Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2017 May 5

= May 5 =

redirects vs aliases vs moves vs inaction
Hello again. There are many examples of wp articles about proteins that have several aliases listed. Many of these were created by ProteinBoxBot about a decade ago and not edited much since. While not being of the mind to do historical research on why the bot selected one name over the other aliases, many of the article names are not what has become the standard name for the protein, and I think the bot just hasn't stayed current. The standard name is listed as an alias, but it is not always obvious that the 2 names are related in any way to the non-specialist reader. So, the question is, what to do about this? Move the article to the standard name? Make redirects from all the aliases to either the current wp article name or the article moved to the standard name? Do nothing, and let non-specialist readers figure out that, for example, p59, GOLPH6 and GRASP55 (which is the standard name) are all aliases for GORASP2? Thanks for guidance. JeanOhm (talk) 01:29, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * If there is now one standard name for a protein, the article should be moved to that name. The article should mention the alternative names. The alternative names should redirect to the article. Where an alternative name is also a name for something else, and has never been much used, it can be ignored; but if it has ever been widely used, hatnotes (for one other meaning) or a disambiguation page (multiple other meanings) can be used. Maproom (talk) 07:48, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Lots of work to do....JeanOhm (talk) 18:37, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Script error?
Whenever I try to load a Wikipedia page it always shows this (in Google Chrome): I always need to close this tab before being able to access the page. Is this a bug or is it a problem with my preferences? Thanks,  Wiki Pancake  🥞 10:12, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Ugh, this is really triggering me..  Wiki Pancake  🥞 10:29, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The test was added two days ago.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Fred_Gandt/getUnpatrolledOfAlexNewArtBotResultsPages.js&diff=778521164&oldid=707330343] You can remove the script from User:WikiPancake/common.js, or apply for the right at Requests for permissions/New page reviewer. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:37, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * May I ask how one can remove the script? Many thanks! NCurse work 08:05, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Italics for foreign words and proper names
I've seen every possible variation of italics in the opening sentences of articles, and I'm trying to get the rules/suggestions straight in my own mind. In the article Wolf cave, the opening sentence is:

Wolf Cave (Susiluola, Varggrottan) is a crack in the Pyhävuori Mountain (Swedish: Bötombergen) in Kristiinankaupunki, near the Karijoki municipality in Finland.

If I understand correctly, Pyhävuori Mountain and Kristiinankaupunki would not be italicized because they are proper names whereas Susiluola, Varggrottan, and Bötombergen would be italicized because "the name itself is being referred to" (MOS). So the sentence would become,

Wolf Cave (Susiluola, Varggrottan) is a crack in the Pyhävuori Mountain (Swedish: Bötombergen) in Kristiinankaupunki, near the Karijoki municipality in Finland.

Is this correct? Thanks, Leschnei (talk) 12:26, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Perhaps not. As per MOS:FOREIGN read along with Naming conventions (geographic names), if the name of the place is written in a foreign language that follows the latin script, we might need to italicize it – for example, Deutschland (unless the said foreign word is so used predominantly across the majority of English media sources). Pyhävuori does not seem written in the English language (and might mean sacred in English); similar is Kristiinankaupunki, which is perhaps referred to as Kristinestad in English. So, in my opinion, while you may need to italicize these foreign terms, Naming conventions (geographic names), suggests that one prefer the English transliteration of the proper name over the foreign one. So you could perhaps consider replacing the foreign terms with available English proper name alternatives. Hope this helps. Lourdes  17:10, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks Lourdes  ; I had not found the link to 'geographic names'. My new solution is to link to the English version of Kristiinankaupunki and the Finnish article for Pyhävuori, both unitalicized. If I am still way off base, I imagine someone will set me right. Leschnei (talk) 22:00, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, I've added my small bit there. Feel free to revert if you feel my addition is not required. Have a good day. Lourdes  02:57, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hey, it looks good to me, thanks. Leschnei (talk) 13:06, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

How to change an image if I do not have 10 edits to make.
Hi,

I need to change our company's logo, however, I do not have 10 things to edit the page is already okay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raynen15 (talk • contribs) 14:39, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I am guessing that the image has not been uploaded to Wikipedia. You can request that the image be uploaded at Files for upload.  ~ GB fan 14:49, 5 May 2017 (UTC)


