Help desk
< January 11	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 13 >

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.

January 12[edit]

CREATE PAGE[edit]

Hello,

I am a career professional musician and I would like to create a wikipedia page. Please let me know how to do this.

Thank you very much, Rich Wyman <redacted spamlink> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.65.213.49 (talk) 00:57, 12 January 2019 (UTC) −[reply]

It is a very bad idea to try to write about yourself in Wikipedia. Please wait until other people without your obvious conflict of interest decide you are notable enough to have an article about you in an encyclopedia. --Orange Mike | Talk 03:01, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rich, how are you doing? Follow what Mike says above. I've reviewed your profile and you'll probably need more reliable sources covering your work before you qualify under wikipedia's notability guidelines (do go through the links). Best, Lourdes 04:29, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Create a full reference for a document that exists online?[edit]

Hello there, I was wondering if "{{cite web " is acceptable for a document that is viewable online, or if there is a specific set of parameters somewhere that goes with something like "{{cite document " -- if there is, I can't find it. I ask because I know there are special parameters for things like "{{cite book " or "{{cite journal ".

I'm asking specifically about this document from the National Park Service, which I intend to use as a source: https://focus.nps.gov/GetAsset?assetID=dd1a624a-3d45-45d2-a3d2-b5af5ff4d8c7

Thank you! Ewen Douglas (talk) 03:45, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cite web is acceptable; but in general, follow the citation style currently used in the article you're editing. That is, there is no hard and fast mandatory requirement to use citation templates. Lourdes 04:26, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Potternewton[edit]

Ref number 19 should have the IBSN number and I cannot get it. Also - number 12 has the publisher and date done incorrectly I think. I cannot fix it on this device now. Thanks if you are able to do these corrections. 175.33.45.21 (talk) 04:38, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I added the ISBN to ref #19. But #12 seems OK, the date there shows the day the content was accessed not of publication. –Ammarpad (talk) 08:16, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Page review[edit]

Hello, I created a page recently and had an email yesterday saying that my page has been reviewed. There were no changes done to the page and I'm wondering what's the implicating of this, is it removing the noindex tag? Many thanks --MariamGreen (talk) 09:16, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MariamGreen: I assume you're talking about the page Taniel. If that's the page, you were notified because the page was reviewed by another user and such actions are only recorded in a log. It's nothing to worry about, it effectively means the page can now be indexed by Google as well as other search engines. –Ammarpad (talk) 09:56, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ammarpad:Thank you for explaining. That's exciting to hear! --MariamGreen (talk) 10:44, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Editing content[edit]

I am trying to add new section in existing wikipedia page. I received following comment ---> Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. <--

How can I answer it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Altafhsayyed (talk • contribs) 12:46, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Altafhsayyed: It appears that the user who reviewed your request may have been confused because you put your proposed changes in a separate section of the talk page. When you make an edit request, simply put your proposed changes along with it, and not in a separate section. I would also note that your proposal is not sourced to any independent reliable sources; that will be needed. 331dot (talk) 12:50, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

problem in translating[edit]

the wikipedia translation guide says that in order to translate an english article you must first find the corresponding page on the other wikipedia(the destination language)and then proceed from there. my problem is that there is no wikipedia in my language and I am trying to begin translating english articles into my language. my language is considered a critically endangered language by UNESCO, so translating wikipedia articles will help a lot. any assistance is appriciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heisenberg höwrami (talk • contribs) 13:32, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Heisenberg höwrami:You are free to use Wikipedia article in any way you see fit based on the CC-BY-SA copyright. As long as you license the translated articles under that same copyright, you do not need to provide us with any notification and you do not need to get any further permission. However, unless you already have a good place on the web and a good infrastructure in place, you should consider setting up your language's version of Wikipedia. The Wikimedia foundation makes it really easy. IN that case, you would be the first administrator on the new Wikipedia and you would need to follow the policies and procedures that the administrators (i.e., you) set up for for adding translated articles to it. -Arch dude (talk) 16:05, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You can start an "incubator" version of a new Wikipedia very easily, but the process of converting it to a fully-participating member of the Wikipedia family is more formal. Please see the instructions linked from meta:List of Wikipedias. -Arch dude (talk) 16:16, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Procedure for merging two articles?[edit]

I have found two articles that appear to be about the same (mythical) persons, and I think they should be merged into a single article.

