Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2017 May 4

= May 4 =

Hiding visited pages from watchlist?
Is there any way to hide visited pages/diffs from my watchlist? Currently the color of an icon changes from green to blue but I wanted the entry to be removed. I could not find anything about that on the preferences tabs, I was wondering if other editors know any way of doing it? Saturnalia0 (talk) 00:30, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * , at the top of a page there is a small five-pointed star. I see it to the right of "view history" but that can vary depending on what gadgets and scripts one uses. If it is filled in blue, the page is on your watch list, if it is empty it is not. Clicking it removes the page from your watch list if it is on the list, or adds it if it is not. DES (talk) 00:45, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Sorry I think I wasn't very clear. What I meant was to ask if there is a way to hide an item I already visited from the watchlist. For instance, if I click on a diff I'd like that diff to be hidden, or if I visit a page all changes from that page to be hidden, but not new ones (currently only an icon changes color on those actions). I don't want to actually unwatch the page. This is because there's usually a lot of changes on my watchlist and I review them on a per-page basis, so visited and unvisited diffs get mixed and I sometimes miss some. Alternatively, if there's a way to group the diffs by page that would suffice as well. Saturnalia0 (talk) 01:11, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * There are a few tweaks you can make to the watchlist which will get you close to what you are asking but probably not exactly. Take a look at WP:CUSTWATCH. There is a preferences option in gadgets that will bold changes you have not visited which I find helpful and might help with your request.  Gtstricky Talk or C 14:26, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Saturnalia0 (talk) 14:43, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Why is the age column not sorting correctly?
In both tables below, why is the last column (on the right) not sorting correctly? The one that is entitled "Current Age". There does not seem to be any rhyme or reason to the sorting results. Also, does not the "age" template return a value that is a number (that should be easy for the computer to sort)? (And not a "string" where the number 100 is considered the characters "1" and "0" and "0".)  Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:58, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello . Your tables' second column was also not sorting. I've corrected the first table. You could make the same changes in the second. Thanks. Lourdes  01:10, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Repinging Lourdes  01:11, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks.  But, you didn't really "fix" the last column.  It used to say "years old" and I still want that "years old" in there (not deleted out).  Why does it not work correctly?  Also, what do you mean about the second column?   The actor names?   They sort just fine, no?   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:12, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I have fixed the last column in the second table by inserting  in the header cell. See  Help:Sorting. I guess Lourdes was referring to people usually being sorted by surname. Sortname can help with that. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:24, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

My original charts
Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:20, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, all! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:39, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

COMPASS
how was the compass invented?

why was the compass invented? were was the compass invented? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.79.190.137 (talk) 01:07, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * See compass.    Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:10, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * And also History of the compass. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.60.183 (talk) 04:04, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

is there a way to collapse a Category?
Heya, I'm still a noob hereabouts, and this may be a noob question. I found myself in the middle of Category:Guitar performance techniques, and after checking out some of these so-called articles, I'm discouraged. One after another has been largely how-to material, further laden with name-dropping of every guitarist who can be associated with the gimmick, lots of bogus historicity (apparently to claim notability) and a dearth of credible sources. They're like padded-out dictionary entries.

I'm an old guitar player and I have never been comfortable caling every little gimmick I employ "a technique," and this Category seems to illustrate my doubts. Something like Fingerstyle guitar is an actual technique (or maybe a collection of closely related techniques), each with various gimmicks.

As WP is assuredly NOT the place for instructional materials, I figure the intent is rather to provide clear and thorough information for non-guitarists. These shards do little in that regard.

So my thought is that the Category ought to be somehow collapsed, and the pieces pulled together into one proper article that is actually informative for the non-guitarist. Weeb Dingle (talk) 06:12, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, many of those articles can probably be merged. See WP:MERGE. You can do merges yourself but you should know that there may a lot of resistance as many people hold these small articles dear. Ruslik_ Zero 08:24, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

new wiki page
how do you create a new wiki page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laura Dove (talk • contribs) 07:28, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Please, see WP:CREATE. Ruslik_ Zero 08:26, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

What to do when the "unreliable" source happens to be right, and the "reliable" sources mostly wrong?
Most of the mainstream press has been gushing about the Ugandan chess player Phiona Mutesi, who overcame extreme poverty and hardship to represent her country at the chess olympiad, and had a Disney movie made about her. Problem is, most of the mainstream news reports are by people who know nothing about chess. Her Elo rating of 1628 is the level of an average club player, as any chess player will confirm. Her achievements are certainly admirable in the context of her background, but she is definitely not a "prodigy" or a "master" or a "champion" by any stretch of the imagination. Unfortunately, many of the websites that point this out are overtly racist (National Vanguard anyone? Daily Stormer?). One of the few articles I've seen which puts some perspective on her achievements is in the Daily Caller, a source whose reliability is questionable due to its highly partisan political bias. Grandmaster Nigel Short is known for stirring the pot, but in this instance his assessment is entirely fair. "(I have) absolutely no desire whatsoever to belittle Phiona's accomplishments. I am very much looking forward to seeing this film, I think it is a very uplifting story. She grew up in very difficult circumstances. However, the fact of the matter is that there are 91,050 players in front of her on the world ranking list... perhaps some perspective is required.". Other grandmasters contacted by the Daily Caller expressed similar sentiments, but preferred to remain anonymous.

