Help desk
< January 27	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 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.

January 28

contents of wikiproject "articles by quality and importance" tables

I'm interested in WikiProject Genetics and WikiProject Molecular and Cell Biology. Both of these have articles rated by importance = Top High Mid Low NA ???

I guess I'm being way too logical, but if there is a mid there should be a BOTTOM in "symmetry" with TOP. I've been using the gadget "rater" to review what were 2044 unassessed articles in the genetics project, and rater allows me to assign a well-deserved bottom importance to articles. Is there some way to modify the table to include Bot? Specifically, the importance =, IMHO, should be

Top High Mid Low Bottom NA ???

Can you please tell me how to do this, or who to ask to do this? I look at the code in the edit screen that generates that table and I'm clueless. Thanks, DennisPietras (talk) 02:12, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a project-wide thing; see WP:1.0#Statistics. It's not something that could be changed by just one project, and it's used so widely that the mere act of changing things might provoke enough problems that people would oppose on that issue alone. If you want to suggest that we add a new level, I'd suggest going to WP:VP/PR, a space specifically meant for making proposals. Nyttend (talk) 02:41, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. If it can't be done for just one project, I'll give up on the idea. DennisPietras (talk) 02:57, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Language in interface messages

Some time ago, I set English as my preferred language at it:wp, so if I go to a nonexistent page like it:Bfesougbsougrsohbroh, I get a message of "There is currently no text in this page..." instead of whatever the normal Italian version is. However, there are two weird spots on the left side: just above the community label, I see "sportello informazioni", and the middle item in the toolbox is "Carica su Commons". I can understand seeing English on another site if they just forgot to update something (i.e. the system uses the English default text), but how am I getting Italian instead of English? Unlike other sections, e.g. the gadgets (whose descriptions are all in Italian), we can't just write entire new MW-space pages and get them to show up in prominent places, so I doubt that these is something created specifically in Italian. Because the gadget descriptions are in Italian, I can't be sure, but I didn't see anything in Preferences comparable to the en:wp gadget that lets you see the interface message names, so I can't identify the MW-space pages that are relevant in this situation. Nyttend (talk) 02:36, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you "navigate to a nonexistent page like it:Bfesougbsougrsohbroh", you are navigating to a non-existent page in the Italian Wikipedia (hence the it: prefix), not the English Wikipedia. The Italian Wikipedia may or may not respect your language preferences here at the English Wikipedia for all of the elements in the sidebar. General Ization ^Talk 02:41, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, but I'm not talking about my en:wp preferences. As I said above, "Some time ago, I set English as my preferred language at it:wp". Nyttend (talk) 02:43, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, sorry, I missed that. General Ization ^Talk 02:43, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

it:MediaWiki:Sidebar, it:MediaWiki:Common.js might provide a clue. Lourdes 06:32, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, wikis can customize their sidebar. The Italian Wikipedia chose the label "Sportello informazioni" in it:MediaWiki:Sidebar. They could have given an English translation at it:MediaWiki:Sportello informazioni/en but wikis usually don't translate their own messages so you only get translations for messages which are part of MediaWiki itself. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:57, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the help. Clearly the important piece of information is the fact that these lists can get extra content — I thought that the list of items in the toolbox was hard and fixed, modifiable only by the sysadmins or developers, or someone else with database access beyond what either admins or stewards can do. Nyttend (talk) 05:15, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Absinthe Drinkers (film)

