Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2019 August 29

= August 29 =

Glen Affric
Ref number  43  is  all  wrong. Help please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srbernadette (talk • contribs) 00:08, 29 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I have removed the ref as requested. It was you that added it, and you could have undone your own edit. - David Biddulph (talk) 01:41, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

What's with the bate and switch?
I ONLY came here because you said, "Ask for it to be created", when there was no page for it. Yet I get here, and there's NOTHING that I could quickly see that allows us to actually ASK for it to be created! And the ONLY thing that I can see is that it is trying to get US to become editors! So I don't like that kind of a false-statement used to just draw us in, without it actually being a way for us to do as it advertised! If you would ADD a way for us to actually ask others to add the article, then things will be great. Please either change the misleading statement or actually add this capability and make it obvious once you get here! Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.98.210.222 (talk) 01:44, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:REQ. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 01:58, 29 August 2019 (UTC)


 * We've had an article about Bait-and-switch for nearly sixteen years. Are you asking about something different?   Dbfirs  06:02, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I created a redirect: Bate and switch. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  06:30, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I nominated that redirect for deletion as an implausible typo (plus, urbandictionary has another, NSFW, definition...) Tigraan Click here to contact me 13:17, 29 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Note: I read the OP as complaining that the 'invitation' to 'request a page' (bait) was 'switched' (in their view) to encouragement to become an editor. Eagleash (talk) 08:57, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I guess you made a search on a non-existing title and clicked "ask for it to be created". The link goes to Articles for creation. Articles for creation says: "If you have an idea for the title of an article, but no content for the article itself, please make a request at Requested articles." PrimeHunter (talk) 09:16, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The OP probably has a point here. We have a page where editors can "ask for [articles] to be created" and it isn't WP:AFC, it's WP:REQ. We could perhaps link to both on the search results page, but probably shouldn't be linking to either with a misleading descriptor. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 13:36, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The message is MediaWiki:Searchmenu-new-nocreate. When the link was added in June 2011, Articles for creation linked more prominently to Requested articles in the opening paragraph.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation&oldid=424347945] PrimeHunter (talk) 16:37, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Bone ash displaying in mobile view on desktop
When I am logged out, using Wikipedia on a desktop browser, bone ash - but not any other page - displays in the mobile view, despite the URL being https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bone_ash rather than https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bone_ash. When I scroll to the bottom of the page and click "Desktop", the mobile view is nonetheless loaded again.

This does not occur when I am logged in, but recurs if I log out. I have seen the same behavior in Firefox on Windows, Chrome on Windows, and Firefox on Android (using the Desktop view, which works for all other pages). This behavior occurs whether I reach the page by entering the URL directly in the browser address bar, by using the Search box, or by following a wikilink from potash. I don't see anything obvious in the article source that would cause this. I'm sure I'm missing something here, but I'm not sure what it is. --Opus 113 (talk) 02:59, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It works normal for me in Chrome on Windows and Safari on iOS with desktop view. If it still happens then try to purge the page. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:08, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It's working normally for me too now (and was working normally when I checked ~36 hours ago). Not sure what was going on. Opus 113 (talk) 04:09, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Regarding a recent "edit war" in the Nigeria article involving myself (and my failed attempts to discuss the issue with the other user in the Talk page)
Hello. I hope this is an appropriate place for this question. I am still a little unfamiliar with Wikipedia's rules regarding this on kind of situation and where to ask for help/advise. I am writing in regard to a recent incident (an "edit war") on/in the Nigeria article. I recently was involved in an exchange with another editor (the user Al-sow) who had been editing that article in several places to state (without support/sources) that the Fula were one of the largest (either the top three or top four) ethnic groups numerically in the country, and had placed their language first in the list of most spoken indigenous languages. I explained (in the Revision History notes when I reverted Al-sow's edits) that (and why) this was inaccurate (according the sources I could find, and unsupported) and I (also in some of my revision notes) posted links to population data sources (you can see my edit notes in the Revision History link linked further down). Al-sow ignored my notes and sources and continued to revert my edits to what they had been (to their own edits), after which I left a message for Al-sow in the talk page

