Help desk
< November 27	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 29 >

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.

November 28[edit]

Question about citation[edit]

Hi!

I was just wondering if someone could help me with this citation (or send me to the right place for help):

Layton, Brandon (February 2016). "Indian Country to Slave

Country: The Transformation of Natchez during the American

Revolution". The Journal of Southern History. 82 (1): 27-58 - via

JSTOR.{{cite journal}}: line feed character in |title= at position 63 (help)

The end part after JSTOR in red and I'm not sure how to fix that.

Thank you! Eschmidt18 (talk) 08:31, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eschmidt18. Did you click on the "help" button? Doing so takes you to Help:CS1 errors#invisible char which explains why you're seeing this error. The software is telling you that there's a problematic character at the 63 position of the citation. I'm not sure which article this citation is being used in, but what you'll need to do is go to said article, open the editing window, find the code for the problematic citation, and then just start counting characters until you hit 63. Once you find the bad character you can either replace it or remove it as needed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:43, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed the error for you. There was a line break between the words "Natchez" and "during" that was causing the problem. There were some other things that needed clean up as well. I also noticed that one of your classmates moved to this directly in the mainspace. That's not a problem per se, but generally new users are encourage to work on WP:DRAFTS first and then submit them for review to WP:AFC. You copied-and-pasted content from Google Docs, but that can introduce some minor syntax errors because Docs doesn't use WP:WIKITEXT for formatting. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:59, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Editing project pages[edit]

Hi, I was wondering, am I permitted to edit Wikipedia project pages, like I would to a normal article? Not to make drastic changes to them, but to maybe slightly reword somethings? The pages aren’t protected and I am an extended confirmed user so I have the ability but am I actually allowed? If not, no worries. Many thanks, Blanchey (talk) 09:20, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blanchey. In principle, yes you can be WP:BOLD; in practice, however, it might be best to be WP:CAUTIOUS unless it's something so obvious that nobody is likely going to complain. WikiProject pages aren't articles which means they don't need to be kept to the same quality standards as an article. A WikiProject page might be something that was worked on by multiple members over the years and the formatting and content might have been determined through extended discussions. So, the WikiProject's members might not appreciate someone showing up out of the blue in and rearranging things, particularly if it's a very active WikiProject with lots of members. You lose nothing by proposing any changes you think need to be made on the WikiProject's talk page, and you might also help yourself avoid problems with the WikiProject's members. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:41, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My article in a sandbox[edit]

Hi, I have an artivle on my sandbox and would like to publish it. How can this be done? (I cannot find buttons or anything to move it as it should be usually done) Is it possible for you to help me?

Thanks Lorenzo patrese (talk) 11:19, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lorenzo patrese New users cannot directly create articles and must use Articles for Creation to submit drafts for review by other editors. What you wrote is wholly unsourced; Wikipedia article summarize what independent reliable sources say about topics that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Also note that writing about yourself is highly discouraged, please read the autobiography policy. If you still wish to proceed, I would suggest learning more about Wikipedia first, by reading Your First Article and using the new user tutorial. You may then go to AFC to create a draft with proper sources. 331dot (talk) 11:29, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah this does not help a lot honestly... Lorenzo patrese (talk) 17:25, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Every 10 words there is a source basically. Please do not ask me to check the notability section haha, I know I'm in the standards as driver less important than me are on wikipedia. There are also tuns of autobiographies on Wiki Lorenzo patrese (talk) 17:28, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft cites no sources. It will not be accepted as an article. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:38, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not only is there not a single reference on the page, there is not even a single source--except for your own website, which doesn't count (I can prove this point: I said it right here in my website!) There ARE a fair number of weasel words (more prestigious; judging yourself as "mature"). Tidy up your use of tense a bit (a lot), and your "article" might pass for a CV in a resume. Oh, and can you back up your assertion that there are "tuns" (?) of autobiographies on Wiki? Uporządnicki (talk) 17:57, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, come down! I see no reason to write and this way, and secondly: guess I'm an athlete who does something else instead of writing wikipedia articles. Anyways thanks for the tips. Lorenzo patrese (talk) 18:49, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

calm* Lorenzo patrese (talk) 18:50, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

in this way* Lorenzo patrese (talk) 18:51, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think most of us do other things besides writing Wikipedia. And your youthful self-importance, as shown both here and in your "resume" needed a bit of bursting. Uporządnicki (talk) 19:49, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lorenzo patrese, It is not normal that a notable person must write his own Wikipedia article. It's usual that one random person says, "I read about this person a lot in the news/books/etc. They are famous enough to have an article on Wikipedia, and I will try to write a good one." I wish you well in your quest for notability. Quisqualis (talk) 21:19, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lorenzo patrese As for your seeing no reason, it does not surprise me that you do not see it, but it's there. You've been told what the problems are, and why your piece is NOT going to be an article as it stands, and likely never will be, but your answers have basically amounted to, you can't be bothered to pay attention to it because you're too good to have to, and you're sure it should just go in anyway. Uporządnicki (talk) 03:00, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did not say its good enough, I just said you editors or whatever should calm down, as you're just attacking people. Anyways, i will not spend the rest of my time discussing with people as you. And anyway, I understand the sources, but its not an autobiography? I mean Im talking about facts. Nicola Marinangeli this one does not seem better, a part from the final sources, but anyway I will add them. Lorenzo patrese (talk) 08:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lorenzo patrese Writing about yourself is an autobiography. 331dot (talk) 09:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lorenzo patrese: I am afraid that your bold assertion of Please do not ask me to check the notability section haha, I know I'm in the standards set people off. That is the Wikipedia equivalent of me saying that I could drive as well as you since after all I have had a driving license for a long time. There is no shame in not driving well (or not driving at all), and there is no shame in not being a long-time Wikipedia editor intimately familiar with article requirements; but claiming that it all does not matter makes people angry.

