Hello Ian, I am currently a University student working on making edits to the topic listed above and had a few questions. When viewing the text logs from the previous editors, it seems as if this page hasn't been updated in a long time. I was making edits to the table and was wondering if you thought it would be okay to list just the genus of the animals instead of individually listing each one off due to the large amount of them. Secondly, there is a portion under these tables that include the use of these toxins in recreational use. I was wondering if you thought this was a relevant and needed bit of information for the subject of poisonous amphibians. I believe that this shouldn't be apart of this particular topic, but I would like a second opinion. Thank you so much for the help! Joseph73780 (talk) 07:08, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Joseph73780. In the existing Poisonous amphibian article, the entire Dendrobatidae has one entry, the genus Mantella has a single entry, while other frogs and toads are single-species entries. If you can find a source supporting a whole genus of family, you might enter them ones. If you only find sources supporting individual species, I think you should use individual species entries. Do the best you can in terms of completeness - if you don't have time to add every species you come across, you should keep in mind that making the article better, even if it's not perfect, is still an improvement.

I'd leave a note on the talk page about recreational uses and see what people say about the possibility of removing that section. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:23, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A follow up question, I was told to make roughly 20-25 species additions to the page and was wondering if I need an individual citation for each species or if referencing towards another Wikipedia that actually discusses that specific species is enough. I ask this, because there are many different species written about on Wikipedia that contain sourcing, but I'm not sure if I need to add that to my bibliography for each one since I'm providing the hyperlink to the Wikipedia page. I apologize if this may sound confusing and hopefully I will hear back from you soon. Joseph73780 (talk) 13:27, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph73780 You should include a reference on the page (and link to the species' Wikipedia article). If you just link to another Wikipedia article, someone reading your article will have a much harder time finding the relevant source (and it might even get removed by a future edit on the other page). Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:52, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, can I copy the sourcing for each one or do I need to search out new sources for it. This is confusing since much of the information added is either based off the original edit where they haven’t left a direct citation or information from additional pages. In the end, it shouldn’t take me to long to make citation additions, it’s just tedious because the original didn’t have this information cited. Ex. The distribution of the species didn’t contain a citation. Joseph73780 (talk) 20:26, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph73780 You can copy the sourcing if it exists. If the original doesn't have a source, then you should definitely find one if you can. Think about it as doing a favor for the next person in your position :) Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:28, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the case that I can’t find an scientific article that supports the information, should I exclude the information from the charts? I apologize for so many questions. I thought, at first, that this information had citations, but it didn’t. Joseph73780 (talk) 20:42, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph73780 No need to apologise for the questions - that's what I'm here for, and happy to help.

If you can't find a source, I'd exclude it. If you can't find a peer reviewed source, but you find it in something in a reputable popular science source like National Geographic you could go ahead and use that. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:46, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should I just get rid of the charts that I was working on in my sandbox due to much of the found species coming from fellow wikipedia articles. I believe a good amount of them had citations, but I will need to double check. Joseph73780 (talk) 20:49, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph73780 If they're already in the main article, you could leave them (or remove them - it's up to you). I just wouldn't add additional unsourced species to the main article. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:53, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It’s apart of the original, but some of the stuff like the scientific name I found through the common name they provided. Does this need to be cited or does documentation need to be found. My main issue is the distribution has no citatinos for the original content, but I think with the sources linked to the names that I want to add could provide that information. Joseph73780 (talk) 21:01, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph73780 There's no firm rule of what you need to do here. If you think it's unlikely to be true, you should probably remove it. If you think it's likely to be true but you can't find a source, leave it. Anything that's somewhere in between is a judgement call. You'll be fine whatever you decide. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:11, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, I have made many additions with the page (except images). I plan on publishing it, but there are issues with the citations that wikipedia gave me and I was wondering why it has this issue on many of them. If there isn't an issue, the page is pretty much ready to be published and when I get the chance I can add the images. Example: It says cite journal and check date values, but wikipedia provided me with this citation after taking it from google scholar. Joseph73780 (talk) 22:15, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph73780 That's a problem with the Cite tool and the main Wikipedia software not working together perfectly.

