Help desk
< March 19	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 21 >

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

March 20[edit]

Original Research and the Iko Iko article[edit]

Hi, I realize this is unlikely the place to mention this, but today while surfing I came across the Iko Iko article, which deals with the famous song of that name. It has been tagged as having OR problems since 2007, but very recently (as in, since mid February 2010) it has turned into possibly the most unencyclopedic article I've ever come across on Wikipedia. The OR here is blatant and extreme -- in particular, check out Iko Iko#The meaning of the words of Iko, Iko, which begins with this gem:

This interesting study into the origins of the song comes from a Wikipedia contributor [11].who may have lifted the veil that has hidden the song's meaning for more than 50 years.

The [11] reference in question, when followed, actually gives the user's name (User:iancully1111) who seems to have created his account specifically in order to develop this article. While I applaud his commitment, he apparently doesn't have the faintest idea that original research is discouraged here. In the last month or so he's made hundreds of edits to the article, and his user page is an article rough draft for Iko Iko. As far as I can see he hasn't ever edited any other article.

On the article's talk page, another user (User:Fish Man) pointed out the OR problems, wondering whether or not we should revert the page to a version before iancully1111's changes (that would be this revision, from January 4th) but no one responded or acted on this suggestion. I don't think the article is important enough that it's on anyone's watch-list, which is why I'm bringing it up here.

Now, I know Wikipedia encourages us to be bold, but I'm not a WP editor, don't have a user, and don't have the time to devote to an edit war in any case, which I am certain would be the result were I to arbitrarily revert his edits. He obviously spent a lot of time on this article, and so I feel bad, but I think if any of you takes a look you'll agree that these changes can't possibly stand. Ideally someone with some standing in the WP community could revert these edits and make the revert stick, possibly also explaining to the editor in question what WP:OR is, why it's not allowed, etc. The material would be perfect for the user's personal website, but it really doesn't belong on WP.

You know that when you've done so much OR that you're citing yourself you've gone too far, or at least that ought to be the conclusion to draw. Sadly, the editor in question seems oblivious.

Thanks for your attention, 66.58.210.21 (talk) 00:08, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I just took care of that. The last 2/3rds of the article was basically an essay written by some user. It was a massive WP:OR problem, so I took it out. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. --Jayron32 03:17, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What, specifically, needs additional references/citations in our article "Armondo Linus Acosta"?[edit]

Additional citations have been requested for our article about Armondo Linus Acosta but we are not sure exactly what else is needed. Often in the film industry there is not a lot of documentation in print. If someone can let us know what else they need to see, that would be helpful. Sita23 (talk) 02:14, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The tag was incorrect - I changed it to {{nofootnotes}} because the references are not cited in-line. Please take a look at WP:CITE for guidance on citing sources. – ukexpat (talk) 02:22, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SAVING FILES IN .MHT FORMAT[edit]

I USED TO BE ABLE TO SAVE WIKIPEDIA FILES IN .MHT FORMAT, NOW I CANNOT. CAN SOMEONE HELP ME? ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davecox67 (talk • contribs) 06:06, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean Wikipedia articles? Files usually refers to image and sound files in Wikipedia. Which browser are you using? Does MHTML help? PrimeHunter (talk) 09:14, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

YES, SPECIFICALLY FILM DESCRIPTIONS AND INFO. I'M USING IE6. I CAN SAVE IN .HTM FORMAT. I CAN STILL SAVE OTHER WEB PAGES IN .MHT```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davecox67 (talk • contribs) 15:50, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop shouting by typing in all caps. Thanks.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:55, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It works for me in IE8. I don't have IE6 for testing. IE6 is from 2001, IE7 from 2006 and IE8 from 2009. Can you install a more recent IE version? It's free. There are also other free browsers which can do it. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:03, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar.... Usage[edit]

Pl correct me- My family and me wish u and family a happy new year. or My family and me wish u and your family a happy new year. or correct usage. contact me ////

My family and I wish you and your family a happy new year. Reyk _YO! 08:46, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Legend-table" (with image) into article[edit]

I want to know how to add a "legend-table" that accompanies an image into an article (under the image). The tag format is "legend-table|lang=en|title=etc". Anthony717 (talk) 08:51, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you refer to commons:Template:Legend-table. That template is at Wikimedia Commons and cannot be used here at the English Wikipedia. Template:Legend is here. Can you use that instead? PrimeHunter (talk) 09:52, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Approval for a bot[edit]

Can I using existing account as a bot, or must to register new one?