Why does the film The Absinthe Drinkers go to this page: The Absinthe Drinkers ? Maineartists (talk) 03:03, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Goes to the director's page apparently. See the external links there, and history at redirected page here; (PRODed 22 September 2013 and redirected thereafter). Eagleash (talk) 03:12, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I thought. But is that really what WP is about? I happened upon it when I was perusing the films of John Hurt and clicked on the film. It directed me to John Jopson. The External Link to a Website is really not a WP article and should not be linked as such: The Absinthe Drinkers Correct? It is not an article. Maineartists (talk) 03:22, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm not sure what you are saying...the external link is in that section and is not an article but a link to an external website. I'm not sure whether this film (or miniseries according to the EL) actually exists or is still in development. Is John Hurt supposed to be in this film as his IMDb page does not seem to include the title. Eagleash (talk) 03:40, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you check the Prod from 2013, the film was noted as 'non-notable upcoming'. Googling does not reveal anything to indicate that it has ever been completed or released. Eagleash (talk) 03:45, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then why is this film linked and in the search database on WP? i.e. there is a film in John Hurt's filmography that is highlighted as a linked WP article page named "The Absinthe Drinkers" (not an external link like John Jopson). When you click on it, it does not take you to the page for which it should: the film "The Absinthe Drinkers" - which if you look under the edit template table it views as such The Absinthe Drinkers (film)|The Absinthe Drinkers. If you type "The Absinthe Drinkers" in WP search as any regular film, it displays all the relevant findings with this: "The Absinthe Drinkers (film), a forthcoming 2015 film". When you click on it, instead of bringing you to an article page for a normal film, it brings you to John Jopson. Regardless of an External Link for the film in question, it shouldn't link you to John Jopson. It should link you to an article on the fim: The Absinthe Drinkers. If there is no article on WP, this film should not be linked to anything; especially a separate subject that you have to search for an external link. One cannot simply link a subject (film) to a singular website on WP and call it done. Maineartists (talk) 04:09, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Absinthe Drinkers is a disambiguation page that lists (and links to) several different thing with that name. One of those is The Absinthe Drinkers (film), which is a redirect to John Jopson#Films and television. As Eagleash says, there used to be an article about the film, but it was deleted as not notable in 2013 and the redirect created instead. That's standard procedure here, although it would help if there was more than the external link about the film on the Jopson page. As usual around here, if you find something that you think is incorrect or misleading you're free to fix it. Options are: Write a new article; Add something to the Jopson article; Ask for the redirect to be deleted. The first two would depend on sufficient reliable sources being found. Rojomoke (talk) 06:10, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am fully aware of these procedures. I am questioning the original intent of the editor in question for those who are inexperienced with WP and how it works. Sometimes we editors get so caught up with what we know, we sometimes forget how to construct things on here for those who don't know how to use WP. For the average user, typing a film in search, one does not expect to pull up a page on a different subject, that does not list the film, but forces you to scan the entire article looking for a single linked website that may or may not be a reliable source. I'm not questioning procedure, I'm questioning content and user-friendly understanding. I knew what I was going to do from the beginning. I just wanted another set of experienced eyes to agree that this film should not be re-directed in its present state. The re-direct should be removed. The website is not a reliable source. Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 12:54, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Where do I find the discussion regarding the deletion of an article after it has been deleted?

An acquaintance of mine is bemoaning the deletion of an article. I'd like to look into that for him, see if there was good reason for its deletion, and ascertain what the chances are of resurrecting it.

I searched for "deleted articles" without any success.

Where do I begin? (And how could I have found out by drilling down from a top-level menu and not having to post this here?)

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frappyjohn (talk • contribs) 06:05, January 28, 2017 (UTC)

@Frappyjohn: The deletion reason will be in the deletion logs. Or you can tell us the name of the article and we can help you further. --Majora (talk) 06:10, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Frappyjohn: Wikipedia is a big place which can be difficult to navigate for new users. One way to find information would be the "Wikipedia help pages" box near the top of this page. You may have to click "[show]" to see the contents of the box. One of the links is "Article deletion". Our search box is primarily for readers of the encyclopedia so it only searches "mainspace" (where articles are) by default. Information about Wikipedia processes is in the "Wikipedia" namespace which can be selected on the search results page. There is a shortcut for this: Add wp: or wikipedia: in front of a search to search the Wikipedia namespace instead of mainspace. The search wp:deleted articles has Wikipedia:Why was the page I created deleted? on the first page. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:48, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Diane Larsen-Freeman article

Dear Robert McClenon

I am just wondering how the article I submitted on Diane Larsen-Freeman is progressing

Is there anything I need to do

Many thanks, Carol Carolgriffiths5 (talk) 09:59, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, it is up to you to improve the draft and resolve the issues highlighted at review. You can obtain advice in this respect by clicking on the links provided on your talk page and leaving an appropriate message at the pages linked to. For future reference, if you wish to contact an individual editor, it is best done at their talk page. (Click on 'talk' at the end of any messages from them). Please sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 11:10, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Transliteration category

Does someone know why Mount Erciyes is categorized in Category:Articles containing unknown ISO 639 language template? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:54, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

{{lang|tl-Latn|Tuz Gölü}} and {{lang|tr-Lant|Kızıl Tepe}} both cause the category. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:04, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What is the correct lang code, then? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:28, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No idea. I only used Special:ExpandTemplates and searched the category name in the result to see where it was generated. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:27, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing errors on Minute to Win It (Philippine game show)

Reference help requested.