 * As unlikely as it might seem, it is theoretically possible to find 10 articles which need an edit (grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc.). 107.15.152.93 (talk) 19:30, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * How dare you. Wikipedia is perfect and finished.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:07, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

List of energy drinks
Two weeks ago I've asked a question on the talkpage of the article above. So far no answer. Is there anybody here that could help me with this? Oxygene7-13 (talk) 17:01, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, can you please elaborate on your question? It's not clear to me which drink you're referring to, or even what's the actual query? (Sorry if I missed something obvious). Lourdes  17:24, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Looks like a revert gone bad. I think it is fixed now.  Gtstricky Talk or C 17:41, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @Lourdes: If you click on the word question in my first sentence you can read my actual question. So yeah... I guess you missed something obvious... (no offence!) Oxygene7-13 (talk) 17:46, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @Gtstricky: Thank you!! Oxygene7-13 (talk) 17:47, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Weird interwiki problem
Hi,

in this article there is a weird phenomenon with the Netherlands interwiki link. It leads to a completely different article on the Dutch Wikipedia. Strangely enough, this does not happen from other language Wikis.

I asked on the talk page, but we're at loss there. Anyone have an idea how to fix this? --93.212.230.88 (talk) 17:33, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I've removed some stray interwiki links from the article. -- zzuuzz (talk) 17:36, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Seems to have worked. --93.212.230.88 (talk) 18:00, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I made a deeper fix: special:diff/778877805. --CiaPan (talk) 18:21, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Tagging a source as possibly being of doubtful authority
I wish to draw attention to a citation. The source clearly qualifies according to the letter of WP:RS, but appears to not be authorotative for the specific content. Example: citing an arbitrary local hospital's website for its explanation of a national health policy, instead of referencing the relevant national health department's actual policy document itself. Which tag is the most apropriate? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:23, 5 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Would or Unreliable source? do what you want?  Gtstricky Talk or C 20:33, 5 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Close, but not quite. I think my first post didn't quite explain my problem properly. What I really want to say about the cite is "Who is this that we should note or care about what they have to say about the issue?" I do not recognize the source as authorotative, thus imho their opinion is of little value or consequence. To be clear it's not a fringe or even a minority opinion, I just doubt that the source is actually useful even though it seems perfectly reliable. I prefer to avoid linking or mentioning the actual topic here as I fear it may result in an unpleasant conflict. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:57, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @Dodger67: I don't think there's any template targeting this issue exactly. The template  linked has a place to provide a reason in it →  . The text you provide will be seen when you hover over it. So even if it alone doesn't flag the issue enough, you could tailor it with the specifics of the problem. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:01, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

SahBabii
Can you please remove SahBabii from the blacklist so that an article can be created. He is currently signed to Warner Brother Records, has a full write up with the NY Times and on every major radio station worldwide.Kimber0316 (talk) 22:09, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * There's background on this here.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:31, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit yeah that was me back then. Now he has more than enough accolades to have an article written even charting on billboard. However his name is blacklisted and I need it removed. Kimber0316 (talk) 22:38, 5 May 2017 (UTC) Well hello stranger, I have been trying to contact you every since he signed...Now there is NY Times, Billboard, etc, etc. Maineartists Thanks for your help. When I try to create a title for SahBabii it says the name, subject, title is restricted/blacklisted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kimber0316 (talk • contribs) 22:57, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I have been following this subject since their first article entry and deletion. I could tell that even though there was not enough media coverage to create an article with substantially reliable sources, I did comment to the creator that in time there would be notable sources to support inclusion; but that it was too early in the subject's career. Now we are seeing that the subject is in fact building a notable name within the media: The New York Times, Warner Bros. Records, etc. I'm not sure what "black list" means; but I would support inclusion at WP as general notability / stub article. Maineartists (talk) 22:50, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I will advocate for this subject's inclusion at WP; but I think you may yield better results here: . Maineartists (talk) 23:28, 5 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I think is referring to the article being WP:SALTed.  † dismas †|(talk) 23:54, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's more than ordinarily salted, due to the initial article being part of the whole OPP mess. That does not preclude this being potentially the subject of a legitimate article. -- Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  00:01, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Ok, thanks everyone for your input. So where do I go from here? Since currently the title is blacklisted?Kimber0316 (talk) 19:32, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, you may re-mention your request at WP:AN; some administrator would come along and may assist you. Thanks. Lourdes  03:06, 8 May 2017 (UTC)