Help desk
< May 9	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 11 >

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.

May 10

new entry

how do i add a new entry/definition to wikipedia?Fertilityauthority (talk) 01:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the Your first article. Wikipedia articles are about encyclopaedic topics that are considered to be notable, which is defined as being significantly covered by reliable sources that are then cited by the article, and under no circumstances is Wikipedia to be used to advertise (see also the Business FAQ). Your username also appears to be promotional, in direct violation of the username policy. Please consider getting it changed if you want to begin editing constructively. Xenon54 (talk) 01:43, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have a cough that someone needs to check out =

No, I'm not asking for medical advice ;) In some of Wikipedia's media files, most recently I've noticed Tchaikovsky's 1812 (), at several spots (one is at 4:00, probably more) someone can clearly be heard coughing. Can this be taken care of? I would have no idea how to do it. THX 68.248.227.1 (talk) 03:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That piece also randomly ends at 11:17,despite purportedly being "length 16m39s". Can that be sorted out too? 03:04, 10 May 2010 (UTC)~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.248.227.1 (talk)

This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Computing reference desk. They specialize in answering computer questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. Kittybrewster ☎ 07:26, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is not uncommon for coughing to be heard in live recordings of classical music. I suggest that it not be removed, as a live concert recording is supposed to be different than a highly polished and engineered studio recording, with its many retakes, dubbing, etc. Princess Caraboo (talk) 13:17, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

articles on TV episodes

I noticed that some TV episodes have articles. These include routine episodes, not the final show or an unusual show. Is this permitted? Assorg (talk) 03:52, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but as per everything else the episode needs external coverage. So an episode that gets press coverage, or is discussed as a particularly good example of something, or similar. In other words, the individual episode needs to be notable. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 04:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is this enough? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coming_of_Age_(Star_Trek:_The_Next_Generation) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cafe_(Seinfeld_episode)

I don't want to make a fuss. I just want to know. I might make a new article if I know in advance what is ok. Assorg (talk) 04:15, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It may be OK if you can find reliable sources which are clearly independent of the subject, and which show a certain depth of coverage to allow the article to pass minimum notability standards. Additionally, Wikipedia articles need to focus primarily on covering topics from a perspective outside of the work of fiction itself. I'll say right now that Wikipedia's coverage of pop culture is woefully weak in this regard, standards of notability tend to be much more lax for topics around popular TV shows and the like, likely due to the sheer weight of fighting the problem. Most of these articles are basically entirely in-universe plot summaries with little else on the wider significance of the subject. The crux of the problem can be understood by reading the (now historical) essay Wikipedia:Pokémon test. I would personally recommend against adding to the problem, but you are free to make any additions you deem, in good faith, to be worthwhile. --Jayron32 04:56, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why does my watchlist have entries like "(+377)" or "(-448)?"

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 15:52, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why does my watchlist have entries like "(+377)" or "(-448)?" Is it some sort of scoring system, and if so what is being scored? The article, my edit, or something else? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guymacon (talk • contribs) 04:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is the difference in the number of characters between the current edit and the previous one. It's a helpful tool to quickly spot something like vandalism; an edit which has something like (-25,456) is likely not a helpful edit, and deserves further investigation. --Jayron32 04:49, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Guy Macon 04:57, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot download my created book

I can creat a book but I cannot download it. When I download it, it displays an information of the reset linking. How can I download it in pdf format? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Htzhang (talk • contribs) 06:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had no problems creating and downloading a book. What happens if you try to "Save and Share your book" to your user space instead of downloading it? -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 10:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Troulbe opening programs

everytime, I open a program , a little screen comes up telling me that IE isn't working. Then it stays there until I close it and whatever I wanted to open--is open. How do I get it to stop that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.8.173 (talk) 07:07, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Computing reference desk. They specialize in answering computer questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:09, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Date/Time

On a recent article (Lena Horne), you reported "This page was last modified on 10 May 2010 at 07:47". My question is, why don't you indicate the Time Zone -- such as PDT, EDT, etc. Without that, the time info is rather meaningless. Don't you agree? Thank you. 216.103.80.241 (talk) 08:29, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unless otherwise specified, all times on Wikipedia are UTC. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\

