Why are your numbers so much greater than those of the CDC? You show about 68 thousand, while CDC shows around 37 thousand — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:FD10:B340:FCD4:853C:8B8A:6BC (talk) 02:32, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the help desk! https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html shows 65,735 deaths in the US. If you let us know which Wikipedia article you're concerned about, we can make sure the CDC reference is up to date. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 02:42, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Brand newbie here trying to make a page and wondering if I did this correctly or if there is something obvious to you experts that I can fix rather than risking the page is removed for my mistakes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kryss_Shane

Thanks so much for sharing your brilliance with me, I am forever grateful! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Munchkin1616 (talk • contribs) 04:09, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Munchkin1616: have you looked at Wikipedia:Notability? In particular, has the subject "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject"? If you are not sure about publishing a page you could use Wikipedia:Articles for creation. I see User:Lopifalko has made some improvements to the article. TSventon (talk) 04:59, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Munchkin1616: Hello. As described in my various edit summaries, there were issues with WP:PUFFERY; WP:PROMO; the endorsements were a WP:COPYVIO; MOS:LEAD should not contain info that isn't in the body of the article; it had no categories; and Medium is not a reliable source; WP:SURNAME; MOS:BOLD; MOS:SECTIONHEADINGS; and the fist mention of the subject's name should be in bold. It still lists magazines and countries in which the subject has been quoted, which is superfluous. -Lopifalko (talk) 05:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Lopifalko and @TSventon: Hi and thanks so much for your helping me with this so I can get it right and not get it deleted!! I linked numerous major magazines, newspapers, tv stations, and websites who have interviewed her or written about her to cover that, should I link more? (I have more but didn't want to link 40 or something if not necessary) How else might I prove her notability? I only used Medium articles because she was interviewed there talking about her academic background and where she grew up and I thought I needed source for that, though I guess it may be in the About the Author of her book so maybe I could cite that? I am using links from her website and such so I have access to that. I could have also fleshed the biography out more but I was afraid that copying/pasting from her site would flag plagiarism and halt this from being kept up on the website. Thanks for all guidance!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Munchkin1616 (talk • contribs) 05:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, a primary source such as an interview is OK for basic uncontentious biographical facts. being quoted by a publication is not considered notable and in my estimation has little value in being mentioned in an article—if the subject is notable you should be able to demonstrate that with independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject, not quotes by the subject, or interviews. Try not to use primary sources such as the subject's web site as much as possible. -Lopifalko (talk) 05:31, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Lopifalko OHHHHH Thank you for clarifying!! I used her website to show what services she offers and the Medium interviews for the autobiographical information. I thought that showing that she was interviewed and quoted by so many major media sources would show she was notable. Do you think this will get deleted as is or can I leave it and then just keep adding to it over time as more gets published about her book which would include reviews and things she would not be interviewed for or a part of? Thank you thank you for all of your guidance, this is my first time trying to write this and I don't want to get it wrong and have it just get deleted! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Munchkin1616 (talk • contribs) 05:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Munchkin1616. Yes, the word "notable" is a bit unfortunate in a way, because it doesn't mean quite the same as the ordinary understanding of the word. The idea is that everything in an article should be verifiable from published sources, and should be neutral about the subject. The "neutral" bit means that Wikipedia is basically not interested in what a subject says about themselves - which means that an interview, or an article based on a press release, is not suitable as the basis for a Wikipedia article. This means in turn that we require places where people who have no conenction with the subject have chosen to publish material about the subject - because otherwise there is literally nothing which can go into the article! --ColinFine (talk) 10:48, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to make hard redirects act like soft redirects as a preference option. I want not to be immediately transferred to the target page, instead, I want the redirect links to always have "&redirect=no" at the end whenever I click on any type of redirects. Is there a way to do that? Thanks in advance.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 05:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SharabSalam: Searching through Wikipedia:User_scripts/List finds User:BrandonXLF/NoRedirect. If you follow its installation instructions, that should do what you want. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:07, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

