Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2020 October 22

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.

October 22

HELP! EDITION MISTAKE

Hi wikipedia team,

I´m writing because accidentally I deleted the prizes section (with all the prizes) of the sociologist Goran Therborn. I`m really really sorry and I was wondering if there is a way tu put them back , I tried to research over them but unfortunately there´s not much information about it. Bold text

Thank you and once again SORRY! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.189.214.210 (talk) 00:07, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Which article are you talking about here? Any reversion to an article can very easily be undone, but first of all, before we can actually do anything about this, we need to actually know which specific article you are talking about here. Futurist110 (talk) 00:12, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

There is Göran_Therborn, but no recent edits there. You need to tell us what article you are editing. RudolfRed (talk) 00:41, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP user: you actually made the edit in Wikidata, not Wikipedia: I have undone it there. But in general, you can usually undo an edit by finding it in the History of the page. --ColinFine (talk) 17:19, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

What’s happening to talk page signatures?

The most recent contribution to Talk:Alt code ends:

The claimed IBM definition, if true, is a very sloppy specification, especially for early DOS screens where character generation for display was an immutably hard coded. --00:30, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

No signature. The page history, however, clearly designates the author as John Maynard Friedman. Why the discrepancy? Peter Brown (talk) 00:57, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

probably just signed with ~~~~~ rather than the usual 4 tildes. That leaves a timestamp only. Meters (talk) 01:03, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

As a fun fact, ~~~ does the opposite: gives the name portion of the signature but no timestamp. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:08, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

LDS Temples

In the article Comparison of temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the temples are formatted as "LDS Temple/Praia Cape Verde Temple | format = LDS Temple compare" surrounded by two curly brackets. I want to edit a few of the entries, but I don't know how. The "| format = LDS Temple compare" is new to me. Who can help? Lou Sander (talk) 02:54, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Lou Sander: The code is rather complicated: It WP:transcludes the template Template:LDS Temple/Praia Cabo Verde Temple which in turn transcludes the template Template:LDS Temple compare passing it parameters pertinent to the Praia Cape Verde Temple. That second template creates a row in the comparison. —teb728 t c 08:26, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Teb728: It's too complicated for me! I just wanted to make it read Cape Verde rather than Cabo Verde (two ways to spell the same place). There are a few others like that, as I recall. Life is too short to take on such a task (unless there's an easy way to do it). Lou Sander (talk) 05:09, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@Lou Sander: The name was changed to Cabo Verde by Jgstokes and ChristensenMJ. If you disagree, you should discuss it with them at Template talk:LDS Temple/Praia Cabo Verde Temple —teb728 t c 10:52, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

LDR errors on Warner Bros. Movie World

 Courtesy link: Warner Bros. Movie World

I have just begun the process of converting all citations in the Warner Bros. Movie World article to LDR. My edit has created errors on the following five named refs: "UW Liquidator", "Laurance", "SMH MW woos world", "SMH New World Order" and "WBMW Harry Potter". Having spot-checked all of these multiple times, I cannot at all see why these refs aren't displaying properly. All names are defined correctly, ref tags are closed properly etc. It would be greatly appreciated if someone more experienced with ref templates than I could please have a look and let me know work out what is going wrong. Thank you in advance. — CR4ZE (T • C) 02:57, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

CR4ZE, I took a quick look and didn't see the problem either. So I went back to the prior version and used the organize refs tool and that managed to make LDRs without the errors. I saved that as the current version. MB 05:00, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@MB: Curious... Seems like the error could have been caused by a bug in the script for {{efn}} then. Perhaps it doesn't like cetain refs being defined as LDR's? Could be worth someone looking into. Thanks for organising automatically and fixing the issue. I'll go through at a later stage and try moving efn's to a list again and see if issues re-emerge, in which case I'll just leave the problematic ones defined in the body. I would've used ref organiser tool but I like manually named refs rather than the generated ref name code, but I may go through your diff later and rearrange/rename if it's worth the effort. Anyway, thanks again for taking a look, much appreciated. — CR4ZE (T • C) 05:56, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@CR4ZE and MB: This is the long-standing software bug phab:T22707. If you try to call list-defined references from within list-defined "notes", the wikitext looks correct and well-organised, but the underlying software quickly gets confused. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:09, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@John of Reading: Aha! So what do you think is the most pragmatic solution? Just keep the problematic notes defined in the body instead? — CR4ZE (T • C) 07:35, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@CR4ZE: Yes, any {{efn}} notes that contain ref tags will have to stay where they are used. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:46, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

