Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2024 September 18

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.

September 18

Notable?

Whenever I stumble across an image that illustrates something important such as the Shakespearean character Falstaff and I do not recognize any actor's names in the caption [1] and the actors are not linked to their own page here at WP, it draws my curiosity to the either the image's notability or the connection it has to something else listed at WP. In this instance, the Pacific Repertory Theatre. It reads extremely promotional, and does not seem to be any more notable than any other regional theater across the country, and tries to come across more important than it is by linking other notable names. Golden Bough Playhouse may be the theatre's home, but even that only links to Edward G. Kuster. I am bringing it here to the Help Desk rather than the Talk Page for two reasons: 1. The Talk Page does not get enough traffic for a discussion, and 2. the last two AFDs I put up for deletion were actually just poorly written articles and either were merged or enhanced to the point of "KEEP". Before I place this up for AFD, should this article be 1. merged, 2. heavily scrubbed, or 3. placed up for AFD? Thanks in advance. Maineartists (talk) 01:21, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Regarding PRT, it seems like it meets the criteria of WP:LOCAL and has been sufficiently covered locally by multiple independent sources in the local area. It does seem that GBP has recently been turned into a redirect to Kuster by an experienced editor, although it does not appear that it was ever discussed, but a AfD was briefly brought up in the talk of GBP. I would think that it simply need to be edited following the guidance at LOCAL. TiggerJay (talk) 03:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@Maineartists: WP:LOCAL is an essay, and even that essay acknowledges that an article about a company (in this case a nonprofit corporation) should cite sources that have a national, or at least regional, audience.

The threshold of notability here is WP:CORP, period. If it doesn't meet the criteria, it's ripe for AFD nomination. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:14, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Anachronist and Tiggerjay for all this. As GBP was merged, I am wondering if this theatre needs its own page at all since it is covered quite well on the page Carmel-by-the-Sea, California under Arts and Entertainment: [2]. Since the PRT page needs a good scrubbing, most of the LOCAL and CORP info would be reduced to what is found at CBTS. There are only a few sentences that need be added to the A&E section. Maineartists (talk) 04:27, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Yep, I wouldn't be opposed of merging it into the Carmel article either and stripping out some of the unnecessary promotionalism. TiggerJay (talk) 05:23, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

I just discovered that PRT not only has its own page, but it also is mentioned at Carmel by the Sea, California and has its own section at Forest Theater [3]. I've placed a "Proposal to Merge" on the Talk Page of Forest Theater: [4] but regardless, the original PRT page should be merged or be placed for AFD. Maineartists (talk) 23:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Could I ask someone to take a few pokes at one of my sandbox pages for some citation stuff?

Hi all, I've been messing with re-using citations for some complex sources, where I want to cite specific page numbers, add a quote (to back the citation/reference) and minimize the number of cited objects in the References sections. I've gone through Preview-level tests and messed with enough various citation templates that I'm not sure at this point which is best for my needs. If it's easier, by all means edit this:

User:Very Polite Person/test3

I don't know what the right formulation for this is... so in that example, I have one source that I used in Born secret. What I want to do is have the single 'object' for that, and then use some other template to repeatedly use that same reference name/link, but then for each new invocation, add a unique page number and a unique "quote" field for each. Ideally, each new citation would be clickable to go back to the main/mother ship Reference citation.

Kind of like these, but I'm not sure what is the right combinations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Very_Polite_Person/test3#cite_ref-2

By all means you have permission to edit that page for this! I am a big fan of re-using my templates for references to keep things simple, so I just need one feasible example (if this is a thing that is possible). If this isn't the right help desk to ask, which could be best? -- Very Polite Person (talk) 02:21, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Quotations require citations, citations do not require quotations. to back the citation/reference suggests to some that you aren't comfortable with the reliability of the source. I hacked your sandbox but left your quotations. In a real article, I would likely have deleted them.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 02:52, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately I've kinda self-recruited myself to help police a... contentious BLP article I came across and started an article that's a bit in my wheelhouse (and also... contentious), and wanted to build up an article that I've had my eye on for a while for a broad set of sciences I am interested in. I was thinking of using quotes down in the References section to minimize any agita by all involved, by being beyond transparent what I'm drawing my sourcing from. So just a page number at most, even for contentious stuff? I have a number of sources like this one for various articles, some of them deep into the double digits or more that I've bee wanting to begin working off. I could be pulling 10, 20 usages off some of them, sometimes from the same page for different ends. Really, just the page number is plenty?

