Help desk
< August 19	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 21 >

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 20

The previous Wikipedia

Wikiwand has taken over my laptop so that I can no longer access the Wikipedia "Did you know" and the other three sections on the Main Page. What has happened? How can I get to view those four sections, please? Garrymo (talk) 01:36, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Garrymo: Wikiwand is not affiliated with Wikipedia as far as I can tell. You will need to ask that company for help. RudolfRed (talk) 02:18, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This also sounds like it might be a malware related issue. You could try various antivirus and antispyware tools to see if this fixed the problem.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:49, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiwand is notorious for taking over. I suggest you get rid of it and all its cookies. Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:34, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps something about that should be added to our article? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:25, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Subheading not being recognised

Hello. I just uploaded Susan Stevens.

Can someone help me make the first subheading Guiding Songs under the section "Select compositions" appear as the rest, rather than plain text? I have used {{columns-list|colwidth=20em| which I suspect has made it go wonky, but I don't know how to correct it. Thank you! 01:47, 20 August 2024 (UTC) BJCHK (talk) 01:47, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BJCHK: Stuffing whole sections into a template parameter can cause different problems. I used {{div col}} instead.[1] There is a little whitespace at the start now but it's a minor issue. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:21, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter thank you! I am still on a steep learning curve with the more technical aspects of Wiki. The column-list is one of my newer additions. BJCHK (talk) 02:36, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Caret in article title

There's an article I want to make and it have caret, so is it within the scope of WP:TSC and WP:FORBIDDEN. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 ^{[𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺]} 07:55, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, go ahead. I'm not sure what your question or issue is. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:08, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article title is "Ar^c". Should the special character be part of the article title or use a hatnote for it? 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 ^{[𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺]} 10:12, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar with the subject but if that is the Wikipedia:COMMONNAME used in reliable sources, I don't see why it shouldn't be the article title. Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:29, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah almost all reliable sources uses that title. Thank you @Shantavira. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 ^{[𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺]} 11:34, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not considered a special character in page names and we for example have ^txt2regex$. I would add an entry at Arc or ARC. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:43, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes noted and thank you @PrimeHunter. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 ^{[𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺]} 14:19, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The caret falls under MOS:TMRULES serving no purposes other than purely for decoration. This shouldn't be confused on whether special characters is or not allowed for article titling. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:36, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's about the debut album AR^C by the band ARrC. It released yesterday and there are still few sources but all sources I have found say AR^C. MOS:TMRULES says:

Avoid using special characters that are not pronounced, are included purely for decoration, or simply substitute for English words or letters (e.g., ♥ for "love", ! for i) or for normal punctuation, unless a significant majority of reliable sources that are independent of the subject consistently include the special character in the subject's name.

It looks like there is justification for AR^C or Ar^c. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:23, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I find the usage rather mixed uses in Korean sources from majority WP:KO/RS#R, with some omitting the caret completely, some changing the caret to interpunct, and some retaining the caret. Hence, skeptical on being used by a significant majority of reliable sources that are independent of the subject. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 19:55, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I somewhat disagree as majority of Korean sources uses caret rather than mixed as you stated, you can see it from oldest to latest search results in Naver and it will have same outcome with Daum and Nate, and also the only English reliable source I could found which is Korea JoongAng Daily uses caret. Here's why I said it is majority is because I search the keyword "AR^C" in the "Find in page" of the browser there are 720 results in the first link page I provided above while 176 results for the keyword "AR·C" and 0 results for the keyword "ARC". So like what PrimeHunter said there is justification for including caret for the EP's article title. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 ^{[𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺]} 10:18, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to "agree to disagree" on restoration on the grounds that pronunciation is included for the first mention as a distinct/unique count (not based on 720 results as count is not distinct/unique) of Korean sources that uses caret and also variations of interpunct included it in their reporting where both symbols (caret or variations of interpunct) are pronounced. Hence this should justify not meeting avoid using special characters that are not pronounced when pronunciation are included. For transparency, I remains skeptical on being used by a significant majority of reliable sources that are independent of the subject regardless I believe that the compromise is sufficient regardless of my scepticism. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:48, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted contributions

Where have deleted contributions gone? Definite editors of a deleted page appear in its history, but the page isn't now showing in their deleted contributions. I've seen this problem on several pages now, but one example is that Draft:World on the Brink shows User:Fractal Figment as the main editor, but deleted contributions shows nothing. It's the same on other pages, and a least one other admin has noticed this recent development Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:25, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak: It's a bug. Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Deleted contributions invisible has some discussion and workarounds. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:30, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John of Reading thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:33, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Need to change our editors of and make multiple edits to a university Wikipedia page