editing to correct a common sense mistake

i just saw this article Thermal stability and its Talk:Thermal stability page had correctly stated that there is error in which article states J/m^2 to g*cm/cm^2 by unit convertion i think correction should be made but last time correction by following talk page made wikipedia delete my edit on article so i want to know if i can do it without asking in talk page as this is takes common sense and so correction should be done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anish59312 (talk • contribs) 05:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Anish59312, I've gone and refurbished the article. If you see a mistake you can WP:BOLDly correct it. If you end up getting reverted, you can discuss it over on the relevant talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC) (Addendum added 06:06, 22 October 2020 (UTC))

Soul Healers

It is a group of pioneer school boys that sings created songs by themselves and it is wonderful — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hlumelo Xamleki (talk • contribs) 07:08, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Hlumelo Xamleki: Hello, do you have a question about how to use or edit Wikipedia? (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 10:02, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Pompeiopolis editing

Hello Jessica, I don´t have much experience in editing wikipedia articles. If I have technically done something wrong, I apologize. I was actually much concerned to find so much wrong information on an ancient site which I am researching for 14 years and on which I published two books and several articles I was repeatedly but vainly trying to correct them, obviously in the wrong way. The text is apparently complied with diffuse sources on the web and did not consider the scientific published work. I am surprised to read the statement of an editor that he/she is editing in the service of the "local authorities" according to Wikipedia policy. It is puzzling that Wikipedia relies on the information of the "local authorities" rather than the published scientific work. Actually, the local authorities" in Turkey generally dislike Wikipedia that was therefore even blocked it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Block_of_Wikipedia_in_Turkey Secondly, “local authorities” usually get their information from the published excavation reports which I authored. Howsoever, my objections are the following: 1) The statement “Pompeiopolis was established together with Neoclaudiopolis as one of a number of cities founded by the Roman general and politician Pompey (Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus) and integrated into the new Roman double province of Bithynia and Pontus in the year 64 BC” contains errors. It was founded between the years 67 and 64 BC within his urbanization project of the former Pontic Kingdom together with seven other cities Megalopolis, Zela, Diospolis, Nikopolis, Magnopolis, Neapolis. Pompeiopolis was named after his founder “the city of Pompeius”. On the other hand, Neoclaudiopolis that you mention received its name from the emperor Claudius 100 years after the city foundations of Pompey the Great. Its predecessor was Neapolis. 2) Pompeiopolis never bore the title “Sebaste”! There was just an error in the reading of a coin. Receuil 1904 wrongly read CΕΒΑCΤΗ ΜΗΤΡ ΠΑΦΛ on a coin, but it was proved on other specimens that it should be read CEΒΑCΤΗ ΜΗΤΡ ΠΑΡΑ(ΛΙΟΥ) as was published in many publications, lastly by J. Dalaison, "L'atelier monétaire de Pompeiopolis en Paphlagonie", in Delrieux (F.) et Kayser (Fr.), éd., Hommages offerts à François Bertrandy, Tome 1: Des déserts d'Afrique au pays des Allobroges, Laboratoire Langages, Littératures, Sociétés, Collection Sociétés, Religions, Politiques, n° 16, Chambéry, 2010, p. 45-88. Today there is no serious scholar who doubts this. Nevertheless, this error still wanders like a ghost in the web. Please stop to disseminate it any further at least in this Wikipedia article! It is just misleading. 2) Pompeiopolis was only mentioned by Strabo and never by Pilinus or any other ancient author. 3) The information on the era 6/5 BC (5 BC is not correct!) preserved on inscriptions, but not on coins, is only indirectly connected with the “death of Deiotaros Philadelphos” which is rather controversial than being a historical fact: Ch. Marek, Stadt, Ära und Territorium in Pontus-Bithynia und Nord-Galatia. Beiheft IstForsch (Tübingen 1993) 71. 4) The information on “ ..by the evergetism of Gnaeus Claudius Severus, Marcus Aurelius' son-in-law and patron of the city” is simply wrong and I don´t know where from you have picked it out. I excavated this inscription myself and my colleague epigraphist Prof. Christian Marek read and interpreted it. The inscription does evidently not mention the son-in-law of Marcus Aurelius as you write but records only titles which can be connected by prosopography with another person from Ancyra. This inscription will be published soon and therefore no further details should not be pre-published in this Wikipedia article. Therefore, I suggest deleting the above-cited phrase part. 5) The indication of continuous publications of annual excavation reports between 2017-2020 is simply wrong. You can easily verify this by clicking the link you have inserted. 