Help desk
< July 24	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 26 >

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.

July 25[edit]

article[edit]

My God, Ya'll must work for the US federal Govt. I just want to write an article describing the Lubbock Tx Memorial Arboretum and IO have been working on it half the day. I'm beginning to think I'm stupid. I read and comprehend English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by James Tuttle Arborist (talk • contribs) 00:40, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, OK, you're on to us. Is there something specific we can help you with? We would welcome an article on the fine Lubbock Arboretum, but I don't see any edits by you yet -- this message here appears to be your first edit? I have left a message on your talk page that might help you get started.

It can be a little hard getting started. We sympathize. Wikipedia:Your first article might help. It contains a link to the "article wizard" which might help. I sincerely would like to see an article on the arboretum. You can come here (or message me privately if you like) with more specific problems you are encountering. Herostratus (talk) 02:47, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why would a list of Wikipedia articles have red links on it?[edit]

I just ran across this page: Index of Albania-related articles. So, I gather that this is a list of articles. Why would such a page, then, have red links on it? Many, in fact. A red link indicates no article. Why would they appear on such a list? Is there any valid reason or explanation? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 04:48, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Some of them are articles that existed at one time, but have since been deleted. You can see a notification of this if you click on e.g. Arjan Celami, Emin Celami, Hava Rexha. I assume that others such as Albanian Center for Art Studies are articles someone would like to see written. Rojomoke (talk) 05:33, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So should or should not those red links remain on that page? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:31, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See also WP:REDLINK, if you did not read it already. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 10:49, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yes, I have read that. What section was pertinent? Or are you just suggesting it, generally? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:31, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also often editors are planning to do articles and have not gotten to it yet. However, without having read the guidelines, a list of wikipedia articles should not have red links for very ling. Carptrash (talk) 17:37, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:33, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IP address[edit]

Would my IP address be open to public if I make a contribution on Wikipedia after logging in? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Litqforviki (talk • contribs) 05:09, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Litqforviki - one of the good reasons to log in with a username is that your IP is hidden from everyone - except a limited number of specially authorized users who deal with security and related issues which require access to IPs. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:47, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Cite errors/Cite error included ref[edit]

I am trying to add Mirna El Hage biography as a Lebanese designer, but i faced a problem of "tag" issue which i do not know what does mean and what should i have to do to tag. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Henriette El Hage (talk • contribs) 11:28, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Henriette El Hage: and welcome to Wikipedia. If you are connected to Mirna Elhage in any way, you probably have a so-called "conflict of interest" in this topic. Please read up on Wikipedia's WP:COI guideline. Aside from this point, you should also check some of the basic informations for new editors, that have been linked on your talkpage (regarding notability, reliable sources, etc.). GermanJoe (talk) 12:05, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Custom flag links in a template[edit]

I'm doing some work on the "Template:IPSC Regions", and want a flag beside each country name. Is there a neat way to do this? I've found that with for instance Australia the following method worked fine. From this: Australia To this: Australia

However, this presents a problem when the association has a name in a different format, i.e. China. From this: China To this: {{flag+link|China|Practical Shooting Association}}

Any ideas? Sauer202 (talk) 12:41, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Sauer202: First of all, you mixed up the arguments in your request (country name goes before link), but {{flag+link|China|Practical Shooting Association}} fails the same way in my preview.

For some reason, changing the template name to "Flaglink" (instead of "flag+link") works for me:

China

Notice also that you can change the displayed text, according to Template:Flaglink, by the "name" parameter, e.g.

Country of chocolate and cheese. Depending on the context, maybe you would prefer

Practical Shooting Association or

any text, really . Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 13:01, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tigraan, thank you very much for the detailed reply. I would like to go with the flag plus a simple country name. However, what do I do when the country name is in the middle of the association name, or perhaps not even there? I.e. "Irish Target Sports" for "Ireland"? Sauer202 (talk) 13:07, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Sauer202: I do not know, as it seems the template needs the wikilink to start with the country name. (Disclaimer: I almost discovered the template with your question.) You can always just call Template:flag and make the link separately in standard wiki markup. As David Biddulph mentions below, it may be that the flag is unnecessary altogether. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:40, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Best to leave out the flags. The template is clear and readable without them. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:22, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ormoc City[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ormoc

On November 8, 2013, the city was largely destroyed by Super Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan)

This statement is far fetched and plain wrong. Ormoc City was not 'destroyed' by any means. The typhoon did hit directly at category 5 because the eye did pass over. The damage was extensive but not destroyed by definition. A large number of structures lost parts of the roofs and windows. I had roof damage and a door blew open as the wind was strong enough to destroy the door bolt. Probably near 100% of the power lines was off the poles along with any other utility that used the power poles in this area and along the path of the storm.

Ormoc is the lazy name. Ormoc City is proper. I think an encyclopedia would be most accurate using the proper name. Look at Government pages.

