Search Frequently Asked Questions |
Search the help desk archives and other help pages |
Contents
- 1 April 5
- 1.1 How do I move an article to a redirect page that points to it?
- 1.2 Chico Scimone
- 1.3 Regarding north Carolinas men's basketball page
- 1.4 Section started by 27.33.147.245
- 1.5 rename request
- 1.6 security numbers
- 1.7 MLK anniversary unmarked
- 1.8 Can we CSD a user page
- 1.9 Wikiscan
- 1.10 moving my questions
- 1.11 How Do I add A Graphic To A Portal?
- 1.12 Question
- 1.13 Is this reuse allowed?
- 1.14 Table problem
- 1.15 ISLISP site
- 2 April 6
- 2.1 Referencing errors on FreeBSD
- 2.2 Help:Cite errors/Cite error references no text
- 2.3 Editing a template
- 2.4 User rights log
- 2.5 A sock puppet has got to my page
- 2.6 what options, if any, do I have here??
- 2.7 Tiny font in Chrome edit box
- 2.8 Protecting Sierra Academy of Aeronautics permanently
- 2.9 Read
- 2.10 Templates
- 2.11 Blackhillsguy
- 2.12 How to write a music on wikipedia
- 2.13 How to set a music password
- 2.14 how to ...
- 2.15 How do I request a draft review?
- 2.16 African American vs. Black
- 3 April 7
- 3.1 Help needed with Authority control
- 3.2 Why am I blocked for editing?
- 3.3 wiki page
- 3.4 Henley & Partners Visa Restrictions Index
- 3.5 Visual Editor Talk Pages
- 3.6 amending page name
- 3.7 EHelp with 'orphan' pages
- 3.8 Text in patents that has expired
- 3.9 Charles Pierrepont, 1st Earl Manvers
- 3.10 Problems trying to save
- 3.11 How to Complain a user ?
- 3.12 extended confirmed user
- 3.13 Wikipedia Policy
- 3.14 Train Route
- 4 April 8
- 4.1 What is wrong with the EB1911 template?
- 4.2 rename request
- 4.3 Use of Wikipedia brand to sell a product
- 4.4 floyd salas
- 4.5 Help! I can't log in.
- 4.6 Purpose of Wikipedia
- 4.7 Uploading my own image work to an Wikipedia article
- 4.8 Problems adding a date to an image
- 4.9 Find Sources
- 4.10 Image in the infobox is misleading but referred to automatically
- 4.11 Saved Pages on mobile aren't found on desktop site
- 4.12 David Jolly
- 4.13 How to "center" an Infobox
- 4.14 The ethics of creating and disambiguating an entry
- 4.15 How do I report a Wikipedia-admin?
- 4.16 Help:Cite errors/Cite error included ref
- 4.17 Charles Pierrepont, 1st Earl Manvers
- 4.18 I have found a page that requires attention
April 5
How do I move an article to a redirect page that points to it?
The article Honda Sabre was created in 2015 and is only a redirect to Honda Sabre V4, an article that was created in 2006. None of the motorcycles were called a 'Honda Sabre V4' by anyone when the bikes came out and the Wikipedia article should be named as the bike was actually named.
How can I move the Honda Sabre V4 article to the Honda Sabre article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by I Use Dial (talk • contribs)
- @I Use Dial: Only an administrator can move an article over a redirect. I have just done this for you. Please edit the article lead so that it makes sense in the context of the title. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:30, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- @Amatulic: Thank you. Done. I Use Dial (talk) 00:55, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- A small correction to the reply from @Amatulic:: If the new title is just a redirect to the old title, with just one line in the page history, the creation of the redirect, then a non-administrator can rename the page, see WP:move over redirect. --David Biddulph (talk) 01:10, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- Cool. I learn something new every day. ~Amatulić (talk) 06:44, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- @David Biddulph:I don't know if this is relevant to that feature, but both pages in this case have quite a few links, which also seems to have some impact on moving pages.I Use Dial (talk) 15:28, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- A small correction to the reply from @Amatulic:: If the new title is just a redirect to the old title, with just one line in the page history, the creation of the redirect, then a non-administrator can rename the page, see WP:move over redirect. --David Biddulph (talk) 01:10, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Chico Scimone
After my grandfather Chico Scimone died in 2005 I wrote an English-language biography for my cousin Micaela Scimone. It was an excellent contribution (I am an author and journalist)and I put a grate deal of time into it for free. I went to look for the biography yesterday and it was no where on Google to be found. So I went to my Inbox and Sent box and the biography had been completely deleted from my account as well as any reference to it! I could only find a very miserable contribution in Italian. This happened once before and my cousin reopened the site. I have the feeling that jealous people are behind this. Or greed and commercial interests? Could you please look into this for me? It is not fair. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.163.160.244 (talk) 01:06, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- There has never been an English Wikipedia article with the title Chico Scimone, nor a draft called Draft:Chico Scimone. (If there had been, these red links would have shown the deletion logs). Did you create it with a different title? You talk about "Inbox and Sent box", but Wikipedia does not have such items. You say it had been "completely deleted from (your) account", but you sent this message from an IP address (which had never previously been used on English Wikipedia), not from a Wikipedia account; if you have a Wikipedia account and tell us its name we can check what was created by that account. Or are you talking about a biography published somewhere other than English Wikipedia (in which case this help desk isn't the place to ask)? --David Biddulph (talk) 01:31, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- Wikipedia articles do not get deleted because "jealous people" or "greed or commercial interests" are active. They get deleted because the articles do not meet Wikipedia's requirements, usually because they do not demonstrate that the subject is notable in Wikipedia's special sense, or because they are not written in a sufficiently neutral tone. Writing for Wikipedia is not the same as writing for other organs, and if you wrote about your grandfather you would have had the additional challenge of overcoming you conflict of interest, which might make it difficult for you to write sufficiently neutrally. --ColinFine (talk) 10:52, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- But as David says, we can find no sign such an article has ever existed here. I searched in many different ways and found nothing. The poster used terminology which doesn't sound like Wikipedia. Many posters confuse us with unrelated websites and this was apparently something the poster wrote 11 years ago. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:37, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- Wikipedia articles do not get deleted because "jealous people" or "greed or commercial interests" are active. They get deleted because the articles do not meet Wikipedia's requirements, usually because they do not demonstrate that the subject is notable in Wikipedia's special sense, or because they are not written in a sufficiently neutral tone. Writing for Wikipedia is not the same as writing for other organs, and if you wrote about your grandfather you would have had the additional challenge of overcoming you conflict of interest, which might make it difficult for you to write sufficiently neutrally. --ColinFine (talk) 10:52, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Regarding north Carolinas men's basketball page
Some ignorant incompetent immature people changed north Carolinas men's basketball team to the North Carolina crying Jordan's with a head coach named crying Jordan, I need this changed immediately and I expect that this is done thoroughly accurately and promptly because false information is not good for society. I expect if you guys have the capability of finding who did this I expect they are banned from editing Wikipedia pages. If this is not changed promptly I will never use your services again.
-do not fail me.
- @172.56.35.32: Okay mate, do you want some advice? How about you calm down? The vandalism was there for a total of five minutes before it was removed, and was even gone before you posted this. How about you get off your high horse and stop talking down to people? You could even change it yourself if you could be bothered to learn wiki markup. So please don't resort to speaking quite angrily to unpaid volunteers who are helping you. Jjamesryan (talk | contribs) 04:44, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, we have too many "ignorant incompetent immature people" whom we call "vandals" on Wikipedia. If you find any other vandalism such as this, look at the history of the article, and click "undo" to revert the vandalism. We are all volunteers here, so you can help to keep Wikipedia accurate when you spot these silly edits. As Jjamesryan writes above, vandalism is usually reverted within minutes, but the more people who watch out for it, the quicker it gets reverted. Dbfirs 12:17, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Dbfirs: I like the good cop/bad cop rapport we've got going on :-) Jjamesryan (talk | contribs) 14:50, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I did wonder whether the vandal (from Michigan State University) was a friend of the complainer (from Joliet, Illinois) who was just trying to wind him up, but I couldn't find any evidence, so I decided to assume good faith, despite the tone of the complaint. Dbfirs 15:40, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Dbfirs: I like the good cop/bad cop rapport we've got going on :-) Jjamesryan (talk | contribs) 14:50, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Section started by 27.33.147.245
Sacred Heart Cathedral is not the second tallest in Australia St Paul’s Melbourne at 96 metres is 2nd, Sacred Heart Bendigo is 86.64 metres in height therefore ranks 3rd. Cheers Will Sinclair
- If you have an improvement to suggest to one of our five million articles, please make the suggestion on the talk page of that article, preferably with a reference to a published souce for the information you want to add. We haven't an article called "Sacred Heart Cathedral", so I have no idea what article yo are talking about. --ColinFine (talk) 10:55, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
rename request
Please rename Talk:MassResistance/Archive 5 to Talk:MassResistance/Archive 2 and rename Talk:MassResistance/Archive 6 to Talk:MassResistance/Archive 3 and then correct the counter in the call to Miszabot (from 6 to 3) in Talk:MassResistance. Thank you.--76.14.40.2 (talk) 06:10, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
security numbers
how many social security numers begin with 555 - xx - xxxx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.194.53.20 (talk)
- Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:00, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- None in the UK, but I assume you mean in America. See Social_Security_number#Structure for details. If 450 million numbers have been issued, then, if all were randomised, about 450,000 might begin with 555, but my estimate will be distorted by regional numbering in the past, and the true figure will almost certainly be more than my estimate. (Apologies to PrimeHunter and other readers for my answer in the wrong place.) Dbfirs
MLK anniversary unmarked
Yesterday was the anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. one of the most significant events in contemporary history was not even mentioned on the main page in the anniversary date section of events in history. For shame. For Shame.