I have added notes about this to the talk pages of the article. There have been no replies or comments in the intervening 26 days. Is there any further procedure I should follow before merging the articles on my own? Bgoldnyxnet (talk) 15:47, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bgoldnyxnet The advice on merging is all at Wikipedia:Merging. If the case seems clear-cut then "Be bold" and perform the merger as per How to merge. If you prefer to make further efforts to open a merge discussion, the more formal procedure involves placing templates atop each article as explained in Proposing a merger : Bhunacat10 (talk), 16:39, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decategorize test pages[edit]

Is there any method by which sandbox/test pages be removed from categorizing into a specific category?Adithyak1997 (talk) 15:52, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Adithyak1997. Draft and test pages should never be put in content categories (though there may be administrative categories which are appropriate). If a draft has a content category link, it should be removed; but if it is a category which will be appropriate when the draft becomes an article, it is a pity to lose it altogether, and WP:DRAFTNOCAT recommends either commenting it out in the source, or turning it into a link to the category. --ColinFine (talk) 17:06, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@ColinFine:, Please check the category Pages with script errors. In that category, there are pages like Template:Country abbreviation/test 1 and User:Ham105/sandbox/p6 which are meant for testing purposes I guess. In such a case, shouldn't those pages be decategorized?Adithyak1997 (talk) 17:30, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is possible that individual pages should be removed from the category, but nearly all the pages in that category are going to be ourtside Article space, because articles rarely have script on them directly. --ColinFine (talk) 18:42, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pages with script errors is added automatically by MediaWiki and not by category code in the pages. Special:TrackingCategories shows the category name is determined by MediaWiki:Scribunto-common-error-category and the category description is "There was an error when processing the modules included on the page." The only way to remove pages is to avoid the script error. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:50, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BLP article not indexed by google[edit]

Hi all, a biography of a living person I created (can be seen here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerome_Sarris), has still not been indexed by google despite being positively reviewed more than two months ago. Could anyone please help me understand why that might be? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ResearchRocket (talk • contribs) 17:07, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ResearchRocket, It appears to have very low view rate, making it not a priority for google's engine to index. WelpThatWorked (talk) (talk) 17:14, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ResearchRocket it shows up as the very first entry when I do a Google search on my iPhone. You might try adding an infobox and photo to see if that helps with other searches. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:04, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly search suggestions[edit]

User:JoeHebda has been adding a banner template {{Friendly search suggestions}} to Talk pages with links to a number of internet search engines - is this in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines? - cheers - Epinoia (talk) 17:54, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the template is supposed to be “placed on talk pages to facilitate the discovery of new information”, so I don’t see anything wrong with that. PorkchopGMX (talk with me - what i've done) 18:29, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

- ok, thanks - Epinoia (talk) 18:35, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of that template, why does it include both "Internet Archive" and "Archive.org"? Both refer to the same Web site. Eddie Blick (talk) 03:13, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Found this posting mentioning me via a search of contributions by Epinoia after a message left on my talk page today. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 21:59, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Spacing at the top of Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion[edit]

Hi, can anybody explain why exactly there is so much spacing at the top of the site Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion? I tried to fix the matter by removing false newlines in some relevant templates, but, unfortunately, that did not work. Hoping for help,--Hildeoc (talk) 23:40, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I think it may just be you – because I (using a mac with Firefox) see no extra spacing at the top of that page, and have compared it with other similarly situated pages and the spacing is identical in my view.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:02, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for commenting, Fuhghettaboutit. I'm using a "regular" desktop PC and Firefox Quantum. Does anybody else here see that extra spacing between the page title and the header?--Hildeoc (talk) 20:51, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think this edit fixes it. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:29, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@John of Reading: Yes, now it looks fine! Thank you so much. Best wishes--Hildeoc (talk) 12:40, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]