I moved to Ormoc City September 2013 and I reside in the same apartment today. I have first hand knowledge of these facts. 180.191.119.44 (talk) 14:37, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced "destroyed" by "extensively damaged". As for the name of the city – Wikipedia articles use the name that the subject is normally known by, rather than the officially correct name. See, for example, United Kingdom. Maproom (talk) 15:24, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Change company page logo (ITE Group, File:ITE_Group_(logo).png)[edit]

Hi,

My company (ITE Group) wants to change the logo of their wikipedia page, as I'm not currently verified user can somebody update it for me?

This is the new logo: https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/shrink_200_200/AAEAAQAAAAAAAAJUAAAAJGJjNzg0MDhkLTRjYTUtNGEwNC05NGUwLWEwM2M0NmQyZGI2Ng.png

Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itegroup-weinberger (talk • contribs) 15:13, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I copied parts of my previous answer to a similar question. I also added a link to the page in the thread title.

Hello Itegroup-weinberger and welcome to Wikipedia (WP). The answer to your question is below, but please do read the whole post.

First of all, ITE Group is not your company's page. It is Wikipedia's page about your company.

If part of your job is related to marketing your company, your edits on WP most likely qualify as paid editing. These must be disclosed, as part of the terms of service. Read the link to "paid editing" to know how the disclosure is made.

Even if it does not qualify as paid editing, you certainly have a conflict of interest in this area of edition. One should usually refrain from editing articles in one's domain of COI, but strictly factual corrections such as uploading a new logo are probably fine.

Moreover, since the logo of your company is most likely copyrighted material, there are licensing issues. There are two options:

Either ITE Group, via an authorized person, allows Wikipedia to use the logo under its license (CC BY-SA), which roughly means anyone (not just Wikipedia) will be allowed to use it. Details about the implications of the license and the procedure to follow are outlined here. If you upload the file outright, it will be deleted, because anyone could upload the file and claim to be you - you need to prove who you are.
Or you can upload a non-free image, in which case it has to follow the criteria of WP:NFCC. In practice here, it means that you must upload a low-resolution file.

If you need someone to upload the image for you, let us know once you have read the previous.

Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 16:40, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Itegroup-weinberger I'm not seeing how this logo is any different to File:ITE Group (logo).png? They look the same to me. Joseph2302 19:14, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think the new logo has a uniform red-orange color in the bottom right (when the old one was a color gradient). Not a huge difference, for sure. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 07:45, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tigraan — Thanks for the information! We would like to choose the second option, and publish a new logo as a non-free image in a low resolution with a tag ITE Group (non-free logo). To confirm that ITE Group holds copyrights for this logo, please refer to this website: http://www.ite-exhibitions.com/ Can you please update the logo for us?

Before I make a real mess[edit]

how do I add a wikilink to Article A (let's say 12th century) from a section of Article B (let's say Valencia) so that the section of Article B [[1]] can be used to get red of the red link for Señorio de Valencia in Article A? So, you can either give me a fish or teach me how to fish, but I believe that this will improve the article and maybe I can learn something. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 15:56, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[[Article name#Section name|pipe (if required)]]... or have I missed the point!? Eagleash (talk) 16:07, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) It sounds as if you want a link from article A to a section of article B. Try [[Valencia#Middle Ages|Señorio de Valencia]], which renders as Señorio de Valencia. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:11, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

, thanks all, Señorio de Valencia is now a blue link in that article. Carptrash (talk) 16:21, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Download-only sources[edit]

(Cross-posted from WT:Citing sources.) Are download links (PDFs, zip archives, executables, etc.) acceptable in citations? Or else if a source is only available in the form of a file in a zip archive or something, what do we do? I can’t find anything in project space about this, or I don’t know where to look. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 16:33, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would infer it is okay from my reading of Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Links_and_ID_numbers (the format target is irrelevant as long as it "helps editors locate the source"). At least a .pdf download should be acceptable (there are plenty of links to in-browser pdf reading). Maybe .zip links are forbidden by technical means for security reasons (though pdfs are hardly better...) but in the rare case they are helpful, I do not see why not.

However:

you still need to be reasonably sure that the website is not copyright infringement etc.
if you find a (legit) .zip of 1,000 books, I do not think it would be correct to link to it in every article about a relevant book. I think the source needs to be reasonably precise still. But of course, that is my gut feeling, not longstanding consensus. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 16:54, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, sources don't have to be readable on line anyway. Many academic journals don't allow free access, and I often give book pages as refs, which may or may not be readable using Gbooks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:15, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On a related note, we don't accept links to what purport to be scans of newspapers or magazines if they are not on the website of the publication itself, because we have no way of verifying that these have not been altered or completely faked. If content was in a print publication, cite the print publication and don't link to a supposed scan thereof. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:23, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please indicate the location of the policy that you just said? If I'm referencing an article from the Chicago Tribune from 1864 and there is a scan at the University of Illinois, I shouldn't link it because it could be faked?Naraht (talk) 19:02, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The rules about reliable sources aply there, Naraht. If the scan is hosted by a somebody regarded as reliable, you can link to it. Orangemike's really talking about scans randomly found on the internet. --ColinFine (talk) 21:39, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ColinFine: Not doubting that, but Orangemike's statement seems *considerably* broader.Naraht (talk) 00:30, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, Colin pretty much nailed it. I've seen folks try to use a bunch of purported clippings (some of them not even showing page numbers, etc.) hosted on the subject's website; that's more the kind of thing I'm talking about. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:24, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orangemike, ColinFine as long as we've made that clear.Naraht (talk) 03:27, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would argue the inclusion of mirrors of works are a consequence of verifiability what is one of our main goals for WP articles, for the benefit of the reader. So, vice versa I would strongly encourage the inclusion of mirrors (archive.org etc) of a source if available and checked by WP authors. Shaddim (talk) 10:34, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Debbie wasserman schultz[edit]

Someone has hacked the page for Debbie Wasserman Schultz and changed her last name. Please change it back; it is an affront and insulting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.36.17.168 (talk) 17:49, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like it has already been fixed. Feinoha ^Talk 17:54, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Already reverted and the page has been move protected by NeilN. Joseph2302 17:56, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Point of clarification: The page was not “hacked.” Moving pages (to change the name) is a normal Wikipedia process. All you need to do in order to move most pages is log in and click Move. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 01:44, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New page[edit]

How can I add a page, for my own books that is? I have been published widely by small and university presses, fiction all--3 short story collections and two novels. I have won the USBook Award for literary fiction, have been reviewed in the NY Times, have written articles for Writer Mag. I may want a Wikipedia page. Can I create it? Do you need links to verify my books? Please advise.

Mary Troy

Publications:

Joe Baker is dead, University of MO press, 1998 The Alibi Cafe and other stories, BkMk Press, 2003-reviewed NY Times, books in brief, december 2003 Cookie Lily, SMU Press (now out of business) 2004--winner of Devils Kitchen Book Award for best book of prose in 2004 Beauties, BkMk Press, 2010--US Book award for literary fiction Swimming on Hwy N, Moon City Press/U of AR Press, 2016.--due out Nov 1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marydelphine (talk • contribs) 20:36, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mary, I've left a welcome note on your talk page which may explain some things about Wikipedia to you. In addition to that, I would like to point out our conflict of interest guideline as well as the notability requirements for authors. Dismas|^(talk) 21:58, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Marydelphine. From your description above it sounds as if you may meet the criteria for notability, in which case Wikipedia could have an article about you. To be clear, this would not be "your page": you would have no control over its contents. Wikipedia has essentially no interest in what anybody (or any company or organisation) says or wants to say about themselves: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with a subject have published about the subject. If there is enough such reliably published independent material about you, then we could have an article about you. You are discouraged from writing it (see WP:Autobiography but not forbidden. If you wish to have a go, please read Your first article carefully, and expect your efforts to be closely scrutinised. Separately from yourself, it is possible that one or more of your books are notable (in Wikipedia's sense) and we could have an article on them - again, not "a page for the books" but "an article about the books", neutrally written and based solely on independent published writing about them. What Wikipedia is not, ever, is a vehicle for promotion of anything, and attempts to use it that way tend to be fiercely resisted. --ColinFine (talk) 10:09, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may also want to consider Wikipedia's "Law of unintended consequences":-
"Once an article is created about you .... you have no right to control its content, or to delete it outside the normal channels. Content is irrevocably added with every edit. If there is anything publicly available on a topic that you would not want to have included in an article, it will probably find its way there eventually." - Arjayay (talk) 10:21, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New page problem[edit]

Hi I recently set up my new page on Wikipedia. I am currently experiencing some issues trying to post something. The page got deleted however I linked the website and wanted to put some basic facts about the company just like Walmart and Canadian Tire Pages.. Is there anyway I can out my information without it being deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PirabaKishan (talk • contribs) 20:52, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PirabaKishan. No there isn't. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, a compendium of mainstream knowledge, and so proper subjects of encyclopedia article entries are topics of mainstream knowledge, as reflected by reliable and independent sources out in the world having previously published significant material about the topic, sufficient to demonstrate that. As such, they cannot contain entries on businesses that the world hasn't taken note of, with significant publication about them in the types of independent and reliable sources I referred to. Having just searched, I can find no indication that such sources exist (quite unlike, for example, the thousands of sources that exist to demonstrate notability and verify the information in an article on Walmart). In any event, Wikipedia is not a proper place for promotion by insiders but for neutrally written articles on topics of knowledge. The page you posted was a blatantly promotional advertisment for the company. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:52, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

However, the above edit is your only edit under this account, and you do not have any messages about having a page deleted. Did you create the page that was deleted under a different account name? If so, read the policy on multiple account names. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:16, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert McClenon: The edit filter log shows the deleted edits. -- John of Reading (talk) 05:47, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]