David P. Agee — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.42.166.109 (talk)
- "On this day" items often change between years to give variation. The page history of Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/April 4 shows it was mentioned in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2014. That is more than normal. Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/January 18 shows Martin Luther King, Jr. Day was mentioned this year. Also note we are an international encyclopedia and he was mainly a domestic figure. I'm not sure his assassination is one of the most significant events in contemporary World history. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:54, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Can we CSD a user page
Can editors CSD a user page for being promotional? This user User:Harshal Narendra Suryawanshi has a page dedicated to promote a mobile phone Gbawden (talk) 13:16, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, Gbawden. Use WP:MFD. --ColinFine (talk) 13:35, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- On the one hand, a user page can be MFD'd for being promotional, but, to answer the question, if the user page is blatantly promotional, it can be nominated for CSD with a tag of G11 (unambiguous advertising). Since we do get a fair number of user pages or user pages that are blatantly advertising, I would use CSD if there is no question. If the CSD is challenged, other than by the author, MFD is appropriate. In user space, I personally wouldn't worry too much unless the advertisement hits one of my hot buttons, such as the use of the first person plural pronoun "we", but other reviewers and experienced editors have different standards. In any case, both CSD and MFD are available for promotional user page drafts. Mildly promotional drafts in user space should be declined by reviewers if submitted and ignored otherwise. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:26, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- I looked it over. In my opinion, the MFD, which runs for seven days, was too mild. I have tagged it for CSD. If an admin agrees with CSD, that will make the MFD moot. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:41, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- On the one hand, a user page can be MFD'd for being promotional, but, to answer the question, if the user page is blatantly promotional, it can be nominated for CSD with a tag of G11 (unambiguous advertising). Since we do get a fair number of user pages or user pages that are blatantly advertising, I would use CSD if there is no question. If the CSD is challenged, other than by the author, MFD is appropriate. In user space, I personally wouldn't worry too much unless the advertisement hits one of my hot buttons, such as the use of the first person plural pronoun "we", but other reviewers and experienced editors have different standards. In any case, both CSD and MFD are available for promotional user page drafts. Mildly promotional drafts in user space should be declined by reviewers if submitted and ignored otherwise. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:26, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Wikiscan
Hello,
Please can s.o give me the adress where the Wikiscans can be seen? That is the page where all users' contributions are listed, sizes of contributions, number of pages created, duration of presence on Wikipedia, history etc. Thanks in advance for the help. LouisAlain (talk) 13:31, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- @LouisAlain: I think you're talking about X!'s tools. These are your statistics on X!'s tools, and simply change the username in the URL to see others'. Jjamesryan (talk | contribs) 14:46, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks Jjamesryan; Ouch! these stats are really impressive and the layout completely different from what I used to see on the French Wiki. I'll have to take some time to make the best of them. LouisAlain (talk) 15:07, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
moving my questions
user "David Biddulph" has moved my most recent two questions and merged them with an old question that was already answered....these two are now going unanswered as they're hidden away....could he NOT do that, please???? I want this question at least answered here and not moved, please....68.48.241.158 (talk) 14:37, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- and I'd like my most recent question moved back...68.48.241.158 (talk) 14:43, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
- It looks very much like as if they are all a development of the same issue. David is correct to move them them into one section, as otherwise anybody that might wish to offer advice is seeing the issue piecemeal and may thus miss something important. That's apart from creating an untidy disjointed page. It might be best if you let the experienced editors who regularly try to offer assistance at this page (such as David) format the page in the most workable or efficient manner. Eagleash (talk) 14:52, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- they're distinct questions...moving them is unhelpful as it's reduced the chance of them being answered (which they haven't been)...people more likely to notice a new topic or notice the table of contents...68.48.241.158 (talk) 15:09, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- as in scroll down to see new topics...or glance at bottom of table of contents...68.48.241.158 (talk) 15:12, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- they're distinct questions...moving them is unhelpful as it's reduced the chance of them being answered (which they haven't been)...people more likely to notice a new topic or notice the table of contents...68.48.241.158 (talk) 15:09, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- It looks very much like as if they are all a development of the same issue. David is correct to move them them into one section, as otherwise anybody that might wish to offer advice is seeing the issue piecemeal and may thus miss something important. That's apart from creating an untidy disjointed page. It might be best if you let the experienced editors who regularly try to offer assistance at this page (such as David) format the page in the most workable or efficient manner. Eagleash (talk) 14:52, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- To put it more bluntly, as you don't seem to have understood the message, coming here and demanding this page is run to suit you is not the best way (by far) to obtain assistance. If you are behaving similarly in content disputes, it is not really surprising that you find yourself in difficulty. Eagleash (talk) 15:25, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- I'm asking it be run normally (new question/new section) and that my questions not be hidden away so that they go unanswered...coming here and demanding the power to arbitrarily move things around on one's whims like they own the place is the problem, thank you very much...68.48.241.158 (talk) 15:34, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- who says I'm having difficulty? I'm pursuing the proper process for content disputes...content disputes is huge part of how Wikipedia operates and creates content....you seem to be having difficulty behaving properly in the help desk, however...68.48.241.158 (talk) 15:39, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- I'm asking it be run normally (new question/new section) and that my questions not be hidden away so that they go unanswered...coming here and demanding the power to arbitrarily move things around on one's whims like they own the place is the problem, thank you very much...68.48.241.158 (talk) 15:34, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- To put it more bluntly, as you don't seem to have understood the message, coming here and demanding this page is run to suit you is not the best way (by far) to obtain assistance. If you are behaving similarly in content disputes, it is not really surprising that you find yourself in difficulty. Eagleash (talk) 15:25, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
Just to remind you that everyone who helps out here is a volunteer and is under no obligation to answer your questions. If you do not like the way the page is run (and has been for some considerable time) then you are welcome to ask at another help-desk. Your demands are not helpful in any way. I'm sure someone will be along to address your concerns...in due course. Eagleash (talk) 16:30, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- This Help Desk is for asking questions about Wikipedia. I don't see any questions, just complaints about your posts at Talk:Godel's incompleteness theorems. Your complaints appear to be mostly that you want to filibuster that page with endless complaints and with biased incomplete RFCs. Semi-protecting a talk page (or a project page) is an extreme measure, seldom done, but permitted, and occasionally necessary. If your rants continue, I will request semi-protection of the Incompleteness Theorem first. It is primarily for registered editors trying to improve the article. I am aware that semi-protecting this page is extreme, because unregistered editors often have valid questions. Therefore be aware that you are risking interfering with their editing privilege by your abuse of the editing privilege here. I will also note that some of your comments are close to earning you another block. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:37, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- please move this to my talk page if it should not be here but my content dispute is genuine and in good faith...I've made dozens upon dozens of beneficial edits to that article if you look at the history....and why are you stating the talk page is primarily for "registered editors"...??? my questions here are genuine and in good faith too...first question was answered well...second question was looking for input as to what route is best for a particular kind of content dispute (as there are several and the pages on these are long and complicated)...and my third question related to another's action that seemed perhaps out of line (ie shutting down even my request for comment...people don't have to comment, of course)...68.48.241.158 (talk) 16:59, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- I understand that the original poster thinks that they have made dozens of beneficial edits. That is their opinion. I disagree. However, I think we can agree to take this to the talk page, with agreement that bringing this back to this Help Desk is strictly unwelcome. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:17, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- please move this to my talk page if it should not be here but my content dispute is genuine and in good faith...I've made dozens upon dozens of beneficial edits to that article if you look at the history....and why are you stating the talk page is primarily for "registered editors"...??? my questions here are genuine and in good faith too...first question was answered well...second question was looking for input as to what route is best for a particular kind of content dispute (as there are several and the pages on these are long and complicated)...and my third question related to another's action that seemed perhaps out of line (ie shutting down even my request for comment...people don't have to comment, of course)...68.48.241.158 (talk) 16:59, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
How Do I add A Graphic To A Portal?
Hello. I have just created the Amiga Portal and am looking to create an icon such that when the portal is listed on a page, it has a nice image instead of the default colorless puzzle icon. Does anyone know how to do this? Thanks in advance. H.dryad (talk) 15:57, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- AFAIK, looking at Template:Portal it seems that the correct way to do it is to get the image added at Module:Portal/images which requires you to . — crh 23 (Talk) 17:53, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Question
how to use wekipedia in english — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.28.217.150 (talk • contribs)
- You are using Wikipedia in English. I'm afraid you'll have to be more specific about what it is you want help in doing. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 09:37, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Is this reuse allowed?
I found this page via Google. The image there is a screenshot of Star Control 2 that I have myself grabbed and uploaded to the English Wikipedia as an illustration. The GameSpot site reuses it without attribution. It's obvious it's taken from Wikipedia, it even shows the captain's name as "Wikipedia" which I expressly put there. It's a local copy, not linked directly from Wikipedia. Granted, neither I or Wikipedia own the copyright to the game's artwork. Is this reuse allowed or is it not? JIP | Talk 17:10, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- @JIP: The answer is probably not, but as the image in question, [[File:StarControlII Screenshot.png]] is listed as fair use, the copyright doesn't belong to Wikipedia. Therefore, they're probably breaking someone else's copyright.
