Help desk
< March 31	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 2 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

April 1

Formatting a hanging indent starting with a manually entered number

Dear experts,

I want to create a numbered list, with each paragraph manually numbered instead of using automatic numbering described in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists#Numbered lists. My preference for manual numbering originates from the numbers being fixed in a drawing in the article, Steam locomotive components. There is a risk that automated numbers will get out of kilter at a future date as a result of an item being added to the list, or of careless editing. I've searched long and hard for a solution.

The present layout (under the diagram) is manual, but looks untidy, so I would like to format the text with a manually entered number, followed on the same line by a hanging indent as in the 2nd example at Indentation (typesetting)#Indentation in typesetting. It would appear like this:

1

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

(I've fudged this above by inserting 5 em spaces after "1", which looks OK in my browser but not necessarily in others, hence my request. In effect I need the equivalent of a tab from the number to the left margin of the indented text.) Advice will be greatly appreciated! Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 03:01, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that what you want is Template:In5. You'd put {{In5}} between the number and the start of the text. Herostratus (talk) 05:32, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Herostratus – I hadn't found the {{In5}} template. Testing it in Safari and Firefox, it's very close to perfect; but in Chrome, the first word starts further to the left than the subsequent lines. If there isn't a "tab" type solution I'll be glad to use it. Many thanks! Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 08:41, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why it is showing same movie thrice here?

Why it is showing same movie thrice here? Is this bug in wiki front page? Rizosome (talk) 03:44, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's an April Fool's joke. The movie Groundhog Day concerns a single day repeating itself over and over and over, and the repetition of the movie's name -- as if the movie had been the featured article yesterday, and the day before that, and the day before that, etc... -- is a jocular reference to that. Happy April Fool's Day! Herostratus (talk) 05:18, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I feel required to link to RUles for Fools now. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:36, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can't log in on Commons – need someone else to perform an edit

Hello,

I can't seem to log in on Commons for some reason. I have no idea why this is.

A category that I was looking at has a broken template. It says "catSeealso" when it should be "catseealso". Commons:Category:Icon sets is the page in question. Can someone else resolve this? Thanks, DesertPipeline (talk) 09:40, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the template -- Eatcha 09:46, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Eatcha: Thank you :) DesertPipeline (talk) 09:48, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Undo changes in good faith

How can I undo a change by marking it as made in good faith? Dr Salvus 11:24, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Usually just by putting "reverting good faith additions" or similar in the edit summary. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:27, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr Salvus: I see you use Twinkle. It has a "[rollback (AGF)]" link where AGF means assume good faith. It says "Reverted good faith edits" in the edit summary. You can also just make a manual revert and write it in the edit summary. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:35, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I wish to become a rollbacker

I whish to become a rollbacker. What can I do? Dr Salvus 11:55, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Read and digest Wikipedia:Rollback_policy#Process, and consider its implications. -- Hoary (talk) 12:19, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Importing images from Geograph.org.uk

Hi - I've been told how to do this in the past, but I do it so infrequently that I'm afraid it's dropped out of my head. I think there's a quick and easy way to import images (specifically, this one) from geograph.org.uk into commons for use in an article. Can anyone point me in the right direction? Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 13:36, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Scratch that request - I found a link to the archived discussion from last year where Deor kindly directed me to Magnus' tool which did the job nicely. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 14:19, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RedWarn

How I uninstall RedWarn? Dinesh (talk) 15:45, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dineshswamiin: I suggest you ask at Wikipedia talk:RedWarn. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:22, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dineshswamiin: Remove the singular and only line of your common.js. クロッド (呼んで) 16:23, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Publishing my contribution

I have now completed an article in my sandbox, which I would like to submit for the world-wide Wiki audience. How do I do this please?