So the problem here is the "reliable" sources are mostly wrong and the "unreliable" source (Daily Caller) in this instance happens to be right. What to do? MaxBrowne (talk) 11:21, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Possibly you can add a most reliable source, the FIDE Chess Profile for Phiona Mutesi ...? --CiaPan (talk) 12:09, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I can't see any gushing in the article as it stands, the factual content seems adequately sourced and any opinions in the sources, should, off course be ignores. even the direct quote seems to be realistic in tone Jimfbleak - talk to me?  12:16, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I still think the article oversells her as a chess player. The opening sentence describing her as a "Ugandan chess champion" immediately raises NPOV issues. She was Ugandan girls' champion a few times. How many competitve girl chess players are there in Uganda? Not many. MaxBrowne (talk) 12:58, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * You can alter the phrasing without need for extra sourcing. Just say "...A Ugandan chess player who won the Ugandan Girls Championship" or something like that.  Problem solved.  -- Jayron 32 13:07, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Category:Tamil Brahmins
User has removed the category Tamil Brahmins from the article K. Kailasanatha Kurukkal. He says "consensus on Wikipedia is that they are treated as a caste when it comes to issues such as categorisation". I want a confirmation of his statement and, if what he says is the case, why the above category exists in Wikipedia.-- UK Sharma3  12:19, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello Uksharma3! This can be a tricky topic. Here is one of the discussions that took place on the subject: Archived discussion. Essentially the category still exists to tag pages related to the caste, but not individuals. If you look at the nominators rationale section of this page you will also find a few other discussions: CFD Hopefully that helps.  Gtstricky Talk or C 13:51, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

pair of articles on French and English Wikipedia
It's been a long time since I edited and things may've changed or I may've forgotten. I want to cross-reference a pair of articles on French and English Wikipedia under "Languages" on the left sidebar. How do I do so? Robert Greer (talk) 15:09, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * If there are no interlanguage links, there should be a button that says "Add links". Click it and a dialogue box should pop up. Put the language in the top box, where it asks for language, and the article title in that language in the bottom box, and click "link with page".  It'll then be linked in both languages, and any other languages either page is linked with. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 15:25, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * To add to what ONUnicorn said, if there are already links present, you'll see an edit links option. It'll take you to wikidata where you can link the articles together. Yashovardhan (talk) 15:29, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Merci boucoup! Robert Greer (talk) 15:33, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * De rien! Yashovardhan (talk) 16:07, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Please remove name from Wiki page
Hi, William Faucette is no longer CEO of this company - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5Linx#History can you please remove his name completely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:3005:716:C100:A476:BEA0:E9A9:3671 (talk) 15:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the correction which is now reflected in the article. Why would you want the name removed completely?  Presumably he is part of the history of the company?    D b f i r s   15:39, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Wolf Lake (New York)
I added a paragraph and cited my sources in the text.I received an error message and I am not sure how you want the sources referenced.Djk1944 (talk) 15:56, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia ! I've gone ahead and fixed the errors with the references in Wolf Lake (New York).  The problem was that you had before the source instead of surrounding the source.  The lets the software know that the reference has ended.  So basically, the source goes between the ref tags, like this: . Hope that helps!  I'll leave a generic welcome message on your talk page with lots of helpful links. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 16:04, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Copyright infringement
Greetings. I started a page. But was deleted due to G11 and G12 rules. I used my website content in the Wiki page that I made. The content is ours. So we are using it on the Wiki page. Can you help me with this problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karl henann (talk • contribs) 15:58, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Are you willing to licence your work in a way that it may be used for any purpose? If so, see WP:IOWN, and then it can be used on Wikipedia.  If not, then it can't be.  RudolfRed (talk) 16:13, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * You need to declare your WP:conflict of interest if you are creating an article about your company. I am unable to see the deleted article, but a copy of a web page ( "It all started with one man's simple idea of building his own resort" ) is unlikely to be written in the encyclopaedic style that Wikipedia requires.  You need to find independent WP:reliable sources in which the company has been written about, and use these as references.  See WP:referencing for beginners.   D b f i r s   21:11, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Neither version provided independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the company, press releases, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company claims or interviewing its management. The first version was also a copyright infringement since your website is not clearly and explicitly public domain and was promotional in tone. You should not write about your own company. The page has been locked by an admin so that it cannot be recreated again Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  10:45, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Non-free image
I don't think the public domain rationale for an image that's been added to an article recently is legitimate. But I know very little about this area and even less about how to ask someone to review it, despite reading a bunch of pages on the topic. So I came here. Can someone please look at the image here? Please ping me, if you respond. Thank you. David in DC (talk) 16:07, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The commons page explains "This work is in the public domain because it was published in the United States between 1923 and 1977 and without a copyright notice.". I guess that explains it. Yashovardhan (talk) 16:10, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I read that, but I have no idea if it's true. It sounds odd that a newspaper would publish a picture without copyright. David in DC (talk) 16:48, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree the tag smells fishy. My search stopped at this paywall. Probably best to nominate for deletion, I will do that shortly. Tigraan Click here to contact me 17:01, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Might be worth investigating all the other images uploaded by that editor. Two of them have been nommed for deletion due to copyright issues. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 21:34, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * At one time, many smaller US newspapers didn't bother including a copyright notice except when a story of particular significance was included, even though this forfeited copyright protection. I am not clear on why this was the practice. DES (talk) 22:10, 4 May 2017 (UTC)