Help desk
< December 7	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 9 >

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.

December 8

Capitalizing main title

Hello,

On the page Association of Independent Evangelical Lutheran Churches, how does one capitalize the "I" in Independent and the "E" in Evangelical as that is the full name of the church and should be capitalized?

The Wiki page link is

Thank you for your help and assistance.

James W. Clifton — Preceding unsigned comment added by James Walter Clifton (talk • contribs) 00:20, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@James Walter Clifton: You need to move the page to a title with those words capitalised. Danski454 (talk) 00:25, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Fixed by OP. Eagleash (talk) 05:52, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Approved

Hello, may I please get in touch with an Administrator to get the role Approved. I recently had an account that was attached to my School Network. All accounts tied to it got revoked and I do not remember my username. I have made over 10 edits on this account already, however, and requested on the Approved Requests Page and got the bot said I already have the role which I don't. Thanks, AwesomeJedi (talk) 00:50, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@AwesomeJedi: Actually, that response was to the user above you. Please do consider the advice given at the Teahouse and use the AfC process to create the article instead of trying (probably unsuccessfully) to get confirmed early. The advice is sound – creating an article is one of the hardest things to do successfully, and you may not enjoy the experience without the guidance of the editors at AfC that are specifically looking to work with new content creators. Thanks for listening. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 00:59, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

miss missouri usa 2020

the photo of megan renee kelly is not the correct person — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.131.166.254 (talk) 02:13, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Miss_Missouri_USA Does not have a photo of Megan Kelly. Which article are you referring to? If you saw it in a Google search, then that is something from Google and not Wikipedia. RudolfRed (talk) 02:43, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proper cite and how to update existing.

Two part question.

1. What is the correct cite for this source?:

ICTUR; et al., eds. (2005). Trade Unions of the World (6th ed.). London, UK: John Harper Publishing. ISBN 0-9543811-5-7.

My web research does not find editors for the 6th edition. ICTUR is the publisher for the 7th (2016) edition. And I have found editors for it.

2. There are over 100 articles that cite this source. They are the majority of the articles listed in Category:CS1 errors: explicit use of et al. I assume there are apps, I think Wikipedia calls them bots, that can be used to update a group of articles. What is the name of an appropriate bot and where do I find out about it? --User-duck (talk) 05:39, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Answers:

If you do not know who edited the 6th edition, omit |editors=. The error message in the above citation is present because 'et al.' is not an editor's name. When there are editors whose names are not included in the citation, use |display-editors=etal. I would write:
{{cite book |year=2005 |title=Trade Unions of the World |edition=6th |publisher=John Harper Publishing |location=London |isbn=0-9543811-5-7}}
Trade Unions of the World (6th ed.). London: John Harper Publishing. 2005. ISBN 0-9543811-5-7.
For only a hundred or so articles you might make a request at Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks; perhaps someone there would be interested in using WP:AWB to help clear that category.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:52, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User-duck I use AutoWikiBrowser, what would you like done on this?Naraht (talk) 13:46, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion

Please promote me to a Confirmed User role. I qualify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by J.Turner99 (talk • contribs) 10:24, 8 December 2019 (UTC) J.Turner99 I have also done numerous contributions via ip before my account was created. — Preceding unsigned comment added by J.Turner99 (talk • contribs) 11:22, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@J.Turner99: You can make a request at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions but you have to state the reason for requesting it. You will be autoconfirmed anyway in two days. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:07, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Cite errors/Cite error included ref

The Suzuki article has a big red error message on it, right at the top— Preceding unsigned comment added by AlainV (talk • contribs) 8 December 2019 14:33 (UTC)

@AlainV:

Fixed (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.) Please provide a link to any pages you need help with. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 14:47, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't know what kind of status this page had. --AlainV (talk) 18:52, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a reference without a weblink

I am trying to add references which are newspaper cuttings, for which I have the JPG file. I do not want the JPG file to be displayed on the wikipedia page, rather to just appear in the references section as a link.

The method I have tried is as follows. I upload the JPG file to flickr.com, get the link, and then add < ref >http://weblink...< /ref > in the body of the article. This worked fairly well last night, but when I view it this morning the size is way too big and I see no way of automatically getting it to be the correct size.

What I would rather do is use wikipedia's file command which is clearly is much richer in features, however I am not sure how to add a file without it being displayed on the page (ie. having the user have to click on it to view it). Nor do I know how to get it into the References section. How is this done? Acferrad (talk) 15:18, 8 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acferrad (talk • contribs) 15:09, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Acferrad: There is no requirement for a reference to have a web link, so this doesn't matter. If the newspaper article was published after 1924, then it is still still copyrighted unless you have evidence otherwise, and you have no license to copy it to anywhere on the web. We enforce this rule on Wikimedia and wikicommons by deleting such files when we find them. We also do not permit links to material on the web that violate copyright. -Arch dude (talk) 15:40, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also: in this era of Photoshop, we do not regard scans of clippings and the like as reliable sources. As Arch dude says, just reference the original article in its original appearance, with suitable level of detail to enable the reader to trace it. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:52, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think I worked out how to do it. All my cuttings are before 1924. For the cuttings I have the references for, I will include these. Acferrad (talk) 16:01, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Only log out of account on one session