I will using the bot to create and mods station articles.219.68.144.148 (talk) 08:51, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Bot policy which says: "Automated or partially automated editing processes, known as "bots", must be harmless and useful, have approval, use separate user accounts, and be operated responsibly." Note Wikipedia:Bot policy#Approval process. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:56, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Somerset de Chair[edit]

The succession box reads "Next" rather than "Succeeded by". - Kittybrewster ☎ 09:59, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 10:11, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help me[edit]

Can you please help me? I am 4 days old today on wikipedia and I have made more than 10 edits, but I still aren't autoconfirmed. Please help me. Kommyboy16. 10:59, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your account is not yet four days old. It will not be four days old until 22:11. Algebraist 11:07, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was thinking about that. It is still 3 days old. Komodoboy16 11:36, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Signature[edit]

How can I make my signature all fancy with different links, colors etc.? I've tried using my preferences to do the trick but nothing seems to work. Mr. Prez (talk) 12:59, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You enter wikicode in the "Signature:" box in your preferences, then untick the "Sign my name exactly as shown box". However, you must read at least Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing your signature very closely. There are stringent guidelines regarding signature appearance. (Consider reading all of Wikipedia:Signatures while you are at it, there are guidelines in other sections.) Not following them, in most cases, is considered disrupting the project. Remember, fancy custom signature is most certainly not required. Xenon54 / talk / 13:09, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Mr. Prez (talk) 20:41, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But, wait, it's now working, but I want the "Pre" part to be green, instead it's coming up as blue. MR.PreZ 20:57, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Try this: MR.Pre Z Xenon54 / talk / 21:04, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way I could make it certain colors in bold print, like Tnxman307? MR.PreZ 21:08, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you can use </bold> Written by GeneralCheese 22:31, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

← Or just use the ''' regular bold wikicode. fetchcomms☛ 14:50, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading images to wikipedia[edit]

I am trying to add a company's logo in the infobox, I read that it should be uploaded to community portal, but dont know how and I read somewhere else that I should edit 10 articles first and then will be able to upload

HELP

PLEASE SEND ME THE EXACT STEPS TO UPLOAD IN WIKIPEDIA AND THEN IN THE INFOBOX

THANKS —Preceding unsigned comment added by Comma10 (talk • contribs) 13:19, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UPI should explain it all. Kayau Voting IS evil 14:19, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

>> When I click on Special:Upload it gives me an unauthorized error, what should I do??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Comma10 (talk • contribs) 14:26, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe your account is not autoconfirmed. Kayau Voting IS evil 14:37, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't. You don't have 10 edits yet. NERDYSCIENCEDUDE (✉ msg • changes) 14:39, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

<edit conflict>If you still can't do it try the commons. Kayau Voting IS evil 14:40, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unless it's a text logo, it can't be uploaded to Commons because of copyright reasons. NERDYSCIENCEDUDE (✉ msg • changes) 14:42, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:LOGO and {{logo fur}}. – ukexpat (talk) 15:38, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unless he happens to hold the copyright or has the company's agreement. Either way it is not surprising, is it? Kayau Voting IS evil 13:43, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Stone article.[edit]

Hello, don't know much about editing wiki, I did it once and got told off because in the time it took me to read the "How to" and learn how to do it, someone had gone in and done it - and all I managed to do was take some brackets off, ah well...any way, the Michael Stone article suddenly changes to Jason Greenwood for a paragraph (Trial) and then back to Michael Stone. Can someone check it's ok, I assume the writer made an error but after my last experience I am not going to touch it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Stone_(murderer) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.22.166.69 (talk) 13:52, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for spotting that, I've fixed it. If you want help with editing a page, read Wikipedia:How to edit a page. Don't worry about mistakes; they can be easily fixed and you there's nothing to worry about if you do the right thing. The change to that article has happened on 15 February (more than a month ago now) at it has gone unnoticed until now. That BLP article needs some cleanup, if anyone has a few minutes to spend. ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 14:02, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the noise[edit]

wat is the noise coming in the night or the insect doing the noise ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrDJariwala (talk • contribs) 14:03, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Umm... cricket? The Science Reference Desk might be a better place to ask, but I think you'll have to provide a little more detail, like what sort of an environment you are talking about. ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 14:12, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Picture[edit]

Hi, I'm new to Wikipedia editing and can't seem to get my picture to work on an infobox. I'm using the code guidelines given by certain help pages, but it only shows up "File:" than the picture link. The image itself doesn't display. Is there different code needed for putting a picture into an infobox? If so, what is it?

If you want to see what I mean, it's on my user page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:TCWikiEditor Thanks! TCWikiEditor (talk) 15:06, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you actually uploaded the image yet? I went to where it should be and found nothing. Rock drum (talk·contribs·guestbook) 15:08, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TCWikiEditor, The link you are adding seems to point to an external website. Due to copyright reasons Wikipedia does not support displaying external images (Images that are not on wikipedia's own servers). In order to display an image you need to be uploaded to Wikipedia first trough the WP:UPLOAD page. Kind regards, Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 15:09, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to add an existing image to an article, add [[Image:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text.]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information.
If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must find out what the proper license of the image is. If you know the image is licensed under a free-license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure what license the image takes, see the file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy. I hope this helps. – ukexpat (talk) 15:10, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

multiple instances of same Wikilink from an article.[edit]

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 19:33, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is this ever allowed ?--Penbat (talk) 19:08, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not specifically prohibited, although it is generally discouraged. Take a look at Wikipedia:Linking#Repeated links for the full guideline. Xenon54 / talk / 19:15, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thx --Penbat (talk) 19:25, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Im New and i want to see more because sometimes it wont let you go on surten stuff