Basically the Cite tool will create references that are Month, Year (like 2010-08) if that's what the source gives it. Wikipedia software, on the other hand, wants Day, Month, Year, or just Year and throws up that red error.

To fix it, click on the reference number in the article text while you're in Edit mode, then click on "edit" for the reference, and find the "Date" field. You can then change that from Year-Month to just year.

Or you can leave it. The nice thing about Wikipedia is that there's a really good chance someone (who is proficient at fixing citation errors) will fix it for you. I think it's kinda satisfying to make those red errors go away :) Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:06, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I wanted to ask about a reference that I have added to the “Animal track” Wiki page. I had written the following in APA format:

Petso, T., Jamisola, R. S., Jr., & Mpoeleng, D. (2022). Review on methods used for wildlife species and individual identification. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 68(1). doi:10.1007/s10344-021-01549-4

A comment was made stating that there is a problem with the date. Would you be able to explain what the issue is? Perhaps give an example of a properly formatted reference? Karlee15 (talk) 14:02, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Karlee15. The problem isn't on your end, it's with the way the Cite tool sometimes creates dated in citation versus how the underlying software of Wikipedia wants dates to be displayed.

The tool created a date that was of the form 2022-02. The software wants either just a years of year-month-date. I fixed it for you, but you can make these changes by clicking on the number of a citation (where it appears in the text, not in the reference section) when you're in edit mode. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:52, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ian! I am editing an article as part of a class at my medical school, and I noticed the article listed the entire, specific diagnostic criteria for a disease. After reading the medical style guide, I am still unsure whether including the specific diagnostic criteria in the article is recommended or if it is better to summarize. Thank you for your help!

Mhowiki (talk) 02:09, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mhowiki. My guess is that it would be better to summarise, but I think you should ask at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine and see what the community has to say. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:23, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ian!

I am editing the European eel article. I have all of my changes saved in my sandbox and I just moved them over to the main article. I noticed that the in-text-citation numbers are different sizes in some spots. In addition, some sources were added to the references section multiple times when that didn't happen on my sandbox page. Finally, the Commercial Fisheries heading is formatted poorly and wedged next to a couple pictures so that it's easily missed in read mode but looks fine beneath the pictures on edit mode. A little bit of help with resolving these issues would be much appreciated. Thank you and have a wonderful day!

[1] -my European eel article sandbox European eel - Wikipedia article

Chipmonkey9 (talk) 21:45, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ian. One of the students moved Gemmatimonas groenlandica sp. nov to mainspace, and as you can see, it's far from ready to be there. I've not got the page mover right, or I'd send it back. Would you please move it and let Johenn11 know it needs more work? Or if there's another procedure I should use /  person I should contact, please let me know. Thanks, BlackcurrantTea (talk) 03:49, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @BlackcurrantTea! I've moved it back to their sandbox and will let them know. Letting me know works (and it isn't usually as slow at this weekend, when I was off for a few days). Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:29, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ian. One of the students (User:Eenock9) of Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/Nazareth University/Equitable Big Data (Fall) is embedding external links into the body of Critical data studies. I've removed them once, they re-added them, and I removed them again. I can't tell if Eenock9 is trying to add the links as embedded citations or as some type of quasi-H:WIKILINK. Regardless, neither of those two things are acceptable any more. So, if they're trying to add citations, then perhaps they should review whatever materials/modules Wiki-ED provides for citations and re-add them as inline citations. If they're trying to create "Wikilinks", then perhaps they should review the guidance provided for linking because Wikilinks can't be created that way.

Eenock9 also tried to add a bunch of citations with this edit, but they added one of them to a section heading and the others were just floating around in the "References" section so that they were pushed to the bottom of the page. I combined the floaters into a WP:GENREF subsection and removed the one from the heading. These too probably can be re-added as inline citations if they meet WP:RS. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:51, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

This week I am supposed to be reviewing a class members edits, and I cannot figure out how to navigate to the correct Sandbox to find the other student's work. I think I am supposed to be here User:Cvaquera59/Online gambling but I cannot find any work there. I am also going to check with my class instructor. I don't want to continue to keep the classmate from having their work reviewed. Any help or training you can point me to is greatly appreciated. Thank you.