- Most Wikipedia images are released with free licences which require attribution, so in that case other websites should always acknowledge Wikipedia as the source. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:19, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- So, what should be done? Normally I'd contact them requiring to give attribution but the problem is I don't own the copyright, it's a direct screenshot of a commercial game. Can I still ask them for attribution? I noticed plenty of other sites also display screenshots of the game but this was the first case I saw one of my own screenshots uploaded to Wikipedia on another site. JIP | Talk 19:44, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Table problem
List of leaders of North Korea includes this table:
Picture | Name | Offices held | Period | Ideology | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kim Il-sung 김일성 (1912–1994) |
|||||
Supreme Commander of the KPA | 8 February 1948 – 24 December 1991 | 9 September 1948 ↓ 8 July 1994 ( 45 years, 302 days) |
Juche (Ten Principles) |
||
Premier of the Cabinet of the DPRK | 9 September 1948 – 28 December 1972 | ||||
Chairman of the Central Committee of the WPK | 30 June 1949 – 11 October 1966 | ||||
Chairman of the Central Military Commission of the WPK | 1950 – 8 July 1994 | ||||
General Secretary of the Central Committee of the WPK | 11 October 1966 – 8 July 1994 | ||||
President of the DPRK | 28 December 1972 – 8 July 1994 | ||||
Chairman of the National Defence Commission of the DPRK | 28 December 1972 – 9 April 1993 | ||||
Eternal President of the DPRK | 5 September 1998 – Incumbent | ||||
Kim Jong-il 김정일 (1942–2011) |
|||||
Supreme Commander of the KPA | 24 December 1991 – 17 December 2011 | 8 July 1994 ↓ 17 December 2011 ( 17 years, 162 days) |
Juche Songun (Ten Principles) |
||
Chairman of the National Defence Commission of the DPRK | 9 April 1993 – 17 December 2011 | ||||
General Secretary of the WPK | 8 October 1997 – 17 December 2011 | ||||
Chairman of the Central Military Commission of the WPK | |||||
Eternal General Secretary of the WPK | 11 April 2012 – Incumbent | ||||
Eternal Chairman of the National Defence Commission of the DPRK | 13 April 2012 – Incumbent | ||||
Kim Jong-un 김정은 (1983–) |
|||||
Supreme Commander of the KPA | 30 December 2011 – Incumbent | 17 December 2011 ↓ Incumbent ( 4 years, 114 days) |
Juche Songun (Ten Principles) |
||
First Secretary of the WPK | 11 April 2012 – Incumbent | ||||
Chairman of the Central Military Commission of the WPK | |||||
First Chairman of the National Defence Commission of the DPRK | 13 April 2012 – Incumbent |
There's a superfluous blank row at the top of Kim Jong-un's part of the table. But I can't figure out how to edit the table to get rid of it. Could someone help me, or do this for me? JIP | Talk 18:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
I took a screenshot of the problem. I would assume I'm allowed to upload this as all the content was on Wikipedia to begin with. I mistakenly uploaded it to Commons when I was supposed to upload it to Wikipedia directly, but I guess this is OK. JIP | Talk 19:35, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- Comment - on my desktop the blank row goes away if I horizontally resize the browser window narrower and reappears if I enlarge the window width. Mb66w (talk) 19:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- It appears to do that for me too. But I noticed that when I gradually shrunk my browser window horizontally, the blank line got narrower and narrower. So I figure it didn't disappear, but instead shrunk to less than one pixel, making it invisible. JIP | Talk 19:53, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- Kim Jong-un has
rowspan="5"
and there is a row with no content. Browsers will usually make such a row invisible by rendering it with height 0 but some of you apparently see an empty cell in some circumstances. The solution is simply to remove the empty row. I have done this in the article.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 21:20, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- Kim Jong-un has
- It appears to do that for me too. But I noticed that when I gradually shrunk my browser window horizontally, the blank line got narrower and narrower. So I figure it didn't disappear, but instead shrunk to less than one pixel, making it invisible. JIP | Talk 19:53, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- Comment - on my desktop the blank row goes away if I horizontally resize the browser window narrower and reappears if I enlarge the window width. Mb66w (talk) 19:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
ISLISP site
There is a reference to PRIME-LISP.net on the ISLISP article. That site does not contain any information related to PRIME-LISP. PRIME-LISP (as a version of ISLISP) and its implementation has been created by me. PRIME-LISP.net was its original site. I have changed it now to http://www.mikhailsemenov.co.uk/im.html. It you are not happy with it delete the whole reference. The implementation is not commercial. The problem is that other sites copy prime-lisp.net link, which contains rubbish. Look at it yourself.
April 6
Referencing errors on FreeBSD
Reference help requested. Hi, I recently updated the article on FreeBSD to reflect the newly added support for 64-bit Linux binaries in FreeBSD 10.3 and got a Cite error: A list-defined reference named "linux-64-bit-freebsd10" is not used in the content (see the help page). I'm not sure what I should do to fix this - the previous reference doesn't seem to be relevant anymore because it was just a road map of possible future features, but some of the help pages on references say I should leave the reference there (but then that creates the problem of the cite error). Thanks, Transfat0g (talk) 01:03, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- First off, I fixed your error in the placement of your reference. You did not close the reference (in other words, you did not add the closing
</ref>
), and the reference was not in the reference template (it was outside the }} closing brackets that are used to transclude templates). Now, in dealing with the error that the reference is not used in the content, this is because you removed the<ref name="linux-64-bit-freebsd10" />
from the content, without removing<ref name="linux-64-bit-freebsd10"> (reference) </ref>
from the location in the ref template (where it is defined). I have fixed both of these things. -- The Voidwalker Discuss 01:19, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Help:Cite errors/Cite error references no text
i couldnot insert name in pradeep subedi account — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohanwa (talk • contribs) 02:06, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- The page (Pradeep subedi) appears to be a test page and is currently tagged as such under criteria for speedy deletion and will be removed in a short time. If you want to experiment with Wiki mark-up, please use your sandbox as doing so in the main article space will result in deletion. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 05:35, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Editing a template
Template:Oil and gas companies of China I am trying to edit this template. I would like to merge the two rows for oil companies into one large row which accommodates two sub-rows (for major oil and other oil companies). Likewise I want to merge the two two rows for natural gas into format. I've seen other templates in this format. Can anybody help me with this edit? Thanks. Insightfulswipe (talk) 08:03, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Insightfulswipe: I used {{Navbox subgroup}} in [2]. Does that look as wanted? I omitted "exploration and production" which seemed too long with the new design. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:51, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks and thanks for the editing tip. Insightfulswipe (talk) 13:15, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
User rights log
This statement has appeared on my watchlist -
(User rights log); 13:52 . . Tony Holkham (talk | contribs) was automatically promoted from (none) to extended confirmed user
- but what does it actually mean? Thanks, Tony Holkham (Talk) 13:45, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Tony Holkham - Please see WP:EXTENDEDCONFIRMED - it basically means that, as you have had an account for over 30 days, and made over 500 edits, you can edit the pages with the new higher level of "30/500 protection" - but it could have been better explained - Arjayay (talk) 14:08, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- Apparently some editors are worried that, although they should have that additional right, it has not been allocated to them. In order to avoid overloading the servers, by doing them all at once, (there are lots of editors with over 30 days and 500 edits) it is being added to editors accounts when a qualifying editor makes an edit. - Arjayay (talk) 14:12, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- Arjayay Thanks for that explanation. Tony Holkham (Talk) 14:15, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- Apparently some editors are worried that, although they should have that additional right, it has not been allocated to them. In order to avoid overloading the servers, by doing them all at once, (there are lots of editors with over 30 days and 500 edits) it is being added to editors accounts when a qualifying editor makes an edit. - Arjayay (talk) 14:12, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
A sock puppet has got to my page
Pamela McColl ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I had it removed and it came right back on - it is the header that questions the information right at the top of the page. Here is what I found in the conversations regarding this problem:
User:GreenDaySun92834 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Multi-user icon This account has been confirmed by a CheckUser as a sock puppet of FlowerStorm48 (talk · contribs · logs), and it has been blocked indefinitely. Please refer to the sockpuppet investigation of the sockpuppeteer, and editing habits or contributions of the sock puppet for evidence. This policy subsection may also be helpful. Account information: block log – current autoblocks – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth A CheckUser has confirmed that this account is a sockpuppet Categories: Wikipedia sockpuppets of FlowerStorm48
Please help Wikipedia to get this message off my page.
Pamela McColl13:59, 6 April 2016 (UTC)184.66.117.29 (talk)
- It is a standrard maintenance tag found on probably dozens of Wiki pages where an editor feels that a major contributor to the page might have a close association to the subject. It was not added by 'GreenDay' (who hasn't edited the page sine April 2015 as far as I can see) but by a completely different and experienced editor in September 2015. Eagleash (talk) 14:18, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- This issue has also already been raised at the BLP noticeboard here. Eagleash (talk) 15:00, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- The page is also watchlisted at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Watchlist (No. 4206). Eagleash (talk) 15:06, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
what options, if any, do I have here??
