Help desk
< December 13	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 15 >

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.

December 14

Publicar / añadir contenido

Saludos,

¿Cómo puedo añadir datos a esta tabla sobre un modelo que he estado trabajando? La tabla se encuentra en este link https://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporada_de_huracanes_en_el_Atlántico_de_2020?fbclid=IwAR3cX_5DxKwvv-FDZgXtGvpHx-Oy_UEK06oyirnESpMCpBc0N35SkYjJbjc#:~:text=La%20temporada%20de%20huracanes%20del,desde%20que%20comenzaron%20los%20registros.&text=%E2%80%8B%20Con%2030%20tormentas%20tropicales%20o%20subtropicales

Y es Predicciones de la actividad tropical en la temporada de 2020.

Gracias, Espero su contestación — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivan802 (talk • contribs) 02:22, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ivan802: This is the help desk for the English Language Wikipedia. Questions about the spanish Wikipedia should go there: [1] RudolfRed (talk) 02:35, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ivan802: Si estas buscando ayuda, es posible que esté buscando esta página. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 02:37, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

need help to create a wikipedia page

Hello,

my mother-in-law , Asha Bage, is a very well known author in India . I'd like to create a wikipedia page with her bio . I am not able to find the info to create it easily. I'd appreciate any help. thanks, -radha — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsbage (talk • contribs) 02:52, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rsbage, You won't be pleased to read this, but the absence of reliable sources for a topic is an indication that the topic is not sufficiently notable for Wikipedia. For clarification, you may want to read about what Wikipedia considers notable.--Quisqualis (talk) 02:56, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A quick Google search shows that Asha Bage is a notable author. She was awarded with the Sahitya Akademi Award in 2006 for her novel Bhoomi. Radha, I suggest that you begin drafting an article. I'm sure there will be no problem with finding reliable sources. Regards, nagualdesign 20:03, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please create a wiki article on "uptobox.com", which alexa rank is < 2000.

Please somebody create a wiki article on "uptobox.com", which alexa website traffic rank is < 2000. Rizosome (talk) 06:30, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rizosome, what reliable sources have talked about it and gave significant coverage? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 08:31, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

agenda to create disturbance

detail study is required — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.203.223.84 (talk) 08:26, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IP editor, what's your question about editing Wikipedia?--Quisqualis (talk) 17:42, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source/visual editing, edit summary text box, lookup values - how to clean them?

In article edit mode (both source and visual) there is an "Edit summary" text box that is used during each time the user is publishing the edit. When typing in this edit box, lookup values show up based on that user's prior history of values entered in this box. This is very useful and saves time for edits of similar type. However, if you make a typo just once while entering a value in this edit box, Wikipedia remembers that and keeps showing up all prior values in lookup, including those with typos that you don't want. This is not just a small inconvenience, this renders the whole lookup useless because the user now has to type long enough string in order to bypass the wrong version in the lookup just so that it starts showing more useful lookup values. Is there any place where the user can access the database of these lookup values and selectively purge the bad ones? Of note, there appear to be two separate lookup datasets - one for source editor, another for visual editor, and I would like to know how to change both. --Nyq (talk) 08:32, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nyq, I believe source editor uses the browser's autocomplete feature, so selecting the unwanted item and pressing ⇧ Shift+Delete should remove it. For the visual editor I believe it saves the last 200 edit summaries but can't be accessed to the best of my knowledge. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 08:37, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Too bad I have just missed a deadline to submit a proposal this year --Nyq (talk) 09:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that Tenryuu! On Firefox, you start typing in the edit summary field to drop down the list, then press and hold ⇧ Shift+Delete, then click on the item that you want to delete in the list. It will then remove that item from the list. However, it then chooses one of the items in the list to insert in the edit summary (not clear which). It also may be removing more than just the one entry you clicked on. To be investigated. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:36, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

