Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2017 May 20

= May 20 =

Use emails as RS's
If I get an email from an entity says "We prefer to be called Fooians" or something, can I put that in the article and say "email can be quoted on request" maybe Siuenti (씨유엔티) 09:21, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Talk about a WP:SPS. If the only source for something is in an email, and hasn't been covered in an independent RS, then why would you want to. Please read WP:Private correspondence: . Also contents of emails are copyrighted, which should encaution one against promising to distribute them. Happy editing! &mdash;  O Fortuna   semper crescis, aut decrescis  09:32, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * , to add to what Fortuna mentions rightly above, the short answer to your query is no. Not only are emails primary sources, they are unreliable sources. This is apart from the fact that we perhaps actually don't care how a company wishes itself to be called. Of course, in egregious cases (when a company complains about vandalism, BLP issues et al), common sense and best judgement may trump procedural issues. We also have the OTRS, the volunteer response team that can be directly contacted by email if a company has any issues. Thanks. Lourdes  09:33, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, apologies for removing your edit- I'm not used to this 'new' edit-conflict screen, and clearly chose the wrong version. In fact, I admit I don't understand it at all. But I was about to paste your reply back in, when you beat me to it. Sorry about that! &mdash;  O Fortuna   semper crescis, aut decrescis  09:40, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No problems. Cheers. Lourdes  09:42, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * For example if someone preferred to be referred to as "she" or "he" wikipedia wouldn't be interested in their own opinion? Siuenti (씨유엔티) 11:01, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Citing as a family member
Hi! I am closely related to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zia_Mahmood, and I was hoping to know how I can edit his page without citing sources other than personal knowledge? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Familyeditor (talk • contribs) 10:33, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Familyeditor (talk) 10:33, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * You really shouldn't edit this page directly. You can find more information about that at Conflict of interest, especially how to proceed. Unfortunately, we cannot accept someone's personal knowledge as a substitute for reliable sources since the goal is for readers to be able to check where the information was taken from. Please try to find reliable sources instead and request changes to the page on its talk page. Regards  So Why  10:42, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Archives for Discussion-Pages
i did here something totally wrong User_talk:Meister_und_Margarita. can someone help? archive is not working. and second question, in german wiki wie can archive on discussionpages with this {Autoarchiv|Ziel='((Lemma))/Archiv'|Modus=Erledigt|Alter=0}}{{Archiv Tabelle}. so i can write is done and only this section will be archived. i am searching something like this in englisch wiki. thanks for helping and informations!--Donna Gedenk (talk) 12:41, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The German page seems to be de:Vorlage:Autoarchiv. The nearest equivalent on English Wikipedia would probably be, in particular the archivenow parameter of User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 21:34, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

I need to quote an article that was published in the pre-internet era.
The review is on-line, so I want to include the URL of the review. However, the link appears on the title of the article instead of the title of the review. Here is what I am doing:

What tag should I use in order to have the link on EPTA Piano Journal?

By the way, I couldn't drop this question on the Teahouse: this site misidentifies me as AI Logorythm and states I am blocked. I have never used such a name!