For future reference..I made a "RfC" in a talk page...it basically became vandalized and filled up by people (who sorta followed me over to my RfC) adding things of absolutely no relevance or substance to the RfC..(ie not following the guidelines for RfCs) and filled up even more by me asking them to stop their improper behavior...so it was ruining and distracting discourse from the RfC (and therefore hurting the Wikipedia process)...there's lots of people contributing properly but it's all getting mixed up with the improper contributions....is there anything I could have attempted to do about this? for example, would I have been permitted to simply undue (ie erase) their contributions...or edit out the improper portions of their contributions?? Or would this have just caused more problems? Or is there really nothing much that could be done that would be at all practical?68.48.241.158 (talk) 14:26, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- The RFC in question — crh 23 (Talk) 15:09, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- You created an RfC, and received more responses that you may have expected, some of them very well-informed. Deleting the responses that you disagree with would do nothing to increase other editors' respect for you. Maproom (talk) 00:42, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- wasn't at all interested in deleting anybody's substantive posts..but wondering about improper posts...like the first response...which didn't substantively address the RfC and just belittled me personally...as this seemed to color other people's view of the RfC...suppose there's nothing that can be done in real time about this, as would have to go through whole dispute process over it??68.48.241.158 (talk) 03:08, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- You created an RfC, and received more responses that you may have expected, some of them very well-informed. Deleting the responses that you disagree with would do nothing to increase other editors' respect for you. Maproom (talk) 00:42, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
- The RFC was then closed about four hours after this post, as No Consensus for what the original poster had said. As the close indicates, a more neutrally worded RFC might be appropriate, although some of the respondents think that the RFC should be at Formal systems, because the RFC isn't specifically about Godel's incompleteness theorems, a formal statement of the limitations of formal systems. The OP is cautioned to read what is not vandalism before using the word "vandalism" to characterize what the OP does state is a content dispute. (Some of the respondents have not been able to determine what the content dispute is, which is one of the reasons why the RFC received so many responses.) The OP is cautioned that the use of the word "vandalism" in disputes that are clearly not vandalism is considered a personal attack and may result in a block. The OP asks, in their edit summary, what options, if any, they have here. Engage in constructive discussion at the article talk page with other editors, many of whom do understand the technical subject matter (rather than insulting them by saying that they clearly don't understand). If another RFC is necessary, discuss how to word it neutrally. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:04, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- the problem was that your first response, which was unsubstantive and just belittled me personally (and therefore improper) colored other people's impression of the RfC who followed you...it's pretty easy to establish that this was your intention as you followed me over to my RfC because you were previously mad at me...so you were successful in damaging my RfC...I just wonder if there was anything I could do about it in real time, like delete it or page an administrator or something.....68.48.241.158 (talk) 03:15, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
Tiny font in Chrome edit box
Hi,
When editing a page, the edit box shows text in a reasonable size in Firefox but it's much too small in Chrome. I can increase the text size using keyboard shortcuts, but to make the edit box text legible I have to increase text size until everything else on the page is absolutely huge. Is this a known issue? Any solutions?
Cheers, Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 15:45, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Protecting Sierra Academy of Aeronautics permanently
To Whom it may concern,
We've been experiencing some internal matters where users and employees are posting some damaging information, this info can delay current and future financials for our company. What would be the best way to resolve this issues on editing to site until we get this matter resolved? Is it possible to Lock this page, we are the owners of this page, shouldn't we have access to this options?
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Castlesierra (talk • contribs)
- We don't permanently protect articles unnecessarily - and if it's a small group of users, we can block or ban them and solve the problem that way. But I am posting your request to Requests for protection, where admins more involved with page protection can evaluate it on the merits and see how best to assist. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 16:39, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
- pinging Castlesierra (talk · contribs) so they get a notification of these replies. Dismas|(talk) 16:42, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- (edit conflict) Please try to understand you are NOT "the owners of this page" see WP:OWN
This is Wikipedia's page about The Sierra Academy of Aeronautics and will contain whatever information has been published in reliable sources, be that good or bad, presented from a neutral point of view.
I note that the page was temporarily protected at 02.28 UTC today and all the disputed material was removed from both the article and the page history. Although that protection has now lapsed, there has been no further edits, other than your (misplaced) request and my removal of it. I suspect the page is being closely watched, but if further unsourced edits are made you should apply to request for page protection - however, we do not usually act preemptively, so a request before any further edits are made is likely to be refused, and could delay protection if it is required. - Arjayay (talk) 16:46, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Please try to understand you are NOT "the owners of this page" see WP:OWN
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I've posted a request at RPP on behalf of Castlesierra, if only because they would have done so anyway had they known to. I agree that full protection really isn't an option, and said so at RPP - but the removed material was bad enough, honestly, that I almost added a week of protection outright. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 16:48, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
-
So all you can do is monitor content? I am afraid that this permanent request to protect the page is necessary for the time being. can you add a longer block say two weeks. Until we figure this out, How can I summit a request for IP address?
- If it's a few editors posting inappropriate content, generally it's better to block them rather than lock the whole article. But the editors over at WP:RPP know their business and can give you a better answer. For my part, I've watchlisted the article and will deal with any problems that I notice. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 21:00, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- The article has been semi-protected for a month, so only confirmed users can edit it. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:02, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
- The article has been proposed for deletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:21, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
-
Read
How to read the page of wikipedia book?
Why I can't read a page through action=read parameter? [3] UY4Xe8VM5VYxaQQ (talk) 16:59, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- Why do you want to read it in this way? Ruslik_Zero 19:32, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- What were you hoping would be on a page with such a parameter? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tuberculosis&action=view redirects to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuberculosis which is the normal place to read the article. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:08, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Templates
Hello,
Are there other templates like [[1935 in the movies|1935]] regarding theater, classical music, jazz, literature, poetry etc? Thanks in advance for helping out; LouisAlain (talk) 17:03, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- What you are asking about are categories, not templates. Ruslik_Zero 19:31, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help but what about the answer? Does something like 1935 exist ?LouisAlain (talk) 21:32, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- Indeed, see Category:1935 in theatre, and regarding your original request, there is Category:1935 in music. -- The Voidwalker Discuss 21:52, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- [[1935 in the movies|1935]] is not a template but a link so your quesion is unclear but I think you are interested in articles about 1935 in the arts. Special:PrefixIndex/1935 in shows all article names starting with "1935 in". Italics indicate redirects. Category:1935 organizes various categories and articles about the year 1935. Category:1935 works may be of special interest to you. Some of the arts don't have an article about the year but do have a category listing articles about specific works. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:04, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- Indeed, see Category:1935 in theatre, and regarding your original request, there is Category:1935 in music. -- The Voidwalker Discuss 21:52, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help but what about the answer? Does something like 1935 exist ?LouisAlain (talk) 21:32, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Coming from the French Wikipedia I was thinking of 1947 or 1891 and 1967 but since I understand you seem perplexed with my query I gather that such models don't exist in the enwiki; Was just trying to do a better job (friendly smile) and thank you, LouisAlain (talk) 22:56, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- I've slightly changed your links so that they point to the articles in the French Wikipedia. I hope you don't mind. Dismas|(talk) 01:10, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Blackhillsguy
Hello,
Whew........!!! It is really difficult to navigate around the Wikipedia!!! Especially for this older guy who does not use a computer often. It seems like it is very hard to get a straight answer to any question but I hope that this paragraph thing may help me. I recently made an historical entry for the topic of 'REDFERN, SOUTH DAKOTA'. Redfern is a historic gold rush area located in the Black Hills of western South Dakota. I own the 14 acres that comprise Redfern and I am quite knowledgeable about the area. Apparently my 'entry' worked because I can see it when I Google 'Redfern'. But, on two occasions, I tried to make an entry for 'HISTORIC GALENA CREEK SCHOOL, BLACK HILLS, SOUTH DAKOTA', and nothing has appeared. Please, why did my first entry work but not my second entry/subject? Is there an easy way to do this??
Kenny
Blackhillsguy (talk) 17:08, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- If you look at your contributions list, it will show you everything you've edited. In your case, as of this writing, it gives me two edits - one to create Redfern, South Dakota and the question you posted here. Administrators (sort of like janitors, we clean up messes) can see if you've had edits that were deleted, but you don't seem to have any. So my recommendation would be to go try to make that second edit again and see what happens. It looks like maybe the browser didn't send it properly or something. Best guess. If it still gives you problems, leave me a message at my talk page and I'll have a look. Thanks, and welcome! UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 21:04, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
How to write a music on wikipedia
Like ♫♬♩🎵🎶♭🎶♬♩🎵🎶♩🎵🎶UY4Xe8VM5VYxaQQ (talk) 17:12, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- @UY4Xe8VM5VYxaQQ: Check out Template:Music--S Philbrick(Talk) 16:50, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
How to set a music password
how to make a password with ♫♬♩🎵🎶♭🎶♬♩🎵🎶♩🎵🎶 UY4Xe8VM5VYxaQQ (talk) 17:12, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
how to ...
Is it true that time and space are calculated by the direct ratio of interplanetary magnetism to solar radiation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:558:1412:5f:cc1c:c3d7:6f8e:d224 (talk) 19:17, 6 April 2016
- First off, please sign your posts using four tildes (these things ~). Second, your question would be better answered at the reference desk for science. This page is for help editing Wikipedia. Although, you might find Space time interesting to read, I'm not sure it answers your question. Thank you. -- The Voidwalker Discuss 20:49, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
How do I request a draft review?
Hello. How do I request a review of my draft Draft:Phineas Stearns? I'm looking for input as to whether the topic meets our notability requirements, as I don't want to move it to article space if it's at risk for deletion. Kirk Leonard (talk) 20:01, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, @Kirk Leonard:. The way to do it is to add
{{subst:submit}}
to the top of your draft- I've done it for you. The process for people reviewing articles is currently semi-backlogged, so it'll probably take a few days or longer to get a review. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:10, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, Joseph2302. Kirk Leonard (talk) 20:25, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
African American vs. Black
I see that you have a latino vs. hispanic page. I think you should have a african america vs. black page too — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.7.70.120 (talk • contribs)
- I think OP is referring to Hispanic–Latino naming dispute but I'm not sure. Dismas|(talk) 22:28, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
April 7
Help needed with Authority control
I would like some advice about how to create the template for the Authority control (AC) box at the end of a Wikipedia article. I have successfully put an AC box at the end of a Wikipedia article in my English-language Wikipedia sandbox, but in my Russian-language Wikipedia sandbox the AC information in the template sandbox produces only a thin empty box on the article sandbox where the AC box should be. What might I be doing wrong?