Sorry, it defaults to UTC - but if you have set a time zone in your preferences, the time (although not labelled) will be that zone's time. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 12:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For more information, see Coordinated Universal Time. Eastern Daylight is 4 hours behind UTC, and Pacific Daylight Time is 7 hours behind. Xenon54 (talk) 10:14, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to find the MediaWiki page for that, but I couldn't find it to start a discussion about this: would it be worth changing the relevant page to include "(UTC)" after the time? -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 10:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 45#at time zone to time stamp at bottom of articles "This page was last modified on .5Bdd month year, at xx:xx.5D". (UTC) has been added and removed in the past.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 11:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a shame there's no TIMEZONE magic word! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 12:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Log in

Hi - I work for a law firm and we need to update our Wikipedia entry. I do not know who set up our page or what the log in details are. How can I update the entry? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.233.131.153 (talk) 10:09, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of things to note:

No one owns an article, even if they are the subject of that article
If you want to update an article, then as long as you have reliable independent sources which verify the information, then you are welcome to do so - just bear in mind that Wikipedia is not an advertising venue, and all articles should be written from a neutral point of view
Assuming that the page was created by a registered user (as you didn't say what page it was, we can't check this), then that individual has their own account - accounts are not for groups of people, or companies (see the User Name policy for more information on this). Should you wish to create your own account for editing, you are welcome to do so - but you need to remember that it will be an account for you only, and not for advertising in articles, as this may lead to the account being blocked.

Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 10:18, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would also be a very good idea for you to read Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations. Gandalf61 (talk) 15:21, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

new section to an article

I want to edit the article on "hygiene" by adding a new section on "home and everyday life hygiene". How do i add a new section - and make sure it is listed in the contents

Florenceboot (talk) 11:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you read Help:Section, that explains how to go about doing that! I would, however, suggest discussing your proposed addition on the article's talk page (here) to get consensus about whether it is required and what should be included - it may be something that has been considered in the past, or the people who have edited the article previously may have suggestions on how best to add this section -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:04, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your question about the table of contents, a new section will automatically appear in the table of contents. You need do nothing other than create the section as described in the Help:Section link.--SPhilbrick T 12:51, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

adding a new section

how do I find out who wrote the current article on hygiene? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Florenceboot (talk • contribs) 11:35, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can find who has contributed to any article by clicking the History link that is at the top of every page. here is a direct link to the hygiene article history for you, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hygiene&action=history ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 11:43, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)Quite a number of editors have contributed in various ways. If you click on the "view history" tab at the top of the article, it will identify the contributors, starting with the 50 most recent. However, using that page is not the easiest at first, although this should help. Is there a specific question you have? For example, if you want to know who added a specific word or phrase, there are tools to do that.--SPhilbrick T 11:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If this is connected to your query in the last section, you do not need to know who wrote the article! Just leave a message on the talk page explaining what you are thinking of adding - interested editors will respond! Alternatively, add a section (as explained at Help:Section) and if other editors disagree with it being there, they will remove/change it as necessary. Getting consensus on adding a section (via a discussion on the talk page) is the preferred method for a very established article (this article was created in November 2002, and has had over 500 editors involved!) -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:57, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Inaction on requested edit

Last Wednesday, I made a request (using the "Request Edit" template) looking for another editor to review and (I hoped) implement a proposed researched + rewritten version of the Fred C. Koch article. However, five days have gone by now without any comment. My explanation of the proposed changes and potential COI issue is on the Talk page for that article; if someone here can take a look at it, I would appreciate that greatly. Cheers, NMS Bill (talk) 13:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine to me, thanks a lot for your work on the article. I've made a minor change to your work, which you can view here. If you disagree with this change you're welcome to revert it. Apart from that the article looks fine, and Shirik (talk · contribs) has kindly history merged your work to Fred C. Koch. Sorry for the unusual delay in getting a response to you. Kindest regards, Spitfire^Tally-ho! 16:11, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help! I'll leave a note on your Talk page about follow-up. NMS Bill (talk) 16:45, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlist

Is it possible to organize your watchlist so that it shows you the articles in the order you added them to your watchlist? --Drogonov 15:29, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that's not possible, or at least not as far as I'm aware. The closest is the alphabetical layout here Special:Watchlist/edit. Spitfire^Tally-ho! 15:33, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do I become an authorized user to be able to upload a file to link to a page I am working on?