The article I have written is Jeter1956/sandbox — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeter1956 (talk • contribs) 16:16, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeter1956: hello, Your contributions show a draft at Draft:Uday Phadke. Is this the item you refer to? You can submit it for review by adding {{subst:submit}} (including the 'curly' brackets) to the top of the markup. This will produce a review notice. Please prepare to be patient; there is a possible delay of up to five months with over 5,000 items awaiting review. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 16:53, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Eagleash: Thank you for your help Jeter1956 (talk) 18:26, 1 April 2021 (UTC) Eagleash (talk)[reply]

@Jeter1956: The draft now contains a notice with a blue submit button. Click on that to submit it. Eagleash (talk) 16:57, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jeter1956. I suggest you don't submit the draft yet, because in my view it has zero chance of being accepted in its current state. I'm afraid you have made several of the mistakes that are usually made by new editors who get stuck straight in to the very difficult task of creating a new article without having spent time becoming familiar with Wikipedia's policies and practices. The main problem is that most of your references are completely useless. The purpose of references in Wikipedia articles is to enable a reader - anywhere, any time - to tell whether the information in the article is reliable (remember, it might have been edited by anybody). Most of your references do not do that. More seriously, it does not look to me as if a single one of your references is a reliable source, wholly independent of Phadke, which contains significant coverage of him. Without at least three such sources, the draft does not establish that he meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. If you were building a house, you started by painting the windows (inserting a picture), then making the windows (the infobox), then gradually built something round them that looks like a house, but you have never built any foundations (the independent reliable sources) or even surveyed the ground to see whether a house built on it will stand up (established notability). Please have a look at Help:your first article. My advice would be to leave this for a few months, while you choose some existing articles in areas which interest you and work on improving them, and learning how Wikipedia works. --ColinFine (talk) 18:02, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeter1956: The item was moved to draft by an experienced AfC particpant who I do not think would done so if it was immediately liable to decline. As a member of a Royal Society it can be argued the subject is considered notable ( See WP:NACADEMIC) but this must be referenced. As noted above, it is not particularly clear which references can be considered usable for Wikipedia's purposes but I feel it is not quite as bad as Colin may think. In cases like this, reviewers will occasionally ask article creators to identify, at the draft talk page, which (as a rule of thumb) three sources they consider to be the most pertinent and reliable in support of the item. These can then be assessed more readily. Having said that the great majority (if not actually, all) statements in a biographical article ought to be reliably supported as Colin implies. However, there is another issue: if this is an autobiography, please see that page for why this type of article is not encouraged and also why it may not always be a good idea. If you have any connection with the subject, please review WP:COI and WP:PAID (the latter condition is mandatory) and amke the necessary declarations. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 20:57, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

how to create the summary box for an academic

Hi I want to create a new page on a notable academic and want to use the summary box format on the side as on this page: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Annette_O%27Connor, Can you tell me how to proceed Blazeware (talk) 17:05, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blazeware The page you linked to is not on Wikipedia, it is on a mirror site. Wikipedia's article about her is here. It uses an infobox specifically for acedemics, which you can find at {{Infobox academic}}. If you click on that link you'll see something that says "Blank template". It lists all the parameters the template accepts. Copy-paste the blank template into the article and fill in as many of the parameters as you have information for by putting the information after the =. So, if the person's name was John Smith, the box should say "|name = John Smith". It should then work. If you need further help or instructions, ask here again. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 17:14, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Blazeware: I usually find several existing articles on a similar subject and pick one whose format I like, and use it as a worked example. I then look at the source wikitext of that article by hitting the "edit" tab to see just how it was constructed. In this case, you would almost certainly see an {{Infobox academic}} near the top. You could choose to copy the entire wikitext into a sandbox page (e.g., User:Blazeware/Grant Getter) and then begin replacing the contents while retaining the format. If you do it this way, then please make very sure you get everything replaced. When you are done, put {{subst:submit}} at the TOP of your new page, and then click the resulting button to submit your new article for review. -Arch dude (talk) 17:31, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much people. Will have a go and see if I need more help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blazeware (talk • contribs) 19:09, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Estimate timeline for Wikipedia deciding on Publishing new Wikipedia page "Kelly Parkes".

Dear Madam/Dear Sir at Wikipedia,

Could you kindly advise on an estimate timeline for Wikipedia to decide on publicly publishing the Wikipedia page "Kelly Parkes".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kelly_Parkes

The Wikipedia page was Edited/Published to Wikipedia on April 1, 2021 by Andreas Alberti.