- English-language sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dolzhnikov/sandbox
- Russian-language sandbox: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%97%D0%B0%D0%B3%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0
Thank you.
Dolzhnikov (talk) 00:22, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- As far as I can see:
- The 'Russian-language sandbox' URL actually points at the Russian Wikipedia's main page, ru:Заглавная страница.
- The ru:User:Dolzhnikov doesn't have any sandbox in Russian Wikipedia: ru:special:AllPages/User:Dolzhnikov
- The ru:User:Dolzhnikov doesn't have any contribution in Russian Wikipedia, except the Wikipedia sandbox: ru:special:contributions/Dolzhnikov.
- Possibly you mean this version of ru: global Sandbox? --CiaPan (talk) 06:55, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Dolzhnikov: I suppose AC won't work on Sandbox. You need to make a regular article in the Main space, then link it with versions in other languages (if they exist), supply appropriate data in corresponding Wikidata entry—and then AC template will get filled with those data.
- Take care when making interlanguage links – en-wiki already has a page about Sue Owen, but they are different persons! --CiaPan (talk) 07:05, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Why am I blocked for editing?
I got blocked for editing. Shown reason was that I blanked my own talk page multiple times. Primarily, I tried to improve an article but someone did not like it. They started insulting by reverting the past conversation which I considered unnecessary to keep because old ones, and adding insulting messages. I talked against first but they reverted again so I blanked them because I did not like to be insulted in that way. That went on multiple times. The problem was - they were on the administrator side. The claim was immediately accepted to block my account. I believe, however, I did nothing harm to Wikipedia, except I removed messages to insult me on my own talk page. I believe the five pillars supports to do so. I put a reference to corresponding five pillar parts to my and their talk pages and they just removed it. Oh, I forgot to mention that the issue was of Japanese version. Here, administrators behave as if they are guardian to bind users follow their favorite rules to govern, I felt. Well, the question is "Is there any ways I am happy to contribute to Wikipedia any more when I am repeatedly insulted and blocked?" Thank you for constructive suggestions. --Wordmasterexpress (talk) 04:13, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- You have never been blocked, and your user talk page has never been blanked. What are you talking about? -- Hoary (talk) 05:52, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- Wordmasterexpress: this is the help desk for English-language Wikipedia. We have no influence over what happens at Japanese-language Wikipedia, and I doubt people here even know what their policy is for talk page deletions. Maproom (talk) 07:50, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
- Thank you for replies. It seems Wikipedia of different languages are put under different rules albeit the rules appear to be very similar besides translated. Under the same rules, though, they once even blocked over major universities for unlimited time which lasted several years. I think I should quit there.--Wordmasterexpress (talk) 08:06, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- We are often asked questions here that we don't understand that turn out to be about other language Wkipedias. As has been mentioned, different Wikipedias with different languages have different rules. Most of them have their own Help Desks. We can't help with non-English Wikipedias, and most of use here don't know the other languages. By the way, you are welcome to contribute at this English Wikipedia, and have not been blocked. If you have questions about our rules, ask here. (You may have blocked if you violate our rules, so asking about our rules is a good idea.) Robert McClenon (talk) 12:40, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you, guys, for comments and warm welcoming messages. I try to make some contribution here. Wordmasterexpress (talk) 00:59, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
-
wiki page
If people have bit good name and achievements then there is no Wikipedia page for them ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.76.53.6 (talk) 06:58, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Does Wikipedia:Notability (people) answer your question? -- Hoary (talk) 07:05, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Henley & Partners Visa Restrictions Index
Good day
I submited my draft page titled "Henley & Partners Visa Restrictions Index" on 24 February for review by your editorial board, however I have not heard back from anyone and the page is still not active.
Please advise on next steps?
Thank you
Mara.ispas (talk) 08:00, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Mara.ispas: The submission was declined on 24 February because "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia." You were notified of that both in the draft header and on your user talk page. What you need to do is rewrite the draft from a neutral point of view and then click the blue "Resubmit" button on the draft. —teb728 t c 08:56, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Visual Editor Talk Pages
Dear all,
Why is the Visual Editor not available on Talk Pages?
Thankfully,
~Robert orschiro (talk) 08:44, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- As mentioned at Wikipedia:VisualEditor, that is a known limitation / possibly intentional design. I would suggest asking your question at the Wikipedia Visual Editor Feedback page to find out more. RegistryKey(RegEdit) 09:38, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
amending page name
Hi
I like to amend the page name. Could someone advise ? Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joyce See (talk • contribs) 09:47, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi @Joyce See:, you need to move the page. As this requires your account to be confirmed, I've moved Mount Alvernia Hospital and Medical Centre to Mount Alvernia Hospital, as from your contributions list, I guess this is what you wanted done. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:58, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
EHelp with 'orphan' pages
I have recently had my Wikipedia page approved, however it is currently classed as an 'orphan' page. It says that there are no other articles linked to it, however, there are a lot of internal links throughout the article. Is there somewhere else that I should be linking as well? I really want to improve my page so would appreciate any help.
The link to my page is here: Bourne and Hollingsworth Group
Ilonam23 (talk) 11:07, 7 April 2016 (UTC)ilonam23Ilonam23 (talk) 11:07, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- It is an orphan because no pages link to it. Links from it do not affect its orphan status. If in doubt, please read WP:orphan (linked from the tag on the page). --David Biddulph (talk) 11:19, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- What David said... And speaking of links, you've overdone it. There is no need, in such a short article, to link the same terms repeatedly. You have 'London' linked at least 2-3 times, 'The Chap' is the same, etc. Once is enough. See WP:OVERLINK. Dismas|(talk) 12:11, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Text in patents that has expired
What is the copyright status of text and pictures in US patents that has expired? Can it be copied into Wikipedia? Bytesock (talk) 12:36, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- It depends on the country, the status of the patent usually has no effect on the status of the copyright of the text and images. Read Copyright on the content of patents and in the context of patent prosecution. — crh 23 (Talk) 16:59, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Charles Pierrepont, 1st Earl Manvers
Refs numbers 2 and 3 are the same - how do I avoid the doubling up? Please keep all quotes. Thanks 101.189.0.102 (talk) 13:30, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- The method is described at Help:Referencing for beginners#Same reference used more than once. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:34, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- And while you're at it, please ensure that the
|publisher
parameter contains just the publisher (where appropriate). There is a separate parameter for the date. See Template:Cite web#Parameters (or Template:Cite news#Parameters which is more appropriate for a newspaper reference). --David Biddulph (talk) 13:40, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Please help me. Wikipedia editor - David Bulluph - responded to my request a few hours ago, but he has a very high expectation - I am unable to do the technical stuff he suggests. I thought that refs 2 and 3 on the above page should be "condensed" into one ref - no doubling up. Please do it - we are unable form our end. Thanks 101.189.0.102 (talk) 00:15, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Merged from below -- The Voidwalker Discuss
- I have added the named reference.
If you would like, I'll go through the references to deal with the-- The Voidwalker Discuss 00:27, 8 April 2016 (UTC)|publisher
parameter. - I have also added the
|publisher
parameter. You can view the changes I made here. -- The Voidwalker Discuss 00:34, 8 April 2016 (UTC) - Do you honestly believe that to follow the simple instructions in the links which I gave you above (and have given you on numerous occasions in the past under various IPs and usernames) is a "very high expectation"? The Voidwalker has given you a link to show you what he's done. If there is something there which you don't understand, please tell us so that we can try to make the instructions clearer for you. (I notice also that yet again you started a new section though it was a continuation of the existing problem, and The Voidwalker had to waste his time putting the question and the answer into the section where it belonged to tidy the page up and put the question into context. This again is a point which has been made to you on numerous occasions in the past, but you appear not to listen, or not to understand, or not to take any notice if you do understand. Again, is there any way that we can make this clearer for you?) I have asked in the past whether you have trouble understanding English but you have assured me that this is not the case. (If other editors here think that they can explain things to this editor to get him to understand, please do so.) --David Biddulph (talk) 01:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Problems trying to save
Hello, Wikipedia won't let me save and is saying it looks like I've tried to save an email address when I haven't. do you know how to get past this warning and publish the page please? Is there an issue with my citations? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HannahCostello1986 (talk • contribs) 13:31, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi HannahCostello1986 - Please sign all posts on talk pages with 4 tildes ( ~~~~ ) which will add your signature and a timestamp.
Your abuse filter here shows repeated attempts to include an e-mail address in the Newcastle College article, whilst the article history shows your previous edit was reverted by a sysop as "Obvious COI".
Before proceeding further, please read our policies on conflict of interest and neutral point of view
Since it won't save, I can't see what you are trying to add. Is there anything in your addition that might make a Bot think it is an e-mail address? such as an @ sign? - Arjayay (talk) 13:59, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
How to Complain a user ?
How can I complain a user? /// How can I contact with admins — Preceding unsigned comment added by Source7123 (talk • contribs) 16:41, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, please sign your posts on talk-pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). Your only contributions, apart from posts at this page, seem to be at Battle of Baideng where there seems to be a content dispute in progress. If you are in dispute with another editor over content you should try to resolve it by means of discussion at their, your or the article talk-page. Without knowing the nature of your concern it is difficult to say whether it is something that an Admin. might deal with; they do not typically become involved in content disputes. I do note that there is one edit summary in the article history which might be considered inappropriate. Eagleash (talk) 16:53, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
extended confirmed user
In my watchlist I see that I have been promoted to an "extended confirmed user." I used to be only "pending changes reviewer and rollbacker". First, let me say that I am honored. Second, let me ask what I can do now that I couldn't do before. Can I diss other users with impunity? Change British spelling to American arbitrarily? Thanks for any insight. --Ravpapa (talk) 17:21, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Ravpapa: Extended confirmed user privilege is a new privilege, which is given to users who meet the 30/500 criteria (account is over 30 days, and has over 500 edits). It means that you can participate in discussion where ArbCom have added 30/500 editing restrictions. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:25, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) See section #User rights log above. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:27, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia Policy
Hello. I am trying to understand WP:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a directory "Wikipedia is not a directory" item 7. It states:
[Not allowed] "Simple listings without context information. Examples include, but are not limited to: listings of business alliances, clients, competitors, employees (except CEOs, supervisory directors and similar top functionaries), equipment, estates, offices, products and services, sponsors, subdivisions and tourist attractions. Information about relevant single entries with encyclopedic information should be added as sourced prose. Lists of creative works in a wider context are permitted."
