Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2016 March 10

= March 10 =

Help:Cite errors/Cite error references duplicate key Slasher film
I edited Slasher film as part of the GOCE backlog blitz. It has reference errors that pre-date my c/e. I have looked at them but cannot figure out how to fix them. Your help would be appreciated. RegardsTwofingered Typist (talk) 00:30, 10 March 2016 (UTC)


 * The issue is that there are a bunch of sources using the same reference name (i.e. < ref name=example >blah blah ), but they all have different reference content. Judging by the source list, I'd bet that's page numbers. :P I fixed a couple, and fixed the brunt of them. - Purplewowies (talk) 02:06, 10 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Fixed after a bit of a false start (and some help from "purple"). The reason is that an editor has used the same reference name for different pages of the same book, which produces the large red-lettered error messages as the content within the parameters differs. There are are now some duplicated refs which need to be combined. (I will do in a short while). Eagleash (talk) 02:10, 10 March 2016 (UTC)


 * ✅, with thanks to . Eagleash (talk) 02:25, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks to each of you for your help. Cheers! Twofingered Typist (talk) 13:40, 10 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Also to who spotted the early dup. ref. that I missed as I only looked for ones after ref 31 which had the mass of red errors! Eagleash (talk) 14:54, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Use Template:Rp
This article looks like a *perfect* example of when to use the Template:Rp and combining all of the references for the Kerswell book. What to people think on that? (It means that the references look like [1]:66-68 ).Naraht (talk) 16:57, 10 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Agreed. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:01, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

,, , Went through Slasher film and combined them by removing the page number from inside the ref and using the Template:RP, Please take a look and see if that looks better. There are now 5 refs, all of the one to Kerswell's "The Slasher Movie Book" are combined to 1, and that one is from 70 different locations in the article.Naraht (talk) 01:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Well done, Naraht! That looks a lot neater. --David Biddulph (talk) 02:44, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. What a difference using Template:Rp makes.Twofingered Typist (talk) 13:37, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Naraht. Eagleash (talk) 13:50, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

jagmohan singh engraver
Jagmohan Singh is India's number one hand engraver he is doing amezing work I challenge that no buddy do work like jagmohan Singh engraver in India level I cannot seen this type of artist he is belong from sobha singh artist family please my request to Wikipedia take a interview and get more about his history its very fine artist you cannot be find this type of artist in India it's my challenge so please do something best regards rangesun pvt. Ltd.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ultimatesunnysingh (talk • contribs) 02:40, 10 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello, this is the page for asking for help in editing Wikipedia. If you would like an article to be written on a particular topic then you need Wikipedia:Requested articles. Eagleash (talk) 03:24, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * , before requesting the article at the desk that Eagleash has recommended, you could read WP:Notability (people) and WP:BLP which would guide you on what is the requirement at Wikipedia before creating (or requesting to create) an article on living people. Xender Lourdes (talk) 04:14, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Need to create and publish an article
Hi,

I would like to create and publish an article. What is the step by step process to create the same? Please help at earliest.

Regards Varun — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nextbrandz (talk • contribs) 16:27, 10 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I've left a welcome message on your talk page. I suggest reading over the information. If you intend on writing an article about Nextbrandz though, you should first read WP:COI and WP:CORP. Dismas |(talk) 18:45, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

How to write page for maximum problem template
How to write page for maximum problem templates, such as Template:Multiple issues, Template:Prose and other related template?UY4Xe8VM5VYxaQQ (talk) 17:53, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Like this:

Click here too see

Or this:

Click here too see


 * Including such a large number of maintenance templates would not be helpful, and many of them are redundant with others listed. What are you actually trying to accomplish, ? DES (talk) 23:53, 10 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Agreed, clear cases of unhelpful over-templating.--ukexpat (talk) 01:55, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