I wrote (in the talk page in my first topic/message to the user Al-sow): "You seem to be editing the article in several places to state that the Fulani are one of the largest (either the top three or top four) ethnic groups numerically in the country, and have placed their language first in the list of most spoken indigenous languages. This seems not to be accurate. From the sources I can find, although the Fulani (at about 4-6% of the population) seem to perhaps be among the top five-seven numerically, they are far less numerous than the Yoruba (about 21%), Igbo (about 18%), and Hausa (about 25%), and also less than the Ijaw (who make up about 10%), and roughly equal or close in number to certain other groups such as the Kanuri and Ibibio (at about 4% and about 3.5% respectively. The Hausa make up about 25%, and the Hausa combined with the Fula make about 29% (see first link below). The Fula alone thus compise only about 4% of Nigeria (up to 6% according to some other sources), significantly less than several other groups. Please do not continue to make these edits unless you can provide a source that supports them. Thank you"

And I (again) gave the below links with some ethnic/demographic information"

See: https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/largest-ethnic-groups-in-nigeria.html

and see: https://www.indexmundi.com/nigeria/demographics_profile.html

See (my talk page message to Al-sow): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nigeria#The_Fula/Fulani_and_their_share_of_the_population.

Al-sow replied with a random list of names stating that they were proof that the Fula were the most numerous tribe in Nigeria (I replied that this was not a reliable source (I tried to explain that Wikipedia requires reliable sources) and I gave Al-sow a link to the WP:SCIRS page on identifying reliable sources.

see (Al-sow's comment and my reply at): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nigeria#This_👇_proves_that_the_Fulani_tribe_is_more_numerous_than_other_tribes

and at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nigeria#not

After this Al-Sow reverted some of my edits again (again editing the page to list the Fula before all other ethnic groups to, according to them, reflect their belief that the Fula are the largest tribe in Nigeria. I repeatedly explained in the edit/history notes that this claim was unsupported and also wrote that if Al-Sow disagreed they should provide a source supporting their claim either in a talk page discussion or cited in the article. They had continued to ignore my notes and replies and make the same edits repeatedly, as you can see in the edit History of the Nigeria page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nigeria&action=history

I tried addressing the issue with the Al-sow in the talk page (as, I believe, is recommended) in an attempt to avoid an edit war, but they essentially ignored my replies or made their own sections justifying their edits by claiming, without any supporting sources, that the Fulani are the majority of Nigeria (based on, to me, some rather strange reasoning) and then returned to making the same unsupported/unsourced edits.

(see the last two sections made by Al-sow, entitled "know: and "I want you to know" at the end of the Talk page link below): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nigeria

Lastly I explained to Al-sow (in an Edit note) that Wikipedia edits cannot be based simply on personal opinions, but they seemed not really to understand (or be receptive).

I was unsure of what the appropriate procedure was in this case since using the talk page to reach a consensus/resolution did not succeed (they seemed unwilling to engage with what I tried to explain). Should I, after discussion on the Talk page failed, have gone to another party for arbitration (before making further edits/reversions) or perhaps reported the other user somewhere (I am not quite sure where)?

I then received an Edit War warning in my talk page and the Nigeria article was protected by an administrator (I posted a message/inquiry similar to this one on the Talk page of the administrator who had posted the warning — I hope that was not an inappropriate place to post such a message. Soon after, the Nigeria article was un-protected by the administrator with the user Al-sow blocked (for disruptive editing). After this, I removed the problematic edits by Al-sow that had remained. The problematic/unsupported edits are now gone from the page, but I hope in doing this I did not violate the three-revert rule. Do I myself now risk being blocked because I continued to remove/undue Al-sow's edits? Is there is an exemption to the rule when the edits reverted are of a blocked editor whose edits have been deemed disruptive (once they have been blocked), as with the edits of sock puppets?

