan. 6 protests an INSURRECTION, it does so knowing that the FBI had stated that the Protests did NOT incorporate elements of,the definition of an insurrection. Thus Wikipedia stating or restating that,Jan 6 was in insurrection, is deemed to be Election Interference. 172.115.207.14 (talk) 14:44, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Have you checked if your sources are reliable? Polygnotus (talk) 14:45, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, by the sound of it, you'll be happier not looking at Wikipedia. Have a good day. ColinFine (talk) 14:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

IP editor. Wikipedia does not claim to be a reliable source. Readers are expected to be able to assess the sources it cites. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

if there is an encyclopedia anywhere else that provides separate articles for every Egyptian pharoah, every Roman emperor, and every King of England, let me know and i will take a look. as far as events within the last five years, that's not necessarily where wikipedia's greatest strengths are. Sm8900 (talk) 15:11, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

If you bother to actually read January 6 United States Capitol attack, you will see that the article does not call the attack an "insurrection" in Wikipedia's voice. The only place that the word "insurrection" appears in the lead section is in describing Trump's articles of impeachment. Much later in the article, in a section about terminology, the article discusses the various words that media organizations used to describe the events of January 6, but does not conclude in Wikipedia's voice that January 6 was an insurrection. As for the FBI, we often hear from Trump's supporters that the FBI is a thoroughly corrupt deep state institution that cannot be trusted because it is biased against Trump. Now, we hear that the FBI is the ultimate authority in determining what is and is not an insurrection. Both claims are false. Cullen328 (talk) 19:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Declare away. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:24, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång I thought the exact same words. Cremastra (talk) 23:10, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Editing Under Categories

Hello my name is Brian. I am new to editing in Wikipedia, and I was wondering if someone can help me on how to add new info to pages in categories? SaberPhoenix01 (talk) 16:52, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@SaberPhoenix01 It would be relatively unusual for newcomers like you to edit the category pages. These are present to allow readers to navigate to articles. Hence Category:Hybe Corporation singles lists the articles which are songs from Hybe Corporation. You might reasonably want to edit these individual articles, or even add an article about a new single which you would add to that category by using a tool like WP:HotCat on the new articles page. See also Help:Category. If I have misunderstood what you want to do, please explain in more detail here and someone will help you. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Brian. You add an article (or other page) to a category by editing the article, not the category.

So, to add Eve, Psyche & the Bluebeard's Wife to the category Category:Hybe Corporation singles, you would insert

[[Category:Hybe Corporation singles]]

into Eve, Psyche & the Bluebeard's Wife, usually at the bottom.

(Having said that, I'm not sure why you were trying to add that single to the category, because it appears it was by a different band, though with some of the same members. But I haven't looked into it closely). ColinFine (talk) 18:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

According to the article, that single was written by a collective including the person who founded the Hybe Corporation. Whether that makes it one of their singles and thus a relevant member of that category, I leave to experts in the music of Korean girl groups. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Regarding adding relationship information to "Personal Life" section of page

Hello, I'm asking for assistance on behalf of Charles Fleischer and his wikipedia article page. He has been in a relationship since July 2023, but I have no way to add a citation for this besides his facebook relationship status. How else can I cite information about his updated relationship with his partner? Thank you. Elwoodziggurat (talk) 20:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Elwoodziggurat.

First of all you must read about editing with a conflict of interest, to understand what you should and should not do. You are strongly advised to make a formal declaration of your connection with Fleischer on your user page. If you are in any way employed or remunerated in connection with this, you must make a formal declaration of your status as a paid editor.

In answer to your question, I'm afraid that you can't. Wikipedia articles should be based 100% on information verifiable from reliable published sources. If Fleischer's relationship has not been discussed by indepedent reliable sources, then it should not at present go into the article. ColinFine (talk) 21:09, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I disagree with ColinFine's interpretation of policy here. The relevant policy language can be found at WP:ABOUTSELF. If there is no reasonable doubt about the authenticity of the Facebook account, the relationship can be mentioned and referenced to the Facebook page. The other person should not be mentioned by name. Cullen328 (talk) 21:19, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

New page submission

I'm an old lady, and I really want to submit this page for CC Lane. I attended a book club where she spoke. As a 70 year old retiree, she began a new career writing romance novels and is doing really well. We all love her new success. I've submitted some of the links I found. I have copies of press releases, but I don't have the links. What else can I do. LenorWilliams (talk) 21:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello! The links you added prove that CC Lane exists and that she published books, but they don't prove that she's a well-known author who has been written about by major newspapers or studied by academics. Wikipedia has notability requirements, so a certain amount of independent press is needed before someone qualifies for an article. It's also worth noting that it's not always fun having an article about yourself. Once they're created, they're public and out of your control. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, LenorWilliams.