John of Reading, thank you so much!. I am so sorry, I forgot to say thank you before yesterday.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 07:12, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey can you please help me, how to edit or add reference link or dead link — Preceding unsigned comment added by Top2stock (talk • contribs) 06:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You mean, how to replace a dead link with a Wayback Machine scrape of the page when it was still alive? If so, better put that aside till you understand the basics, which are explained in Help:Referencing for beginners. -- Hoary (talk) 07:05, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think I've posted about this before: I keep spotting what is evidently the same user, who has now appeared under at least four different IPs, making the same types of disruptive edits to articles about reality shows: normally, making changes to either the colours of tables or the names of judges so that the page becomes inconsistent. Because they're not obvious vandalism, they tend to go unnoticed by WP:RCP, though the user also doesn't tend to respond to requests to discuss these sorts of changes before making them.

Each of the four IPs is currently blocked either for disruptive behaviour or block evasion, but it's getting a bit out of hand. I requested a few of the main target pages be protected, but it's clearly not feasible to block every page about every reality show. (In addition, one of my protection requests was initially declined because the edits by three of the relevant IPs were spread over a month, so I'm loath to make any more until I know what the right thing is to do.) Can someone advise if there's any route I've missed, or any noticeboard to post on?

(I've deliberately not provided diffs or the IPs because I don't want to create drama before I post on the correct noticeboard, but I'm happy to supply if requested.) YorkshireLad  ✿  ^(talk) 10:01, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

YorkshireLad, You might wish to ask for a rangeblock at WP:ANI, wherein a range of IP addresses can be blocked, which usually catches folks with shifting addresses. It doesn't always work, but its worth an ask. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 11:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CaptainEek, Thanks! Would that work if the IP addresses all start with different pairs of numbers? (I have little experience with "back-end" internet stuff... YorkshireLad  ✿  ^(talk) 12:05, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

YorkshireLad, Ah, probably not. That also might be evidence that they are different people, but only a CheckUser would be able to tell. Usually ranges will try to block ranges in just the last two number blocks, so for instance if the ip is 1.1.100.100, and recently also used 1.1.100.50 and 1.1.100.80 if you were lucky you might be able to block just a range of addresses in the las tblock between like 40 and 110. Thus you've only blocked 70 IP addresses. But if the first number changes? Even if you protected the range 1./././ to 2./././, you've blocked hundreds of thousands or more addresses, which means you're likely to get collateral damage. However, if there are just two distinct ranges, say a person is editing from their phone or their computer, then it is possible that you could get away with two separate range blocks. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 20:53, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CaptainEek, Sadly, they're four completely different ones.  :-( I'll wait to see if they come back when the blocks expire/under a different IP, and then maybe take it up at ANI if so. Thanks a lot for your help! YorkshireLad  ✿  ^(talk) 15:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Immalice — Preceding unsigned comment added by Immalice (talk • contribs) 10:43, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Immalice: Hello, please see the welcome message at your talk page. If you wish to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia please study the links given there and the tutorial; but whatever you decide, please do not continue to make disruptive edits. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 10:57, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to update all the links regarding the recent page move to COVID-19 pandemic. Would AutoWikiBrowser help me do that? Should I request the permission? Interstellarity (talk) 10:53, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Interstellarity: AutoWikiBrowser (AWB) does help to make repetitive edits. I'm not sure exactly what you want to do, but two things to consider:

1. One of the AWB rules of use is "Do not make insignificant or inconsequential edits. An edit that has no noticeable effect on the rendered page is generally considered an insignificant edit."
2. WP:NOTBROKEN states we shouldn't bypass a valid redirect and point the link directly at the target page.

Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 13:27, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@GoingBatty: Here is an example of an edit I would like to do with AWB. Interstellarity (talk) 14:04, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Interstellarity: Edits like that don't seem to fall under either of the cases I mentioned above. Thanks for the example! GoingBatty (talk) 14:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

hi, I wanna add my home town and my village details on Wikipedia and protect that context from thers editing please guide me how to add my village details? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ManhaKashmiri (talk • contribs) 11:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ManhaKashmiri: "[...]and protect that context from [o]thers editing[...]" Then you don't even need to start writing something. Please have a read of Wikipedia:Ownership of content and, as I assume you haven't already, the Wikimedia Terms of Use. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:53, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ManhaKashmiri Sorry, you can't prevent other editors from editing any article you create just because you don't want others to edit it. Articles belong to the community, not to those that create them. 331dot (talk) 11:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ManhaKashmiri: Although you cannot protect the article, we still do want an article, so I hope you will persist. But first, please read WP:NOT to get a feeling of how Wikipedia works. Then, find some reliable sources (WP:RS). Read a few of our articles about other villages to see how they are formatted, pick one you like as an example, and write your article following the guidance at WP:YFA. We usually caution first-time article writers to make sure that the article topic is notable (WP:N), but villages are presumed to be notable, you you are OK on that if you can find any reliable source that confirms that the village exists. -Arch dude (talk) 14:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm noticing that a lot of articles about towns have what seems to be an excessive list of shop chains. For example Stratford-upon-Avon lists Asda Living, B&Q, Argos, Pizza Hut, WHSmith, Subway, The Big Fish, Game, Jollyes Pet Shop, Boots, M&S Foodhall, Sports Direct, New Look, Outfit, Poundstretcher, Pets at Home, Halfords, Matalan, Next and Costa Coffee. In particular Costa Coffee seems to be linked from practically every town article. This hardly seems to be necessary but it is so widespread that it doesn't seem practical to open a discussion on every talk page. They look like spam to me. Is there some guideline?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:40, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shantavira, I would agree those are both unnecessary and unnecessarily promotional. Are you noticing that, for instance, all the Costa Coffee links are being added by the same user? Remove them and see what happens. If someone reverts, ping them to a new section on the talk page and discuss. —valereee (talk) 17:02, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Junk like that falls under WP:UNDUE and WP:NOTDIRECTORY. I advise purging them mercilessly whenever you find them. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What's the correct way to cite an article serialized over more than one journal issue, like first two Ben Duncan entries here - ? Retired electrician (talk) 16:55, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Retired electrician we usually cite sentences or at least paragraphs, information that is proported.. generally in a specific page (or at least over a couple pages). You will see bibliographies, but you should try to cite to a specifical page in this case. What is that cannot be sourced to just one of the journals? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is one journal. One article spread over two issues. The subject isn't that hot to warrant citing whole sentences or paragraphs, plain sfn is sufficient. Retired electrician (talk) 20:03, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have found that there are many prejudice sentences in the Article. I was under the understanding that this is a honest information site and not a political gaining entity writing. I am disappointed at this unfair practice. Very disappointed, and I'm not recommending this site for information anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nettywoods (talk • contribs) 17:33, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nettywoods: Welcome to wikipedia. If you have ideas on how to improve the article, please start a discussion on that article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 17:51, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nettywoods: When you post on Talk:Donald Trump (or any other article talk page) to suggest improvements, please be sure to be specific with the sentences that could be improved and provide independent reliable sources. Thanks for helping to improve Wikipedia! GoingBatty (talk) 18:43, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @Nettywoods: Wikipedia does not claim to be free of bias. Any bias in independent reliable sources will be reflected in Wikipedia. Wikipedia presents the sources to allow readers to judge them and their bias for themselves. As noted, if you have suggestions for improvement, please offer them. 331dot (talk) 18:48, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there!