Thank you for your helpful feedback, Best regards, Andreas Alberti — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreas Alberti (talk • contribs) 17:51, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andreas Alberti. I'm sorry, but there is no timeline, and there is no estimate. This is entirely a volunteer project, and reviewers (like all other editors) work on what they choose, when they choose. What I can tell you is that whenever a reviewer picks up that draft, if it is in its current form, it will be declined. Please look at my reply to a previous question #Publishing my contribution on this page: almost everything I said there applies equally to your draft. --ColinFine (talk) 18:07, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, there are a couple more things to say: you haven't submitted your draft for review, so it is unlikely that a reviewer will even look at it. See the reply Eagleash gave to that other question, above mine, for how to do it when it is ready for review. Another is that promotion of any kind is forbidden in Wikipedia. And a third is that if you have any connection with Parkes, you must read about editing with a conflict of interest. --ColinFine (talk) 18:12, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Andreas Alberti, your references consist mostly of YouTube videos which are not independent and do not establish notability. You need to read Your first article and follow the good advice you will find there. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:43, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may need to change the name of the article to "Kelly Parkes (US singer)" as I see there is a British singer called Kelly Parkes. She is from Dudley,West Midlands Spinney Hill (talk) 21:16, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't notice the existence of any article on any Kelly Parkes. I don't see how this other Kelly Parkes would be an issue. (What is an issue is that the draft doesn't demonstrate that this Kelly Parkes is notable, as the concept is understood in Wikipedia.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:23, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Changing My Username

I will become an more active contributor and need to change my username. Can you help me figure out how to achieve this? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miss.a.cruz (talk • contribs) 17:54, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Miss.a.cruz: Welcome to the Teahouse. You can request a name change (venues can be found at Wikipedia:Changing username), but it's easier to just create a new account and abandon this one with your two edits. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:05, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Editorial skills

Hi

Is it possible to work closely with a good editor to craft my Wikipedia skills, I like the source and I think I can improve a lot of articles (a hobby of mine)

Thanks, looking forward to connecting with the editor community. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drpauluk1 (talk • contribs) 21:07, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just start by making minor improvements to existing articles. Then move on to substantial improvements to existing articles. Then perhaps create your own drafts for articles. Whatever your additions, always include clear citations of reliable sources. You will make some mistakes, which people will correct. Sometimes they'll complain. Sometimes the complaints may be unjustified because your edits were misunderstood. Learn to argue back where necessary, informatively and dispassionately. Avoid edit wars. With more practice, you'll make fewer mistakes. You won't need tutelage. -- Hoary (talk) 22:14, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Drpauluk1: When you edit Wikipedia, you are working with its entire community of editors in a collaborative fashion. How "closely" you work will depend on many things, but one main approach is to be bold. Just go ahead and make what you think is an improvement, and if you mess it up, or even if someone disagrees, then another editor will revert your change. You can then discuss your change with the other editor to reach a consensus. This is called the "bold, revert, discuss cycle, and is a good example of "working closely". If this does not work well for you after you've tried it a few times, come back here for other suggestions. -Arch dude (talk) 00:39, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Page translation

Hello, could I copy the whole source of a Greek wikipedia article and paste it to the English one? Thanks in advance. Holloman123 (talk) 02:12, 2 April 2021

@Holloman123: I'm assuming you mean translating it to be an English article here? There's guidance at WP:TRANSLATION, but note that not all content is likely to make it over due to policy differences between the two Wikipedia projects. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:23, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thank you. Holloman123 (talk) 02:37, 2 April 2021

Trying to add two refrences from the same site

I'm editing Pinus pseudostrobus, and I want to cite two pages from the same website (POWO)- Pinus pseudostrobus and P.pseudostrobus var.pseudostrobus. However, when I do this, I get an error message- it says I defined the same title twice. How do I fix this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abies balsamica (talk • contribs) 23:35, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Did you perhaps attempt to use the same string XYZ in two examples of "ref name=XYZ"? -- Hoary (talk) 00:08, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Can I do this, and what is normal protocol when using numerous refrences from the same site? Abies balsamica (talk) 01:59, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Abies balsamica: You only have to use named references when you're trying to use a reference of the same web page more than once. When you're referencing two different URLs from the same web site domain, you don't have to name the references. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 02:59, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]