T57fd (talk) 14:09, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Hi, T57fd. If I understand the dashboard correctly (I'm not a WikiEd person, but a regular Wikipedia editor), Cvaquera59 doesn't have a draft ready. On Cvaquera59's page there, the Sandbox Draft link should be blue, meaning that there's something there, like the one on your own page, instead of a red link (nothing there). I don't think there's anything for you to review yet. Do check with your instructor; perhaps your classmate's been in touch with them. Happy editing, BlackcurrantTea (talk) 15:21, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your quick reply. I was really concerned I was holding someone else up. This was really helpful. Have a wonderful day! T57fd (talk) 14:28, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Dcole123/Harry Tschopik Jr. Dcole123 (talk) 17:48, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dcole123 looks like you've figured it out. Is there anything else I can help you with? Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:23, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

Hi Ian,

I have been editing the Adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and one of the main things I have been doing is adding/updating references of secondary literature published within the past 5 years. As I've been adding references, I've also been updating the information within the article to match what the updated research states. As a result, I have ended up deleting portions of the existing article (along with the citations) to add my updated information. I noticed the error codes (included in screenshot below) at the bottom of the references section of the article, and I'm not sure how to remove/fix this. Any help you can provide with this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you in advance for your help, Medstud15 (talk) 18:06, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Medstud15. The problem with those references is that they're in a template at the bottom of the page. (You can see them if you switch to source mode and scroll down to the references section.) I commented them out (using <!-- and --> tags). I'm happy to fix any more errors that pop up this way; please let me know if you need me to.

(This is why I'm not a fan of using references in a template at the bottom of the article - they're rather difficult for new editors to manage, but throw up their big ugly errors if you do things wrong.) Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:08, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A good solution in cases like this is move the citations (uncommented) to the "Further reading" (as citations, without the <ref> tags). This will avoid generating the errors, while still retaining the utility of having full citations for good sources, without hiding them. I've made this change in this edit. Mathglot (talk) 11:30, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making this edit for me. Is there a tutorial or can you explain how you move those references? In case I need to do so again as I continue to make my edits. Medstud15 (talk) 14:30, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much Mathglot. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:24, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ian,

I wanted to follow up since it has been a week since I posted my questions here and I haven't heard from you. My article is due in two days now for class so if we could resolve the couple issues I'm having soon that would be wonderful. Thank you and have a great day.

Chipmonkey9 (talk) 17:05, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chipmonkey9 Sorry I missed your message. That issue with the reference sizes is strange, but I fixed that in addition to the heading issue. I'm not sure about the duplicate references, but I'll take a look at that later. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:21, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning,

I really appreciate the help you have given me so far. I wanted to check in and see where you are at with the references issue since my article is due tomorrow. Let me know if there is anything I can do to help! Thanks and have a wonderful day.

Chipmonkey9 (talk) 18:35, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chipmonkey9 I don't think you should worry about the duplicate reference issues. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:31, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you for all of your help.

Chipmonkey9 (talk) 20:34, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ian,

I am editing, Central Time Zone, and I would like to change the article to "Central Time Zone (UTC-6)." Central Time Zone leaves an amount of ambiguity to the article as a few nations have a central time zone. The addition of UTC-6 specifies the actual zone being searched. Are there stipulations in regard to changing the title of an article? Bubbalicious82 (talk) 19:14, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Bubbalicious82. The naming convention for Wikipedia articles favours shorter, more concise article titles, so I suspect the preference would be to leave the article where it is.

