Help desk
< February 5	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 7 >

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.

February 6

best way to add a reference to an entire table?

Hello! What is the best way to add a source for data that is arranged in a table? As, I have a singular source for all of the data in the table, so I'm not gonna add the same source to each cell/row. (The specific cases I've been stuck on is for result/medal tables in sport competitions.) I know sometimes you can add a caption/header to the table and add your citation to that, but that's not always possible. I've sometimes seen tables that add Source: <ref>[the citation]</ref> below it, but that feels a bit improvised. TheZoodles (talk) 13:11, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheZoodles: Add it to the table's caption. All tables should have one (MOS:TABLECAPTION). Bazza (talk) 13:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bazza that alright to do if it results in redundancy? Like if the section header is "Medals" and then you name the table header also "Medals"? TheZoodles (talk) 15:59, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheZoodles: Yes, but "Medals" strikes me as a not very informative caption. MOS:TABLECAPTION gives some background and guidelines. For your example, is it a simple list of medals, or does it include names of people who won them? Another example: the finals table at 2023 World Para Swimming Championships – Men's 150 metre individual medley § SM4 could be captioned just "Finals", but "Results of the SM4 finals on 1 August 2023" would be much more informative. Bazza (talk) 16:28, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bazza oh, I hadn't considered it like that. Thank you for clarifying! TheZoodles (talk) 08:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Colour changes in edit history

Is it just me or have the colours changed when checking diffs? Now they are blue and yellow. It's confusing me. :/ AussieWikiDan (talk) 14:26, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AussieWikiDan have you switched from desktop view (no colours) to mobile view (blue and yellow)? TSventon (talk) 14:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No I haven't changed anything (unless by accident). It used to be red for deleted text. AussieWikiDan (talk) 14:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Try clicking on this diff and switching between mobile and desktop by clicking on mobile view and desktop at the bottom of the page. TSventon (talk) 14:44, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your advice. It still keeps the colours the same. I'm not sure what I've done lol AussieWikiDan (talk) 00:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AussieWikiDan if you are atill having a problem you could try the Village pump (technical), WP:VPT. TSventon (talk) 18:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are blogs by professionals okay?

So I found a source for a song genre, Pump it Up by Elvis Costello, says the song is punk and rock and roll. But I was wondering if the website Produce like a Pro is reliable? Iamthegoat524 (talk) 15:05, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLOGS says Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications.

Genre ascriptions for music are often contentious, so I advise discussing it first anyway. ColinFine (talk) 15:30, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Iamthegoat524 - it would help if you can provide a link to the actual statement, rather than an out of context question.
Although blogs are generally considered unreliable (especially those edited by multiple people, with no editorial control), Warren Huart is a respected professional, and, although he calls his website a blog, he appears to control and edit the output. Produce like a Pro has never been discussed at the WP:Reliable sources noticeboard, but it is already cited in 25 wikipedia articles [1].
Genres are only ever opinions, and cannot be dis/proven, but his is a professional opinion, so it is similar to a music journalist offering their opinion in a music magazine. However, I would like to see the actual comment, in context, before being more definite. - Arjayay (talk) 15:38, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

here's the link -------> https://producelikeapro.com/blog/pump-it-up-elvis-costello/ Iamthegoat524 (talk) 16:05, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iamthegoat524 - I can't see that that article describes it as punk anywhere - we have "with its punk-attitude mixed with ironic humor and a cleaner, more-polished sound." and "the song’s punk-energy and sound. However, unlike the pulsing bass lines usually found in punk, Bruce Thomas’ bass line carries an infectious groove. Likewise, the organ part also separates the song from being “strictly” punk." and "Its punk guitar and drum sound – combined with a grooving bass line, organ, and wit –" None of these say it is punk, they all say it isn't punk, because of the humor, cleaner more polished sound, no pulsing bass line, etc. which differentiate it friom punk. - Arjayay (talk) 16:33, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What about rock and roll? Iamthegoat524 (talk) 00:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stalking

Hello,

Can I report an user for stalking?

This person has been systematically interacting with me, without being invited or saying anything productive, just to intimidate me. I said they should find something better to do, and they answered "Have no fear, I have plenty of time to keep an eye on you even while doing many other things", which is a creepy behavior. JoaquimCebuano (talk) 15:15, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you messed up the link (missing a 0 at the end), unless this has to do with IP edits to a Naruto-related article in 2007. Special:Diff/1203994970/1204081980 should work properly. ayakanaa ( t · c ) 15:34, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, i am sorry, dont know how that happened. I think its the right one now. JoaquimCebuano (talk) 15:38, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JoaquimCebuano, you're free to take anyone you like to WP:ANI, including an admin like UtherSRG, as long as you're sure you can build a convincing case against them - but I wouldn't recommend it. Keeping an eye on folks editing in contentious topic areas, especially when they've been skirting the rules, is generally within an admin's remit. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 15:43, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is intimidation. JoaquimCebuano (talk) 15:48, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ANI is open to you, @JoaquimCebuano. Good luck. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 15:49, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Attribution / page history not referenced in page creation that appars to be translated from Portuguese Wikipedia

Hi, not sure if this is the right place, feel free to redirect as relevant.