I am interpreting the exception as allowing a simple list of "CEOs, supervisory directors and similar top functionaries". Is this correct? Admins and editors are objecting to this without providing rational grounded in Wikipedia policy.
Can a consensus override my citation?
Thanks.Formulairis990 (talk) 17:24, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Your link doesn't work. Perhaps you intended to link to WP:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a directory ? --David Biddulph (talk) 17:30, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- This is apparently already being discussed at Talk:WNYC#Officers, Directors, Trustees, Key Employees, and Highest Compensated Employees [excluding compensation], where many other editors have given their views. Bringing it here might be regarded as forum shopping. If you don't agree with the consensus at the article talk page you might want to read WP:dispute resolution. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:42, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- As I noted on the article talk page, this is a content dispute. It has been discussed at the article talk page, where the discussion is inconclusive. The advice to seek dispute resolution is good. This doesn't look like forum shopping to me, but a somewhat loaded question, and this Help Desk tries to give unloaded answers to loaded questions. Try either Third Opinion or a Request for Comments. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:18, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- I thought that Third Opinion applied only for disputes between 2 editors? In this case a number of editors seem to disagree with the OP. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:33, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Yes I meant WP:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a directory, thank you.
- Thank you. No forum shopping. No loaded question -- perhaps you mean the bit about the admins not providing "rational grounded in Wikipedia policy". I put that in there to indicate that I have not gotten the above questions answered there, and that that is why I turned here. I also came here to see if I am not missing something before considering turning to WP:dispute resolution. I'm trying to get straightforward answers to pretty straightforward questions: Does the citation allow me to do what I interpret it to do? And can a consensus override such a citation? Formulairis990 (talk) 18:43, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Short version - no. Consensus determines how facts are presented in an article - and consensus is situational. So no, that citation does not allow you to add a list to an article when multiple other editors object to that list - even if another article has such a list. Your task would be to convince other editors that such a list would improve the article. If there still is no consensus, then perhaps it'd be best to wait until more of the individuals you plan to list are notable - a list of notable individuals is much easier to justify. But either way, that's a discussion you need to have there, and not here. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 20:44, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- I was mistaken and had not counted the number of editors involved. Third Opinion is not applicable, because there are multiple editors. To explain what User:Ultraexactzz has said, a citation is the minimum that is needed to include information. It does not justify overriding a consensus, because other issues such as due and undue weight apply. To restate the question, a citation does not override a consensus. Consensus governs, with the exception that consensus cannot override Wikipedia policy, but Wikipedia policy doesn't require (or forbid) the table, so consensus does apply. If the editor who wants to include the table disagrees with the consensus at the talk page, Request for Comments is a way to get a larger consensus. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:31, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you all, this is helpful.
- I'm not trying discuss the merits of my edit. That's why I've avoided specifics here. As a new user, I'm trying to understand the process, and reconcile what I've experienced with what I've read on the Wikipedia guidelines/policy pages such as WP:AADD and WP:DISRUPTSIGNS item 4.
- I strongly believe there is bias. But I am confused if this bias is allowed because it is the consensus POV.
- "consensus is situational" is very vague to me. How do you determine when consensus is out of bounds biased?
- Are there policies/guidelines to making an objection?
- I've been interpreting the objections as making logical fallacies, intentional or not, straight out of WP:AADD, putting aside the ones that I do believe are disingenuous.
- Doesn't an objection have to address my specific evidence and rational for inclusion? I ask because I've gotten a lot of this isn't interesting because it's not X, but not addressing my specific argument for why there is a large information seeking constituency that would find it interesting for other reasons.
- Maybe this boils down to how can I determine if an objection is founded/legitimate? I don't mean if I can find an alternative policy meaning due to a missing apostrophe. Formulairis990 (talk) 21:51, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- I was mistaken and had not counted the number of editors involved. Third Opinion is not applicable, because there are multiple editors. To explain what User:Ultraexactzz has said, a citation is the minimum that is needed to include information. It does not justify overriding a consensus, because other issues such as due and undue weight apply. To restate the question, a citation does not override a consensus. Consensus governs, with the exception that consensus cannot override Wikipedia policy, but Wikipedia policy doesn't require (or forbid) the table, so consensus does apply. If the editor who wants to include the table disagrees with the consensus at the talk page, Request for Comments is a way to get a larger consensus. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:31, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Short version - no. Consensus determines how facts are presented in an article - and consensus is situational. So no, that citation does not allow you to add a list to an article when multiple other editors object to that list - even if another article has such a list. Your task would be to convince other editors that such a list would improve the article. If there still is no consensus, then perhaps it'd be best to wait until more of the individuals you plan to list are notable - a list of notable individuals is much easier to justify. But either way, that's a discussion you need to have there, and not here. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 20:44, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- As I noted on the article talk page, this is a content dispute. It has been discussed at the article talk page, where the discussion is inconclusive. The advice to seek dispute resolution is good. This doesn't look like forum shopping to me, but a somewhat loaded question, and this Help Desk tries to give unloaded answers to loaded questions. Try either Third Opinion or a Request for Comments. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:18, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Train Route
What page is the map of the train route on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.248.144.131 (talk) 21:20, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- What train route? This is your only edit. I am assuming that you are asking a question about Wikipedia articles. If not, this is the Help Desk, which is for questions about using and editing Wikipedia. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:26, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
April 8
What is wrong with the EB1911 template?
For some reason, articles that incorporate parts of the 1911 Encyclopedia Brittanica (and there are alot) no longer have the relevant article in the template. Instead it has a red link for article name given, that only leads to the wikisource main page for the 1911 Encyclopedia Brittanica. For instance, from Hecataeus of Miletus
- It seems to be working now. I think what happened was that an improvement to the template contained a stray extra pipe, which was then fixed here but it may have taken a while for that fix to propagate. Anyway, I checked three articles using it and it was working in each. Are you still seeing the error?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:22, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
==Sources==
- This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "article name needed". Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
So what gives? Why aren't the relevant articles linked like they used to be and how do with fix it?--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 01:46, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- It seems to be working now. I think what happened was that an improvement to the template contained a stray extra pipe, which was then fixed here but it may have taken a while for that fix to propagate.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:25, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- I still see it in a few places such as Cyclopædia, or an Universal Dictionary of Arts and Sciences--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 02:30, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- I am not previously familiar with this template, but my reading of the documentation is that at a "minimum", you must provide a title parameter: if at Wikisource using |wstitle=; if elsewhere using |title= in conjunction with other parameters, depending on what you want to do. There is a footnote next to the section stating what the "Minimum is:", that in turn says "It will also work with no parameters, but that sets a category flagging that no article name has been given..." and that does seem to be non-functioning now, in articles like the one you linked above that contains no title parameter. Maybe that is a result of the recent edits by User:PBS, who will now be pinged here. Anyway, it was probably always a good idea to have fixed uses that did not contain the title parameter. Now there's more incentive! --Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:57, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- From my phone. Thanks for the heads up. Not broken.Without an article name howvto validate the citation, because what we are saying is somewhere in the 26 volumes and tens of thousands of articles there is some text copied into this Wikipedia page,but we are not telling you where to look instead you can spend time finding it yourself. Without an article title as a minimum (vol and pages should also be given) it does not meet WP:V or guidance inWP:CITE. EB1911 is a wrapper around
{{cite encyclopedia}}
which now also puts out a red warning message if certain parameters are absent :
- I still see it in a few places such as Cyclopædia, or an Universal Dictionary of Arts and Sciences--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 02:30, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Empty citation (help)
-- PBS (talk) 09:48, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
-
- So, if I understand correctly, we are no longer giving an article title, but asking the reader to find where the information came from themselves? While that might be OK when the article to go to is obvious, there are cases when the citation is under a different one from the title ergo Cyclopædia, or an Universal Dictionary of Arts and Sciences where the citation is under Chambers, Ephraim or Ch'unchu people where the citation is Chuncho. It could be more user friendly.--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 02:43, 9 April 2016 (UTC)--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 02:43, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
rename request
Please rename Talk:Yorkshire Terrier/Archive 9 to Talk:Yorkshire Terrier/Archive 1 - mistake in Miszabot parameter on Talk:Yorkshire Terrier Thank you--76.14.40.2 (talk) 05:28, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Done, and counter on parent page adjusted accordingly. --David Biddulph (talk) 05:46, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Use of Wikipedia brand to sell a product
I came across an Amazon product listing in which a company is using the Wikipedia name, logo, and overall appearance to sell a mediocre trivia game. This feels like people could be potentially misled into thinking the product is affiliated with Wikipedia, although the product description does note that this is not the case. Is there a way to submit this for legal scrutiny by the Wikimedia Foundation? 2601:644:1:3E52:C1BB:1B62:935:659E (talk) 05:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, this packaging misuses the Wikipedia name and logos. I'm about to submit a report at meta:Special:Contact/licenseabuse. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:08, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Can they even do that with the logo? Is it under Creative Commons--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 06:40, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- No. wmf:Trademark policy --ColinFine (talk) 11:52, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Can they even do that with the logo? Is it under Creative Commons--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 06:40, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
floyd salas
Floyd salas the writer is not mexican..his family from castile spain and belgium..I am a relative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.44.169.129 (talk) 07:38, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- The article Floyd Salas, assuming it's the same person, states that he is American. Eagleash (talk) 09:44, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- I have removed a stub template and category which indicated Mexican descent.[4] PrimeHunter (talk) 10:49, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Help! I can't log in.
