Help desk
< April 19	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 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.

April 20[edit]

Malfunction in personal userbox[edit]

I am trying to create a personal userbox, User:Mandruss/UBX/AntiTikTok, using the userbox User:Mandruss/UBX/Signature as a working example. In the new userbox, the |id= parameter is not being processed as I expected. It should show a small version of the specified image at the left side of the userbox, as in the working example. What am I missing? ―Mandruss ☎ 02:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mandruss: File:Bajs.jpg is on MediaWiki:Bad image list so it cannot be displayed outside its file page. Choose another image. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:59, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing. Censoring images of poop, lest somebody be offended. Now I remember why I semi-retired. Thanks. ―Mandruss ☎ 10:41, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mandruss: MediaWiki talk:Bad image list says: "Images on the list have normally been used for widespread vandalism where user blocks and page protections are impractical." Feces has several poop images. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:25, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it does, and the only one remotely suitable for my purpose is File:Human_Feces.jpg, which is blocked from use everywhere except Feces and Human feces. Presumably those with delicate sensitivities don't go to those articles, so it's ok to show poop there. ―Mandruss ☎ 13:33, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest that regardless if you can, putting a pile of poop on your userpage isn't likely to further the production of an encyclopedia. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 15:18, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

True, and the same applies to almost every userbox. It doesn't further the production of an encyclopedia to tell the world what your favorite video game is, or that you have visited New Hampshire. And yet we allow that and countless other similar cases, or at least tolerate them, which is effectively the same thing. I've never even seen anything negative said about those userboxes. This tells me the community feels that, at least in the case of userboxes, editor self-expression is more important than furthering the production of the encyclopedia. The community has spoken. ―Mandruss ☎ 15:53, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I speculate the community might not speak the same way about feces. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 18:59, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps. But I'm 99% retired (after 8 years of faithful service), so I'm not furthering the production of the encyclopedia much anyway. Thanks for the input. ―Mandruss ☎ 17:51, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Geography archeology dots[edit]

Sometimes I would go into pages that is related to history and would see three red dots. Like for example would see it on the Eboracum page on the map. Sometimes it would be on ancient sites dating thousands of years ago or just a few hundred years ago. But in some case it would be one big dots eve on ancient related page. I've always wonder about the three dots. Edwardadrian (talk) 02:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Edwardadrian: That appears to be how Template:Infobox ancient site chooses to mark the location of the article subject on the map. Other templates may (and do) mark locations in other ways. My guess is that a page showing "one big dot" is using a different template (for whatever reason), but it's impossible to be certain without an example to refer to. ―Mandruss ☎ 02:41, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Edwardadrian: Yes, {{Infobox ancient site}} uses File:Archaeological site icon (red).svg. Three dots in a triangle is an icon for historic sites and has its own Unicode character U+26EC Historic Site with a redirect on ⛬. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:20, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I want the Wikipedia to be more authentic source of content[edit]

Respected! It is a kind suggestion that allowing any to edit content could lead to vulnerability of the site content. Please don't allow any one to edit the source otherwise it could be replaced with the fake content. In order to edit or post the content author must be registered to a reputed institute, so that the content posted by author is valid not fake content before publishing his content similar to journal or research publish by the author or first validated before publication. 182.183.136.64 (talk) 05:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your suggestion is certainly an interesting one. I wish to draw your attention to Scholarpedia, which has implemented a process similar to the one you suggest. It's unlikely that this proposal would be adopted here, however. Shells-shells (talk) 05:48, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're almost certainly not the first person to suggest something like this and you won't be the last. However, I think this question was decided very early when Wikipedia was just starting and the side in favor of keeping Wikipedia "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit" won the day. If you're interested in learning more about the beginning of Wikipedia, the article History of Wikipedia goes into more detail. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:59, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your suggestion that someone should be "registered to a reputed institute" is a pathway to stagnation. It might work fine for active academic subjects but would exclude those with a professional knowledge gained in industry or the best sort of amateurs who have studied long and hard in their own time. It's bad enough trying to get to sources when you are outside academe but to block such editors would destroy the project. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 07:32, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Page Issue[edit]

I have edited my page, but page is not working [[John Samuel Malayalam Writer|John Samuel Malayalam Writer]] (talk) 08:58, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See your talk page. AndyTheGrump (talk) 09:02, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)User:John Samuel Malayalam Writer, as is clearly explained on your talk page, the article John Samuel Malayalam Writer has been deleted "because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising". Please note such a page is NOT "your" page, but Wikipedia's page, and must conform to wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please stop trying to use Wikipedia to promote yourself. Arjayay (talk) 09:05, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Moving A Drafted Wikipedia to Another User[edit]