Someone by the name of [Juliette Han] keeps reporting me although I am doing nothing wrong. I have tried to change the thumbnail image on the [Mindy Kaling] page because the [Mindy Kaling] image from the 2019 Montclair Film Festival is not an accurate representation of Mrs. Kaling. It misrepresents her in an unflattering manner and is not an up to date image. I have been trying to update it to a more accurate and encyclopedic image. I donated my image (I took it so it was my property) to Wiki to avoid any copyright issues, but yet this individual has reported me for copyright. I have tried to go through the correct levels of warning them of using an unencyclopedic image, but they instead said I was the vandaliser. I am simply trying to make the page more accurate and instead am being harassed. Please help! DayvonHole (talk) 19:21, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DayvonHole: I can see on User talk:DayvonHole that you have been involved in an edit war over this image. While you believe that the new image is better, other editors disagree. Instead of making the same change multiple times, the appropriate thing to do is discuss your ideas in a civil manner at the article talk page: Talk:Mindy Kaling. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 19:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DayvonHole: Also, if you work for "Mrs. Kaling", please read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. GoingBatty (talk) 19:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DayvonHole, you are attempting to use brute force and persistence in order that a photo you took should be the main photo for the article Mindy Kaling., ignoring escalating warnings. Your account is very close to being blocked. What you should have done was ask others at Talk:Mindy Kaling for their opinions of the new photo, then reach a consensus. In my opinion, it is unflattering and taken from a steep angle.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:40, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He did not take the photo. He uploaded a copyrighted photo claiming it to be his own work. I have nominated the image for speedy deletion on Commons. --MrClog (talk) 19:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He has also been leaving misleading user warning templates on our talk pages. Ed6767 (talk) 19:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ed6767 and MrClog I did take the photo!! I took it with my own iPhone!! I have no idea how to use wiki and I have been doing my best to abide by the rules. I did research and was informed that I should add a warning to your change because it used an unencyclopedic image Ed6767. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DayvonHole (talk • contribs) 20:19, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DayvonHole I have to agree with the editors above. I just did a reverse search on the image in question and found it on other websites, one that you can't just create an account and upload it. I am sorry to say this, but you just hurt your cause by lying. If you aren't lying and you did in fact take that image, you might need to disclose that, as the image is on other websites. Elijahandskip (talk) 20:25, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Elijahandskip Are you talking about the Montclair photo? I did not take that--I have tried to change it to a personal photo that I have taken that Juliette Han keeps saying is copyrighted. The photo I am trying to change it to is one that I took from The Late Late Show set. DayvonHole (talk) 20:32, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DayvonHole, I am wanting to clarify, is this the photo you want to add or what is it in relation to the conflict? a photo you took. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:03, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: The purpose of an image is to identify the subject. The image being submitted by DayvonHole doesn't do that as well as File:Mindy Kaling (46863597125) (cropped).jpg, which is the current version. The current version is clearer, taken at a direct angle, and is more suitable as a portrait. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to include Commons pages on my enwiki watchlist? CJK09 (talk) 19:57, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is none. Global watchlist is a long standing community desire that has not been realized yet. Ruslik_Zero 20:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DannyS712 wrote a script to do this. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:00, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Market research companies by country, which was correctly named Category:Marketing research companies by country, houses 16 SubCats named Marketing. The terms are not identical: Market research and Marketing research each have a wiki article.

I am seeking to restore the correct naming.

I tried WP:REFUND (since one of the two actions was a delete). There I was directed to WP:CFD. One of the two people who did the summertime rename REVERTED my request at CFD with one word: Misplaced.

I am coming to the help desk based on the first word of your desk's name. Pi314m (talk) 20:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know if we ever use hatnotes to disambiguate a subject from another subject who doesn't have an article? Here's the scenario:

• Aarushi Sharma is an Indian model and actor. She looks like this.
• There is another actor, Arushi Sharma. She looks like this and appeared in a film called Love Aaj Kal.