It reads "Exception encountered, of type "Exception"". How can I solve this problem? --111.4.3.129 (talk) 10:25, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Try again in a few minutes. If this does not resolve the issue, you might try using a different network or internet connection, or try using a different computer. This should resolve your issue. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:28, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- The error message means the account is probably hit by the bug at phab:T119736. If the username gives the same message when entered at Special:CentralAuth then it's almost certainly this. The usual solution is to add the username to phab:T119736 and wait for somebody with the right database access to fix the account. If you give the name then I can add it. If you don't want the username and IP address to be associated publicly then you can mail me the name to jens.k.aget2net.dk. The name without the IP address would still be listed publicly in phab:T119736. It may take days or more than a week before listed accounts are fixed. You are free to create a new account if you don't break Wikipedia:Sock puppetry. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:39, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Purpose of Wikipedia
What is the main purposes of using Wikipedia? What dose it real help? and when is it helpful? Does it indicate any future opportunities to the society at a particular community ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.172.44.162 (talk) 14:15, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Please do your own homework.
Welcome to the Wikipedia Help desk. Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misevaluation, but it is our policy here not to do others' homework, but merely to aid them in doing it themselves. Letting someone else do your homework does not help you learn how to solve such problems.
Please attempt to solve the problem yourself first. You can search Wikipedia or search the Web.
If you need help with a specific part of your homework, the Reference desk can help you grasp the concept. Do not ask knowledge questions here, just those about using Wikipedia. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:21, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Uploading my own image work to an Wikipedia article
Hi there,
I am wanting to upload an image file to a Wikipedia article, and it is all of my own work, however, I do not know how to prove this nor do I want to be accused of copyrighting.--AlexMlcfc (talk) 16:41, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexMlcfc (talk • contribs) 15:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi AlexMlcfc. We so often get misunderstandings here (and at the Commons) of what "own work" really means, that I hope you can provide some detail. Is this a photograph that you took, holding a camera in your hand (not: an image create by someone else that you found and downloaded/screenshotted/scanned/secondarily photographed), or alternatively, an original drawing/chart etc. that you personally drew or created in an image application?
If so (and assuming any photograph does not capture any derivative material that remains unblurred), then yes, you own the copyright and can release it under a suitably-free copyright license (or into the public domain). If this is the case, don't upload the files here but to the Wikimedia Commons (as previously linked) so that the image can be used at all projects. In fact, if you upload it here, it will just create work for others to transfer it to the Commons. To do so, go to the Commons' upload wizard and follow the steps, choosing a free license.
What is important is that you provide some detail upon the upload. For example, the image page created through the wizard will have certain information fields listing how you answered. You can edit them after the upload if there's insufficient detail when first uploaded. Don't just leave it at "own work", but be more transparent, such as "photograph by me on ____ using..." or a myriad of other possibilities, but making it clear by context you are really the author.
If you did not take/create the file yourself, it still might be free, but we would need the detail to give an opinion on that. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)
The image I want to upload is of my own work entirely, created in office online powerpoint containing no photographs. Hopefully this is ok? Once before I tried the same upload and it was declined by Wiki but that could've been me not giving enough information. This time I'll be extra careful in adding more clearer and precise information about my upload. I'll have a go at attempting an upload, and I'll let you know how I get on. Thanks ever so much for your tips, advice and help on this, much appreciated. UPDATE: It has worked fine, so really pleased. It's in my uploads at the moment, so at some stage once I've tweaked/updated it to what I want, I'll consider fully uploading it to the related wikipedia article. If I don't upload the file to the article, at least I'll have it for future reference If I ever went back to this. --AlexMlcfc (talk) 20:45, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- @AlexMlcfc: Ah, yes, I see you uploaded an image at the Commons previously at File:Leicester City 2014-02-27 18-52.jpg that was deleted because it was a sports logo. This is entirely different, so there shouldn't be a problem. Nevertheless I would add something next to own work there, like "created using powerpoint", e.g.,
|source={{own}}; created using powerpoint.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:58, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Problems adding a date to an image
I'm trying to upload an image to my Wiki article, I've got everything done so far, except for the date. I am not sure how to add a date in the "Date" category of the image upload, when I type in a date, the "Save" button is still unavailable, the date Is required to upload the image. When I click on the provided date numbers (April 0008 - 0016) the selected date does not appear in the text box. There is not an option to scroll down, so I assume that there is a glitch or something. Please answer back ASAP, I need to get this article completed. The image is an illustration of a character, created by myself (SkinnyGreenKiller). I'm not having trouble with a copyright problem, I am literally having trouble with adding a date to the upload.
This is NOT a "homework question" I am a adult, I do not have homework. This is a serious question involving a problem with uploading my image to my article. I am creating this article so that people may better understand information on a series that I am creating, do not mock me with your "homework question" bullshit.
Thank You~ SkinnyGreenKiller (talk) 16:19, 8 April 2016 (UTC)SkinnyGreenKiller
- In regard to your question, I would expect that dates requested would be of a form like 2015/04/05 or April 5, 2015 or something similar. I'm not sure what April 0008 - 0016 means.
- Also, two points. Wikipedia discourages people from writing Autobiographies (see WP:AUTOBIO) or any article where there exists a significant conflict of Interest (WP:COI)Naraht (talk) 17:40, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- Wikipedia is not the place for original text such as yours. Please see my note on the talk page of the article, and copy your text to your own computer before it gets deleted. Sorry to disappoint you, but this is the wrong website for your efforts. You are welcome to contribute to this encyclopaedia by adding facts that are already published in WP:reliable sources. 19:55, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Dbfirs
Find Sources
How do I correct the Notice "Find Sources" warning? Eking91484 (talk) 17:28, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Eking91484: I'm assuming that you're referring to your draft, Draft:IBM Faster. To find sources means basically that. Find sources for where you got the information in the article and then add those sources, or references, to the article. They should be unrelated to the subject of the article. So, something not published by IBM. Was there an article in an industry journal? Maybe magazine articles? Those would be considered sources or references. See WP:RS for more on what is considered a reliable source. Dismas|(talk) 17:44, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Image in the infobox is misleading but referred to automatically
In the infobox of a chemical element, the crystal structure is identified as "tetragonal." This is the correct nomenclature for both the crystal system and the crystal structure (of which there is a subtle but essential difference between these terms). However, the image shown is misleading, as it shows the crystal SYSTEM and not the crystal STRUCTURE. I cannot seem to edit it, since the image is directly inserted based on the format of the infobox. How can this be resolved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kclarevalentine (talk • contribs) 17:45, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Only by uploading (preferably to WikiCommons) a correct image and subsequently replacing the one in the infobox. You'll probably need to provide something as a source for the change too. Eagleash (talk) 17:47, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Kclarevalentine: Thanks for helping improve Wikipedia! Regarding your question, I'm you're talking about the pictures in the element infobox, found here. This falls under the umbrella of WikiProject Elements, so if you think the infobox formatting is mistaken then either be bold and change it yourself (using images that comply with WP:IUP), or leave a message on their talk page where you're likely to be able to talk to editors who are experienced in that field. Finally, please sign your messages on a talk page with ~~~~ so everyone knows who you are and when you left the message. Cheers — crh 23 (Talk) 18:01, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Saved Pages on mobile aren't found on desktop site
I have the Wikipedia app from Google Play Store. On the mobile app I can sign in and have "Saved Pages", but on the Wikipedia desktop I can't find where my saved pages are. Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Easloans1 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- They are only saved on within the mobile app. The feature is not currently available on desktop or the mobile website. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
David Jolly
An editor just added a personal attack about David Jolly on the article's talk page.[5] Can a talk page rant like that be removed since it has absolutely nothing to do with the editing of the article and, most importantly, the article is a BLP? Dirroli (talk) 19:31, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hello Dirroli. WP:BLP applies to pages in all namespaces, very much including talk pages. Unsourced negative or controversial content about a living person may not be stated as fact on any Wikipedia page, and may be removed by any editor, and such removal does not constitute edit warring. DES (talk) 21:05, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, DES! I saw you hatted it. I don't know if it's even possible, but shouldn't it be removed altogther, including from the edit history, since it's a personal, unsourced attack about a living person? I know very little about Jolly, except what I've read in the sources, but it seems to me that an attack like that is defamatory and shouldn't even be in the history. Otherwise, anyone can could go on a talk page and call someone a rapist or a murderer, and it would just stay there forever for the whole world to see. Also, in my opinion, hatting a personal attack like that, instead of completely removing it, only serves to put a huge spotlight on the comment, thus tempting more people to read it, not less. Does my point make sense? Dirroli (talk) 21:27, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- That was a quick response, Dirroli, for accusations rather less serious than ones of rape or murder. I also warned the poster about the matter. It is possible for me to "revdel" the content so that only admins can see it. An oversighter (which i am not) could remove it so that only the few people with oversight permission could see it. I don't think that is warranted here, but if you think it is, use the contact methods on the page linked above to request such action. What I did will prevent it from being indexed by search engines, or visible at a glance. DES (talk) 22:08, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Although the editor's accusations do not rise to