The first thing I will say is that writing a new article is an extremely challenging task for a new Wikipedia editor, and most editors who attempt it before they have spent time learning how Wikipedia works have a disappointing and frustrating experience. My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft.

The good news about your sources is that neither links nor copies are required: as long as you can provide bibliographic information (author, title, publisher, date, page number etc), that is enough. If a legal copy is available online, then you can also provide a link to it, but that is a convenience to the reader or reviewer, not an essential part of the citation.

The bad news is that press releases won't help. 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. That is the sort of source you require, and unless you can find several such, no article is possible. ColinFine (talk) 21:17, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

LenorWilliams, if you are, as you say, an old lady, I expect that you'll have some recollections of one or more among World Book Encyclopedia, Encyclopedia Americana, and Encyclopædia Britannica. None of these would have so freely used language such as "fascinating romance novels", "talented writer", "incredible emotional and passionate journeys", "fresh perspectives", "captivating tales", or "amazing romance novels"; and certainly none would have used "you" (either for an undefined person or for the reader). Wikipedia too is an encyclopedia, and in the dispassionate nature of their language, encyclopedias have changed little during the last century. (Of course, if you can specify the reliable source that talks of "amazing romance novels", in those words, it may be appropriate to quote that source.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

August 29

Cite web error because URL contains spaces

Reference number 4 in Michael Horowitz (endocrinologist) (ref name="AO Media note") is reporting an error, and I can't see how to fix it. The error message says "Check |url= value". Clicking on the Help link, the problem seems to be that the URL contains blanks. But the actual URL does contain those blanks - when I paste that URL into a browser it works perfectly. So can any kind person let me know how I can fix the Ref to remove this error? Gronk Oz (talk) 01:14, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: Try replacing the each of the spaces with %20 RudolfRed (talk) 01:25, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

See Percent-encoding RudolfRed (talk) 01:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I pasted the URL into a browser and then copying back into Wikipedia, which had the effect of replacing spaces with "%20". TSventon (talk) 01:34, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done @RudolfRed:@TSventon: Thank you! I wish the Help for Cite Web had this simple work-around.--Gronk Oz (talk) 07:54, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I am seeing inaccurate information.

I am seeing inaccurate information. PamelaHarrLud (talk) 07:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@PamelaHarrLud: In order for anybody to help you, I think we will need more information. Which particular article, what is inaccurate, and ideally can you provide a reputable source with the correct information? Gronk Oz (talk) 07:59, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I am no longer married to Sean Ludwick. That is the first thing. I am referred to as Spouse.

Second, my sons are not relevant in this and I do not know why they are mentioned and they were NOT 11 and 13 at time of the accident. They were 8 and 11.

There is hearsay in this entry and not fact, additionally.

Who created this entry ? PamelaHarrLud (talk) 21:12, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Does this have to do with Sean Ludwick? 331dot (talk) 08:03, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, this is the internet... Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:44, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@PamelaHarrLud: Please see Our FAQ for people mentioned on Wikipedia. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:44, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Did you post this Wikipedia entry ? There is inaccurate information here. PamelaHarrLud (talk) 21:10, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

It still says "he is married to Pamela Harrison Ludwick...."

Why did you create this Wikipedia posting in the first place ? PamelaHarrLud (talk) 21:54, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

At the time you wrote your comment the article said that "he married" ... this is a fact, apparently conceded by yourself. The article was presumably written because the article subject has become notable because of his various actions. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:25, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

It currently says:

Spouse Pamela Harrison Ludwick

Why are his sons relevant to wikipedia entry ?

Who was the first person to write this entry about Sean Ludwick ? PamelaHarrLud (talk) 22:37, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Logs

On my commons.js I have a couple of scripts that add links, one I can go directly to a user's deleted contributions (without going through contributions) and another so I can go directly to edit mode of my main sandbox. Is there an equivalent that will give a direct link to my logs (without going through contributions)? Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Jimfbleak: User:PrimeHunter/My logs.js. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:07, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter:, great, many thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

First time editing - help needed

So basically I'm going to China soon. I'm Vietnamese. We fly in an airline called Lucky Air, a "budget" airline based in China. We will fly to Lijiang from Cat Bi International Airport, located in Haiphong. I checked the destinations and there wasn't Haiphong in the Vietnamese section. Added it but it shows the country is Haiphong. I wanted to add Haiphong into the Vietnamese group but based on my name, I have never edited anything (well, did change one letter from non-capital to capital in a future Singapore metro station since I used to be obssesed with it) so I need help. I'm kinda sure some veterans will laugh but hey, this is a first time editer. The page:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucky_Air Idonteditjustwatching (talk) 13:42, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