HELP! The person who set up our Wikipedia page is no longer working here. I need to make a lot of changes to a small university Wikipedia page. Can someone please help us through the spider web that is editing a Wikipedia page? Catherine Wetzel at SU (talk) 14:19, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Catherine Wetzel at SU Wikipedia doesn't want employees of universities (or any other organisation) editing the articles directly owing to their conflict of interest. We have specific procedures for you to follow. First, you must declare yourself as a paid editor. See that link for how to do this. Then make an edit request on the Talk Page of the relevant article. This is easiest to do with the edit request wizard, which then alerts neutral editors to consider your suggestions. Make sure you include reliable sources which for some things can be the university website: see WP:ABOUTSELF. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:24, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael D. Turnbull: That's not what our COI policy says. For example, it says "Editors who have a general conflict of interest may make unambiguously uncontroversial edits" which means that User:Catherine Wetzel at SU is at liberty to make such changes, subject, of course, to our usual polices on matters such as referencing and NPOV, as well as on paid editing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:18, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pigsonthewing While that is true, the OP is a paid editor, so I emphasised the strongly discouraged part of the "paid" guideline. In some cases I point people to WP:ASFAQ which has a number of examples of things it is OK to do. That didn't seem to be appropriate here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:33, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neither ASFAQ nor the section I cited have exclusions for paid editors. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:52, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what point you are making. The restrictions on paid editors are stronger than on editors who are not paid, so to avoid answers here that would be WP:TLDR I tend to link to what I consider to be the most important policy/guidance. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:34, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that you should not make false statements such as "Wikipedia doesn't want employees of universities (or any other organisation) editing the articles directly". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:26, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to what Mike Turnbull says, please bear in mind that 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. ColinFine (talk) 16:36, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised nobody else has brought this up, but your initial question suggests a misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is about. You talk about "our Wikipedia page" (the small university). Your university will never have a Wikipedia page, because no university--and no anything or anyone else--has a Wikipedia page. There might be an article about your university, and ideally, it will be written by people with no connection to your university. And that article might not be what you would like, but if things in it are relevant and well-sourced, there won't be much you can do about it. Wikipedia is not a place to maintain a web page to tell the world what you would like them to know about yourself or your company or organization. Uporządnicki (talk) 23:35, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Page has disappeared?

Hello, We had a Wikipedia page and now it seems like it has disappeared. We did not receive any email or warning and not sure what must have caused Wikipedia to take this decision. Can someone please help us get our page back? Thank you. Padra clinic Canada (talk) 17:52, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Padra_(clinic). Please see WP:OWN as to why this is a wikipedia page about something *not* owned by the organization. In addition, it appears that your username is already marked as inappropriate since it indicates that you are talking for a group of people/organization rather than it being for a single individual.Naraht (talk) 17:57, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedia Editors,

I am writing to formally appeal the decision to delete the Wikipedia page for PADRA Clinic.

[snip lengthy advertorial]

I am committed to ensuring that the content about PADRA Clinic on Wikipedia is factual, neutral, and adheres to Wikipedia’s standards. I would appreciate the opportunity to work with the Wikipedia community to restore the page and address any concerns that led to its deletion.Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your positive response and am willing to collaborate on any necessary improvements to ensure the page meets Wikipedia’s guidelines. Padra clinic Canada (talk) 18:20, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is AI-generated puffery. We're not impressed. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:21, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In using "we" it seems that there is also immense conflict of interest as the pronoun implies the author as being affiliated with PADRA Clinic. MallardTV (talk) 19:04, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the WP:ORGNAME username does that a little too. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:00, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. Unless there are enough such independent sources to base an article on, there is literally nothing that can be written in the article, and no article is possible. ColinFine (talk) 21:58, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft declined, wondering why.

My draft List of L'Officiel (Paris) cover models was declined. I don't want to sound stupid, but I am genuinely confused. It was tagged as failing WP:NLIST and lacking reliable sources.

Reliable sources

The moderator said that it "lacks any independent reliable secondary sources" which I mean it does. I'm not denying it the magazine issues themselves are the sources and that is not secondary. However are they really needed List of Vogue (US) cover models simply lists external links.

This is the same for most other lists of Vogue cover models (excluding Czechoslovakia with 2 references, India with 23 references, Philippines with 24 references, Scandinavia with 5 references and Teen Vogue with 55 references).

It is also the same with listing only external links for Lists of Elle cover models (excluding Elle India, which is sporadically referenced also Elle Girl has 1 reference).

The Lists of Harper's Bazaar cover models all only mention external links.

In my draft about L'Officel cover models external links are given only, same as the majority of lists of cover models on Wikipedia.

Along with this WP:NLIST mentions The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been. which should be covered by the external links. To pass into the main space, should external links be renamed to references?

Notability

I believe the draft passes notability as the overall group of cover models is notable, WP:NLIST states that Because the group or set is notable, the individual entries in the list do not need to be independently notable.

