Help desk
< July 6	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 8 >

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 7[edit]

A draft is a copy of an existing article[edit]

Hello, I stumble upon this draft Draft:FGV Holdings and found that it is the exact copy of the existing article Felda Global Ventures Holdings with the exception of the page name. I guess the editor is new and want to make a change on the article's name/content to reflect the change of the company name but doesn't know how. Where do I go to report it is a copy? I guess if it is an article on the mainspace I should go to AfD but since it is a draft, I'm not sure what to do. Thank you for your help. Froswo (talk) 00:48, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The copying was attributed so it's not a copyright violation, but I've deleted the draft as a copy of an existing page.I have doubts about the main article, largely sourced to the company itself it probably doesn't meet the new notability guidelines, but that's another issue Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:47, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Need simple instructions for how to nominate an article for assessment[edit]

Greetings, and thanks in advance for assistance. I need simple instructions for how to nominate an article for assessment. I have edited or helped to edit several stub and start class articles, and would like to see if they are ready to be upgraded to a higher class. Can someone please point me to a page that clearly describes exactly what I need to do to start the process? Thanks! AnaSoc (talk) 01:39, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've never bothered to learn the answer to this question, but a quick search found Wikipedia:WikiProject assessment, which has a note that explains that it's about article assessment, not project assessment. Note that an article's class and importance are both with respect to each project separately, so an individual article has multiple assesments. Does this help? -Arch dude (talk) 01:46, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I think some (or even most?) WikiProjects allow you to tag the WikiProject template with |reassess=y to request reassessment for that WikiProject. Adam9007 (talk) 02:17, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks talk and Adam9007 AnaSoc (talk) 00:05, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Typing error in the Content of- List of largest California cities by population[edit]

https://prnt.sc/k3m95i, Use This Link For Screenshot — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.156.218.70 (talk) 10:53, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The screenshot highlights "populous" in "It is the second most populous city in the United States." in List of largest California cities by population. I'm not sure of your point. If you think wiktionary:populous is not a word then you are wrong. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:44, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

how to write a article in wikipedia?[edit]

I am having a doubt in writing a article in wikiedia on a particular topic. So i shlok mundhra kindly request you to help me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shlok1111 (talk • contribs) 12:54, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Shlok1111: For starters, do not try to write an article about yourself. If you did qualify for an article, do not try to edit the article, either. See WP:COI for why.

If you're going to write an article about anyone or anything else, here are the steps you should follow:

1) Choose a topic whose notability is attested by discussions of it in several reliable independent sources.

2) Gather as many professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources you can find.

3) Focus on just the ones that are not dependent upon or affiliated with the subject, but still specifically about the subject and providing in-depth coverage (not passing mentions). If you do not have at least three such sources, the subject is not yet notable and trying to write an article at this point will only fail.

4) Summarize those sources from step 2, adding citations at the end of them. You'll want to do this in a program with little/no formatting, like Microsoft Notepad or Notepad++, and not in something like Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer.

5) Combine overlapping summaries (without arriving at new statements that no individual source supports) where possible, repeating citations as needed.

6) Paraphrase the whole thing just to be extra sure you've avoided any copyright violations or plagiarism.

7) Use the Article wizard to post this draft and wait for approval.

8) Expand the article using sources you put aside in step 2 (but make sure they don't make up more than half the sources for the article, and make sure that affiliated sources don't make up more than half of that).

Doing something besides those steps typically results in the article not being approved, or even in its deletion. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:07, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to reference the same text more than once and have it appear in Notes section once[edit]

Hello experts,

I want to add the same caveat a number of times times in an article and to have it appear once in my Notes (Reflist|group=note) section. I'm familiar with ref name= "name" and subsequent use of the ref name. However, I don't want the caveat to appear in the References (reflist) section — only the Notes section.

Just in case I'm not being clear enough, I want the displayed Wikipedia page to look like this -- let's say it's going to end up as the 4th note):

One paragraph: text text text ["note 4" in the usual blue and square brackets] text text text

Another paragraph: text text text ["note 4"] text text text

(Then at the end of the article):

NOTES HEADING

Various notes, let's say 3 of them.