The second one, however, does not have an article, but twice recently,[1][2] people have mistakenly attributed the movie Love Aaj Kal to the first actor. It seems like a hatnote would help suppress the confusion, I'm just not sure if that's typically done. Thoughts? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: Judging from a number of biometric features (cheekbones, jawline, cranium, hairline, earlobe, etc.), I believe the two photos are of the same person. Although the the articles were published only 8 days apart, the photos might represent pre/post lip augmentation. 107.15.157.44 (talk) 22:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The one with the existing article tends to appear in Punjabi-language projects. Love Aaj Kal is a Hindi film. Note also this anon editor's comment. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:03, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyphoidbomb: In this case, I don't believe a hatnote is warranted; a discussion on the article's takpage is the best option. Since that page is not likely to get a response any time soon, I recommend WP:Reference desk/Entertainment for finding differentiation information. Although I've only compared the two photos, I think they are the same person -- she could simply be bilingual (or at least learned the script). 107.15.157.44 (talk) 19:42, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't actually answer my question, since I was asking about whether we ever use hatnotes to disambiguate when there is no second article. If you don't know the answer, I'll wait for someone who does. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, they are very obviously not the same person. [3][4]. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:14, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The lead of Wikipedia:Hatnote says: "Hatnotes provide links to the possibly sought article or to a disambiguation page." Wikipedia:Hatnote#Non-existent articles says: "Hatnotes should not contain red links to non-existent articles". Hatnotes can link to articles which include information about the subject. It's weak here but this is possible:

Not to be confused with the actor Arushi Sharma in Love Aaj Kal (2020 film).

Draft:Arushi Sharma exists but mainspace should not link to drafts. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: Thanks. I'm willing to give it a shot, considering it seems to be a recurring mistake, as you also recently noted and reverted at Love Aaj Kal (2020 film). Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I am assisting someone of notable standard in Poland. The polish wikipedia on them can be found here, https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B3zef_Blass. They were active and involved in another notable entity, in Poland, and that wikipedia page can be found here https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klub_Poszukiwaczy_Sprzeczno%C5%9Bci. However, the latter page has no mention of the individual involved who was the President of the organization for 14+ years (i.e. notable to be listed on the wikipedia article). Since the individual already has a wikipedia article RE: themselves, would it be allowed to add information regarding this and then use primary sources? I am having a bit of trouble understanding all of the ins and outs of required sources.

On the same note, are you able to request a wikipedia article be created/added to another language's wikipedia? I.e. can I create an english version of the polish artciles above? (this his my main question) 1106kathleen (talk) 21:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)1106kathleen[reply]

@1106kathleen: For questions about the Polish Wikipedia, please contact their help desk. Yes, you can create an English version of articles on the Polish Wikipedia - see Wikipedia:Translation - provided that the topics meet the English Wikipedia's standards for notability. GoingBatty (talk) 22:13, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1106kathleen, Polish-language Wikipedia doesn't obviously have a help desk that's closely equivalent to this one. However, Portal wikipedystów has a lot of links, among which one or two are likely to offer answers to your first question. -- Hoary (talk) 22:27, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1106kathleen, if you are assisting Józef Blass [pl], then you should also read the conflict of interest guidance and are strongly discouraged from editing affected articles directly. TSventon (talk) 22:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ron Burnett (1947) is an author, professor and the President Emeritus and Research Director for the new Centre for Transdisciplinary Studies at Emily Carr University of Art and Design. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rburnettatemilycarr (talk • contribs) 21:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Redacted)

I've removed the bulk of the entire pasted article, since there's no need cluttering up the help desk with it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:02, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rburnettatemilycarr: When I compare the article dump you added here against the current version, there is no difference. So it's unclear what missing content you are complaining about. Also, you have a clear conflict of interest and are strongly discouraged from editing that article at all. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:07, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rburnettatemilycarr: However, you can suggest edits for other editors to make at Talk:Ron Burnett and/or Talk:Emily Carr University of Art and Design, as long as you provide independent reliable sources. GoingBatty (talk) 23:09, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rburnettatemilycarr: ...and you disclose your conflict of interest, of course. GoingBatty (talk) 00:10, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]