I have recently been switching accounts a bunch; I just did the trial for my now-approved bot. However, because I use Firefox normally but it doesn't support one feature I need for the bot, some edits I did using the same code (each was manually approved) to test outside of the trial needed to be on Chrome. When I logged out of my main account on Chrome, it automatically logged me out of all my devices. Is there any setting to make it not do this? It's pretty annoying. DemonDays64 (talk) 16:39, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not possible, sadly, apard from clearing local browser cookies instead of clicking on Log Out – Thjarkur (talk) 16:48, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Cerise Moth

NEED INFO ON THE CERISE MOTH,Y DON'T YOU HAVE ANY?CAN U CREATE A PAGE FOR THE CERISE MOTH — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panthra79 (talk • contribs) 18:50, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Panthra79, please keep discussions in one place. There are now responses to your post at the Teahouse. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 19:08, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Questions Regarding Process and Protocols for Dispute Resolutions & Anonymity for Editors

I'm new to Wikipedia editing and, admittedly, have much to learn about this process.

Question #1: When there is a dispute regarding a page (under New Section), who ultimately decides how that dispute is resolved? Is it resolved by a committee that reaches consensus? Or some other process? Who is on the committee, if that is the remedy? What is the criteria for becoming an editor with editorial control over protected pages? Are there any transparency requirements for such editors to identify by name and bio who they are? If not, why not? Has there been any deep discussion about the problematic nature of having anonymous editors with editorial control over a site designed to engage democratic participation?

Question #2: What can be done about the Sister Cities California page that is out of date and needs serious updating. It is a transcluded document and cannot be edited. Help!

Ah, never mind, no worries. A friend is teaching me how to update the sister cities CA page by using the code. Fingers crossed. LOl.Marcywinograd (talk) 22:44, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your guidance. Marcywinograd (talk) 19:15, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Someone else will hopefully explain question #1, but regarding #2: You can edit List of sister cities in California by clicking on the pencil icon in the top right corner when editing, that will switch over to the Source Editor which is better equipped to editing that particular page. The problem with that page is that the lists are inside {{colbegin}} and {{colend}}, which the Visual Editor doesn't know how to handle. – Thjarkur (talk) 19:43, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcywinograd: For #1: please try hard to reach consensus via a discussion on the talk page. Please start by assuming the we are all here to build the best encyclopedia we can (see WP:AGF) even, (or especially) if the other party is being unreasonable. Only after that has failed, then proceed to WP:DISPUTE. -Arch dude (talk) 20:10, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Marcywinograd, there are no "committees" associated with articles and any editor is welcome to participate in discussions about article improvement. If an article is protected at a certain level, then only editors who meet the requirements of that protection level can edit the article directly. Read Wikipedia:Protection policy for all the details. Semi-protection is the most common, and that limits editing to registered accounts at least four days old with at least ten edits. This deters casual "drive by" vandalism and disruption by IPs and throw-away accounts. No editor nor any administrator has any "editorial control" over any page, although more experienced editors who have a deep understanding of policies and guidelines are often more influential in discussions. The basic way of resolving disputes is talk page discussion among interested editors leading to consensus. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:03, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Cullen and Thjarkur, for your insights and guidance. Yes, the talk page is best, absolutely, for resolving differences. In terms of the Sister Cities page, if I don't know how to use anything but the visual editor, I'm assuming I can't edit the page. Is there some way to start over with that list--because it must be incredibly out of date.Marcywinograd (talk) 21:28, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the columns from List of sister cities in California so you should be able to edit it freely. – Thjarkur (talk) 23:29, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Thjarkur, for your efforts to make this easy for me. I'm afraid I'm only botching it up, so I am going to stop and just work on putting together (in a file on my computer) an updated list of sister cities for CA. Then, perhaps my friend who is adept with software and code can help me enter it correctly. As of now, when I insert new sister cities without the code, using only the visual editor, I don't get the flag icon for that respective city--so it doesn't match what's there, format-wise. Marcywinograd (talk) 00:53, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not adding the flags is fine, minor formatting like that is usually resolved later by other passing editors. The main thing the article needs are inline citations. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:59, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thjarkur, so I am proceeding correctly, should my friend and I be switching out the links back to Wikipedia for each city, in other words linking instead to the respective city's sister city program page or some news article that verifies those city's sister cities? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcywinograd (talk • contribs) 11:01, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You can place your cursor at the end of the line and click on "Cite" where you can add a link to an external source that verifies the information. That will create the small "[1]" style citations. – Thjarkur (talk) 14:45, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disabling "esc" key in rich text editor

I was a bit shocked recently to lose all my work editing page because I hit the Esc key. Is there a way to disable this behaviour? Stevage 22:33, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Does not appear to be possible (at least I wasn't able to solve this with a userscript). I try just to be careful to switch to the Source Editor every few minutes and save a backup on my computer. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:17, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, thank you. Switching to the source editor and back is a good idea. Stevage 01:45, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why not these?

I noticed OANN. COM is described as "... an American right-wing to radical right wing pay television news channel"

Fix is described as, "... American conservative cable television news channel."

HOWEVER...

CNN nothing about its left leaning is the description.

MSNBC nothing about its MASSIVE FAR left leaning.

How about some balance here? Either remove the descriptors from OANN and fox or, add M to others.

The hypocrisy is not becoming — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:7930:4AC0:C007:F119:968B:BB33 (talk) 23:21, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia describes things as most independent reliable sources do. If you have independent reliable sources that describe CNN differently, please offer them. 331dot (talk) 23:28, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]