editor

Sorry, this must have been asked a gazillion times, but anyways: Any way to disable the slow and confusing editor for text in English Wikipedia? (Not sure what it's called, so I've tried some changes in my preferences... but haven't been successful yet.) I just want to get back to the normal editor that was used until a couple (?) years back. Thanks, Ibn Battuta (talk) 10:44, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ibn Battuta: Do you mean switch to the visual editor? If so, click on the pen icon in the top right (when editing) and select visual editing. Pahunkat (talk) 11:08, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ibn Battuta: There are several editors and VisualEditor has been an option since 2012 so it's uncertain what you refer to. Based on the "2017 wikitext editor" tag in your recent edits, you may have enbabled "Automatically enable most beta features" or "New wikitext mode" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures. Try to disable them. If that doesn't give the editor you prefer then you can enable or disable VisualEditor at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:00, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestions. Well, I've checked and it's definitely not about the "visual editor" (which makes things look even more awkward)... What I'm looking for is simply the old-fashioned regular text editing window, with a line of special characters (which I can click on, then they get directly pasted into the text editor) underneath... with the summary field underneath... next the questions if this is a minor edit and if I want to watch this page... next (what I miss most) the buttons to publish the changes, to preview the changes, or to show the differences to the existing article version... underneath that comes a list of used Wikipedia objects and Wikipedia templates. ... [And once I click on preview, the text-to-be is displayed on top and the text editor underneath, again followed by all the stuff mentioned above.]
1) What is this called? and obviously 2) How do I switch back to that view? ... Thanks a lot (!!), Ibn Battuta (talk) 21:25, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ibn Battuta, it sounds like you may be talking about the legacy source editor. I haven't used it in ages, so I'm not sure if it still exists, but see if it comes back if you tick "Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta" and untick "Enable the editing toolbar (This is sometimes called the '2010 wikitext editor')" (from Preferences → Editing). I will reiterate what PrimeHunter said: double-check that "New wikitext mode" isn't enabled in your "Beta Features" tab. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 21:33, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, Tenryuu & PrimeHunter!! Yes, this worked! (Sorry, somehow I must have skipped one line of PrimeHunter's answer before...) ... or well, almost: Right now, when I click on "edit" on any random page, even if I've never visited it before, it first takes this long time loading (as it always does with the newer editor), and then, well, it displays the newer editor. If I now reload the page (CTR+R), it displays the "legacy source editor". Any way to get directly to that latter editor, without having to first reload the page? Cheers, Ibn Battuta (talk) 21:58, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can't download the PDF file of the reference

Apparently, the PDF list starting with http cannot be downloaded. Is it possible to replace this with https? Thanks!--SilverMatsu (talk) 11:01, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bit difficult to help when you haven't specified which of the 6 million+ articles you are referring to! You should be able to edit the reference in the article yourself to switch to https. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:08, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael D. Turnbull: After editing according to the advice, it is now available for download. Thank you!--SilverMatsu (talk) 12:39, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! I have no idea what Infinite-dimensional holomorphy is, SilverMatsu, but I'm sure its important to some group or other ;-) Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:51, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Page won't go online

Hey,

I created a page about 5 months ago with the hope of it being uploaded to wikipedia on my favourite music producer P2J, I added loads of information and it's all 100% accurate so i'm unsure why it hasn't gone up. Am I missing something? He's had massive hits with the likes of Beyonce, Mark Ronson, Gorillaz, Alicia Keys, Khalid, Pharrell Williams and many more

Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by OllieTFC (talk • contribs) 16:12, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome. Like a number of new users, you created the page as your User Page, rather than in your sandbox or using (the recommended) WP:AFC process. As it stands, the "draft" needs to cite some reliable sources from independent places before it has any hope of being accepted, OllieTFC. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:19, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Replacing non-free images

I'd like to replace most of the images in the Super-Kamiokande article with higher resolution images. Some of them, such as File:Pp-chain and CNO chain.jpg, are very basic diagrams that have been directly copied from non-free sources then reduced in size in order to conform with non-free image policy, to the point where they are now barely legible. What I'd like to know is if I produce higher-resolution diagrams that differ from the originals in some ways will it be permissible to upload them for use in the article, essentially sidestepping copyright restrictions, or will someone object?