How can I move an editing draft to another person/account? I could not find any information about this on the internet. Mechka med (talk) 16:26, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mechka med: Wikipedia is a collaborative project. Nobody "owns" a draft, even it it's a user subpage, although by convention I think most editors defer to the user for user's subpages. I suggest you move your draft into "draft" space if ti is not already there. You accomplish this by using the "move" button. -Arch dude (talk) 16:33, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mechka med: If this is about Draft:James Vaughn Warren, then it is already in "draft" space and does not belong to you. It belongs to all interested editors. -Arch dude (talk) 16:37, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AI[edit]

Does WIKI use AI to create any content 8.45.30.175 (talk) 18:53, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes. See Wikipedia:Artificial intelligence. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:21, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

editing 181.9.199.25 (talk) 21:05, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How can I get my page assessed?[edit]

A few weeks ago I created the page Morley Vernon King. Is there any way I can get it assessed by Wikiprojects? Comitialbulb561 (talk) 21:17, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're asking about getting the various WikiProjects added to the talk page, which will notify them? You can do that yourself. If you take a look at the code on the talk page for a similar article, you can get an idea of which projects to add. Valereee (talk) 21:34, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Comitialbulb561 (forgot to ping). Valereee (talk) 21:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing errors on Battle of Tora Bora[edit]

Reference help requested. Hello, new editor here. A bot has just informed me about an apparent error reference in this edit I made on this article. I am still learning how to edit and not quite understanding everything. I have been struggling from the start on how to correctly add citations as I am quite technically illiterate and I quickly lose track of everything, especially since I have been writing simultaneously so effectively multitasking (the show preview feature is really a great help in this respect.) I want to fix the citation errors of course, but I am not quite sure what the error even is or which citation exactly is the issue in this case. I cited multiple sources in that session and can't even tell which one is causing the issue, much less how to fix it. Furthermore, it is difficult to keep track of since everything appears to be working. The bot says something about a "missing periodical", but even after reading that wiki page I still don't understand exactly what that even means. Would anyone be so kind as to help me understand how to fix this referencing error? Thanks, Fanatizka (talk) 23:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It appears this error has already been resolved, but the issue was that the {{cite journal}} template you added in the second paragraph of that edit requires a journal name, but none was provided (likely because the linked document was not taken from a journal). If you happen to have this same issue in the future, changing the citation template to {{cite web}} should fix it. Tollens (talk) 23:39, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thanks for the response. The citation was to an online PDF file, which I mistakenly thought was what the cite journal was for since it didn't auto-fill in for the URL like the other citations did. I will use the ((cite web)) template when in doubt in the future. Thank you. Fanatizka (talk) 23:58, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia keep coming back to mobile version even I switched to desktop.[edit]

Why my wikipedia in chrome mobile keep coming back to mobile mode even I switched in desktop mode? Pls help. Thanks. Rendell1234 (talk) 23:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Enable mobile version. You can also paste this into your "Shared CSS/JavaScript for all skins:" in your preferences

(function () {

// Find the link used to switch to the desktop view.

var desktopLink = document.getElementById("mw-mf-display-toggle");

if (desktopLink === null) {

return;

}

var href = desktopLink.getAttribute('href')

// Make sure we're not already in the desktop view, which could lead to

// an infinite loop.

if (href.indexOf('.m.') > -1) {

return;

}

// Navigate to the new URL, replacing the history element, as if we were

// never on the mobile site! You can use .assign() instead, if you want to

// keep the URL of the mobile site in your history.

window.location.replace(href);

})()

PalauanReich (talk) 23:11, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also this happen when I clear data on chrome. If I switch it to desktop in google search and going to wikipedia, the website goes back to mobile version. But even I removed the "m" on it, it still on mobile. But if I switch to desktop on goofle chrome settings, still on mobile bjt in larger desktop version, I need only to remove the "m" if I switched to to "desktop" in chrome on wikipedia itself. Pls help because I don't want mobile version of wikipedia since 2015. Rendell1234 (talk) 23:17, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, paste that into your shart css/javascript and it should work. If you want more info, see this forum post PalauanReich (talk) 01:31, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can stay in desktop mode permanently by pasting this line into your common.js file (User:Rendell1234/common.js):

mw.loader.load( "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:%C3%9Ejarkur/NeverUseMobileVersion.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript" );

CodeTalker (talk) 17:10, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]