I need to upload a new logo but the upload form says it is for confirmed users, yada. How do I get permission to edit everything? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjhallifax (talk • contribs) 15:56, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Before you can upload your account must be autoconfirmed - ie 10 edits and at least 4 days old. – ukexpat (talk) 16:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You need one more edit as I type this! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:05, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New mentor/adopter person

Hi, I was wondering if it is possible to change my adopter/mentor. I am very active on Wiki and he is just absent too much to satisfy my questions. Homework2 ^{pass a note}sign! 16:02, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest that you firstly leave a message at his talk page - and then look for another mentor, and ask them. This isn't really the place to ask! If you are being mentored, go to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User Rehab; if you are being adopted, go to Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's Area/Adopters -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:07, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glucaid

Glucaid is glucose drink for GTT patient. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.109.55.128 (talk) 16:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Also, if you have any questions about using Wikipedia, this is the place to ask. TN X Man 16:41, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

speedy deletion tag on a talk page

I found a speedy deletion tag on a talk page Talk:Shri Saibaba Sansthan Trust, Shirdi. Now, the article Shri Saibaba Sansthan Trust, Shirdi is absolutely not "pure vandalism". Can talk pages really be deleted independently of the article?? And why not just delete the nonsense text on the talk page? Lova Falk (talk) 17:06, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done - here. – ukexpat (talk) 17:13, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Lova Falk (talk) 17:17, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How does one permanently close a Wikipedia account?

How does one permanently close a Wikipedia account? I searched the FAQ but, surprisingly found nothing.

Thanks in advance.

Precisionfiltration (talk) 18:11, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't possible - you should just stop using it. Prodego ^talk 18:13, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also Wikipedia:Right to vanish if you want the username to be hidden, but it's easier for us if you just stop using the account. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:15, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can put {{retired}} on the user page. kcylsnavS (kalt) 13:03, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia with citations

I looking at material on copying within Wikipedia, but could only find information about copyrights.

My question is, can I copy cited material within Wikipedia without looking up the citations, relying on the original editor? (I will note that I am generally reluctant to do this, having corrected several mis-cites. However, sometimes it appears to be the lesser of two evils.) May this be done?

On the side, because the article is so complex, I will just ask: For copyright purposes, is it enough to put a reference to the original page in the comment on the edit?

Thank you.Mzk1 (talk) 18:17, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's generally a bad idea to cite material found in Wikipedia. While editors are striving to make it as good as possible, it is a tertiary source, which is general not a good cite in any event, and the material can change. (If you want to cite, it is better to go to the references included, but you've said you don't want to do that.)

If you are writing something about Wikipedia, then it would make sense to cite Wikipedia, and there are ways to do that to ensure that you cite a stable version. Can you explain how you intend to use it, and perhaps we can give a more specific answer?--SPhilbrick T 18:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see this page: Citing Wikipedia?--SPhilbrick T 18:43, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I am not being clear.

What I mean is, that a particular page has some information that I use on another page. What I wanted to do was to copy the information, together with its citations, which in this case I am not able to look up. As I said, I do not like doing this; I already have problems with citations copied from the Jewish Encyclopedia, that I found did not support (or even refer to) the material that the editor copied. But in some rare cases, this appears to be my best option. But I am not citing Wikipedia, I am citing the original sources, but I am relying on the other editor's having seen them.Mzk1 (talk) 18:48, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks, I did misunderstand. I have seen a discussion of that issue - I'll see if I can find it.--SPhilbrick T 18:52, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please check to see if Wikipedia:Summary style will accomplish your goal. I believe it is the preferred way to do what you want to do. However, that is not the discussion I was looking for and will keep looking.--SPhilbrick T 18:55, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I was looking for : Copying within Wikipedia--SPhilbrick T 19:07, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all of your efforts; I did see that article before. But I do not see where it addresses the issue of citation copying.Mzk1 (talk) 19:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As far as the citations themselves, they can be copied without attribution as they should only be short factual descriptions of the references used. The material supported by the citation is the part that requires attribution, and since you want to copy both, you should provide attribution. Per Copying within Wikipedia that Sphilbrick pointed you to, you can attribute in the edit summary with something like "copied content from [[article name]]", or to be more thorough, you can place {{copied}} on the talk pages of both the copied-to and copied-from articles. Does that answer your question? VernoWhitney (talk) 18:06, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Leaving aside the attribution issue, which I think is amply covered, I have done this myself and understand your uneasiness. When a source is inaccessible, in a way it relies on our *own* trustworthiness as editors. By that I mean that if an inaccessible source is cited by User:Habitual Vandal and Hoaxer, it's far more likely to be removed as unreliable than if placed by User:10 Billion Featured Articles to His Name. The edit summary and talk page can also help with this, as you can note in either or both that you are taking the citations on faith but have not verified them yourself. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:28, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

