Help desk
< March 31	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 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.

April 1

Interlanguage links

Dear editors: Is there a guideline or advice page about when and whether to add links to articles in another language to the body of an article? For example, if in the middle of a paragraph or a bulleted list there is mention of a subject which has no article in English, but has one in French or Chinese, should a wikilink be added that takes the reader to the article in that language? —Anne Delong (talk) 00:56, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Anne Delong: You can use the {{ill}} template. It will display the enwiki redlink with an interwiki link in parenthesis next to it. --Majora (talk) 02:38, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I read the question, I swear. But my mind decided to answer something different. As to your actual question, if there is guidance, not that I'm aware of. But that template is used on thousands of pages so it seems to be relatively commonplace. --Majora (talk) 02:40, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Interlanguage links--Moxy (talk) 05:57, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Majora and Moxy. I had found the Interlanguage links page, but was unable to find in it any guide as to whether it was appropriate to add a link in the body of the article which sends the reader to a page in another language. The template seems to be a good compromise, since it preserves the redlink while presenting the option (albeit somewhat subtly) of reading in another language.—Anne Delong (talk) 15:54, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

it's best not you add external links in the body of articles.... external link section would be better. There is General consensus that you should not lead our readers to non-english Wikipedia in the body of the article.--Moxy (talk) 15:57, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you are going to claim consensus Moxy you are going to have to point where that consensus exists. Even the help page you linked to before says that {{ill}} is a fine choice for this situation and the use of that template on almost 30,000 articles seems to go against your claim. --Majora (talk) 18:07, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ELPOINTS as linked from the other article....see note 2.--Moxy (talk) 18:13, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Interlanguage links, when formatted correctly, aren't technically external links. External links, as defined on that page, are to places outside Wikipedia. Other projects are still Wikipedia (just in a different language) and therefore cannot be classified as external. --Majora (talk) 18:16, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

pls read me yes they are external links.--Moxy (talk) 18:21, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It very very clearly says that there is no consensus either way on that RfC. It also further says that there is at least as much support for removing these links as there is for adding them. So claiming that it would go against consensus to use something like {{ill}} is clearly 100% false and an attempt to move a lack of consensus to what you want. And please, thread your responses. It is common courtesy. --Majora (talk) 18:28, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps best if you don't answer questions on the help desk that you don't really know the answer to. You where not aware of the help page nor the guideline on the matter. The RFC says language wikilinks are external links..... you need to provide a rational for using them in the middle of aticles if you wish to use them. Read the RFC close as a whole....don't just pick the one quote that is about nav templates....over the external links portion --Moxy (talk) 18:46, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You aren't the first person to try to shoo me away from the help desk and you certainly won't be the last. To claim I wasn't aware of the help page is bullshit (best not to claim what other people know or not since you can't read minds). I said I wasn't aware of any guidance on the matter. Which was true in terms of the use of {{ill}} in articles and continues to be so. There is no consensus either way for including them in templates. That is what that RfC was about. As for calling them "external links", fine you got me. It does say that. But it seems like you are a little late to the party. If you are really that gung-ho about this, which it seems you are, perhaps you can just go through the 30,000 uses of {{ill}} and remove it then? Nominate the template for deletion at TfD just to appease yourself and prove you're right? That will solve everything. --Majora (talk) 18:57, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just try to help people with the right information in the future ...I am not trying to get you to leave ...just dont jumpin when your not sure about the question. Try to assume good faith by all pls.. we have no need for rants here. Wikipedia:Help desk/How to answer-- Moxy (talk) 19:04, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Making an article

I can' figure out how to write an article... could I have directions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SAM191 (talk • contribs) 03:05, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:42 explains what standards we use when determining whether or not to allow an article. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:24, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SAM191, welcome to Wikipedia. Why don't you also go through Wikipedia's guide for new editors > How to write your first article? Come back if you need any more assistance. Thanks. Lourdes 03:26, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Having problems with archive bot configuration, again

I set up an auto archive bot on my own user talk page a couple of days ago and it won't work, I've set up an archive index and even started the first archive myself and it still won't archive. Could someone please take a look? It's located at User talk:ThatGirlTayler. Thank you!!! ThatGirlTayler (talk) 13:51, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I changed User Talk to the standard capitalization User talk.[1] Namespaces are case insensitive in wikilinks like User Talk:ThatGirlTayler but it depends on the bot coding whether it matters here. Come back in two days if it hasn't archived. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:05, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: Thank you, again! Really appreciate it! ThatGirlTayler (talk) 14:10, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Filter contributions page to show only non-current edits

Lots of the lines in my contributions page say (current). If I want to filter it to show only the other results (ie pages that someone else has edited since my last edit) can I do this? Amisom (talk) 20:13, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Amisom: Yes, this can be done. Go to Wikipedia:User_scripts/List#Contributions to read about the "Hide Top Contribs" tool, then jump down from there to the footnote - number 193 at the moment - that tells you how to enable it. Once installed, when you visit a contributions page you'll see a new option up by the search box at the top right, "More > Show/hide top". Selecting this will make all the "current" contribution lines disappear, allowing easy review of the remaining lines. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:03, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Born/Died dates reversed

Look at this website, the born and died dates are reversed:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bugental — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.149.40.12 (talk) 20:15, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. Born 1915, died 2008 (but neither date is referenced.) --David Biddulph (talk) 20:36, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]