This would need a citation from a reliable source. That said, many of the destinations at Lucky Air are already uncited. It may be possible to cite them from timetables, but these are primary sources.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 14:02, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

videos

On the home page after I've told you what I'm searching for, all I see is videos for that search. You are aware that the tabs at the top of the page include "videos". So why are they there? My most frequent searches are for album jackets for logging my cassette tapes. Sometimes, I don't know which album i need, so I use the song and artist for my search. When I do that, I have seen the song and click on it to get the album. But, ,ore often than not, THERE IS NO LISTING OF THE SONG that is not followed by "You Tube". If i want the videos, I'll click the video tab. If I don't click it, don't send video information. 24.152.228.155 (talk) 16:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Are you searching in Wikipedia? Wikipedia normally searches for articles, not visual media.

If you are not searching in Wikipedia, we can't help you here, because this is the Help Desk for Wikipedia only. ColinFine (talk) 16:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

How to get two templates next to each other in info boxes, and not on top

I am seting up a wiki page on Miraheze (Just fictional), where I am using a template within a template: [3]https://dicemanager.miraheze.org/wiki/Purafoin_Warriors My problem is that the match kits (at the bottom of the infobox) are on top on each other and not next to each other. How can I fix this? Magnern (talk) 18:54, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Magnern: This is a help desk for Wikipedia. We are not affiliated with Miraheze but I took a look. You can place them in a table like this:

<table>
<tr><td>{{Football kit
 | pattern_la = _red_stripes
 | pattern_b = _redstripes2
 | pattern_ra = _red_stripes
 | pattern_sh = 
 | pattern_so = 
 | leftarm = 
 | body = 
 | rightarm = 
 | shorts = 0000E8
 | socks = FF0000
 | title = Home colours
}}</td>
<td>{{Football kit
 | pattern_la = _blue_stripes
 | pattern_b = _bluestripes
 | pattern_ra = _blue_stripes
 | pattern_sh = 
 | pattern_so = 
 | leftarm = 
 | body = 
 | rightarm =
 | shorts = 
 | socks = 0000E8
 | title = Away colours
}}</td></tr>
</table>

.

It doesn't use wiki syntax for the table because it would conflict with the template syntax. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:35, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

draft article

I drafted a COI page for "Christopher ("Kit") Lukas the other day. I want to add to it but can't find it. Where is it hidden? thank you. Sakultik (talk) 19:04, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "COI draft". The subject already has an article(unless you are writing about a different individual with the same name). Do you mean your draft about his deceased wife Draft:Susan Lukas? I don't see any drafts about Christopher. If you want to propose COI edits to the Christopher Lukas article, you may use its talk page. 331dot (talk) 19:15, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. What happened was that I thought I had to start a new COI draft under AFC. I called it "Christopher ("Kit") Lukas to differentiate it from the original (Christopher Lukas) page. I added about ten references. Is it possible I now have to back and add those to the original page, or does the "Kit" page exist somewhere. Sakultik (talk) 19:17, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

There's something going on on your userpage which should really be in Draft: namespace. Is that what you mean? I'm happy to move the page for you. Cremastra (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, please! Sakultik (talk) 19:22, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Okay. I'm going to move your userpage to Draft:Christopher "Kit" Lukas, then re-add your COI box. Cremastra (talk) 19:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done. Cheers, Cremastra (talk) 19:26, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Della Reese's filmography

Della Reese appeared briefly in the black and white movie called Let's Rock (1958). She sang a song called "Lonely Ville". PeterBurgessGriggs (talk) 22:20, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Delegated legislation (United Kingdom); mass AFD

On the Law of the United Kingdom page, there is a page containing a sidebox referring to lists of delegated legislation

• United Kingdom statutory instruments
• Scottish statutory instruments
• Welsh statutory instruments
• Statutory rules of Northern Ireland

Many of these articles don't serve any purpose. They aren't informative and they strictly refer to primary sources.

I would like to propose a mass deletion of these articles.

What information do I need to give to suggest this?

Additionally, I would like to suggest that Statutory rules of Northern Ireland be exempted from this for all years between 1974 and 1998 [inclusive], because they were doing the job of primary legislation in this period.

I would also say that I am only suggesting that ***list*** pages would be included in this grouping of articles to be removed. To that end, these pages would be excluded.

• Statutory instrument (UK)
• Statutory rules and orders
• Ministerial order
• Scottish statutory instruments
• Statutory rules of Northern Ireland

I am not suggesting the deletion of articles about the concept of secondary legislation, only these lists.

I am also not sure if these pages should be included

• List of statutory rules and orders of Northern Ireland
• List of statutory rules and orders of the United Kingdom
• List of regulatory reform orders
• List of Church of England instruments

because they're only one page each DotCoder (talk) 22:33, 29 August 2024 (UTC)