GNG versus other notability guidlines[edit]

I've been wondering about this for a while. In cases where a specific notability guideline (for example WP:ATHLETE) is applicable, does it supersede the GNG? RadManCF ☢ open frequency 20:12, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do you mean? In general practice, the specific notability guidelines exist to clairify cases where a specific class of article is likely to pass the GNG. As in "Pro atheletes that compete at the highest possible levels of their sport almost always are written about in lots of magazines and newspapers, so all such people are likely notable." In general, articles are never deleted at AFD because they pass the GNG but do not pass any specific guideline (thus, a minor league baseball player may be notable for reasons that have nothing to do with his being an athelete; OR he may have recieved lots of coverage of his baseball play despite not meeting WP:ATHLETE.) The basic rule is if the in-depth, independent, and reliable sources exist, the subject is notable even if the subject does not fit into any of the arbitrary categories listed at some random subject-specific notability guideline. We don't generally delete any properly-referenced articles regardless of what the subject specific notability guidelines say. --Jayron32 20:32, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moreover, most if not all of the specific notability guidelines restate the GNG as one of their criteria. There are a few cases where the terms of a specific guideline may seem to trump the GNG. For example if a person was running for political office, particularly local political office, and lost. The person may have gotten lots of press coverage, but all as part of or in connection with the campaign. Such a person will not in general pass WP:POLITICIAN and some will argue for deletion, partly on the ground that such coverage is not "significant" and "in-depth", and some on the grounds that the campaign is a single event, and WP:BLP1E applies. Decisions have gone both ways in such cases, but where the coverage seems to be about the person, for example a truly in-depth political profile, rather than just about the campaign, articles are often not deleted. But these are ofdten borderline, judgment-call cases. DES ^(talk) 20:53, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I could rephrase my question as: If a specific notability guideline applies, and an article fails it, but still meets the GNG, would the article be worthy of inclusion? RadManCF ☢ open frequency 21:05, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. The general notability guideline trumps everything else. As Jayron32 said earlier, an article on a baseball player will never be deleted because the player meets the general notability guideline but not WP:ATHLETE -- for example, a well-covered minor league amateur player, who would not meet WP:ATHLETE because they do not play at the highest professional level. The sub-guidelines only exist to extend what is considered to be "significant coverage in reliable, independent sources", relating to a particular subject area. Xenon54 / talk / 21:09, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ImageRemovalBot[edit]

Why does User:ImageRemovalBot still say "removing deleted image" rather than "removing deleted file"? Komodoboy16 21:27, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Though the namespace was recently renamed to "file" (and some of us of a certain Wiki-age still habitually use "image", it still works), the vast majority of files uploaded locally to the English Wikipedia are copyrighted images that are claimed as fair use. User-created images, movies and audio files are usually freely licensed and thus go to Wikimedia Commons. So most, if not all, of the ImageRemovalBot's jobs would be removing misplaced and inappropriately tagged images, with only the occasional movie or audio file. Besides, even if this wasn't the case it would still be too time consuming and confusing to rename the bot to "FileRemovalBot". Xenon54 / talk / 21:33, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Komodoboy16 21:36, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Translation // French[edit]

Can Wikipedia translate the article on the French Wikipedia about Jules Contant?

Jules Contant (Blois, 1852 – 1920) est un artiste-peintre français ayant travaillé avec les impressionnistes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.201.127.3 (talk) 21:32, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia cannot translate anything, but there are editors who will translate articles. Please look at WP:Translation. --ColinFine (talk) 11:41, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The French article in question is interesting and a good basic outline, but contains far too much irrelevant detail, is unreferenced, and needs a stronger asssertion of notability. I have drafted an English version based on the French article and will store it in my sandbox until I have it ready for the mainspace. Ka renjc 12:43, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond the Pole[edit]

The director of the film has asked me to edit what is there already and everything he is asking me to include keeps getting reverted. Help would be wonderful! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Azaskarsfan (talk • contribs) 21:45, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Before you do that, please read our guidelines for editing with a conflict of interest. Then please discuss your proposed changes on the article's talk page. – ukexpat (talk) 22:08, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So many edits...[edit]

Why are there so many edits made here every day? Komodoboy16 21:46, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean on Wikipedia or on the help desk? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 21:51, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikipedia. Komodoboy16 22:00, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well it is one of the most visible websites on the internet and it is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit... – ukexpat (talk) 22:05, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Well, I'm just wondering why somany people come here. Komodoboy16 22:08, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can see three reasons: (1) We have an article on anything and everything. (2) Anyone can edit. (3) We get mentioned quite frequently on well-read news websites such as BBC News, as well as tech-oriented sites such as Slashdot. (An unfortunate side effect of this is more often than not reporters don't know what they are talking about, and this leads to a lot of misconceptions. The BBC and New York Times are probably exceptions, their stories are well-researched.) In addition, these combine to make Wikipedia appear near the top of Google search results. Xenon54 / talk / 22:31, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]