request to move draft to main space

I made a request back in March to move a draft to main space (I have not made 10 edits with my account) and I have not heard anything back yet. Does this mean my article was not approved? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Les Lent (talk • contribs) 19:05, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You learn something new every day. I've never seen that template before. It add your request to a category, one I've not seen before. I'm not sure who monitors it. More comments shortly.--SPhilbrick T 19:12, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I glanced at the category, and see 243 entries in it. The one I looked at was created in January, so separately I'll look into why it isn't getting much attention. Regarding your article:

Fairly well-written, so that's a good start.
Almost devoid of references, and the one that is there, isn't in the proper format. References can be tricky, but they are very important. Please check out WP:CITE and footnotes.
One of the reasons you need references is to support Notability, which is critical. I suspect this subject is notable, but you need to reference reliable sources.
It is best is notability is asserted in the lede paragraph.
If you can add a few references supporting notability, I'll be happy to move it for you, but when you have edited twice more, you can move it yourself. Make sure you have some references supporting notability before moving, ot is may be in danger of deletion.--SPhilbrick T 19:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

editing an erroneous image caption

I cannot figure out how to edit the text in the caption of a photo. I (Raymond Duncan page: caption reads that he is pictured with his daughter - in fact it is his son -- the Library of Congress text describing the image should be used instead - it is accurate.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doreeds (talk • contribs) 20:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done with this edit. The file information was at the top of the page and I edited the caption there. If you still have questions, just let me know. TN X Man 20:45, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The caption was in the lead section which can be edited by clicking the "edit this page" tab at top. See more at Wikipedia:Lead section#Editing the lead section. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:08, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How Do I Update a Logo on a Wiki Page

Hi Wikipedia - There is a logo on our Wiki page that someone else created that is not a current logo. Our Company would like to change that logo to a current logo. After spending 2 or 3 hours on your page, I cannot figure out how to do it. Please help.

Sandra Fullsailbrewing (talk) 23:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Logos at Wikipedia are uploaded as images. If you click on the image, you should be taken to a documentation page. From that page, you can upload a new logo, once you become autoconfirmed (after 4 days and 10 edits). Upload a new version following the instructions at WP:UPLOAD. Please try not to make any major edits to your company's page, though, as working for the subject of an article constitutes a conflict of interest, and you may find it difficult to maintain a neutral point of view writing about something with which you are affiliated. Intelligentsium 00:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We can do it if you give the page name and a link to an image file with the logo at the company website. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:12, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That would be most excellent if you could update it for us. Here is the page and here is the link to the logo. Thank you. Sandra

http://www.fullsailbrewing.com/client/Full-Sail-Brewing-Company-Logo.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_Sail_Brewing_Company —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fullsailbrewing (talk • contribs) 01:41, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded File:Full-Sail-Brewing-Company-Logo.png at a reduced resolution to comply with our fair use policy. It is now displayed at Full Sail Brewing Company. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:31, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

THANK YOU and CHEERS! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fullsailbrewing (talk • contribs) 02:39, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you don' mind another question. I noticed on some of the other Brewery pages they mention their brewery tours and Tasting Rooms. How do you add a section like that to a page? Here is an example... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heineken_Experience#Current_Brewery_Tour —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fullsailbrewing (talk • contribs) 02:48, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think any of that tour stuff is encyclopedic, it reads more like a travel guide and should be heavily reduced if not excised completely. – ukexpat (talk) 15:39, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]