Being on the cover of L'Officiel is notable for numerous reasons. Being on the cover of the magazine can be an entryway into becoming a prominent model with many models having their first cover be for L'Officiel (notably Linda Evangelista and Wilhelmina Cooper). Across the Internet (I admit many are less reliable sites) L'Officiel is regularly noted as one of the most prominent French fashion magazines, so being on the cover has to be notable? Along with this less onto the notability of the magazine but I do not see how being on the cover of L'Officiel is less notable than the cover of Harper's Bazaar Chile or Elle Kazakhstan.

Anyways, I'm not trying to come off as brash but I am simply confused on why the draft was declined, and I hope these reasons can be pointed out to me (or ways to improve the article). Jayediting (talk) 22:46, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is demonstrated through significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Find sources which discuss the topic of L'Officiel cover models in depth, and you will have something to convince people that the topic is notable. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:54, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Harvnb refs (Again)

I asked for help before: Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2024 August 15#Help with Harvnb refs

I now have the exact same issue at a different article, when I click on the ref I added, the source in bibliography is not targeted.

I did what they said at the previous discussion. Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:52, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is about Katzrin ancient village and synagogue? Always include the article name where the problem exists; don't make help desk volunteers hunt for it.

Macoz & Killebrew 2022 is a different publication from Macoz & Killebrew 1988. Be sure that you are linking the correct publication(s).

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:35, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, messed up with the year. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 02:43, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

St Anne's College, Oxford

Reference 18 has a "red alert". Please fix if able. Thank you in advance. 115.70.23.77 (talk) 23:39, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It took a while to find the error but I think I fixed it. There seemed to have been a problem with the spaces in between the words. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 03:59, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Midori No Sora, what did you do? The message referred to a dash, was the problem a hidden character next to a dash?

IP editor, reference 18 is to "Daily Mail, August 8th, 2004" (diff), so according to WP:DAILYMAIL it should not be used as a Wikipedia article. More generally, as I have argued on the talk page, information about members of the Middleton family, who did or did not study at St Anne's, is not relevant to the history of the college. TSventon (talk) 12:00, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TSventon, sorry for the late reply.

I don't how to properly explain this in words but I'll try my best.

The error message pointed out that there was a soft hyphen inserted at position 133. At first, I didn't know what that meant so I first tried replacing the hyphens with the En dash but that didn't seem to work.

Then I counted all of the words manually until I reached the 133 position in the text. There was no hyphen inserted there, but I found out that there was an "invisible space" in between the words. (I.E. I pressed the backspace key on the 133 position but nothing changed. I pressed it again and then the space disappeared.) After manually spacing out the sentence again, that finally resolved the issue. I don't know why it didn't appear in the revision. The hyphen had nothing to do with the error message so I reverted the hyphen I inserted.

For some reason, the link to the source is broken and I cannot seem to access the website. Anyways, per WP:DAILYMAIL I've removed that source completely.

Cheers. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 00:34, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you not read the help text linked from the error message? Here is the reference with the error (permalink). Also: Soft hyphen.

If you did read the help text, what about it is/was unhelpful?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:55, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Trappist the monk and Midori No Sora: thank you both, I did read the help text and MNS clearly did too. I was hoping for a tool to make the invisible character visible, rather than having to count to position 133, but that might be unreasonable. I was interested in a general answer, as the easy answer was to remove the Daily Mail reference. TSventon (talk) 01:08, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I did read the help from the error message.

The error message said that there was a soft hyphen inserted, so I tried replacing the hyphens but, that didn't seem to work. After reading the list again, the error was likely the zero-width space, which matches the description of what I said above. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 01:11, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, the error message was correct. Soft hyphens (SHY) are invisible until the line needs to break on the word that holds the soft hyphen. In this case, the soft hyphens are oddly placed; they lie between the 'm' of 'married' and the space following 'was' in this fragment of the quotation: '... was married ...' (<s><space><shy><m>) and similarly between the space and the 'e' of 'engineer' (<n><space><shy><e>) in '... an engineer ...' Copy the 'married' fragment to your clipboard and then follow this link (it is safe). Paste your clipboard into the big text box at upper right, then click the big down-arrow below the text box. At the left will be a vertical column describing each character in the text box. The character just above the 'm' is described as: 'U+00AD: SOFT HYPHEN'.

Prove to yourself that soft hyphens only become visible when a line break is needed in the word holding the soft hyphen. Just below I have removed the soft hyphen from the beginning of 'married' and placed it between the two 'r's. Edit this section and place your cursor at the beginning of 'was' and then stand on the space bar; 'was married' will move right. Note what happens when one more tap on the space bar tries to push the 'd' in 'married' beyond the right margin.

was married

Of course, don't save your edit.

Why do you think that the error was likely the zero-width space?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 02:31, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was sort of complicated, but thank you for this information! I saw the word: "without actually displaying a visible space in the rendered text." on the zero-width space article, and I immediately thought this was it.

I guess I was wrong.. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 04:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]