Because of that, the wall of text hides the most important information, so here we go again. If you want your draft to be accepted, you need to show that you satisfy Wikipedia’s definition of "notability". "Notable" does not mean "important" or "prestigious" or whatever usual meaning the term has.

That means finding multiple sources (multiple: 2 is the bare minimum but 3 are usually required) that simultaneously (1) speak/write at length about you, (2) are independent, (3) are reliable. In 99% of cases for biographies, such sources are newspaper articles, possibly in the specialized press - but beware that "profiles" (= interviews) are not independent, and neither are churnalism pieces (i.e. press releases lightly repackaged to pretend it is independent - those are very easy to detect once you know they exist).

If you cannot find such sources, then there is no point in working on the draft any further, it will not help.

If you can, then you can move on to the next problem - you need sources for every statement (every race participation and place, etc.). Usually the sources identified in the previous step will cover most of it, but additional sources that only satisfy (3) can be used.

There are also some issues of formatting and promotional wording, but those are rather minor and can be easily solved. Notability is the big hurdle that you need to clear. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the clearing of ideas. Yes, I understood the lack of sources on the article, its just I did still not add them. I will now.

Thanks again for helping me and explaining how things go around here Patlor643 (talk) 10:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So, I don't get it. Facts aren't autobiography, or autobiography isn't fact? Which is it? In any case, the last time I looked, your "facts" included some pretty lofty self-assessments. Uporządnicki (talk) 10:54, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I think Tigraan cleared my ideas, there is no need to add Patlor643 (talk) 11:04, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, a lot could very well be added. But in this instance, I now see I misread the comment I was addressing; I'll give you that. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:12, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

screwup[edit]

Ugh. I moved User:Valereee/Kim-Joy Hewlett to Kim-Joy Hewlett over a redirect using the move tool because the various reams of directions at various pages seemed to be telling me that if I was "using the move tool" this would merge the histories, but it didn't. And now I can't figure out how to fix it.

Is there a "Moving over a redirect" for dummies somewhere? If there isn't, can someone explain in a few steps what I need to do in such a case? WP:MOVEREDIRECT just tells me why what I just did wasn't helpful, not what I should have done.

What should I do now? I went to Special:MergeHistory but it wants two different pages.

I'm suspecting what I should have done was something like:

move the redirect to some temporary page
move the draft to the old redirect
use mergehistory
delete the old redirect from the temporary page

Thanks for any help. Valereee (talk) 15:18, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Valereee: There were four old edits in the page history of the redirect. If you wanted to history merge them with your new draft then you could have:

Use MergeHistory to history merge the redirect into your draft
Move the draft to the old redirect

This achieves the same as your 4 steps without involving a temporary page. It's too late to use MergeHistory now when the revisions are deleted under the same page name but you can just undelete them. That's all, no need for MergeHistory, they will automatically be part of the same page history. Redirects don't require attribution so it's common to just delete them and keep them deleted when you move over a redirect. You don't have to do anything. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:40, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thank you! After all this time I still am attempting to learn much of how some things are best accomplished. Very annoying of me, but somehow I doubt I'm actually going to get much better at this kind of thing. Valereee (talk) 18:47, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When a subject of an article changes its name ...[edit]

When the subject of an article changes its name, what is the preferred way to mention and link (or not link) the two names? Is there a policy other than wp:notbroken?

What I am wondering about is, is it preferred to this:

'graduated from Ryerson University (now Toronto Metropolitan University)'

or

'graduated from Ryerson University (now Toronto Metropolitan University)'

Seems a small point, but in this case Ryerson University is a redirect to Toronto Metropolitan University, so linking both would be duplicate wlinks in effect. Alaney2k (talk) 15:57, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, I would type Ryerson University (now Toronto Metropolitan University). --Orange Mike | Talk 16:10, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, although that sure seems like a long wlink. (a lot of blue) Alaney2k (talk) 18:04, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Alaney2k conversely, you may want to use "Ryerson University", keeping the link shorter. Quisqualis (talk) 21:02, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General question regarding concert tour articles[edit]

Looking at drafts that are deemed as "tribute tours", being that they have no reliable sources that are verifiable, would it violate a part of WP:NOT regarding it being original research? I do suspect self-promotion is an issue regarding it. HorrorLover555 (talk) 16:58, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, HorrorLover555. If a concert tour has not received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources, then it is not eligible for a Wikipedia article. You are correct that Wikipedia is not a place to promote anything. Cullen328 (talk) 19:04, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am Lisa parker www.lisaparker.co.uk[edit]

how do I get added on here Willow Norman Smith (talk) 17:02, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If someone without a conflict of interest decides that you satisfy Wikipedia's criteria of notability, they could write an article or a draft. Note that Wikipedia does not recommend autobiography. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:10, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

camp wood military base[edit]

I have obituary notices stating camp wood named after Joseph E Wood Cellarratt (talk) 22:12, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For context, see this help desk post. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:14, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]