View page history for deleted and merged pages
Is there a way to view the page history as well as old talk pages for articles that have been deleted or merged into other articles? Not necessarily to try to restore them but just to see the discussions and see what the page used to look like in the past, the way you can do with normal Wikipedia articles. -KaJunl (talk) 19:29, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * For deleted pages, the answer is no. You'd have to be an admin to see old versions of a page. They sometimes need to get an old article to restore it to userspace in order for it to be brought up to standard. After all, what would be the point of deleting an article if just anyone could go see the old version? I'm not sure about merges though, so I can't answer that one. Dismas |(talk) 19:43, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Couldn't you say the same thing about edits though? What's the point of deleting a section of an article that isn't notable or reliable if we can all view it in the page history anyway?  Well, I think there is a point.  For a deleted article, maybe I want to see what it looked like before in order to evaluate whether it made sense to delete.  Maybe I want to see the deletion discussion.  Maybe I want to see whether the content in the deleted article is now appropriately moved to other articles, or whether it's nowhere in Wikipedia now.  Or maybe I'm just curious - for example I love reading the page history on articles just to see how things change over time.  I don't know, it seems weird that we can view old edits but not old articles to me.  Or maybe in the past, an article's subject was not notable, but now it is after years have passed, and someone wants to create a new article but maybe a better way would be to restore the old article rather than rewrite everything from scratch, if a lot of the same info happens to be true.  Really it's just a theoretical discussion; I don't need to see any particular deleted article right now.  Is there an appropriate place to discuss this if I have an opinion about the current setup that only lets admins see them?  -KaJunl (talk) 19:54, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You can see deletion discussions if they were AfDed. Just search " Articles for Deletion/(article name) ". Thanks, Jjamesryan (talk &#124; contribs) 21:10, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * , you (and anyone) can see the deletion log entry made when an article was deleted, and any deletion discussions held on it. If you really think a deletion was incorrect, ask a helpful admin, or bring it up at deletion review -- try asking an active admin first. If you want to try working on creating a valid article, esp for things deleted as not notable or overly promotional or the like, ask an admin or use WP:REFUND to ask for a user copy to work on. Or just start on a new version from scratch, it may turn out better. I would advise doing so on a user space page on in Draft space, to avoid G4 speedy deletion until you are ready to support a case for retaining your new version. Merged pages usually leave a redirect at the original article name(s), and the full history may be seen there. DES (talk) 23:51, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * What is AfDed? And I am not trying to create a new article or wondering about any specific article.  I just disagree with this policy.  I don't see the purpose of hiding deleted articles if we aren't going to hide prior versions/edits of articles.  Is there somewhere where this could be brought up for discussion?  I feel like it kind of limits the transparency of Wikipedia.  -KaJunl (talk) 00:11, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * One example (though again, this is just an example and I don't specifically need to see this article for any reason)- I was reading the AIG page, and there was mention of Chartis, and it said they renamed Chartis to AIG Property Casualty. However, this was the first mention of Chartis in the article and I thought it was confusing to say it got renamed without mentioning at all earlier.  I went on the talk page, and I saw there was a discussion there about merging the Chartis article into AIG.  But reading the talk discussion was mostly meaningless because I couldn't actually see the old page.  I didn't want to recreate the Chartis article, or to even expand much if at all on Chartis in the AIG article - I mostly just wanted to understand what was being discussed on the talk page.  What's the point of the talk page if the articles being discussed are impossible to view sometimes?  The whole thing just seems very against the premise of Wikipedia to me.  -KaJunl (talk) 00:17, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Chartis hasn't been deleted. The history is there.  If you want to look at the version before the merge and redirect you can find it here. --David Biddulph (talk) 05:38, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Again, that was just provided as an example though.  I still disagree with the policy.  Is there a place to voice opinions about Wikipedia policies like this?  -KaJunl (talk) 19:32, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Foot notes.
How do I add a footnote to support my edit to an article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rooguspark (talk • contribs) 20:16, 10 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello, you need to add using the ref tags found at the bottom of the edit window. Add the opening . See also WP:REFB for more information. Eagleash (talk) 20:49, 10 March 2016 (UTC)