Help desk
< April 4	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 6 >

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.

April 5

audio display doesn't start with the first sounds

In IPA_pulmonic_consonant_chart_with_audio there are a lot of very short (ca. 3s) audio files. These are typically in the form (let's take "b" as an example) "b-a , a-b-a".

When I click to play them, I firstly see a loading beam (for the file, I presume), then the audio file is rendered. But when the file is played /has to be loaded for the first time, the beginning is missing. Here it is mostly the first "b-a". I suppose, that the time missing corresponds to the time taken to load the file.

This problem is a bit annoying. I always have to play a file twice. --Utonsal (talk) 00:59, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It works for me in Firefox. They load quickly and play from the start. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:15, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

+1. I'm not having any troubles loading the audio clip and am able to hear the entire thing upon clicking it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:49, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It still doesn't work for me (also in Firefox, "Troubleshoot" mode).

Do you see the loading beam/bar at all?

Thanks four your answers. Utonsal (talk) 23:36, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When I reload the page and click the play button, I see the loading bar for maybe half a second. It starts playing after the bar is gone. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:22, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

when is nudity unnecessary/removable??

I was reading the hemodialysis page when I came across a photo of a woman shirtless to demonstrate the placement of a permacath for dialysis. The line was placed above the breast area, and the breasts could have easily been cropped out of the image. I nearly removed it immediately, but having checked the policies of wikipedia, reconsidered when I found that wikipedia has no stated rules on nudity, so my question is - should the image be removed, if it's replaced with another illustrating the permacath without nudity?? Or should the image be left up? 109.149.127.38 (talk) 01:41, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In general, if you come across a photo in an article that you don't think belongs (for any reason - not just nudity), you should open a discussion on the talk page. (Talk:Hemodialysis in this instance.) You can also remove it with an edit summary like "see talk". Be prepared to check back later to see if anyone has responded and to discuss as necessary.

In this specific case, I'm not sure that photo is contributing much to the article. The text near the photo does not discuss a permacath or when or why it is used, let alone where on the body it is placed. I'm inclined to think that either it should be removed or its relevance should be made more clear in the text. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 03:36, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adding external links to Wikipedia Character pages

I'm adding relevant links to TV characters wikipedia pages. The links I'm adding are these character's 'landing page profiles' that the broadcasting/production company has created.

The problem I'm having is that Wikipedia is telling me that I'm adding too many external links in rapid succession, and the website may be blacklisted. How do I move forward? This is a very, very well known TV show that has many characters (and many awesome wikipedia pages). 2001:8003:7C0D:F500:3056:E60B:F061:E570 (talk) 03:29, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. According to [1], all additions you've made today has been reverted. If you disagree with that, your next step is to discuss with the editors who reverted you, like for example [2]. WP:EL is relevant here. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:42, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

review draft

Courtesy link: Draft:List of storms named Mac - pls accept do you decline or accept my draft 119.94.58.16 (talk) 05:18, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

People on the help desk are not, in general, the same people as AFC reviewers. As explained in the box at the top of the draft, drafts are reviewed in no particular order. There is nothing you can do to make it faster, and trying to find ways to get a faster review is likely to irritate other editors. ColinFine (talk) 08:17, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To be frank, it is extremely unlikely that such a pointless "article" would ever be included in Wikipedia. At a push, for subjects in the form of "List of X named Y" a disambiguation page might be more appropriate. Please read Wikipedia:Your first article. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:00, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are lots of these... ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 13:34, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jeez. WikiProject Weather has a lot to answer for lol... Valereee (talk) 18:29, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They are set index articles which remind of disambiguation pages. Category:Set index articles on storms has 802 members. The subcategories of Category:Set index articles on tropical cyclones have around 1250. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:38, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good lord! You only created it yesterday. Still, since it's a clear decision, I'll go ahead and accept it. Just don't expect such prompt service next time. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:26, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Writing about hidden history

