Help desk
< March 13	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 15 >

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.

March 14[edit]

Made an oopsies[edit]

Probably deserve a trout for this, but I accidentally set myself as my mentor. Is there a way to fix this? vghfr (✉ Talk) (✏ Contribs) 01:50, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done :) Tollens (talk) 03:12, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

King City[edit]

Why are you showing King City Canada when I put in King City Oregon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:100F:A107:1EDE:9861:5D0A:7BC4:20CC (talk) 02:35, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from top of page into its own section. Skynxnex (talk) 02:44, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where is it showing that? King City, Oregon seems fine. If you were using a search engine, it might be an artifact of Google Knowledge Graph or something similar. RudolfRed (talk) 02:47, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Status Update on Wikipedia Account and Submitted Draft[edit]

Hi, I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to inquire about the status of the Wikipedia account I created and the final draft I submitted on February 23, 2024. As of now, I have not received any notification regarding whether my draft has been approved, disapproved, or is still pending review. I would greatly appreciate it if you could provide me with an update on the final status of my submission at your earliest convenience.

Page link : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CJDarclLogistics/sandbox

Your prompt response would be highly appreciated as I am eager to know the outcome of my submission.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. Warm regards, CJ Darcl Logistics CJDarclLogistics (talk) 04:35, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spam deleted and user blocked. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 05:04, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He was blocked because he was spamming the same message repeatedly to get attention. 1615 P. Enrique (talk) 22:38, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit page Angelo Savelli Eng[edit]

I made some additions to the Angelo Savelli page and they were deleted. I would like to understand how to solve the problem. Thank you very much Susanna Argenterio Savelli (talk) 10:46, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Angelo Savelli (Bazza 7 (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC))[reply]

@Susanna Argenterio Savelli: The page's history shows you broke copyright by copying text from another place, which is not allowed.

Your username suggests you may have a conflict of interest: see WP:COI and follow instructions there for disclosing any relationship with the subject of the article you may have.

You may ask other editors to add or amend information in the article by making an edit request: see WP:EDITREQUEST. Bazza 7 (talk) 11:01, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Avoiding white space next to a scrollbar[edit]

The wikitable in Comparison of web browsers#JavaScript support behaves helpful:
This table is wider than the centered content column which occupies about one third of my screen width. But because there is plenty of white space to the right of the content column, this table extends beyond the limits of the content column into that white space, thereby preventing a horizontal scrollbar and making all of the table visible at the same time.

But the table in the next section Comparison of web browsers#Protocol support behaves unhelpful:
It is constrained to the central content column but still wider than it, producing a horizontal scrollbar. This makes it impossible to view the whole table at once, which is annoying, according to the plenty of unused white space next to it.

Comparing the two tables, I find identical declarations in its headers: class="wikitable sortable" style="font-size: 85%; text-align: center; width: auto;" and style="width:12em" .

What is causing the different behavior of the two tables and how can I modify the second table to appear like the first one ? -- Juergen 89.245.3.28 (talk) 18:25, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Statue of Responsibility Foundation[edit]

Check Wikipedia led me there. Some double redirect thing going on, while an article has actual text content. Maybe someone tried to expand a topic which is already a section in target or somewhere else... Definitely can't solve it myself: usually I only do wikignome code edits on this wiki. Sorry if this is not the right place. InternetowyGołąb (talk) 18:50, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Odd edit [1]. Someone changed the redirect target while also adding a bunch of article text at the same time. Then the bot fixed the double redirect. RudolfRed (talk) 18:55, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have reversed the edits as the text had no independent sources and was invisible as it was added to a redirect page. Information about the statue has also been added to the Gary Lee Price article, which also has no independent sources. TSventon (talk) 19:12, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarification and further edits. Looks like

Done?InternetowyGołąb (talk) 21:44, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can I get my article removed?[edit]

I made an article and want it removed.Can I get assisted in this? The draft is called Zhwe with Breve. Thanks Eggs111 (talk) 19:41, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Eggs111: Yes, you can put {{Db-author}} at the top of the draft and an admin will delete it for you. RudolfRed (talk) 19:44, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Primary and Secondary Resources[edit]

I was told that court opinions are primary sources, and I need secondary resources. Can one put both primary and secondary sources? Supermario54321 (talk) 20:11, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Secondary sources are always preferred. If there are no secondary sources for some information, and it is uncontroversial factual information, and encyclopaedic in character (as opposed to trivial, or incidental to the topic being discussed) then it may be cited to a primary source.

So if the primary source gives the same information as a secondary source, there is no point in citing both. But if a primary source gave an uncontroversial detail (eg a date) that was absent from the secondary source, that could be cited to the primary source. ColinFine (talk) 20:21, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that sometimes first-hand information is not sufficient to provide comprehensive information or complete background, so we can consider supplementing and supporting it with second-hand information.Second-hand information can be interpretation, analysis, or commentary on first-hand information, or the views and research results of other scholars and experts on the subject.

First and foremost, I think second-hand information should be a reliable and authoritative source, preferably published by experts, scholars or authorities.

When quoting second-hand information, it is advisable to provide a clear source of reference so that the reader can verify it.

Second-hand information should be a reasonable interpretation and analysis of first-hand information to help readers better understand and evaluate the information.The combination of first-hand and second-hand information should make the entry more comprehensive and persuasive, but there was a need to ensure that the second-hand information cited was reliable and appropriate. 유신예 (talk) 04:55, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Usage[edit]

Can I read out loud Wikipedia articles on my new podcast legally? Thank Bluemoonodem (talk) 20:55, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Generally yes, as long as you say where they come from. For details, see Reusing Wikipedia content. ColinFine (talk) 21:00, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bluemoonodem: Yes, but since Wikipedia articles are copyrighted and licensed under CC-BY-SA, you must license the resulting podcast (or that portion of it) under CC-BY-SA, and also attribute it to the article. -Arch dude (talk) 02:53, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]