4. ^ The caveat text as defined in its first occurrence.

Various other notes.

With thanks for your time and expertise, Dougal. DAHall (talk) 13:51, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This foesn't work for you?

Some text.<ref group="note" name="note_4">Note 4 text</ref> Some more text.<ref group="note" name="note_4" /> And yet more text.<ref group="note" name="note_4" />

Some text.^{[note 1]} Some more text.^{[note 1]} And yet more text.^{[note 1]}

References

^ ^a ^b ^c Note 1 text

—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:14, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It does! I had wanted it to appear under the "Notes" heading as described rather than, but instead of lazily getting back to you I experimented and now have exactly what I need. Many thanks! -- Dougal. DAHall (talk) 14:38, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is it acceptable to upload a secondary logo to use at the bottom of a university infobox?[edit]

Dear Wikipedians,

Some university infoboxes have a second "logo"-type image displayed at the bottom, which I believe are trademarked and non-free images.

I would like to add these types of logo images to university pages that do not have them.

Some examples:

1. Yale University has a "Yale" single-word wordmark
2. Beijing University and Duke University have basic wordmarks
3. Johns Hopkins University has a wordmark which is a combination of a graphic logo and the university name
4. University of Tehran has a fancier all-graphic wordmark with a color background

Please let me know whether it is acceptable to upload new logo images under non-free fair use for one-time use in the infobox if they resemble examples 1, 2, 3, or 4. I would use these images only once, at the bottom of the university's infobox.

98.200.15.243 (talk) 18:50, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to upload a photo that I took myself.[edit]

I get a message that it could not be determined whether the file is suitable for wikipedia or words to that effect.

I'm trying to an entire article into shape. It has a lot of information, many sources, and photos taken by me and from the City of Austin (which allows this: https://austintexas.gov/page/city-austin-open-data-terms-use) and I am being frustrated by this.

Wastrel Way (talk) 20:37, 7 July 2018 (UTC)Wastrel Way[reply]

Where have you been trying to upload the photo you took yourself? --Orange Mike | Talk 20:40, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on the article in my sandbox. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Wastrel_Way/sandbox&action=submit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wastrel Way (talk • contribs) 20:59, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, didn't sign that. More information: I put the cursor in the editing area, where I think the photo should go, and click on the little mountain icoon and get a succession of dialogs, I say that the photo is my own work, etc. and I get that message. Wastrel Way (talk) 21:12, 7 July 2018 (UTC) Wastrel Way[reply]

There's a reason we advise people to leave pictures to the very last. At this point, it's much more important to convert all the external links in this article into proper footnotes. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:17, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okey-dokey, then. No problem. I was just working on the links while you were answering that. Wastrel Way (talk) 21:22, 7 July 2018 (UTC) Wastrel Way[reply]

Colour of text on my user page[edit]

Hi. Can anyone help me understand why the text on my user page has gone yellow, when it used to look like this (something to do with the yellow titles?). Cordless Larry (talk) 21:17, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You had unmatched font tags.[1] The treatment of bad html has changed. See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Tidy to RemexHtml. Also, <font>...</font> is deprecated. You should use something like style="font-family: Arial; color:#FFD800;" in the div instead. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:47, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, PrimeHunter. Much obliged. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:51, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Elephant's Foot[edit]

There's an ongoing discussion about merging the Elephant's Foot article to the Corium article if anyone would like to chime in, but more importantly the sources cited in the Elephant's Foot are clearly unreliable.

What is preferable in this instance: removing the unreliable sources cited or removing the sources and the sourced content? I'd prefer to remove the content along with the sources as they both are unreliable, but that would mean completely blanking the article as there is no reliably cited content.

Thanks, Pagliaccious (talk) 22:19, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion of this type should continue on the talk page until a consensus emerges. If no consensus is emerging, please follow the dispute resolution process (see WP:DISPUTE). At the help desk, all we can do is point you to the appropriate policies. See WP:V, but I suspect you are probably aware of it. -Arch dude (talk) 04:15, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks for the help. Pagliaccious (talk) 17:31, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[note_1-1] Note 1 text

[note 1]