Here is the article's Revision History page again for reference:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nigeria&action=history

Any help/replies/attention to this matter (for future reference) is greatly appreciated. Thank you Skllagyook (talk) 05:52, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * You do risk being blocked for edit warring, but this is at the administrator's discretion. If they did not block you at the time, it is likely that they did not think a block was necessary on this occasion. I suggest that you (re)read BOLD, revert, discuss cycle and Edit warring and keep better track of your edits if you get involved in an edit war again, as administrators may be less sympathetic if you do it again. Dispute resolution has suggestions on how to proceed if discussion does not resolve the dispute. "There is no deadline."
 * Also, please try to keep your questions brief: I have collapsed some of the detail. TSventon (talk) 11:12, 29 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your reply. I will keep those things in mind. Skllagyook (talk) 11:25, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Search results without redirects?
Is there a way to search so that redirects are not included in the results? I'd like to see the results of without the redirects. SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨ 05:43, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * That's sadly no longer possible. (The option was removed, there is a phab ticket trying to have them reactivate it.) – Thjarkur (talk) 10:01, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Darn. Thanks, SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨ 16:45, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Hsi Lai Temple
This page contains citations with the information about the '1996 campaign finance controversy' Members of the temple have continued to edit this out, even though it was well documented by several media outlets and official US government documents.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hsi_Lai_Temple — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.131.49.98 (talk) 08:41, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ I’ve restored the information. Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 10:53, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation for articles with same or similiar names
Hi,

Is there a minimum number of articles in the mainspace that a disambiguation should be created? Is it two? Here are the 2 articles with the similar name Kenneth Murchison and Kenneth MacKenzie Murchison. If yes, I will created a disambiguation. Thanks. Flipchip73 (talk) 12:14, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * See WP:DAB and WP:SIMILAR, you could do this with two, but I don't think it's necessary in this case, as the articles are clearly disambiguated, so a WP:HATNOTE would suffice. Neither looks like the genuine WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:29, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Lee Vilenski, Ok. I will keep that in mind. Thanks. Flipchip73 (talk) 12:34, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I have added the hatnote to Kenneth Murchison. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:02, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * PrimeHunter, thank you again for the effort. Flipchip73 (talk) 13:47, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Author for Hire?
Am I able to pay a volunteer to write an article about Amilian (TheRealAmilian) if I provide all sources such as website, newspaper article links, etc? Is this against the rules? I have no experience in writing Wikipedia articles and I don't know anyone else that can. I really need help with this article, even if I have to write it myself. Thank you so much for your help guys. It means a lot.

~Amilian~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amilian6969 (talk • contribs) 12:58, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * If you pay a volunteer, then they are not a volunteer. I do not recommend paying anyone to write a Wikipedia article.  It has been done, and it is possible to do so while remaining in compliance with the terms of use and Wikipedia policies, however it is very difficult to do it correctly, and there are a lot of scammers out there who will take your money without delivering on their promises. If you have all the necessary sources, I would recommend posting at Requested articles, including the sources in your request there, and then waiting for an actual volunteer to take up the challenge. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 13:07, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Just go ahead and write the article as a draft, following WP:YFA. As long as you provide references that show that the subject is notable, your draft will not be deleted. Even if the draft is truly horrible, it will be a place to start. You can start by finding an article that has the form that you like (section headings, infobox, etc.) and copying it, and then replace all the contents with the equivalent information about your subject. Once you get it somewhat close to what you want, submit it for review. -Arch dude (talk) 15:55, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Editing help
Hi I need helping editing accurate information on a page. There has been many unsourced editing in the page in the last days and wikipedia users have been deleting acurate information I edited, even deleting the link from The German Parliament, (source) from where the information added was translated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Friedrichsruh-Aumuhle (talk) 13:59, 29 August 2019 (UTC))


 * , editors have suggested that you discuss this at Talk:Carl von Bismarck. Click "New section" at that page and make your case. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:55, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Pisonet
A pisonet is a mini-type internet cafe or computer shop mainly found in the areas of Metro Manila and the Philippines, Originate in brgy 648(Islamic Center). A pisonet is a major hub for internet enthusiasts and children who only have small amount of money to surf and play some games which more contributes demand to this business.