6) The statement “Trial trenches have been dug all over Zimbilli Tepe in the last fifteen years and nothing came to light dating to 1st century BC so far. Persisting in thinking that Zimbilli Tepe is the place of the Pompey's foundation makes no sense” ignores that In the excavation trenches of the theater at least 12 Mithridatic coins and in another place a Pergamenian cistophoros were found. It is true that we cannot assign any structure to this early period yet. But didn´t it take at least six years to reach the Roman levels? It is well possible to find earlier levels in the future. Therefore, for the time being, there is no reason to doubt that the city was not founded on the hill. It is just trivial to state that the city was founded somewhere else because someone observed a possible stadium in the nearby Tasköprü. I suggest that this supposedly new discovery should be first presented to scholarly discussion before presenting it to the wider public. As it is shown in the case of Sebaste, once unproven information is hastily spread in the world it is very difficult to eliminate it later, even if it is proven as false. 7) As for the earthquake there are at least eight written sources that mention an earthquake in the time of Justianus in Pompeiopolis. Despite some confusion with Mysia, the scholarship does not doubt the identification with Pompeiopolis in Paphlagonia. A new detailed article is being written on this topic. 8) Already the enormous diameter of the octagon has been the subject of discussion whether or not the interpretation of "macellum tholos" is right within the excavation team. The reviewer of the first Pompeiopolis volume also harshly criticized this issue. 9) It is not right to mention one sub-project including its leader and financial sources etc. If this self-presentation is really required all other sub-projects and the financial support received by the German Research Foundation and other institutions should be also presented in the same detailed way, even it would appear odd in a Wikipedia article. It is just sad and also ridiculous that the former team members must carry out the much-needed discussions via Wikipedia article quasi ananomysly. From the scientific point of view, it would be much more gainful to discuss directly on controversial questions. Wikipedia is not a platform to clear personal rivalities. Thank you for your assistance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pompeiopolis (talk • contribs) 07:39, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Pompeiopolis It is unlikely that the user you are addressing will see your post here on the Help desk. Please discuss your concern on the article talk page, your talk page, or the other user's talk page. —teb728 t c 08:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Pompeiopolis: Ah, I see that Jessicapierce referred you here to the help desk for general editing questions. While help desk volunteers don't know about the subject of the article, we can tell you that disagreements about article content are resolved by discussion on talk pages to reach a consensus. Your initial edit to Pompeiopolis was a major revision. When that was reverted, the next step would normally be to discuss it on the article talk page. Unfortunately you proposed them as a semi-protected edit request with massive block of text -- which was rejected because it did not say clearly what changes you wanted. It looks to me like your changes contain several separable parts; so it would be useful to discuss them separately. I would also recommend free discussion of the separate changes rather than semi-protected edit requests. —teb728 t c 11:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Pompeiopolis: : A couple more points: Wikipedia summarizes what is published in published reliable sources. If sources disagree, it summarizes what both/all sources say. If the article does not summarize all sources, you should point that out on the article talk page.

Conversely, Wikipedia does not publish original research. If the article has content that is not sourced to a published reliable source, you should point that out in the article talk page.

Finally, the fact that your username is the same as the article subject suggests to me that you may have a conflict of interest with regard to the article; please read WP:COI. And if you are being paid to edit the article, you must comply with WP:PAID. —teb728 t c 22:01, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Pompeiopolis: Please also keep in mind that this is a volunteer project, where people contribute whatever time they can spare, and choose what they wish to work on. When you write over 1100 words with no paragraph breaks, you are unlikely to get other editors to read and correctly understand what you write, or want to get involved. I would suggest having a quick look at WP:CHEATSHEET (especially regarding Help:List) and using the Show preview button to see what your post looks like to others before saving ("publishing") it. If you can chop it up into numbered sections (using lines starting with '#'), or even better, try to resolve just a couple issues at a time, you might get better results. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:48, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Moving a draft

