Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2022 March 30

= March 30 =

being told Im vandalizing a page when I'm adding citations and information value
hello, I recently registered and this is my first edit. I am a professional journalist whom has been collecting information on a deceased actor and the many lawsuits that surround his historical material. Ive attempted on many accounts to update the information that is available with the correct fact based work cited material but have been repetitively told that what I am doing is vandalizing the page without further explanation or context. Ive reworded things to eliminate any options and cited 13 sources. Still I am told that the revisions will be reversed and now being told if I edit it again I'll be blocked. I worked extremely hard to find the facts and provided credible resources in my citations. Please can you tell me why this is taking place and what if anything can I do about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DataCollectionExpert (talk • contribs) 01:43, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @DataCollectionExpert: I suggest you take it slowly and learn how to cite sources on Wikipedia; Easy referencing for beginners is a good primer on that. For example, this edit of yours does not have an inline citation, so it was understandably reverted. I also invite you to take the time to digest Reliable sources, as some references, like Discogs, are not considered to be reliable by Wikipedia's standards due to their user-generated content. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:19, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * , your additions have been written in an almost incoherent fashion with many errors of grammar, spelling and capitalization. Your writing lacks clarity. Your referencing skills are very poor. It is not surprising that your edits have been reverted. If you want to make contributions to the encyclopedia that will stick, you will need to step up your game and do a much better job of writing and referencing. Cullen328 (talk) 04:48, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree that "vandalism" is probably too strong a term, because you don't appear to be deliberately causing harm. But don't get into an "edit war" by putting the same material back repeatedly.  There is a normal process in Wikipedia (described at WP:BRD) to Be Bold - somebody Reverts - Discuss.  You boldly added your material, then others reverted it, so the next step is to discuss it on the article's Talk page (Talk:Alexander Scourby).  Explain what change(s) you want to make and list the sources.  Editors can discuss it and agree on what to do: Wikipedia operates by consensus.  You might also want to remember that Wikipedia aims to summarize what the best sources have to say about a subject; we do not use that to build an argument or to prove a point.  For instance, nowhere in the article on Adolf Hitler does it say he was a bad man; it is left to the reader to reach their own conclusion about that.  So make specific proposals on the Talk page, with sources, and build an agreement.--Gronk Oz (talk) 07:17, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Harv and Sfn multiple-target errors
Only American Civil War and Clara Bow, have Category:Harv and Sfn multiple-target errors. 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 03:05, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I've fixed American Civil War, following the advice at Template:Sfn, and the category is currently empty. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:15, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Translation
Hello,

2018, 10 Oct I created Page in Georgian language. page name is - დავით ზილფიმიანი.

I need to translate the page to make the information understandable to all of readers. But the system says that I have not right to translate the page. How could you help me? Is any other way to translate my page without these 500 edits restiction?

Thank you in advance

--Stereo Plus (talk) 08:47, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Inga Bajelidze, Admin of Stereo Plus


 * Let me check that I understand your situation, . (1) When you say that you are the/an "Admin of Stereo Plus", do you mean that you are an employee of the company Stereo Plus? (2) Do you hope to create an article about the founder of the same company, Stereo Plus? -- Hoary (talk) 09:17, 30 March 2022 (UTC)


 * You will need to change your name, as business names are not permitted on the English Wikipedia. Please go to Special:GlobalRenameRequest to change your name. It must be a name for you alone.  Please understand that writing on the Georgian Wikipedia is different from writing on the English Wikipedia. There are different standards here. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Actually,, if you are indeed at the company Stereo Plus, you'd be welcome to use a name such as "Inga at Stereo Plus" or "IB at Stereo Plus". -- Hoary (talk) 09:48, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi,
 * I have requested the name change. thank you for advise.
 * what do you mean in different standards? as I have read, admin should have 500 edits to have permission of translating English articles. is it correct? Stereo Plus (talk) 10:28, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi,
 * Yes, I am an employee. I already requested the name change. as for the second question, I need to translate the Georgian article in English language.
 * Georgian article already exists.
 * Thank you for your reply Stereo Plus (talk) 10:25, 30 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Stereo Plus, any editor (aside from those who are banned or evading blocks) may create a draft article. Being an administrator has nothing to do with it. (Actually I suspect that you misunderstand "admin", or anyway use the word very differently to the way other people here use it.) A draft article may be a translation into English of an article written for the Wikipedia of another language. That other language may of course be Georgian. However, (1) the first edit to the English translation should have an edit summary declaring what it's a translation of; (2) the talk page of the English translation should provide more details of what it's a translation of; (3) the translation (or augmented version of the translation) must satisfy the policies of English-language Wikipedia (which are likely to be very different from those of Georgian-language Wikipedia); (4) as you have a conflict of interest, the draft will have a conflict-of-interest template until some other editor (not you) removes it; (5) as you are being paid to create the article, you must disclose this conspicuously; (6) I hope that you are not in a hurry: having a draft such as this accepted as an article is a process that tends to take months (and may never succeed). -- Hoary (talk) 13:07, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

EDITING MY PROFILE
Hi,

I would like to find out how I edit my profile.