You can raise the idea on the article's talk page and see what other editors think. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:02, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for such a prompt response! For clarity moving ahead, a shorter title is preferred, and any ambiguity is then worked out quickly in the heading? Bubbalicious82 (talk) 20:36, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Bubbalicious82, No; a shorter title is preferred (WP:CONCISION), but not at the expense of WP:PRECISION. There may be a U.S. bias in operation here, which could be raised at the article talk page if you propose a move. The only other "central" time I'm aware of is CET, but they never drop the 'E'/'European', and if no other time zone is commonly referred to as "central time", then the current title is probably okay. See WP:COMMONNAME and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. If you start a move discussion at the Talk page, please read and follow WP:RM#CM. Mathglot (talk) 22:26, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

I need help with renaming my sandbox. I'm currently drafting an article in my sandbox for Ron J. MacLaren, but I accidently titled it "Ron J. Maclaren" without capitalizing the L in his last name. How do I fix this?

Thank you!

--HondainaPot (talk) 22:12, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) @HondainaPot:, your user subpage now has the capitalized L at User:HondainaPot/Ron J. MacLaren. Mathglot (talk) 23:32, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! HondainaPot (talk) 23:38, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am working on the Femicide in Latin America article for a class right now, and have completely moved my contribution onto the existing article. If you could take a look at it and give me feedback I would appreciate it! Stud3nt1947 (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

I need help with... publishing my work

--Ohunayo (talk) 07:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohunayo It looks like you've managed to move your work to mainspace successfully. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

I need help with being able to edit a template, to create my bibliography. --BryceKubasta (talk) 00:59, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) @BryceKubasta: usually, when we talk about "editing a template", we mean changing the code of the template itself, and I'm pretty sure you didn't mean that. Did you mean, you want to use one of the citation templates, like {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}}, or {{cite web}} to create citations for your bibliography? If so, please see the documentation at those links. If after reading them, you have a specific question, please come back and ask below, as it will be easier for Ian to respond if he knows what kind of difficulty you are encountering. Thanks, (edit conflict) Mathglot (talk) 08:00, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BryceKubasta It looks like you've clicked on the grey box without your bibliography sandbox. Those spaces aren't meant to be edited. You need to click somewhere else on the page to be able to edit. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:45, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: User:EricY.22/sandbox

Hello Ian,

Hope all is well. I would like to publish my sandbox named "User:EricY.22/sandbox" but unfortunately, Wikipedia is not letting me rename the article. Could you please help me in renaming the article to "The Gee Family in Houston."

Best,

Eric — Preceding unsigned comment added by EricY.22 (talk • contribs) 07:51, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) EricY.22, Ian will give you more information, but your article is not ready for publication yet, as there are several issues:

• It is almost entirely unsourced, except for a couple of footnotes near the top.
• It relies on a single source, Chao & Chan (2019); as a general rule, you should find at least three, reliable, independent sources before considering publication.
• The part about "Ling Nam College" is on page 15 of the pdf, but your footnote doesn't give the page number, so I wasn't able to find it, the first time I looked. Please add the |page= parameter to your footnotes (or use {{rp}} after a <ref>.)
• Wikipedia has a concept called WP:Notability, which you must have learned about in your training modules, and it's not clear to me that C.Y. Chu (C.Y. Gee) is notable, or at least, you haven't demonstrated it yet. If he is not, no amount of fixing the article will suffice to get it published, so you should focus on this last point first.

I'm sure Ian will have more to say, but that should give you something to think about. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 08:15, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mathglot! And thanks for adding sources EricY.22

There's a short introduction of what to do next in this video. In the interest of brevity, I think Gee family would be sufficient for an article title. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:31, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, @EricY.22, you're still one edit short of the threshold that will allow you to move a page on Wikipedia - you currently have 9 edits, and you need 10. Once you've made your 10th edit you'll be able to move your draft to mainspace. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:33, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The page in question was moved from their sandbox to main space by EricY on 30 Nov. (diff), and moved back to their sandbox on Dec. 1 without leaving a redirect by Mathglot (diff) for referencing problems. Mathglot (talk) 01:29, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ian,

Tonight I came across 5 student projects moved to main space and none of them are main space ready. They still had the user sandbox tags on them! There has been no effort to adapt a student paper to a Wikipedia main space article.

Please tell instructors not to suggest that students move their articles from User space to main space without running them through AFC. I moved these pages to Draft space but I've found students not to get the hint and if they are moved back, they will be deleted. This happens towards the end of every school term. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:47, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]