Hello, I'm trying to move a draft to article space but in the article space there is already some history (currently a redirect with a bit of history). Do I need some particular user right to do this? I am aware of the requested moves page, but I'm more interested in understanding the rights thing at the moment. I'm not seeing anything on point in the various documentation about moves. Thank you. Hobit (talk) 12:03, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

You would need an admin to do it so that they can delete the page during the move. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 13:00, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Shouldn't the two histories be merged? Hobit (talk) 14:06, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hobit, I'd say that unless the draft was actually based on the old history, there wouldn't be any point doing a history merge (but I'm not an admin) ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 14:55, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

And even if a histmerge was needed, an admin would need to delete the page to permit the move anyway, then undelete the old revisions. Admin would still be required for the move. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 15:12, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks folks, I'd not realized how hard it was to move a draft over a redirect since I'd never really had to deal with this before (although I guess if there was just one redirect in the history it will let you do it as a non-admin?). In all cases, thanks again. Hobit (talk) 15:54, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Whether my page has been submitted for review

Hi Can you please see the link below and confirm that my page has been submitted for review. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Ram_Setu_Controversy&action=submit

Or

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ram_Setu_Controversy

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhumi2tandon (talk • contribs) 13:09, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

It has - but it will be rejected out of hand. Wikipedia does not host research essays. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 13:11, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

• Note: Deleted (twice) as copy-vio; and now submitted for a third time (nom'd speedy). Eagleash (talk) 17:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

2020-21 NCAA Division I men's Basketball season article

Can you please fix the error i made please. 68.102.42.216 (talk) 16:13, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Done, you had the link URL as hhtp not http. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:19, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Wrong scientific classification

On Fossa (animal) the scientific classification information is completely wrong and Fossa is not a part of Panthera genus but I am unable to fix the issue — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dq209 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Dq209: Edit Reverted by Anaxial. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:49, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Link appears to be broken and perhaps linked to virus

To all,

On the page about "Sources Chretiennes" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sources_Chr%C3%A9tiennes) the link at the bottom to a list of the works went to a page that could not be found and my anti-virus software gave me a warning message. I don't know where the correct link is, or how to fix it, but I'd recommend the true link be found!

Thank you!

73.79.144.48 (talk) 18:07, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

All external links there work fine for me on a Mac. Theroadislong (talk) 18:21, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

All external links there work fine for me on a Windows 10. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:44, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Sandbox Help

Hi. I don't have a "more" dropdown on my sandbox page so I can publish my article to wikipedia. Can you help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roper19 (talk • contribs) 19:22, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Roper19: The "more" dropdown only shows for WP:AUTOCONFIRMED - or on narrow devices where the options dont fit otherwise. Howewer, if User:Roper19/sandbox would be moved to mainspace, it would be quickly moved back or delted, as it is completely unsourced. Wikipedia is not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok. Well looking at the linked article I just need to wait the 30 days. Is that correct? I've been working on the page for some time now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roper19 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Roper19: Time does not matter. References matter. Add references to your draft, or it will never be an article. See WP:REFB for some guidance on referencing. RudolfRed (talk) 19:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Harry Black

I would like to take this page down. In that this was prepared by an employee who worked for me several years ago for an organization that I no longer work for. As such, I dont have information that would give me the ability to edit. Can you assist? My contact info is — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.124.44.254 (talk) 23:17, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

You don't have a say in whether we keep or delete an article about you short of pointing out incorrect information that needs fixed/removed. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 23:28, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Anyone may edit that page. Although you should not, due to WP:COI. If there are changes you want to suggest, post it on the article's talk page along with {{edit request}}. RudolfRed (talk) 23:30, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Which Harry Black are we talking about? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:30, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

The city manager. He included a link to the article in the header when he originally posted here. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 14:15, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Then it was a bad idea to remove that link. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:58, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

COVID-19_pandemic/sandbox

Hey! We are working on a big restructure for the COVID-19 pandemic page (see article talk for more info) and one user asked me to create a sandbox version of the article. I created it but maybe I wasn't supposed to put it in mainspace? Is it ok? Any help? Thanks! -- {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  ^talk 23:36, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

I moved it to User:Gtoffoletto/COVID-19 pandemic sandbox. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 23:58, 22 October 2020 (UTC)