Jpkent (talk) 13:05, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * If I understand your question, you want an external link on EPTA Piano Journal. That is not allowed in the cs1|2 templates.  To Link to an on-line copy of a journal article, place the journal article's URL in url.  In your example, http://epta-europe.org/piano-journal/ is almost right.  All you need to do is change that URL so that it points to the on-line copy of the article.  Readers following that link will be able to get to the journal's home page from there should they desire to do so.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:24, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The problem is that there is no on-line copy of the article: the on-line presence of the journal came later. What I want to do is make it clear that the journal exists on-line, so the reader can find it, but the title of the article must not bear a link. So how do I put the link on the title of the journal and not on the title of the article?
 * And why does the Teahouse keep blocking me under a name that is not mine?
 * Jpkent (talk) 16:14, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I cannot answer the teahouse question.
 * First you wrote: The review is on-line... and now you write The problem is that there is no on-line copy of the article. You will perhaps understand why I wrote the caveat at the head of my last post.  Regardless, it is the purpose of a citation to identify the source that supports one or more statements in a Wikipedia article.  That the journal publisher may or may not have an on-line presence is immaterial.  It is not the purpose of a citation to tell you the address of the journal publisher's on-line presence any more than it is to tell you the address of the library down the street where you may read a newspaper from June 1995.
 * From the Piano Journal website, it would appear that digital copies of older issues are not available, nor do they make mention an inventory of back-issues for purchase. This particular case is tough.  WorldCat doesn't seem to know much about Piano Journal and the journal apparently isn't sufficiently notable enough for a Wikipedia article (nor is its parent organization).  You might add 0267-7253 to the citation which gives a couple of hits at WorldCat and (for me) suggests that two university libraries within 30 mi of me may have copies of the journal, though not necessarily this particular issue.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 17:19, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * From the Piano Journal website, it would appear that digital copies of older issues are not available, nor do they make mention an inventory of back-issues for purchase. This particular case is tough.  WorldCat doesn't seem to know much about Piano Journal and the journal apparently isn't sufficiently notable enough for a Wikipedia article (nor is its parent organization).  You might add 0267-7253 to the citation which gives a couple of hits at WorldCat and (for me) suggests that two university libraries within 30 mi of me may have copies of the journal, though not necessarily this particular issue.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 17:19, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Inserting new tagline
There is a tagline (subtitle) that appears on Wiki pages in the mobile app, and on the live dropdown when entering a subject in a search window on both the desktop and mobile apps. How does one go about inserting this into a page that has none? algocu (talk) 14:02, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's from the English description field at Wikidata. Click "Wikidata item" under "Tools" in the left pane on the desktop version of the article. If there is no such link then the article doesn't have a Wikidata item and you cannot add a description (don't create a Wikidata item just to do it). The Wikidata description is also used for many purposes outside Wikipedia. See wikidata:Help:Description for guidelines. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:27, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

How to link
Just created https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Rodger_Fleming but still there is an issue in this table https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_A._Lindbergh_Chair_in_Aerospace_History with activating the link, how can i make that link in the table work? Thanks. prokaryotes (talk) 15:51, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The link needs to be James_Rodger_Fleming. It's working now. RudolfRed (talk) 15:57, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you Rudolf. prokaryotes (talk) 15:59, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Accessing older answers
The answers that were given me on the Teahouse last week are no longer on the Teahouse page. How can I access them? Jpkent (talk) 16:19, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi . You can always see the page history of the Teahouse page and check the revision which has the answers to your question. Read Help:Page history to know more about how to surf any page's history revisions. For your benefit, here are the answers that were posted at the Teahouse in response to your query. Write back if you need more assistance. Thanks. Lourdes  16:33, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * And, for future reference, near the top of the page, below the big blue box, there's a link: "Archived discussions". Just below that, there's a search feature for finding archived discussions from this page and other help pages. Rivertorch   FIRE WATER   16:38, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot, Rivertorch. You have told me all I need to know!
 * Jpkent (talk) 10:19, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Molly Hatchet
There has been repeated page abuse and page vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockinmomma (talk • contribs) 17:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * You are in an edit war. Stop now.   Discuss the dispute on the article's talk page, and if that doesn't work follow the advice at WP:DR RudolfRed (talk) 18:00, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

No entering an edit summary for new section?
I just added a new section on a user's talk page using the "New Section" button, and there was no place to enter an edit summary. Is this normal? If a use "edit" to add the new section without using the button, there is a place to add an edit summary. RudolfRed (talk) 18:18, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * This is normal. The edit summary is automatically populated with the section title followed by ": new section". The box for the section title appears at the top of the edit page. -- zzuuzz (talk) 18:55, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. RudolfRed (talk) 19:17, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Infobox books
I just had a look at Human, All Too Human and wondered whether it wouldn't be better to place the infobox headline at least on the same level as the introduction line – like in other infoboxes, too. Otherwise you have this big spacing... What do you think?--Erdic (talk) 21:43, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

2017 Army Black knights Football schedule
Can You move the 2017 Army black Knights football schedule from draft to the main page. 2600:8803:7A00:976A:C9AA:D31E:C121:F76A (talk) 21:59, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * This is about Draft:2017 Army Black Knights team, which duplicates the content already at Army Black Knights football. Maproom (talk) 08:17, 21 May 2017 (UTC)