In the past I have produced original artwork that was entirely my own and was accused of copyright infringement, leading to a protracted debate — one of the main reasons I no longer contribute regularly — and I have no wish to waste my time creating useful diagrams if some asshole's going to get all shirty about it. nagualdesign 18:45, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can do this. The ideas themselves are not copyrightable. Ruslik_Zero 20:13, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. nagualdesign 20:38, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nagualdesign: This is complicated. "creative elements" are copyrighted, but the underlying information is not copyrightable. If part or all of your image is "too similar" to the original in some way that is "creative" then you have infringed on the copyright. This is similar to "close paraphrasing" of text. In both cases, it's a judgement call (how similar is too similar?), which why why there can be an argument. To complicate matters, if there is only one reasonable way to convey some piece of information, then that specific way is not creative. Furthermore, if some "creative element" is in very common use across multiple independent works ("the butler did it!") then that element is not copyrightable (scenes a faire). Since this is all so subjective, we at the help desk cannot give you a definitive answer. This is exceptionally frustrating, because the work you propose to do is very valuable. -Arch dude (talk) 21:23, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated. I'll try to remake the images as differently as possible without changing the information they illustrate, rather than simply making hi-res copies. If you don't mind, I'll post links to the new images on your talk page once I've uploaded them in case you have any further advice or suggestions. Regards, nagualdesign 21:54, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nagualdesign:I am happy to give an opinion. I'm not an expert, so I will likely be somewhat conservative. -Arch dude (talk) 02:57, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Taking my name out

The things that I keep on doing are true please stop taking them off — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brunsonaj12 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Brunsonaj12. You seem to have made two edits where you replaced a name that was easily verifiable from source material, unless you have a better source that is always going to get reverted. Besides, you should not be writing about yourself on Wikipedia. --Paul ❬talk❭ 19:15, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Brunsonaj12: also have a read of WP:TRUTH. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:32, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Brigading

Waqar Zaka, a famous personality, is calling for Ahmadiyya-related articles to be brigaded. Although majority of the vandalism has been taken care of, I was wondering if there are any steps that could be taken to avoid any further vandalism? :
>> Taimoor Ahmed^{(Send a Message?)} 19:38, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Taimoor Ahmed: If you see an page getting repeatedly vandalized or disrupted, make a request at WP:RFPP for the page to be protected. RudolfRed (talk) 19:41, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Taimoorahmed11:, fixing ping. Got confused by your sig. RudolfRed (talk) 19:42, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Changing <references/> to {{reflist}}

Is changing <references/> to {{reflist}} to be avoided per WP:CITEVAR? User-duck (talk) 20:25, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think WP:CITEVAR is advising upon the format of the actual inline or footnote citations themselves, not the template (or tag) that ultimately groups them together to display. The {{reflist}} template, as per its own documentation, encapsulates the <references/> tag and offers some additional formatting options. I always use the template for this reason. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:46, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That was my understanding. I am fixing SFN errors and changed to {{reflist}} to specify narrower columns. The change was reverted citing WP:CITEVAR as the reason. Thought I would get a second opinion. User-duck (talk) 22:13, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jeanette Magel

THIS IS A HOAX PAGE: NO RECORD of any Jeanette Magel anywhere in the London Gazette (which goes back hundreds of years) in which ALL judicial commissions and honours (Dame Commander of the Order of the British Empire; DBE) MUST BE gazetted to be valid. Also, there is not a single reference to any Jeanette Magel aside from this article on the ENTIRE World Wide Web. Hard to believe for a judge and a Dame, to boot. I would question the article creator, User: Amisom. (Wonder what his or her mother’s name is, LOL.) Other editors, including User: Gareth Griffith-Jones, appear to have accepted the article’s prima facie legitimacy precisely because it is so innocuous and anodyne.

