Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2021 March 13

= March 13 =

Imelda Marcos
I was browsing about when the year Imelda Marcos was born, it caught to my attention your stating that they( Ferdinand Marcos and Imelda) stole a huge amount of money in the Phils. As a Filipino who grew up in that country I have the right to say that you should research Philipine status under his regime. Not even a single case proved that they stole money. Check the real history like a deeper meaning of Philippine history. The Aristocracy in the country change the Philippine History, that makes my country sick for the last 30years after Marcos administration have fallen. You need to do more research.

Thank you, Arlene Dalisay — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.150.28.21 (talk) 00:50, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * If you feel there is incorrect information on an article, you can feel free to make the edit yourself or make an edit request on the corresponding talk page, provided you have reliable sources to back up these changes. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 01:32, 13 March 2021 (U


 * No. It is proved that the family has stolen millions of dollars from the Philippines. Check these sites

https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/65607-greatest-robbery-of-a-government https://www.rappler.com/voices/thought-leaders/analysis-just-how-bad-was-corruption-marcos-years --ProWarCrime (talk) 12:57, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Christopher Bullock
I have added  a  commons  file  inside the info  box on the above  page. It needs to be centered  and  enlarged; it is  too  small. Please help if you can - Thanks  175.32.41.33 (talk) 01:53, 13 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Ah, the spouse of one Barbara May Lupton! Well, IP, you can centre it, by removing "|thumb". But you can't make it any bigger, because the file that (hello!) uploaded is a measly 74×150 pixels. -- Hoary (talk) 01:59, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Editing my entry in Wikipedia
I have just spent 3 hours editing my entry in Wikipedia, to correct factual errors and omissions. I then clicked on 'Publish', as there was no option to 'Save' visible anywhere .... but when I subsequently checked my entry in Wikipedia to see my corrections, none of them had registered. Please help by advising me to make edits effectively. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenwich Road (talk • contribs) 06:47, 13 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Which article was this? (There's no sign here that you've edited anywhere other than on this page.) But whichever the article, you shouldn't edit it directly; you should instead edit its talk page, saying there which changes you'd like to have made to the article, and why. Please see Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. -- Hoary (talk) 07:23, 13 March 2021 (UTC)


 * If you are given the option to "Publish" and click on this, then what you have is normally saved. You will get an error message if you attempt to "Publish" a version that includes links to websites that are blacklisted (because of attempts to spam links to them, because they routinely flout others' copyright, etc); you won't be given the impression that your attempt to "Publish" was successful. -- Hoary (talk) 08:23, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * "Publish Changes" should be interpreted to simply mean "Save Changes". The button used to say save changes, but it was changed to emphasize that all saved edits are visible to the public(such as this page). As Hoary aptly notes, you should avoid directly editing the article about you, but you may make a formal edit request on the talk page, detailing changes you feel are needed, along with any reliable sources to support them. 331dot (talk) 08:31, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Your account has not saved anything outside this help page. If you were not logged in then there is a chance your changes were saved but reverted and can be seen by clicking the "View history" tab, or that the changes actually are in the article but you need to bypass your cache to see them. It's impossible for us to tell without knowing the page. I guess you are not an old road. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:57, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

WP:VAND and WP:DE
Which are the differences beetween WP:VAND and WP:DE? DrSalvus (talk) 15:15, 13 March 2021 (UTC)


 * "Vandalism" is behaviour which is "deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose", while "disruptive editing" is disruptive in effect though not in intention. Maproom (talk) 15:18, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Disruptive editing can be intentional but often isn't. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:21, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I've been doing some destructive edits lately with no intention of doing damage to Wikipedia. How can I make other users understand that I do not vandalize? DrSalvus (talk) 15:28, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Dr Salvus have you read Competence is required, which advises that editors need "the ability to understand their own abilities and competencies, and avoid editing in areas where their lack of skill and/or knowledge causes them to create significant errors for others to clean up"? TSventon (talk) 16:08, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Dr Salvus, it's good that you're asking questions—asking for more information (or taking time to learn more by reading policies, guidelines and discussions) rather than jumping right into a new area is often a good way to make others understand that you are acting without intent to damage Wikipedia. Stick to small things that you have done successfully in the past and read lots before taking any new types of actions. By making good contributions to articles, like you have done on football-related topics, you show other people that you are here to help. — Bilorv ( talk ) 18:45, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Notability criteria for scientific subjects and experiments?
What is the relevant notability criterion/guideline when it comes to scientific topics, like proteins, chemical reactions, various reagents, etc.? And is there any guidance for evaluating notability of experiments, or are they just considered "events"? JoelleJay (talk) 19:10, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I assume both are just considered under GNG, but it would be helpful to know of any consensus discussions since these topics are more nuanced than the "RS coverage" anticipated by GNG criteria. We have informal notability guidelines for practically every sport, so I was very surprised to see there was nothing on scientific subjects. JoelleJay (talk) 19:18, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * There is general advice for chemistry at WP:NCHEM, . Most scientific Projects are pretty active, so for specific cases you could post a suggestion at a Project Talk page before starting to draft a new article. There is WT:WikiProject_Chemistry, for example and others are listed at WP:WikiProject_Council/Directory/Science. We always welcome new editors in science areas provided they are competent in the subject they write about. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:46, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the NCHEM link, Mike Turnbull! I wonder why it isn't included in Category:WikiProject notability advice? It would also be really helpful for such essays to be included in the lead of the AfD (science and technology) DS category. JoelleJay (talk) 03:05, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