And thanks for that edit, that's neat--does that template/inline linking there just default to the first character set of the reference 'anchor'? What if I have several sources from the same author, like multiple different "Wellerstein", different sources, but same year? Just use some other character string to differentiate? -- Very Polite Person (talk) 03:00, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Generally, the page number is enough. A reader who is sufficiently interested in consulting your source can (should) read the sourced material in its own context, where it is free from any real or perceived en.wiki bias.

{{harvnb}} accepts one to four author surnames and a year. From these it makes a link to CITEREF<name1><name2><name3><name4><year> (no spaces). At the same time, the cs1|2 templates create an identical target ID from the first four author surnames and the year portion of the source's publication date. When there are multiple sources by the same author(s) in the same publication year, to disambiguate, append a lowercase letter to the publication date:

{{cite book |last=Wellerstein |date=1900a |title=Title One}} → CITEREFWellerstein1900a (target)

{{cite book |last=Wellerstein |date=1900b |title=Title Two}} → CITEREFWellerstein1900b

{{harvnb|Wellerstein|1900a|p=35}} → CITEREFWellerstein1900a (link)

{{harvnb|Wellerstein|1900b|p=35}} → CITEREFWellerstein1900b

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:28, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Policy about quotation marks in a song title

I was looking at Hyakuman-kai no "I Love You" because of its DYK and I could swear there was a policy where you reduce the quotation marks in a title to single quotes if it's referred to in quotes (so the title of the article would be the same but in the text the song would be referred to as "Hyakuman-kai no 'I Love You'"). I can't find it, so maybe I hallucinated it... if someone could direct me to that policy (if it exists) it would be greatly appreciated. AsYouWish13 05:19, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

That's not a policy. It's just standard American English. Per Quotation mark, "In American writing, quotation marks are normally the double kind (the primary style). If quotation marks are used inside another pair of quotation marks, then single quotation marks are used." Clarityfiend (talk) 08:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

AsYouWish13, are you looking for MOS:"? Folly Mox (talk) 14:44, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@AsYouWish13: The specific guideline for the usage in question is MOS:QWQ. Note the last sentence there for how to add a thin space between the closing single and double quotes. Deor (talk) 16:04, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

How to cite hardcopy sources which has no softcopy available on the internet

There's this 100yr jubillee book of the church which has the list of former layministers and sacristans. But i have doubt adding it here beacuse i cant refer it to a softcopy like a pdf on the internet. is there a way to add info from a source where a sopftcopy or a url for it is unavailable? VihirLak007 (talk) 08:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia content is based on reliable published sources. They can be either hardcopy or softcopy, but they must be published, i.e. available to the public. If they are not published they cannot be used for Wikipedia content. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:28, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

if its available in a public library, which is in this case the public library of the church where the jubilee book is available for anyone to read, how can i cite it? any template? VihirLak007 (talk) 08:37, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

VihirLak007, you are describing a self-published source that can only be used with great caution, and the relevant policy language is at WP:ABOUTSELF. For a template, see Template: Cite book. Cullen328 (talk) 08:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

When a person or organization has paid to get their book published, it is actually not considered published. It is unreliable. TooManyFingers (talk) 07:15, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

donation

Dear all, I wanted to make a donation, but you ask to much privacy information: name, email address, and then you also would know my bank account, which i don't like. Sorry. 2A02:A440:569D:1:94F9:E822:6B82:19AA (talk) 08:21, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

That is really no different from making any other donation or purchase online, but you can find alternative ways to donate at https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ways_to_Give Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:30, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Translated name of an institution

Our hospital (Hôpitaux universitaires de Genève, a French name) has in the distant past used one English translation (Geneva university hospitals) of its name. Today, common practice and the formal decision to simplify down to the singular form in English, prefers the version: University hospital of Geneva. This is problematic as the Wikipedia page is of course titled as per the old translation : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_University_Hospitals

Should I - and if so what are the repurcussions in terms of referencing - attempt to CORRECT that page title, and all the mentions therein? Or just leave it as is.

Curiously, the Wikimedia Commons label, under the External Sources section of our wiki page states having "media related to University Hospital of Geneva", the correct later English translation.

The whole question arises in my mind as I started looking at updating the page of our new director general, where I was on the point of adding : "He is currently director general of the (later English translation name)" which, of course, would not match the name on the wikipage currently.

