Help desk
< July 31	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 2 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

August 1

How to find my draft article and continue writing

I started a new article today - my first ever. I had to sign out and run an errand. Now I would like to continue working, bur I cannot find the draft. Can anyone help me get back to it?

Thank you for any suggestions! Joseforrest (talk) 00:58, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseforrest: Did you start it under a different username? Did you start it while logged out? What was the name of it? This account only has one edit (to here) and nothing else. Did you forget to save the article? --Majora (talk) 01:02, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseforrest and Majora:Maybe the article was deleted, which would show as this account having only one edit. Do you have any idea what the title was? Pppery (talk) 12:06, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseforrest and Pppery: His article is here; and it will not pass AfC anyway because it already has an article here. _Muffled ^Pocketed 12:11, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, that draft was created after the post here. So I don't think that is the article he was talking about. -- GB fan 12:16, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Point! But could have been the same and deleted as a duplicate? _Muffled ^Pocketed 12:20, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't that have been very out of process? First, a draft should not normally be deleted as a duplicate, but declined by a reviewer. Second, even an article in article space that is about to speedy-deleted is normally tagged for speedy deletion, which results in a notice to the editor. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:27, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The account has no deleted edits. Non-admins can see that by clicking "Edit count" at the bottom of Special:Contributions/Joseforrest (that tool is sometimes down or slow). Only admins would be able to see the contents of deleted edits if there were any. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:48, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter and Robert McClenon: Both quite correct of course. So, either written as an IP (how would that work? Does an IP have access to Sandboxes, etc?) or another account, I guess. _Muffled ^Pocketed 13:52, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IP's dont have personal sandboxes but they can create pages in the draft namespace, for example via Wikipedia:Articles for creation. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:56, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata question

Hello, I have a long list of articles that are on the dewiki, and I would like to find the corresponding article titles on the enwiki. Is there a way I can easily find these enwiki article titles using Wikidata's information (not manually)? Secret Agent Julio (talk) 10:34, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Laird

My muck-up. Ref number 25 is from a book (not a newspaper) and should have the ISB number. I cannot do this. Please help and add in the ISB number and leave in the quote. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srbernadette (talk • contribs) 10:50, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As has been pointed out to you before, the "About this book" link on the left hand side of your Google book page will show you the ISBN. The template to use is {{cite book}}. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:57, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry David, but I am very pleased to be able to do the editing that I CAN do!! I cannot do this - and I will muck it up for sure. Please help. Srbernadette (talk) 11:43, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel that you can't edit Wikipedia, goodbye. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:47, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There's no requirement that you provide anything less than a bare reference, Srbernadette- someone will sort it out at some point. There are, after all, editors here whose entire wikicareers are based on such work. Good luck. _Muffled ^Pocketed 11:52, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's not difficult at all, Srbernadette.

You have say https://books.google.com.au/books?id=10jOCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA18&lpg=PA18&dq=courtesy+title+the+younger++bloomsbury&source=bl&ots=Yzj_a06MQb&sig=FYFTl7XYZZvaOrqMgpf6m8kf8ik&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi79dLZ_5_OAhUBxpQKHZ_3DlMQ6AEILjAD#v=onepage&q=courtesy%20title%20the%20younger%20%20bloomsbury&f=false
Open Wikipedia citation tool for Google Books in another window/tab.
Paste the Google Books URL in the field and click "Load"

Et voila you now have a nice {{cite book}} inside ref tags.

<ref name="Publishing2016">{{cite book|author=Bloomsbury Publishing|title=Titles and Forms of Address: A Guide to Correct Use|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=10jOCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA18|date=21 April 2016|publisher=Bloomsbury Publishing|isbn=978-1-4729-2434-6|pages=18–}}</ref>

Withour ref tags: Bloomsbury Publishing (21 April 2016). Titles and Forms of Address: A Guide to Correct Use. Bloomsbury Publishing. pp. 18–. ISBN 978-1-4729-2434-6.