Thanks, Hayley.booo (talk) 15:42, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Author's blog as a source

In cleaning up references at Penelope Farmer, I noticed that the entire second paragraph under 'Life' came from the author's blog; the source of the blog is confirmed by the Guardian, here. I haven't done much editing of biographies, so I am wondering (1) can this blog be used as a source for anything? and (2) is there any reason that I shouldn't delete the entire paragraph as unencylopedic (sp?) and poorly sourced? Leschnei (talk) 17:24, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And third! What would be a better heading than 'Life'? Leschnei (talk) 17:24, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Leschnei: most of this is covered by WP:SELFPUB, which talks about when self-published material can be used in limited amounts. I won't reproduce it all here, but basically (1) it can be used to support straightforward, impartical, non-controversial facts. They do not contribute to the subject's notability. (2) rather than deleting the whole thing, fix what you can then consider the above and decide whether there are some parts of it that are so egregious that they need to be removed. (3) I don't much care for "Life" but I have not seen any alternatives that really grab me either: some use "Biography" or "Personal life". Use your judgement. --Gronk Oz (talk) 06:55, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I take a closer look at that blog, there is nothing there to indicate that it relates to the subject at all. So I'm not even sure that it can be counted as "self-published". Might need to tag it as {{citation needed}}. I have removed the lengthy, unsourced quotation which was unencyclopedic anyway. --Gronk Oz (talk) 07:00, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks for your help. Leschnei (talk) 13:29, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

COI question

Greetings, I recently submitted an article on my great grandfather who, as the Publisher of a local newspaper, was an influential figure in politics and local affairs during much of the 20th century. (Article title: Hulbert Taft). He was noteworthy enough for the article to have been accepted, but the article still needs further development.

I included the appropriate tags on the Talk page of the article, as well as on my user page as I wish to provide full disclosure as to any conflict of interest I may have. My question: Is this this COI disclosure strictly for informational purposes for editors, or might this fact somehow interfere with the article's "publication"?

KenMahler (talk) 17:59, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, it will not interfere with the article "publication" (although we do not actually publish articles). Ruslik_Zero 18:31, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How to experiment with edit filters?

Hello!

Is there any way for me to test out edit filters? I have noticed that some edits that trigger edit filters may cause a tag to be applied to the edit's entry in the edit history. I have tried replicating similar edits on the sandbox page but they did not trigger the edit filter and cause the tag to be applied. Is there any page where I can experiment with these matters?

Thanks for your advice, <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 20:57, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Some Gadget Geek: Some filters test the edit count or permissions of the user making the edit, so you won't be able to trigger them when logged in to your usual account. You could try logging out, or perhaps register a separate test account following the advice at WP:SOCKLEGIT. Do you have a particular tag in mind? The list at Special:Tags has links to the triggering code, though some of the coding can only be seen by edit filter managers. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:48, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edit filters can also test the namespace. Wikipedia:Edit filter#Tools and resources mentions an external tool which may be difficult to apply to Wikipedia scenarios, and Special:AbuseFilter/test which can only be accessed by edit filter managers. Even my admin account doesn't work there. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:24, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Business Efficacy

You don't have a definition of page about this., — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:598B:C500:8DBE:1A2B:5405:2563 (talk) 21:41, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@2A02:C7D:598B:C500:8DBE:1A2B:5405:2563: Great, there's a project for you! Every article here has been written by a volunteer like you, so if you think that subject is notable and it is supported by enough reliable sources then feel free to go ahead and write it. If you need help, feel free to ask. --Gronk Oz (talk) 10:25, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2017 January 28

Contents