I want to write about a side of a genealogy that was left underrepresented and hidden from the media and history. Am I able to write about it as there aren't any sources online to use as reference, only the other side of the family history are in the media. J.h.2804 (talk) 12:09, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Notability. Family genealogies are unlikely to meet Wikipedia's notability requirements. Sources must be published and should meet the other criteria described in Wikipedia:Reliable sources, but they do not have to be online. Print sources are entirely acceptable. Jc3s5h (talk) 12:21, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"hidden from the media and history" hints that your hidden history may be outside the scope of Wikipedia. But the internet is vast. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:51, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know that the history I wish to write about was only vaguely mentioned in an article I wrote. Due to censorship, it was kept hidden for a long time. J.h.2804 (talk) 12:57, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@J.h.2804: you are conducting what we call original research. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and original research is not published in encyclopedias. There are lots of other places on the internet were you can publish your results. Google for "genealogy wiki". You can even publish a book for very little money. -Arch dude (talk) 14:04, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How is '(subject) of the same name' linked?

I'm browsing Wikipedia and I see in an article: "...2011 film of the same name..." all linked (see here [3]) and then another article saying "..lead single of the same name..." only partly linked (see here [4]). Is there a common consistent way of linking these phrases or are both correct? Gamowebbed (talk) 14:19, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The first linking style is slightly preferable (see MOS:MORELINKWORDS), but in my opinion both styles are clear enough to be acceptable. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:42, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gamowebbed This looks to me just like the individual preference of editors, both of whom have used a piped link. MOS:SPECIFICLINK suggests the longer version is better. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:44, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Walter Gladwin/ Wrong picture on your site

Walter Gladwin (wrong picture on your site) 108.21.198.43 (talk) 14:19, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

IP editor. The picture is sourced from this website. Do you have evidence the NY Law School is wrong? If so, can you point us to a reliably-sourced picture of Walter Gladwin? Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:25, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

motorcycles

hi anyone ,concerning page "list of production motorcycles under 0_60mph under 3.5 seconds " i want to add a motorcycle but have found it impossible,as im useless with tech ,i want to add my 1996 cbr1000f which is 0_60mph in 3.1 secs but it just will not let me ,can anyone help ,thankyouReepoman777 (talk) 15:28, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Reepoman777 Someone reverted your addition because you didn't cite a source. Do you know of a published source that indicates reaches that speed in that time? ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:48, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hi,thankyou for help but not got a clue how to find and do that ever,the motorcycle is on wikipedia but im totally lost ,thankyou anyway 👍 Reepoman777 (talk) 16:31, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Log In

I'm an American living in Germany. I wish to create an account to post my information on Wikipedia. Will the User Name and Password that I select for the USA Wiki also function to log in to the European Website? Thank you for your time and assistance. Scotty Riggins 2003:EE:3739:8B18:3107:1AE7:C9FC:A7D6 (talk) 16:10, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no "USA Wiki" nor yet a European one. There is an English language Wiki (hey, you're here) and there are German language, French language and many other XYZ language Wikipedias. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:15, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP! The answer is yes. Wikipedia has a single unified login across all of the various Wikis operated by the WMF. Also, there isn't a USA Wiki or European Wiki. Wikipedias are only separated into different languages, not regions. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:16, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't an American Wikipedia, only an English Language one. Yes logins are global, you can edit the German, French, Welsh or any other language Wikipedia that you want. It also works on numerous other Wikimedia sites like Commons and Wikidata. See Wikipedia:Unified login. - X201 (talk) 16:17, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you one and all!! 2003:EE:3739:8B18:3107:1AE7:C9FC:A7D6 (talk) 16:19, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am a little concerned by your "to post my information on Wikipedia". I'm not sure what you mean by "my information", but please be aware that posting information about yourself is rarely appropriate: see WP:AUTO and WP:NOT. ColinFine (talk) 19:05, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Organization Page