Thanks Elizabeth Littlefield — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C7:A80D:E701:95D2:E98:8D47:1DC8 (talk) 10:28, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia does not have profiles, it has articles. You are welcome to visit Talk:Elizabeth Littlefield and make a formal edit request(click for instructions) detailing changes you feel are needed. They should be sourced to a published independent reliable source. 331dot (talk) 10:37, 30 March 2022 (UTC)


 * [Edit Conflict] Wikipedia is not social media and does not contain any "profiles." It is an encyclopedia which contains articles about subjects, based solely on information that has been published in Reliable sources that are completely independent of their subjects. Any information not so published is not allowed, because readers would not be able to check its source and verify it for themselves. (Also, this helps to prevent malicious actors inserting false information about a subject; a danger that any politician, for example, will be aware of.)
 * Autobiography, while not strictly forbidden, is strongly discouraged, and the subject of an article should not make any edits to an article about themself. Instead, they should make edit requests on the article's Talk page, with exact suggestions and with links or citations to reliable sources that corroborate the information in question; other Wikipedia editors will then evaluate these and perform (or not) the relevant edits.
 * To be clear, are you the subject of the article Elizabeth Littlefield? {The editor formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.233.48 (talk) 10:46, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Are you the editor formerly known as 87.81.230.195? --R. S. Shaw (talk) 03:30, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was me. In March 2011 my home ISP, which provided a static IP, was taken over by Sky, which provides dynamic IPs. Since for ideological reasons I do not wish to have an account, I adopted the "formerly" tag to ensure continuity in conversations such as this.
 * Did you have a reason specific to the current topic to ask the question? I asked the current querent if she was the Elizabeth Littlefield of the linked article both to provide a convenient link for everyone's convenience, and to confirm that she was actually talking about that " profile " article. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.233.48 (talk) 06:46, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Nothing re the topic; just a) I was curious about your claim, and b) of course, we don't know if either of your claims are true, but she theoretically might be able to prove hers (if she wanted to), whereas your claim seems unlikely to be provable. The article wasn't linked until you added one, but the article's talk page had been. We probably won't hear any more from OP. R. S. Shaw (talk) 20:55, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Re (b), I don't see that it really matters if my "claims" are not provable: even if they were untrue (and what would be my motive for making it all up?), it still wouldn't affect any factual matter in the encyclopedia, and in any case I strongly believe that any edit should stand or fall on its own merits, not on the reputation of the IP or named Account making it. However, if you would like circumstantial proof, read a few of the contributions made under that ISP up to March 2011, and compare their prose style to some of the thousands made from other IPs since then (because dynamic) using the "formerly" tag.
 * When I was typing my initial response, 331dot's response was not visible to me – that's what led to me prefixing mine with "[Edit Conflict] – so as far as I knew I was adding the first link to the article; once the conflict occurred, it didn't occur to me to edit out my link just because 331 dot had linked a related, though different, page.
 * As for the OP's "proving" that they are the same person as the article is about, that was not the purpose of my asking; I was merely trying to establish if she was that Elizabeth Littlefield or another Elizabeth Littlefield (which, in fact, we still don't know) in order that we could give the best advice. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.233.48 (talk) 23:51, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

deletion of my own wikipedia page
Good morning to whom it may concern,

I have had a wikipedia page from a very young age. I would like to request to delete the page entirely as I have grown older and realised I do not really want all that information about me online for anyone to access. is there any possibility to delete the page.