Epicurus' paradox (00:26, 2023 December 12) was created with what appears to be a direct translation from the portuguese wikipedia without any attribution at all. pt.wikipedia - Paradoxo de Epicuro (version as of 00:26 2023 December 12)

Hopefully the attribution can be resolved or somehow referenced as per Wikipedia:Translation # License requirements. Shazback (talk) 16:33, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Making my Article Live

Hi there,

I have had my account for more than 4 days, and have made 10 successful edits. I am unable to make the article I have in sandbox live. Can you please advise on how I can do so? Aishap (talk) 18:30, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aishap You seem to have submitted this draft for review just after you posted here. It is now awaiting comments from experienced reviewers, which can take a few days (or longer, sometimes). Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

okay got it - thank you! 174.88.92.124 (talk) 18:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aishap: Please see your talk page. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:00, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't look to me as if you have enough reliable, independent sources to establish that the series meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. 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. I suggest you look for some sources that meet the criteria in WP:42 while you are waiting for a review.

Your draft also contains some peacock words (such as "biting"), and needs to give some context for what "#werk" means (I have no idea).

Please don't be discouraged at my criticism: like many new editors, you have plunged straight into probably the most difficult task there is on Wikipedia, that of creating a new article; and if, as appears likely, you have a conflict of interest, this is even harder. My standard advice to new editors is to not even try it until they have spent a few months learning how Wikipedia works by improving existing articles. ColinFine (talk) 23:00, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Best way to portray currency inflation

What's the best way to show currency inflation? Specifically, two shillings and six pence (2s. 6., a half crown) and £30,000 in 1964. Spagooder (talk) 20:50, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Inflation/UK? DonIago (talk) 21:01, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but how about for the half crown? Since that's been antiquated for decades. Spagooder (talk) 23:40, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If my calculations are correct, half a crown was 26⁄240pound, so for a half crown in 1960 you could type "a half crown ({{Inflation|UK|0.1833|1960|fmt=eq|cursign=£}})" to get "a half crown (equivalent to £5 in 2023)". Deor (talk) 00:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deor, the half crown (British coin) was 30⁄240, i.e.1⁄8pound. TSventon (talk) 00:48, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so the 0.1833 in the template I gave above should be replaced with 0.125. Deor (talk) 01:00, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also the 0.1833 should have been 0.1083. TSventon (talk) 01:12, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Is the following correct? {{Inflation|UK|0.125|1964|fmt=eq|cursign=£}} Spagooder (talk) 02:37, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spagooder, that looks fine, you could add a decimal place or two, e.g. {{Inflation|UK|0.125|1964|fmt=eq|cursign=£|r=1}}. TSventon (talk) 09:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This was very helpful, thank you. Spagooder (talk) 12:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Protecting a frequently vandalized article?

What is the best way to get protection for an article that is frequently vandalized by multiple users? Purity test has suffered from unconstructive edits for more than a year, primarily from unregistered users, some of whom have been warned, sometimes repeatedly. It seems addressing the vandals individually will be ineffective - can the article be protected? Thanks. Etoile ✩ (talk) 22:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can post a request at WP:RFPP, but pages are not protected pre-emptively. - FlightTime (open channel) 22:17, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Etoile The current "problem" is that the issues are not "frequently" by RFPP standards. They are unlikely to protect an article that had no disruption this year, disruption generally has to be more "obvious". For the time being, you can watch it, perhaps mention the problems you see somewhere like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality and ask people there to keep an eye on it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:41, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RefToolbar ISBN search broken

RefToolbar's ISBN search function has been broken for me for several months now. Has the issue been documented somewhere? Is there a different tool that should be using? --Paul_012 (talk) 23:05, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Paul 012: It works for me, e.g. on 0-596-51516-2 in Firefox with Vector legacy. Please always give an example when you report a problem. Does it work if you log out? PrimeHunter (talk) 23:45, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. Indeed, it does seem that the issue lies in the works I've been trying to cite. Your example works fine, but none of the following seem to work on Vector 2022, whether logged in or logged out, on Edge or Firefox, with ISBN-10 or ISBN-13, and with or without hyphens. All of them turn up results when searching directly on WorldCat. ISBN 9811435979, ISBN 1351159224, ISBN 9748987221, ISBN 6163410998, ISBN 616551412X. Wonder if there's a common pattern here? --Paul_012 (talk) 07:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Paul 012: Your examples also fail for me. It appears from phab:T336297 that the tool no longer uses WorldCat. phab:T355482#9477525 says: "I think it was known that when we switched our data source for ISBN lookup (T336297 and T336727) that we would lose coverage in certain areas and gain coverage in other areas." PrimeHunter (talk) 12:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointers. The discussion under that first Phabricator ticket does provide some explanation. --Paul_012 (talk) 13:17, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]