Thank you for your advice ! InstitCommsHug (talk) 12:46, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, please know that your username is against our username policy. Your username cannot be that of your job or part of the company("Comms"), it must represent you as an individual, as only a single person should have exclusive access to your account and may not share it with others. Please go to Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS to request a change of username. 331dot (talk) 12:52, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Understood, thanks very much and will do (the change request.) InstitCommsHug (talk) 14:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@InstitCommsHug Changing the title of an article is done by moving it to the new name. In this case the hospital's own website (English version) still shows its name as Hôpitaux Universitaires Genève. Once we have a reliable source, even the institution's own website, that documents what you call the "formal decision" to make the change to "University hospital of Geneva", then Wikipedia will follow suit. As a WP:PAID editor, there are some things you need to do (see that linked page) before you provide the move request, which can be on the Talk Page of the article using the edit request wizard to draw it to the attention of uninvolved editors. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:23, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME is also relevant; the official or legal name of a topic is not necessarily the title of its article. 331dot (talk) 14:57, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

for PANCREAS (edit) I propose this link in "ADDITIONAL FUCTIONS":

!N "ADDITIONAL FUNTIONS" : HELP

Recently, an unprecedented role in pancreatic carcinogenesis has been highlighted through the concentration and elimination of radiocesium in pancreatic juice. Studies by Nelson, Sodee, Bandazhevsky, Venturi, and others, have reported that pancreatic cells have a high capacity to concentrate the harmful radioactive Cesium in experimental scintigraphies with Cs-137 and in soils polluted by radioactive fallout in mammals (mice, dogs and humans) and also in birds and fish (chickens and carp).

Xventuri (talk) 14:38, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

This is best directed to Talk:Pancreas. 331dot (talk) 14:40, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@Xventuri Note that Wikipedia has very stringent sourcing requirements for medical claims, explained at WP:MEDRS. I don't think these sources qualify but you can discuss that on the Talk Page of the article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

I note that you have already added material to the Italian Wikipedia and marked it as a "minor" change. That is not how such an addition would be considered here (see WP:MINOR). If you are in any way related to the author Venturi of the 2021 article (as seems possible given your username), you should carefully read this advice about conflict-of-interest editing. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:07, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

I am the author ( Venturi Sebastiano) of the two modifications in PANCREAS Wikipedia ( it and en.)

https://www.bing.com/chat?q=venturi+sebastiano+researches&qs=SYC&showconv=1&sendquery=1&FORM=ASCHT2&sp=4&ghc=1&lq=0 Xventuri (talk) 16:05, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Not sure why this one page isn't showing as "disambig" while others do

Hello. I just hit my 20 year editor mark and was checking on the articles I've created via this page. I noticed that the Harry Williamson disambig page shows on my list as "Unknown" in assessment while a very similar page, the Anita Miller disambig page shows up correctly as a disambiguation page. I've checked and they seem to have the same basic structure in terms of how they were created, categories, talk pages, etc. Not a huge deal but it's made me curious. What am I missing? Thank you. Jessamyn (my talk page) 19:38, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@Jessamyn: I made null edits of Harry Williamson and Talk:Harry Williamson. It changed from "Unknown" to "Disambig". PrimeHunter (talk) 20:30, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I have learned a thing today. Jessamyn (my talk page) 15:17, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

How to verify unpublished information obtained by a professional journalist (who is a Wikipedian)?

A person, the topic of a Wikipedia article, died about a year ago. Reliable sources conflict or are ambiguous when they died. I started a talk page discussion. About a year later, a journalist who wrote one of the sources, who is also a Wikipedian, posted in that discussion saying they have personal correspondence from the family confirming the date of death. They want to know how to add this information. -- GreenC 22:47, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

If reliable sources conflict on the date then just give both dates and both sources. Sources must be both published and accessible to the public (or at least some members of the public). See WP:PUBLISHED and WP:PUBLISH. Personal communication is not "published" by Wikipedia standards and is not accessible to the public, and cannot be used as a source. Meters (talk) 23:30, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

But if the journalist in question is, in due course, able to have the date published in a source considered Reliable by Wikipedia's criteria, as presumably was their previous piece, that new published piece could then be cited in the article. Remember, Wikipedia has no deadlines, and every article is open to future improvement. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.83.137 (talk) 11:46, 19 September 2024 (UTC)