I want to edit my organization's page, but am aware that only reliable sources should be used. However, things like a mission statement and the organization's history are only found on an organization's page and are generally not referenced in 3rd party sources. How do I address this? Thomas River (talk) 16:33, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has very little interest in mission statements. Theroadislong (talk) 16:36, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mission statements are purely promotional, and unless discussed and analysed by third-party sources don't belong in an article. Likewise, if the history of an organisation is of any great relevance, it will be possible to cite third-party sources. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:38, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) "My organisation" implies that you need to read WP:COI and possibly WP:PAID before editing. Unless the change is totally trivial you should post a request on the article's talk page giving details of the change and sources then await another editor reviewing and implementing the change. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:40, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. What about the first sentence on most Wikipedia pages that describes what the organization is? If this is outdated for an organization and 3rd party sources cite the organization's website as its source for describing the organization, would this still be considered unreliable? I have read through the COI pages, but just want to understand what sources can be used before posting a request on the talk page. Thomas River (talk) 17:42, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

TR, we do want to get it right. The best way to do that is to show recent reliable and independent sources using brief descriptions of the organization that are different than what WP says about it. Valereee (talk) 17:50, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Thomas River, if something isn't being discussed by reliable independent sources, generally Wikipedia doesn't consider it worth mentioning. The mission statement belongs on the organization's website and their linkedin, but not here. Valereee (talk) 16:41, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Avoid mission statements is worth reading. Cullen328 (talk) 16:43, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mission statements are a tool used by management to trick employees into caring enough about their bosses to work harder for them. As such, they aren't really useful for an encyclopedia article about a company in particular. It should also be noted that if no independent sources have covered information about the organization in question, than by definition, it is not notable enough for an encyclopedia article at Wikipedia. What Wikipedia articles need in order to exist is sufficient reliable source text to use to research and cite. If that text doesn't exist, then there's no need to create an article. --Jayron 32 18:00, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Last antecedent rule

Hello. This article has some amount of detail, but it doesn't actually explain what the rule means or does. I know a guy who is a lawyer (or "solicitor" as we say in Britain) and he facepalmed when he saw this. Can we modify the article to give examples and explanations that will help somebody who wants to understand the concept? Thank you. 2A00:23C5:FE18:2701:7DA1:9208:6A27:EEDD (talk) 16:51, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is crowdsourced by self-selected editors ("anyone can edit"), and that can include you. You do not need anyone else's permission. Quickly review our rules and guidelines, and then edit the article to add those examples. Ideally, you would take examples from reliable sources WP:RS and summarize and reword them to avoid copyright violations, and cite your sources. -Arch dude (talk) 17:12, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As noted above by Arch dude, Wikipedia is not supposed to be finished, and it is expected that there will be, at any given time, any number of omissions, inaccuracies, errors, and other problems. The idea is Wikipedia is probably better today than it was yesterday, but it is not currently perfect, nor will it likely ever be. Instead, look at the errors as an opportunity to contribute to the project yourself. Wikipedia only exists because people who care decided to spend a few minutes to make it better. It requires no special qualifications to do so, just noticing an problem and being alive is all you need to be. You seem to be sufficiently qualified. --Jayron 32 17:56, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that article is borderline gibberish. I'm a lawyer, and I think the language being used is unnecessarily obtuse. I can see how a layperson wouldn't be able to make heads or tails of it. Generally speaking, when you see something like that, bring it to the attention of the relevant wikiproject (Wikipedia:WikiProject Law in this case) so people who are generally interested in the topic area and have access to sources can take a look. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 18:04, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Organization name change