WP:MENTOR
Hi. I think I should join the WP: MENTOR. Despite having made more than 3000 changes, I think I'm a bit inexperienced. I believe I need to be supported by a more experienced user. How can I ask a user to be my mentor? DrSalvus (<b style="font-size:80%;color:#a9a9a9">talk</b>) 19:28, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * See WP:AAU (which was linked in the page you quote). Eagleash (talk) 20:08, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

extinct mountaines in uk
Snowdon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:3F14:5601:1554:DAE4:9E5B:109B (talk) 20:15, 13 March 2021 (UTC)


 * What is your question about editing Wikipedia? There is no article or category called anything like "extinct mountains in the UK". I've never encountered the phrase "extinct mountain": if you mean Extinct volcano, I don't think that Snowdon has ever been classified as a volcano, though it is made of volcanic rock. --ColinFine (talk) 21:22, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Citing source without unique URL
I have a question about citing a particular online webpage. I want to cite an online database of Colorado high-school championships to update an article about a school's athletic records. However, the only way to see the records for a specific school is by doing a search for the school on the webpage itself. This means there isn't a unique URL for the school's record -- only a URL for the database itself. How should I go about citing this? It would help a lot with cleaning up the entry for the school, but I want to make sure users are able to accurately find the exact source of my info.

https://chsaanow.com/history/champions/all/ is the database in question. The search feature is underneath the heading that says "All-time champions"

Rileydblack (talk) 21:10, 13 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Go back to basics. A citation is intended to provide a way for an interested reader to find the cited information. If the URL is insufficient, then add the needed "recipe" for finding it. For example your citation could be search for Longmont HS at  . -Arch dude (talk) 00:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Gotcha. Added a "recipe" - thank you for teaching me a new term :) Rileydblack (talk)


 * See List of American Idol alumni album sales in the United States for many examples of references that include navigation. Happy editing!  GoingBatty (talk) 01:37, 14 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the examples! Rileydblack (talk) 17:20, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Messages without reply
I have sent two messages to a user and I need a reply. Surely he read it but he didn't answer. What can I do? <b style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:80%;color:#000080">Dr</b><b style="font-family:Verdana;color:#27B382">Salvus</b> (<b style="font-size:80%;color:#a9a9a9">talk</b>) 22:04, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

How do you report a bad editor?
There is a lot of back and forth between the editors on the pages for both “counting on” and “19 kids and counting”. People will go in and make updates and add information and then other editors will CONTINUOUSLY remove it because they PERSONALLY feel the information shouldn’t be available. Wikipedia is an information site - having users take information down because they don’t agree with it being on there is INEXCUSABLE. There is no option to report the editors who continue to delete information and previous edits. PLEASE DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS. It has been happening for a very long time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DishSoap24 (talk • contribs) 22:04, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a mere "information site", it is an encyclopedia with criteria for inclusion. If there is information that is in dispute, you need to discuss it on the article talk page. It is difficult to say more unless you provide specific diffs that we can examine. 331dot (talk) 22:14, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello, . This is your only edit with this account. Do you have another account? I looked at the history of the second article you mentioned, and I see highly experienced editors enforcing policies and guidelines to prevent addition of poorly referenced content that violates WP:BLP policy and creates accessibility. problems. If you have complaints about an editor, discuss your concerns on the editor's talk page. There are various methods of Dispute resolution available as well. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  22:21, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, creating a second account to stir up debate is sockpuppetry, which is generally met with an indefinite block of editing privileges. Matt Deres (talk) 13:41, 14 March 2021 (UTC)