the level of rape or murder, saying the someone has "ties to a criminal enterprise" is still extremely serious. Therefore, at the very least, I feel it should be deleted from the talk page. And thanks for the info about "revdel"... can you please do that, and have an oversighter remove it? I'm sure your request will be taken much more seriously than mine. If you or I were notable and accused of being part of a criminal enterprise, with absolutely no evidence, I'm sure both of us would do everything we could to get it removed so that no one could ever see it, right? Thanks again for your feedback on this. Dirroli (talk) 22:54, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Done. Actually I am more of the "publish and be damned" school, feeling that an unjustified accusation often boomerangs, Dirroli. However, I have redacted the specific accusations, and deleted the revisions where they were present. (The page history shows who edited and what the edit summary was, but the actual content is hidden from anyone who is not an admin.) That should be enough. There are specific conditions for the use of oversight, and i don't think this case meets them. If you disagree, read the oversight page and reach out to an oversighter by email as suggested there. Such a person will independently review the issue and apply the relevant policy. @Dirroli: DES (talk) 23:43, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Although the editor's accusations do not rise to the level of rape or murder, saying the someone has "ties to a criminal enterprise" is still extremely serious. Therefore, at the very least, I feel it should be deleted from the talk page. And thanks for the info about "revdel"... can you please do that, and have an oversighter remove it? I'm sure your request will be taken much more seriously than mine. If you or I were notable and accused of being part of a criminal enterprise, with absolutely no evidence, I'm sure both of us would do everything we could to get it removed so that no one could ever see it, right? Thanks again for your feedback on this. Dirroli (talk) 22:54, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- That was a quick response, Dirroli, for accusations rather less serious than ones of rape or murder. I also warned the poster about the matter. It is possible for me to "revdel" the content so that only admins can see it. An oversighter (which i am not) could remove it so that only the few people with oversight permission could see it. I don't think that is warranted here, but if you think it is, use the contact methods on the page linked above to request such action. What I did will prevent it from being indexed by search engines, or visible at a glance. DES (talk) 22:08, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, DES! I saw you hatted it. I don't know if it's even possible, but shouldn't it be removed altogther, including from the edit history, since it's a personal, unsourced attack about a living person? I know very little about Jolly, except what I've read in the sources, but it seems to me that an attack like that is defamatory and shouldn't even be in the history. Otherwise, anyone can could go on a talk page and call someone a rapist or a murderer, and it would just stay there forever for the whole world to see. Also, in my opinion, hatting a personal attack like that, instead of completely removing it, only serves to put a huge spotlight on the comment, thus tempting more people to read it, not less. Does my point make sense? Dirroli (talk) 21:27, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
How to "center" an Infobox
See image top right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holly_Arntzen
I'd like it centered? How? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BSmith821 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- When using infoboxes, you don't need the
[[File:(name)|thumb|(caption)]]
. You just need to put the file name in, and the caption on the infobox line that says|caption=
. I have fixed it, but if you have any more questions, please let me know. -- The Voidwalker Discuss 21:24, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
The ethics of creating and disambiguating an entry
There is an IT company in California named Astreya, with the url Astreya.com. I am the author of a book entitled The Astreya Trilogy. I can't control Google, but Wikipedia asks me "Do you want to create a page called Astreya?" Could or should I do that? If I did, it would enhance the opportunity for potential readers to find me and my book and stop them getting confused by the IT company. Is this a fair use of Wikipedia? I'd just go ahead and try, but it seems inappropriate for an author (me) to create inter-referencing pages based on his or her books or the characters within them. Also, is it ethical or egocentricity of the worst kind to create a Wikipedia page for myself? Seymour C H (talk) 21:15, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, Seymour C H. As per WP:AUTOBIO and WP:COI it is discouraged for you to create an article, under any name, about yourself or your own work. Also, Wikipedia should never be used to promote a person, a book or product, a movement or cause, or anything else. Wikipedia articles should be neutral, describing as objectively as possible what has already been published about various topics. First of all, is your book truly notable? (See WP:NBOOK.) Has it been covered at some depth in multiple independent published Reliable sources? If not, it does not qualify for an article here. If it has, then you could try Requested articles, but there is a long backlog there. You could just wait until someone with no COI writes an article. Or you could use the article wizard to create a draft, and put it under the Articles for creation project. After you say it is ready, (perhaps quite a while after) an experienced editor will review your draft and either accept it and move it to the main article space, or decline it and indicate one or more issues that must be corrected. It often takes several tries to get an article draft accepted. If you want to take this route, please read Your First Article, Referencing for Beginners, and Wikipedia's Golden Rule as well as the pages linked above, before you start. DES (talk) 22:18, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
How do I report a Wikipedia-admin?
He banned me from the Swedish Wikipedia without a reason, can I report him?--Butterfly1066 (talk) 22:34, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- This is the English Wikipedia. We have no control over administrators at other language Wikipedias. There might be a complaitn process you could engage in at meta but your question, versus the facts, does not motivate me to track it down. You should be bending over backwards when posting something like this to not display yourself in a false, positive light. It would take you so much farther. For example, had you written here something to the effect of, "while I was warned about edit warring and about the three revert rule, I had explained that the edits I reverted were really within the exception to the rule. The admin nevertheless banned me peremptorily with little discussion, labeled me a troll in the block log entry, and did not even allow editing of my talk page to allow an appeal (and so forth)". Your white-washed spin on what happened is bullshit.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:48, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- The thing was that I stopped the edit warring quite soon, and continued to just argue; they didn't have any reliable sources or anything.. And all the sudden he just bans me, with only one comment "troll".--Butterfly1066 (talk) 23:49, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Butterfly, you said you were banned "without no reason", which means you were banned with reason. A double-negative; that's basic algebra. In any case, you can report anyone for anything. But, remember, it's like a lawsuit... you can sue anyone for anything, but it doesn't mean you'll win or that it won't be deemed frivolous. Or that it won't backfire on you. Dirroli (talk) 23:00, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- I thougt this is the way you speek;) I've changed to "a", is this ok?--Butterfly1066 (talk) 23:49, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Butterfly, it took awhile to find your account on the Swedish Wikipedia since I do not read Swedish, but I found your contributions and block log. The next-to-last thread on your talk page titled "editing War" has these three comments: (1) "Read what we write about restoring several times in a row in our approach on redigeringskrig.Yger ( discussion) April 8, 2016 at . 19:55 ( CEST )", (2) "Have read it: ' Exception vandalism . Removal of graffiti and vandalism may require three resets or more, and even users who have already made three restorations of an article for 24 hours has the right to recover the article by graffiti. However, important to distinguish from vandalism edits that you simply do not agree with. ' - Butterfly1066 ( discussion) april 8, 2016 at . 22:55 ( CEST )", and (3) "To avoid accusations of edit wars do well to avoid even come close to making restorations that can be perceived as such. Riggwelter ( discussion) April 8, 2016 at . 23:02 ( CEST )." The final thread on your talk page titled "wonder" is another three-comment exchange with the admin who blocked you: (1) "Do you feel that you understand what is Wikipedia ? Or do you just want your opinion plazas completed and published ? Riggwelter ( discussion) April 9, 2016 at . 00:06 ( CEST )", (2) "I know very well what Wikipedia is just find interesting that all other Wikipedia pages say one thing while the Swedish says something quite different. Please show sources of your statements so that you can take them seriously .-- Butterfly1066 ( discussion) April 9, 2016 at . 00:12 ( CEST )", and (3) "I think Swedish Wikipedia can do without your quibbling. Bye! Riggwelter ( discussion) April 9, 2016 at . 00:13 ( CEST )". Riggwelter then blocked you indefinitely with this message: "A Google translation for your block says, "April 9, 2016 at . 00:12 Riggwelter (Talk | Contributions ) blocked Butterfly1066 (Talk | Contributions ) with a duration of indefinite ( account creation disabled e - mail blocked , can not edit own talk page ) ( Troll Account )". Dirroli (talk) 01:01, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
I translated the talk page discussion at Sverige, which apparently led to your block. I don't really understand the issues involved, but you clearly were not trolling. You were indeed attempting to add sources, and you were participating in the talk page discussion in a civil manner. However, I have no idea whether the sources you were trying to add were reliable or not. It seems that the other editors were just getting annoyed with you for some reason. You may have deserved a temporary block for edit warring, but nothing you said or did appears to warrant an indefinite block, especially one given so abruptly and with almost no provocation. But, again, I may be missing some key facts. Anyway, I think you should appeal your block and get a full explanation about why it was given. I don't know how you would do that, and I see you can't even edit your own talk page any more, so hopefully someone here can educate you on how to file an appeal on the Swedish Wikipedia. Dirroli (talk) 01:19, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Help:Cite errors/Cite error included ref
Bold text gatik — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.16.71.5 (talk) 00:32, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- I have fixed the error on List of internet service providers in India. Another time please note the article involved, and if possible link to it. Thank you. DES (talk) 00:39, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Charles Pierrepont, 1st Earl Manvers
Why is the name 2nd Duke of Kingston in red? Please help. Thanks so much 101.189.0.102 (talk) 04:42, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Because Wikipedia doesn't have an article for Evelyn Pierrepont, 2nd Duke of Kingston-Upon-Hull. We do, however, have an article for Evelyn Pierrepont, 2nd Duke of Kingston-upon-Hull. I believe the difference is in the dashes. Dismas|(talk) 04:46, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
I have found a page that requires attention
This page seems to be an attack page of sorts and violates the Wikipedia ToS. I request immediate attention here to this user's page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ReleaseThKraken — Preceding unsigned comment added by Funtimer45 (talk • contribs) 05:35, 9 April 2016 (UTC)