Thank you very much — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.170.82.25 (talk) 10:51, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It would help if we knew which page it is, and if you really are the subject. -Roxy the grumpy dog . wooF 11:00, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Theroadislong (talk) 11:04, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I've trimmed a bunch of unsourced or poorly sourced cruft. On the fence about AfD. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:32, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi IP 81.170.82.25. There's really no way for anyone to tell for sure that you're Gayatri Nair (if that's the page you're referring to) unless you register for WP:ACCOUNT and have your identity verified by WP:VRT. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons for more information, but there are way for people written about on Wikipedia to seek assistance for others. There's even something called a courtesy deletion as explained here that is sometimes applied in cases like this, but please understand, though, that no such action is likely going to be taken as long as your identity remains unverified. You shouldn't post any of your personal contact information on any Wikipedia pages as explained here, but you can have your identity verified via email if you wish. It's also important to understand that Wikipedia articles aren't owned by their subjects, and the subjects of articles don't have an sort of final editorial control over what written about them on Wikipedia. Articles are written about subjects, not for or on behalf of subjects; so, it's not really your article per se in the sense that a social media account or personal website might be considered to be yours. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:04, 30 March 2022 (UTC)


 * The IP editor may or may not be who they claim to be, but I could find no significant coverage that is not related to The Voice in a quick online search. As a result, I think WP:REALITYSINGER applies, and I have redirected the article. Tigraan Click here for my talk page ("private" contact) 15:01, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
 * No objections here. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:04, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Reasoning behind "ndash"
I have had several reviewers have me replace the keyboard "-" with "ndash". Why is that important? Is it best then to us that with "" these brackets or can just the word "ndash" be used to replace the "-"? Is this "ndash" only suppose to be used to separate page numbers (i.e. pp. 31-39) or is it also to be used for all dates in an article (i.e. 1 April 2022 - 2 March 2022)? Should the "ndash" template have been used on this on this date example? I'm trying to figure out why it needs to be used and why can not the everyday keyboard "-" be used in an article. Thanks for simple explanation for reasoning on this "ndash" thingie.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:20, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi . You'll find some information about this at MOS:NDASH, but what's written there might not be well known by most editors. Grammatically, there is a difference as to how n-dashes, m-dashes and hyphens are supposed to be used, but I'd imagine many people don't worry about such things when it comes to casual writing; Wikipedia articles are, however, expected to be written in more formal style, which is why you might come across others who are sticklers for "fixing" this kind of thing. As for the difference between ndash as a template, and n-dash as the plain text symbol –, they both seem to display the same way and which is used may simply come down to preference; for example,  using the template looks like , and    using the text symbol also looks like  . Using the template, however, might place the page where it's used in maintenance category so that it can be reviewed since templates are often connected to category pages in some way, which is something that using plain text might not allow. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:45, 30 March 2022 (UTC)


 * , it's also normal practice in printing books and journals, so it's consistent with other formal writing. ndash is used for any range, whereas the hyphen is to join words or parts of words, so the usage is quite different Jimfbleak - talk to me?  14:11, 30 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks Marchjuly and Jimfbleak for your replies. Now I have a good idea for its purpose and how to use it.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:19, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Sonic the Hedgehog (film series)
Hello. I am ZX2006XZ. For the past month, I have a working on a draft for Paramount Pictures/Sega's Sonic the Hedgehog film series. I started working on the draft a few days after a third Sonic movie and a spinoff series on Paramount+ centered on Knuckles were announced. Now that critical reception for Sonic the Hedgehog 2 has surfaced, I have submitted the draft for review. The only problem is that Sonic the Hedgehog (film series) is a redirect to Sonic the Hedgehog (film), and is protected due to "disruptive editing". See redirect's revision history at this link.

So, what I'm trying to ask is if this redirect can be unprotected so submitting the draft of it won't be such a hassle. It would also be great if I could get into contact with an administrator for this. Thanks. ZX2006XZ (talk) 15:39, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and submit the draft. When the draft is approved, the reviewer will handle getting it moved over the existing redirect.  Requests for unprotecting a page can be made at WP:RFPP RudolfRed (talk) 18:56, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The thing is, I have submitted the draft for review. ZX2006XZ (talk) 18:58, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Then there's nothing for you to do but wait for it to get reviewed. ColinFine (talk) 22:37, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Indeed. A reviewer will pick up that bit. For what it's worth, WP:RM/T is the place. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 06:55, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

What happens to the page contents when a Wikipedia article is deleted?
What happens to the page contents when a Wikipedia article is deleted? I assume it is no longer available to the general public, to view? Or is it? If I (an editor) want a copy of that page, where can I make such a request? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:49, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * When a page is deleted, all edits are moved to a different database table, including all information about the edit such as content, edit summary, author, revision number, etc, from which they can also by restored. Assuming that the page or the edit in question wasn't removed by people with higher force, all administators have the technical ability to view the deleted revisions. Some administrators might choose to provide copies of deleted pages, see Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:00, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Joseph A. Spadaro Also, depending on the reason it was deleted, you can request a copy of it to be restored via the request for undeletion process. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 16:18, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, all! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:06, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Accused of Hijacking My Own Account...?
Please help me understand something - I signed into Wikipedia and got to MY page, only to find details for someone with teh same name, but it clearly was not "me." I updated the page with my information and received an email that I had "hijacked" the page.