Invented on March 2010 First Pisonet Build on March 2010 By: Junaid Ibrahim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naidz24 (talk • contribs) 17:46, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Pisonet article's talk page is the place for discussing improving the article. Better yet, you can be bold and edit it yourself! 2606:A000:1126:28D:C11B:68F2:2FB:1B34 (talk) 18:49, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * As you have been bold twice and reverted twice, I suggest you limit your editing of that article to only adding the photo and not rewriting the article's text, as your text was not an improvement.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:45, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I took the liberty of adding photo. 2606:A000:1126:28D:C11B:68F2:2FB:1B34 (talk) 21:55, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Edit conflicts with myself
Right now, whenever I make an edit, the edit goes through AND I get a message about there being an edit conflict. So every successful edit seems to be detected as being in an edit conflict with itself. Is this a known bug? Thue (talk) 18:16, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Hmm - that's a new one for me. You might try posting at Village pump (technical). <b style="color:#7F007F">TimTempleton</b> <sup style="color:#800080">(talk)  <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  20:26, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * There is already a discussion involving wikEd at Village pump (technical). PrimeHunter (talk) 20:31, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Preventing sockpuppetry accusation
I occasionally edit Wikipedia using a certain mobile device. Recently, I attempted to do so, but accidentally forgot to log in first. To my astonishment, I discovered that I am not allowed to edit from the mobile device's IP address because that address has been blocked for one year due to persistent vandalism. I am not the person that made those edits, but I don't want to be accused of sockpuppetry in the future. What can I do to sort this out, and do I need to be worried that I will be banned for sockpuppetry? --<u style="color:#0000ff"> Puzzledvegetable <sup style="font-family:Century Gothic">Is it teatime already?  19:07, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Checkusers can't tie an IP to a user, so any action would have to be based solely on behavior, not IP addresses.  OxonAlex    - talk  19:36, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It is not quite correct that Checkusers can't tie an IP to a user. The main part of the technical data checkusers can see is the IP addresses used by a given user account. However, checkusers will not go "fishing" for a link between accounts/IPs without pre-existing evidence, and they will not reveal the IP information of a sockpuppet account whenever possible (per the second paragraph of CheckUser it is not always possible especially when sockpuppetry occurs between accounts and IPs). Tigraan <span title="Send me a silicium letter!" style="color:">Click here to contact me 11:48, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Bad phrasing on my part there - was meaning that CU's generally don't disclose that an account is operated by a specific IP, and was unaware that that wasn't a hard policy under the privacy policy, rather than something that can be done when necessary.  OxonAlex    - talk  15:51, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The IP address used by your mobile provider is probably shared between many users, one of whom is evidently a vandal, but I can see no evidence to link this to you, so you don't need to worry. Just remember to log in when you edit.  Many of us forget occasionally, and we don't get into trouble for using an IP address.  On a few occasions, I've gone back and re-signed an edit made anonymously on talk pages, but that reveals your IP address at the time, so I don't recommend this.  <i style="color: blue;">D</i><i style="color: #0cf;">b</i><i style="color: #4fc;">f</i><i style="color: #6f6;">i</i><i style="color: #4e4;">r</i><i style="color: #4a4">s</i>  19:44, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not sure if Wikipedia can like whitelist your account from the block but you might be able if you do a unblock request — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.215.220 (talk) 23:36, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * From what wrote, I understood the block to be for anon IP editors only, so no whitelisting would be needed.   <i style="color: blue;">D</i><i style="color: #0cf;">b</i><i style="color: #4fc;">f</i><i style="color: #6f6;">i</i><i style="color: #4e4;">r</i><i style="color: #4a4">s</i>  12:13, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not a big deal if you're editing from a blocked IP range. I don't block someone just because they're on the same IP range as a vandal.  You'd have to do something suspicious. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:39, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Page for Exceptional Living Scientist & Surgeon
A colleague of ours, Alan Scott, MD (San Francisco) has had a remarkably productive career (he is the discoverer of Botox(r), among other things!), which we believe should be documented in Wikipedia. Dr Scott has published many papers, which would of course be referenced, but there are also biographical facts and related info that would need to come from sources that have not been peer-reviewed. It seems impossible to write a timely and useful biography of such a living person without these sources, and we are unclear about how to deal with this within Wikipedia's guidelines. Advise? Jmm1947 (talk) 20:08, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * He's already on Wikipedia. Alan B. Scott. If there's anything important missing that can be properly sourced, you can add an edit request to the talk page. <b style="color:#7F007F">TimTempleton</b> <sup style="color:#800080">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  20:17, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Please note that Wikipedia is not the right place for "things that need to be documented". As an encyclopaedia, it records only facts that have been documented previously in WP:Reliable sources.  Volunteer editors here will be happy to add any such information that you can find sources for.   <i style="color: blue;">D</i><i style="color: #0cf;">b</i><i style="color: #4fc;">f</i><i style="color: #6f6;">i</i><i style="color: #4e4;">r</i><i style="color: #4a4">s</i>  20:26, 29 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes, there is a poor, stub-like page, apparently produced as an exercise some time ago, which provides few relevant facts. There is a note on that page to provide "biographical information". Where is such info supposed to come from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmm1947 (talk • contribs) 20:46, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Alas, it may only come from reliable, published sources, according to the rules of Wikipedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2019 (UTC)


