Help desk
< August 18	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 20 >

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 19

List of pages matching search

I'm running JWB (an in-browser tool similar to AWB), and I'm trying to find a way to get a plain list of pages whose text includes a search term somewhere. The search box with quotes works great for this, however it's impractical to manually copy a list from there. I know that AWB can do this, but is there some other way to do this so that I don't have to bother the AWB folk too much (and also to make it so I can fiddle with it more without wasting others' time)? LittlePuppers (talk) 00:17, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LittlePuppers, you might want to leave this question at User_talk:Joeytje50/JWB or WP:VPT. You might get a more relevant response. Ed talk! 00:29, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Using Wikipedia as a resource for school

Hello, I have been editing Wikipedia on and off for a while now (mainly doing anti-vandalism edits) and recently received a school task to invent a species. Part of this task is to create a Wikipedia style entry on said made up spices. Therefore I am checking if I can create a page under my own user space, in order to create said entry. (e.g. User:All hail Armok/[Whatever I call the species]). Thanks you. All hail Armok (talk) 00:48, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@All hail Armok: Welcome to Wikipedia You can't create something made up that is intended to look like a real article. RudolfRed (talk) 01:00, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All hail Armok, as it isn't relevant to the development of the encyclopedia and could be misinterpreted as a draft article for a real species, I'd advise you to keep this off-wiki, or try a different Wiki that runs Wikipedia's software such as the test wiki Ed talk! 01:00, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Democratic national convention 2020

This page has under protests section been vandalized by someone labeling TRUMP as "drumpf". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.221.215.33 (talk) 02:46, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Already

Fixed with this edit. Eagleash (talk) 03:09, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NBA divisional tables

2019–20 NBA season

Hi, can the tables in the above page be updated? I've noticed that the games behind column is incorrect. Anthonylopresti1 (talk) 04:09, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Anthonylopresti1: Thanks for pointing this out. The tables are driven by templates, which I don't know how to update. I put this info on one of the template talk pages. Template talk:2019–20 NBA Atlantic standings#This looks incorrect TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:30, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Timtempleton and Anthonylopresti1:

Fixed Yup. The individual division games behind were incorrect. Whoever last updated Template:2019–20 NBA West standings and Template:2019–20 NBA East standings forgot to set the leader of each division, which apparently has to be done manually. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:35, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the fix AlanM1. Do you think its worth placing a bold line underneath the last team that played in the bubble in both the Division and Conference Standings? This way its clear that Washington is above Charlotte despite having a lower PCT. Also, do you think it would be useful to add a 'p - clinched play-in spot' in the Notes and place next to Memphis? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthonylopresti1 (talk • contribs) 08:43, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lupton family

I know I said I would not trouble the editors again (!) but please fix up the following: in the 20th century section:

1 - Place the new file of head of Olive Middleton on the other side of the page to balance the page and be consistent.

2 - Also, please remove the funny ]] signs that are immediately under the sub-heading - Olive Middleton (nee Lupton).

Thanks and sorry 175.33.139.143 (talk) 04:34, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. As I've told you a couple of times before, you are always welcome to make such requests at my talk page. There are some people who don't like you making them here. Maproom (talk) 06:11, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's official policies and guidelines overrule consensus?

Does the fact that the article Kosovo was moved by an admin without a consensus and with a reasoning that goes against Wikipedia:Assume good faith mean that Wikipedia's official policies and guidelines such as WP:COMMONNAME are prioritized over the consensus of the editors involved? StellarHalo (talk) 04:49, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a loaded question. None of its premises are true. – Teratix ₵ 06:09, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying there was a consensus for that particular controversial move? If so, where? StellarHalo (talk) 08:08, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Determining consensus is primarily about weighing the strength of arguments, and not counting votes. The admin who closed that discussion explained this. 331dot (talk) 08:12, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Does that mean that in an editing dispute, if my arguments are more based on existing guidelines and policies while the arguments of my opponents are not, the administrators will uphold my positions? Just asking in case I find myself in a long dispute. StellarHalo (talk) 08:17, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can't promise you anything, but in general, it is the strength of the arguments that matter, including those based in Wikipedia guidelines. There are occasional exceptions, such as ignore all rules, but even then a persuasive argument that there is a benefit to the encyclopedia must be made. Keep in mind that people can disagree in good faith as to what guidelines mean. 331dot (talk) 08:24, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nike Dattani