Hope you stay. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 12:42, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. And you can add the quote= parameter in "Other fields". Using the quote from the article, it would look like this: Bloomsbury Publishing (21 April 2016). Titles and Forms of Address: A Guide to Correct Use. Bloomsbury Publishing. pp. 18–. ISBN 978-1-4729-2434-6. The widow of a chief or laird...The heirs of chiefs, chieftains and lairds are addressed in writing with the distinction "the younger" before or after the territorial designation...all unmarried daughters use the (territorial) title...It is not the custom for younger sons of a chief, chieftain or laird to use either the "Younger" or the territorial titles. -Sam Sailor ^Talk! 12:45, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Accounts

Hello, What are the declarations and procedure I need to follow if I want to create alternate accounts (like another account for testing) Varun FEB2003 ^{I am Online} 13:41, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Sock puppetry. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:26, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Stalin

I have a discussion with another user about the article Joseph Stalin. Point of discussion is the removal of the Russian script name and his birth name. User:0xF8E8 thinks that it is irrelevant & clutter and can be cut out, I think it is relevant. The Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies is not very clear abut it but mentions foreign script name and pronunciation in one of its examples (Muammar Gaddafi). We had some discussion (User_talk:The_Banner#Joseph_Stalin) but I does not look very fruitful.

Any advice or clarification about the manual of style? The Banner talk 14:34, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a Figure

I wish to update a Figure on ALOX5 with a new Figure of my making which diagrams a biochemical pathway. I have been directed to ask here for directions on how to do this. ThanksJoflaher (talk) 15:01, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Joflaher: Assuming it's in a file, what is the file type? Will you release it with a free license? Images with free licenses and a file type at commons:Commons:File types can be uploaded at commons:Special:UploadWizard. Where in the article do you want to display it? The infobox needs special treatment. See Wikipedia:Picture tutorial for outside the infobox. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:25, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The file type will be in one of the acceptable types and be released with a free license. I will follow your directions. Thanks!152.11.90.104 (talk) 12:23, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Page of a Research and Education Organization

I am interested in editing an already created page about a research and education institution. Currently the information on the page is lacking, and what is there is poorly sourced. My main question is about using sources from the organization itself. I know that using information published by the organization is question is usually discouraged, but for some things, like information about the labs and research equipment, the only available sources are from the organization.

The group also seems to be fairly unique in that it has close ties to, but is not a part of, three universities. Is information about the organization published by any of the three universities considered independent? Faculty from the universities staff the lab, but the organization in question is a separate institution.

I am a student at one of the universities, but I am not affiliated with the organization in question directly. In your opinion, would a conflict of interest exist if I were to edit this page?

Thank you, and if I can provide more information to help clarify anything let me know. GeneralGravitation (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@GeneralGravitation: ...Triangle Universities Nuclear Laboratory...? _Muffled ^Pocketed 15:46, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sorry probably should have just said that.GeneralGravitation (talk) 16:37, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello GeneralGravitation and welcome on Wikipedia (WP).

The universities are not independent sources - even if no direct funding happened, "having close ties" usually means having a vested interest in the success of the other entity. For instance, they will publish press releases about newly publised scientific papers, but these should not be used to demonstrate widespread interest in the scientific theory in question. Non-independent sources can however be used for uncontroversial information, for instance the precise name of the organization, its address, the architect of the building etc. "Uncontroversial" means that none is likely to challenge/disagree with the information. Of course, common sense is needed - for instance, revenue reports from big companies are usually reliable to source their sales numbers, but if the company has been accused of accounting fraud then the numbers should not be reported in WP's voice.

For instance, Foo is a cutting-edge and leader technology in its domain is an overly positive (non-neutral) formulation; if there is any objective reality behind this it should be attributed to a relevant reliable source, for instance According to the Bar ranking, Foo is the best gizmo to do (stuff). (citation)

As for the WP:COI issue: you should declare your COI (follow the link to know how to do it). This being said, I do not think you will get into much trouble if you fail to do so, as long as none starts to object to your edits (in which case, you must immediately mention it). The problem with COI editing is that your judgement is biased, so if you feel strongly about a topic it is best to keep clear; but the amount of COI that arises from "I see their building when going to school" is so minute that it seems unlikely. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 17:10, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with Tigraan, and I encourage you to work on the article. I'm adding it to my watchlist and will give suggestions, if you like. Naraht (talk) 17:20, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Tigraan and Naraht, I appreciate your input. To make sure I am understanding correctly I will present an example: a letter from the United States Department of Energy denoting that TUNL is a center of excellence would be permissible as a source because it will be used to corroborate the "Uncontroversial claim" that the institution is, factually speaking, a center of excellence, despite the fact that the letter would not be considered an independent source since the DOE is major funding contributor for TUNL?GeneralGravitation (talk) 17:36, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GeneralGravitation, I think it is fine, but only because center of excellence has a precise and neutral meaning that is quite different from "an institution that does great work". I just checked the thing on the internet before screaming "no!!!", so you want to at least wikilink what CoE means. Notice also that the DoE made TUNL a center of excellence in (date). (ref) is better than TUNL is a center of excellence (ref): the DoE is part of the information. Compare with bacteria are usually a few micrometers long: that needs sourcing, but we do not really care which scientific study as long as it's a reliable one.