 * It has to come from WP:Reliable sources. If you can't find those, then you will need to publish your information elsewhere. A few basic facts could be taken from a subject's website, but an independent source is preferred.  Can you not find somewhere that the subject has been written about?  Has he not been interviewed?  <i style="color: blue;">D</i><i style="color: #0cf;">b</i><i style="color: #4fc;">f</i><i style="color: #6f6;">i</i><i style="color: #4e4;">r</i><i style="color: #4a4">s</i>  20:56, 29 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Please note that there is plenty of biographical info in the very first source shown on the page! I only looked at the first ref, there may be more in the other ones. Hope this helps.  Tribe of Tiger <sup style="font-family:Segoe print;color:#B22222">Let's Purrfect!  03:20, 30 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I will work on expanding the article  Tribe of Tiger <sup style="font-family:Segoe print;color:#B22222">Let's Purrfect!  03:38, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Failed rollback
I'm trying to rollback or revert Sigurjón Sighvatsson to the immediate prior version (16:50, 4 July 2019) but both failed with the error message:


 * Grabbing data of the earlier revision: Could not rollback, because the URL filmreference.com is on the spam blacklist.

I'm not following as I don't see that I use that URL in any way. What am I missing?-- S Philbrick (Talk)  20:16, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The first line that you are trying to rollback says

Sigurjón Sighvatsson was born in Reykjavík, Iceland, the son of Sigurborg Sigurjonsdottir and Sighvatur Karlsson.


 * Are you sure you want to rollback? You may lose some info. Otherwise, you could also go back to the old version and just delete that ref code. <b style="color:#7F007F">TimTempleton</b> <sup style="color:#800080">(talk)  <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  20:24, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) You want to revert an edit [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sigurj%C3%B3n_Sighvatsson&diff=913074785&oldid=904801164] which removed a link to filmreference.com. That means your revert would be adding the link. It was originally added before it was blacklisted. You can use the undo link instead and manually remove the link before saving. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:27, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks to both. I've now fixed it. S Philbrick (Talk)  20:33, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I hope blacklist means it should not be used ever, and there was no grandfathering. S Philbrick (Talk)  20:34, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * There is no grandfathering. Existing links work but they cannot be restored once they have been removed. MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist can be overridden by MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist but it's unlikely to happen here. It was blacklisted at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/April 2019 PrimeHunter (talk) 21:00, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Does anyone know why the Miꞌkmaq article is protected
The only vandalism i could find was from a blocked account but it happened 3 months before it was protected and the protection log does not say any reason why except for something that is not a policy but a essay — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.215.220 (talk) 23:33, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The protecting administrator El C said in their summary that it was done for secret reasons, citing WP:BEANS. This suggests that if the reasons were revealed publicly, it would encourage disruption. I advise you to ask them privately via email. – Teratix ₵ 23:50, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I've unprotected to test the waters — let's see what happens next. El_C 01:35, 30 August 2019 (UTC)