Kyoto University IP addresses keep removing "Kyoto University" from a scientist's Wikipedia page, but there's concrete evidence that the scientist worked there. Can we block a range of email address from Kyoto University, from editing that page? Dr. Universe (talk) 05:13, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your best venue for that would probably be WP:RFPP. LittlePuppers (talk) 11:39, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mahaveer swami

You've mentioned dead. On their bio. You need to mention nirvana or moksha. They've not died they've attained nirvana. And uve mentioned cause of death starvation. They didn't starve for food. They compromised food and fasted. You can't mention the cause of death get your facts clear and remove death from all gods of jainism and mention moksha or nirvana — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.172.21.176 (talk) 08:43, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably about Mahavira. The article has a section Mahavira#Nirvana_and_moksha.

Wikipedia articles should claim as fact only that which is verifiable. Therefore, it carefully separates religious beliefs from historically-attested events. For instance, our article Jesus says (in Wikipedia's voice) that a person existed, was a religious leader, and died from crucifixion, because historical (non-Christian) sources corroborate this. The claim that he was resurrected is mentioned, because it is a central tenet of Christian doctrine, but proving it would invalidate centuries of medicine; it therefore cannot be given in Wikipedia's voice unless some extraordinary proof is given, which is unlikely to emerge after two millenia. The same holds for Jainism topics. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 13:02, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with article Lahore Front

I have read the article and shows very biased opinion by the authur. The auther states that it was a clear victory by India over Pakistan, If that was the case India would have occupied Lahore. But in reality was a great defiance by the military to halt the Indian aggression on Lahore front . India had around 100,000 force and Pakistan 50,000. The Pakistan military held their ground and unitl the peace treaty . To call it Indian victory is very much biased approached. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.186.189.16 (talk) 09:41, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Issues with article content should be discussed on the article talk page. Articles summarize what independent reliable sources state, so if they phrase it as an Indian victory, that's what the article should say(even if there was some degree of a tactical victory by Pakistan). You will need to have independent sources to support any claims you make. 331dot (talk) 09:48, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey Royal article

Hello all,

This article reads like a CV and relies on a single reference which my computer flags as a security risk.

What would be the best way to tag the article for attention? I've never done this before.

Thanks! PrincessPersnickety (talk) 11:21, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@PrincessPersnickety:

tagged by me and LittlePuppers. If you have Twinkle, its actually pretty easy. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:51, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Victor Schmidt Thank you for your quick help, I will have a look at Twinkle. I've only just started editing so have mainly stuck to typos so far :) PrincessPersnickety (talk) 11:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re HG Wells novel The War in the Air

I have today tried to amend the name of this book to its correct title 'The War in the Air: And Particularly How Mr. Bert Smallways Fared While It Lasted' but one of your admins doesn't apparently think it necessary yo label things correctly and changed it back again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:1833:E200:C49F:9843:DBE8:66E8 (talk) 12:41, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This must be about this revert.

Regarding the process, the revert was done by Huggle (a semi-automated edition tool) and contains no meaningful edit summary. I would suggest that Samf4u should slow down the Huggle-ing because this edit was not a clear case of vandalism, so an explanation would have been warranted. Technically, per WP:BRD, the onus would be on the IP editor to open a discussion on the article's talk page to discuss this, but I do not think that is necessary.

Regarding the content, here's one book cover with the extended title, and the first edition from here contains it on the inside title page (page 8 of the document in the source). I therefore tend to agree with the edit. The formatting also matches that of other books with subtitles, e.g. Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea has the subtitle A Word Tour underwater in the lead; unless there is something in the manual of style that says otherwise, I think the IP edit should stay. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 13:14, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted it in the infobox and allowed it in the lead section. If your gonna bitch be sure and tell the whole story. - Samf4u (talk) 14:06, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I somehow missed that the revert was in the infobox, not the lead; sorry about the misrepresentation. (I agree with the revert then, though not with marking it as minor or the lack of edit summary.)