Note sure how that's handled. The Loyal Order of Moose is now called The Moose Fraternity. How does one make this change? Fezland (talk) 18:09, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a reliable source documenting the name change, you would edit the article in question to fix the text of the article, and cite your source showing the name change. Then, you move the article to the new title. Help:Move covers the technical aspects of this. --Jayron 32 18:41, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fezland The issue here is naming conventions of the Men's group, the Women's group and the umbrella. Loyal Order of the Moose being the men's group, Women of the Moose being the women's group and the Moose International which is an umbrella over both of them (in the US as well as the equivalents in the UK). I *think* from looking at https://www.mooseintl.org/ , that Moose Fraternity may be the US piece over both men (LOOM) and women (WOOM), but I'm not sure. A Reliable Source is what we are looking for.Naraht (talk) 15:06, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So the only reliable source would be in issues of Moose Magazine Mooseintl.org. The Loyal Order of Moose (LOOM) no longer exists. We are no longer a men's group. In 2021 the LOOM voted to allow Women into the men's side making us a unified fraternity, The Moose Fraternity as it is no called. The phrase 'LOOM' is replaced with the terms 'Lodge' or 'Moose' and the Women of the Moose (WOTM) has been reclassified as a higher degree for the female members that functions like the Moose Legion a higher degree for the men. Moose International is our headquarters, but when members join they don't join Moose International, they join their respective lodges of 'The Moose Fraternity.'

https://www.mooseintl.org/one-moose-a-reality/ Fezland (talk) 15:25, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fezland Sorry for not seeing this in time and having to respond in archives. I've left a note on your talk page.Naraht (talk) 14:27, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How to search talk page archives for keywords?

Hi, pardon the noob question, but I can't seem to find a way to search talk page archives for subjects. For example, the Wiki page on "lame edit wars" mentions the dispute over whether the Beatles (or should it be The Beatles?) are a rock band or not, and recommends looking it up in the TPA. So, can one go to the "Beatles" talk page and enter "rock" in some field or other way such that it searches all 30-odd archive pages? Or does one have to do an ordinary "manual" word search on every single archive page? TiA, T 84.208.65.62 (talk) 18:51, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. On the talk page Talk:The Beatles, there is a banner at the top, under the list of archive links, that has a field with a button "Search archives". I searched "rock" as you suggested and it returned this[5] result. Hope I've been of some help. --DB1729^talk 19:08, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There will usually be such an archive search box on pages with archives. Otherwise you can enter rock prefix:Talk:The Beatles/ in the normal search box. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:17, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

how provide translated page

Hello, I would like to provide the wikipedia reader with the opportunity to click 'french' for a page well written in english... I would google translate it, and make final correction and put it in wikipedia Chimpenzee (talk) 18:58, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chimpenzee, if you're asking how to translate an English Wikipedia article into a French Wikipedia article, see Wikipedia:Translate us. Be aware that the English and French Wikipedias are separate projects, each with their own sets of rules. Here's a link to French Wikipedia if you haven't already checked it out: link. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:06, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

great complete answer, thank you ! Chimpenzee (talk) 17:30, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chimpenzee It sounds like you're offering to translate any English article, after any user clicks a link (in the article?) labeled "french". What you wrote was a bit confusing, so I might be way off base. If what I said is indeed what you are proposing, then ... First, it would be a huge undertaking: suppose hundreds of readers clicked a "french" link on different articles. Would you then translate hundreds of articles to French? How would the reader know when you are done? Some of the articles might already have translations, and you would have to check that. Second (or maybe fourth), this would require some code to notify you about the clicks. Fifth, the French Wikipedia would need to approve each translated article (or decline and ask for improvements).

I hope that I misunderstood your request, because what I got from it won't really work. David10244 (talk) 08:59, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello thank you for your answer, in fact I am only interested to translate some page that my GF wants to read. Putting the translation on french wikipedia will allow all french speaking readers to benefit, I was given a good link = https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Translate_us

Thank you again Chimpenzee (talk) 17:30, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chimpenzee Thanks for that clarification. So you only want to translate one page, then? Please read the "translate" link that was given above. Notice that computer-only translations are usually not very good; translators should be fluent in both languages. It's easy to miss shadings of meaning in a language that you're not completely fluent in, which is probably why I misunderstood what you wrote. David10244 (talk) 17:00, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]