I replied that I did not mean any ill-will and told the person to correct it and put it back the way to was prior to making my edits. I checked this morning and the detail has been updated to the old information for the other person (with my same name), yet I still have logon rights to make edits to the page.

So - If I have established a login and password for this specific account, how is it that I'm being accused of "hijacking" the page? Seems to me that if the other person wanted their detail to be shown, then they would have the access to do this themselves.

Please help me clarify this -

Thank you very much -

Dean — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.159.78.171 (talk) 16:28, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * If you are the operator of the DeanTracy account, you currently are not logged in to it. You "hijacked" the article Dean Tracy(which is not an account and not associated with a particular account) which is about a different individual from yourself. If you merit a Wikipedia article(per the notability criteria), any article about you will need to be created and will need to have what we call a disambiguation in the title(such as "Dean Tracy (coach)"). It is strongly advised that you not attempt to write about yourself, please read the autobiography policy.  However, if you can set aside what you know about yourself and only write based on what independent reliable sources say about you, you may create and submit a draft at Articles for Creation.
 * It is not necessarily desirable to have an article on Wikipedia. There are good reasons to not want one. 331dot (talk) 16:35, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * If you look at the message that User:Johnj1995 left on your talk page, the word "hijacking" is linked to Article hijack, which explains what you did. -- Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:15, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * You seem to be confused as to how Wikipedia works. Wikipedia is the Encyclopedia that anyone can edit.  That means you can edit (virtually) any page in the encyclopedia (with the exception that some articles are protected, usually temporarily, usually due to vandalism).  You do not need an account to edit articles here.  Although we may have an article about someone with the same name as you, no one owns that article.  If we had an article about you, it would not be your article, you would not own it.  The other Dean Tracy does not own that article, although it is about him.  You still have rights to make edits to the page because you still have rights to make edits to any page, because this is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit.  Does this make sense? ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 17:18, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * This may be as simple as not understanding the difference between a WP:USERPAGE and an WP:ARTICLE. For the most part, you are free to edit your user page as you see fit, but you can't change the content (e.g. WP:HIJACK) of an article about another person to turn it into your user page. And, if you wish to create either a user page or an article promoting yourself, then you should probably just go elsewhere. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 17:43, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Category:Polish Enlightenment

 * "Category:Polish enlightenment", now spelled with a lower-case "e", should be corrected to "Category:Polish Enlightenment", with the word "Enlightenment" capitalized, as is customary for that historical period.
 * I don't know how to make that correction. Could someone please make it?
 * Thanks.
 * Nihil novi (talk) 17:22, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd add an entry in Categories for discussion. If the article Polish Enlightenment was under that name rather than being a redirect to Enlightenment in Poland than I think you'd be able to put it in as a non-controversial, but since it isn't, I think adding to the above is probably best. Note, if you go through that process, (or even the non-controversial) getting approved, I believe that a bot program will go through all of the entries that are in that category and move then. I'm not saying your suggestion is wrong, I'm saying there is a formal process that if it is approved, then someone who wants to change it back would need to go through another discussion.Naraht (talk) 17:27, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you, ! I've added an entry to Categories for discussion, per your suggestion. Nihil novi (talk) 17:54, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

How to start a page
I'm trying to create a new page and I'm having a hard time sifting through all the articles. Can you someone direct me to an easy button page or instructions for getting my page submitted to go live? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wonderfront Festival (talk • contribs) 19:43, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has articles, not mere "pages". This is a subtle but important distinction.  Before you get into creating articles, however, you will need a different username, that is not that of an event(which I presume is what you want to write about).  Please see your user talk page for important information. 331dot (talk) 19:51, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I had a look around in a web search and concluded that the Wonderfront Festival would have difficulty meeting the general notability guideline. It is a music festival in San Diego, California that is being staged in November 2022. An article simply to create publicity for it would likely lead to a speedy deletion request.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 20:00, 30 March 2022 (UTC)