INACCESSIBLE/UNVERIFIABLE REFLINKS – NO LIBRARIES TO GO TO EVEN IF THESE BOOKS EXIST, WHICH I DOUBT

Ibbetson, David (1999). A Historical Introduction to the Law of Obligations. Oxford University Press. p. 78. ISBN 019876412X.
Honeyball, Simon (2011). Great Debates in Employment Law. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 200–205. ISBN 019876412X.

BOGUS REFLINKS

https://www.hendersonchambers.co.uk/ -- nothing for Magel, although she purportedly trained there

No. 56069 (p 1030)". The London Gazette. 11 May 2000 -- Checked londongazette.co.uk and this gazette #56069 makes no reference whatsoever to Magel, whose name is nowhere in the entire Gazette (which goes back to the 19th century) -- https://www.thegazette.co.uk/wills-and-probate/notice?text=&location-postcode-1=&location-distance-1=1&location-local-authority-1=&numberOfLocationSearches=1&start-date-of-death=&end-date-of-death=&start-publish-date=&end-publish-date=&start-claim-expiry-date=&end-claim-expiry-date=&edition=&london-issue=56069&edinburgh-issue=&belfast-issue=&sort-by=&results-page-size=10&results-page=9

"No. 58937 (p 926)". The London Gazette. 19 September 2008 -- Checked londongazette.co.uk and this gazette #58937 makes no reference whatsoever to Magel, whose name is nowhere in the entire Gazette (which goes back to the 19th century) -- https://www.thegazette.co.uk/wills-and-probate/London/issue/58937/notice?results-page-size=10&numberOfLocationSearches=1&location-distance-1=1&london-issue=58937

Supperstone, Lawrence (2001). The Bar of the 1980s. London: Sweet & Maxwell. pp. 58–60 – NO RECORD OF ANY LAWRENCE SUPPERSTONE FOUND VIA GOOGLE SEARCH. APPARENTLY FICTITIOUS NAME. NOTE: THERE IS AN HON. MR JUSTICE (MICHAEL) SUPPERSTONE, SO I GUESS WE SEE WHERE THE NAME CAME FROM!

Cuney, Gillian (1984). "Falkirk and ors v Argos Ltd: umpiring David and Goliath in the Industrial Tribunal". Employment Law Bulletin. Oct (2): 143–49 – NO RECORD OF ANY GILLIAN CUNEY FOUND VIA GOOGLE SEARCH. APPARENTLY FICTITIOUS NAME.

If I am mistaken (and I am positive I am not), my apologies. 67.84.231.44 (talk) 21:58, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, this does indeed look like a hoax and perhaps other content from the same user needs to be looked at with some care. Theroadislong (talk) 22:12, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would consider some caution before jumping to conclusions with this. The user(s) in question have been wiki members for quite considerable time, so we aren't looking at a create-and-run situation. Regarding the references, the books in question (Ibbetson/Honeyball) do exist and the properties check out, less the isbn which has been copied from the other erroneously. I would sooner look at this from the point of view of verifiable notability, which I think is where it probably falls apart somewhat. The lack of search results is not itself an indicator for a fictitious article, though it does make verifying notability a struggle. In saying that, I am not wholly ruling out a hoax article, but if it is, I wouldn't have easily guessed. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:17, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree this is a hoax. There is nothing in newspaper archives, nothing in books and nothing about this person (there is one that died in the US in 2001, unrelated). Praxidicae (talk) 22:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, definite hoax; a 2001 reprint of Ibbetson's book is accessible online, and page 78 doesn't even cover the twentieth century, let alone mention Magel. – Teratix ₵ 10:42, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Air BMS/0B Blue Messenger

Blue Air is suppose to be BLA/0B

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/airlines/0b-bla

Can this be looked into and changed on wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:600:C500:56D0:F041:D922:95FC:5F7D (talk) 22:55, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you have an improvement to suggest for an article, please post on the article's talk page, with a citation to a reliable published source. --ColinFine (talk) 23:56, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]