After this thread opened, Alexcalamaro reverted the lead. I re-reverted to keep the extended title in the lead. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 14:38, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Tigraan, All good. - Samf4u (talk) 16:29, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Tigraan and Samf4u. It is also OK for me (I didn't check enough covers to see the long title, my fault). Alexcalamaro (talk) 17:28, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

gadget or script

I've got something enabled that lets me hover my cursor over someone's signature and a little box pops up that tells me what rights they have, their edit count, account creation date, date of last edit, a bunch of other stuff. I'd like to advise a new user to install or enable whatever it is (I think the information might help them stay out of trouble), but it's been so long since I installed it that I have no idea what it's called. Thanks for any help! —valereee (talk) 12:53, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Valereee: At Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets, "Navigation Popups". —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 13:13, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! —valereee (talk) 13:28, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How Date of birth and place can be changed

How to edit date of birth and place of birth — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.72.10.15 (talk) 13:47, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which article are you referring to? You can change a birth date by editing a page (assuming it is not protected), but you will need to provide reliable sources demonstrating that your change is correct. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 14:38, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming you're referring to infoboxes, you'd have to edit the code in them. You can use the visual editor to click on the infobox template, click on the edit button on the tiny window that pops up, and navigate to the text fields that describe birthdate and birthplace. Change the text and click Apply Changes in the top-right corner to submit those changes, and then click Publish changes to commit to them. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:39, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In some places, the page uses the date and/or place from the associated Wikidata item. In this case, you must edit the Wikidata item instead of the Wikipedia page. You still need to cite a reliable source for the date. -Arch dude (talk) 15:09, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Will Wikipedia merge their site to fb or google like whatsapp did?

Wikipedia now running out of money asking donations, Will Wikipedia merge their site to fb or google like whatsapp did? Man Floor (talk) 14:20, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not running out of money - it has always run on donations. To answer you further: no. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 14:21, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WhatsApp is an application developed by a for-profit corporation. It's investors made many millions of dollars when they sold the company to Facebook. Wikipedia is crowdsourced online encyclopedia developed and maintained volunteers running on systems belonging to and maintained by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, which is supported by donations and which has plenty of money. There is no requirement, no incentive, and no desire to merge with any for-profit corporation. -Arch dude (talk) 16:28, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To quote an email sent on the Mailing List, which feels relevant: Today I had a coworker private message me, worried that Wikipedia was in financial trouble. He asked me if the worst happened, would the content still be available so that it could be resurrected? I assured him that Wikimedia is healthy, has reserves, and successfully reaches the budget every year. Basically I said there wasn't much to worry about, because there isn't. >>BEANS X2^t 18:53, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Like any bureaucracy, the WMF always wants more money and always wants to expand its operations. But really, it's not in any trouble. There are also tons of off-wiki copies of the textual content of Wikipedia. The image collection is more of a problem since it's harder to mirror because of its size. 2602:24A:DE47:BB20:50DE:F402:42A6:A17D (talk) 08:09, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My Non Profit Organization

My non profit organization does not come up on Wiki and I would like to add it, how do I do this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tkc071 (talk • contribs) 15:30, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Tkc071: The short answer: Don't. The slightly longer answer: As someone closely affiliated with the organization, you have a conflict of interest and should not write about the organization. If you are convinced the subject is "notable" as Wikipedia uses the term, the first step you should take is to make a list of reliable sources that are about the organization but were not produced by it, then visit Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Organizations and add it to the appropriate alphabetical section. Then wait for a volunteer editor to take interest in writing the article. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:37, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tkc071. Hundreds of new editors come here every day to promote themselves, their band, their company, their non-profit. Typically they have a frustrating and miserable time, because they are trying to do something which is contrary to everything Wikipedia stands for: promotion (in the Wikipedia world, this word is not limited to commercial activities). If your non-profit meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - principally, that several people wholly unconnected with it, and without being prompted or fed information by it, have chosen to write about it at length, and been published somewhere reliable - then Wikipedia could have an article about it. The article will not belong to your organisation, you will have no control over its content, it will be based almost entirely on what those independent people have published about it, and not what you say or want to say about it; and you are discouraged from writing it yourself. --ColinFine (talk) 16:19, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Cite errors/Cite error ref no input

Courtesy link: Evergreen State College

Hi folks--I have tried to edit the Evergreen State College page and add a reference link to explain that the college considers itself a liberal arts and sciences college. However, I mistakenly added cite marks where I shouldn't. I now can't see where they are to remove them. Please advise, thank you.

There were 2 stray notes up top that were causing the issue, which I have removed. Why aren't you mentioning it in the body? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:14, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will! Thanks for the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.211.31.240 (talk) 23:15, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Fixed. LittlePuppers (talk) 23:20, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]