Also, that letter needs to be "published" - it does not have to be accessible from the internet or freely, but it has to be accessible to whoever tries hard enough (see WP:SOURCE).

By the way, give a look at WP:INDENT when you can. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 17:56, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weird vandalism on lactic acid, only visible via app

A user alerted me a strange vandalism to lactic acid that I cannot repair or even understand. On desktop and via mobile browser, everything looks fine. But when you search for "lactic acid" in the app, it shows a smaller subtitle beneath it, which is apparently Spanish for "hairy penis". But I cannot find that text anywhere in the page source, looking from either desktop or through the app. So where is it coming from, and how do I fix it? HCA (talk) 18:05, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Normal on that is that there was vandalism on a template called from lactic acid which has been reverted and that the app is viewed an unpurged version.Naraht (talk) 18:29, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That description comes from Wikidata. The vandalism has been reverted there. -- John of Reading (talk) 18:37, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, that vandalism was done on May 19th, 2016.Naraht (talk) 19:56, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone! HCA (talk) 20:58, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

comment on article for deletion

I would like to share my thoughts on an article set for possible deletion. How do I do that?Distjudgeak (talk) 19:16, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Distjudgeak, go to the article, read the banner at the top that says that it's up for discussion. In that text, there will be a link in blue that says something akin to "...the discussion for this entry..." or some such verbiage. That should take you to the discussion page for the article's possible deletion. Dismas|^(talk) 19:18, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Distjudgeak: Also note that if someone has asked you to comment on a deletion debate then a) this will be ineffective, as the discussion is not a vote and b) they may be canvassing, which can be grounds for blocking. — crh ₂₃ (Talk) 19:23, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article already in another language

I was going to write an article on Max M. Ellis since there is not an article on him in English Wikipedia. When doing my research I ran across an article on him in what I think is Swedish Wikipedia. The Swedish articles can be seen at this link, https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Mapes_Ellis.

Is there anyway to import a translation of the article into English Wikipedia or do I just need to start from scratch?

Thank you for your help, Gooseneck41 (talk) 16:23, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is possible to import the Swedish article (if sources are defined) and then translate it. Ruslik_Zero 20:42, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The policy here is at Wikipedia:Translation. As policy, in general, don't use a machine translation for this, but you can create a stub with a request that it be translated from the Swedish and give credit to the Swedish article version. For this particular article though, taking the machine translation and putting it into english would give a pretty good result. In the mean time, I've used template:ill to make a link which points to the Swedish page and will automatically point to the english page when created. Note there are two other Max Ellis entries right now, so I'm not sure whether the Middle name is the best distinguishing entry vs (Scientist).Naraht (talk) 20:48, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Naraht. I created the page and I think I put it the request for translation. If you have time, could you take a look and make sure I didn't mess it up too badly? I stuck with the name Max Mapes Ellis but that was because I wasn't for sure how to change the name once I hit the link on the Sigma Pi alumni page. If you think it should be renamed to Max M. Ellis (Scientist) please feel free to do so. Gooseneck41 (talk) 16:57, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added my reliable source to my page and it still says the page might be deleted

I added my reliable source to my page and it still says the page might be deleted--how do I know it won't be deleted since I have added two reliable sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calliebeltowski (talk • contribs) 21:16, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1) The article is plain selfpromotion. 2) The reliable source is not reliable conform Wikipedia: Reliable sources. 3) The article gives no indication why Beltovski is notable. There are more people who design webpages. The Banner talk 21:28, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And creating ads for websites you've designed is WP:PROMOTION as well. If that's all you're going to do here, you're eventually going to get yourself blocked for not making any legitimate contribution to the project. --Orange Mike | Talk 09:23, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]