Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2012 February 1

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.

February 1

interwiki links do not work

in all wikipedias interwiki links do not seem to work. is there a technical problem? --91.20.60.86 (talk) 00:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, was just edit conflicted: I have just edited Bungotakada and while I made no change to the links to foreign language Wikipedias, these links are all now appearing at the bottom of the page in red rather at the side in blue. Thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 00:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:VPT#Interwiki_links. Dismas|^(talk) 00:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

User page not created after sign up

After I got to the wikipedia page after sign up that listed the articles that needed to be edited i did so, but after editing i clicked on my username on the top right corner (my username was red) and my browser displayed a could not find this webpage notice — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thetechexpert (talk • contribs) 04:14, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

You should have gotten a page to let you create that page, but just in case I've created the page for you (as well as leaving a welcome message on your user talk page.) See if you can get to the page now. RJFJR (talk) 04:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Try to provide a verifiable link for "Niticeability".

Got this error message in my sandbox page - "Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{Reflist}} template or a <references /> tag; see the help page."

My userid is ikjeft03. Please help. Thanks, Robert— Preceding unsigned comment added by ikjeft03 (talk • contribs)

See Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. Basically, you have references but you haven't put the template in to display them. Just put {{Reflist}} where you want them to appear. Dismas|^(talk) 05:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Trying to get some feedback: Did the help page in that message help you or did you not see the link? ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 12:22, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

navigation box help

how can I make this box better? I mean what information typically goes here? Also how on earth do you change the colors and formatting ? thanks. Here is the box:

See Template:Los Angeles, :New York City, :Philadelphia at their respective pages for inspiration. I can't help with colors & formatting. Dru of Id (talk) 11:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Color is covered in the basestyle parameter. - Purplewowies (talk) 16:59, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Also, see Wikipedia:Navigation templates. - Purplewowies (talk) 19:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

How long do I have to wait before setting up a proposed new WikiProject?

How long is a WikiProject proposal supposed to be listed at WP:COUNCIL/P before I can create that project? Should I simply wait a bit longer? If the proposal does not get any responses, can I go ahead and start the project anyway? The proposal I made is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/NFCC Enforcement. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 12:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The instructions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals say you should wait until you have 6-12 supporters. -- John of Reading (talk) 14:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

It also says 'all failed proposals older than 3 months...'; so, up to three months... I've also verified that the acronym does not appear in the archives of previous suggestions. Dru of Id (talk) 21:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Dorial Green Beckham

Said on his national signing day he signed with the Mizzouri Tigers- I think it should be "Missouri" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.114.4.196 (talk) 16:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Looks like it's been fixed. When you see an error like this, you can fix it yourself. Be Bold. RudolfRed (talk) 16:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

PDF off computer as reference?

As a new user I would like to attach a pdf document as a reference to an article, I have the pdf on my desktop but would like this to be available for others to vies. Could anyone tell show me the coding required to upload the pdf and also how the pdf icon is shown. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuttlebug (talk • contribs) 16:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

For a source to be used as a reference in Wikipedia, it needs to be something that has already been published. If it has been published elsewhere, are you sure that you can put in on Wikipedia without breaching the existing copyright? - David Biddulph (talk) 17:04, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it has to have been published somewhere else (i.e. it should not be something you just wrote yourself for the purpose of proving the information you just added). If it exists elsewhere online (even if through a paywall), you can use a link to it and use it in the normal way you would use other references. If it is licensed to be freely available or in the public domain, you can also upload a copy to a file hosting site. But if it is copyrighted material, please do not upload it yourself.

You can, however, still cite it even then. Though you can not link to a full copy, identifying the source of information as accurately as possible is good enough. It's the same thing you do when citing offline printed material.

If it is an article in an academic journal or a serial publication, I recommend using the {{Cite journal}} template. If it is a book, use {{Cite book}}. Include as much details as possible - year/date, author, and title at the minimum; and ISBN/ISSN/DOI, publisher, editor, chapter, volume, pages, issue, etc. when appropriate.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 18:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

wp access

Please help!

I can't log in.

I started editing enwp in 2008, mostly from a Nokia cellphone, provided by a 3rd party. Other than that, mostly on public computers.

I lost access at home early last year, maybe March or April, I don't know, but you can look at my contribs, and you'll see that I came to a screeching halt. It's not like I was super-prolific, like some of your editors: I may have created one or two articles, probably deleted by now, but as I used WP, & Wiktionary, etc., if I saw a typo or poor grammer, or felt that I could contribute, in whatever small way, I did. I was "be[ing] bold"!!! I don't know who comes up with the WP philosophy, but I like most of it very much. WP is something I want to be a part of, to give back. I don't feel that way about much that I encounter on the web, or in the world, for that matter.

I know, I'm rambling Probably inappropriate at the help desk.

Anyway, I was Ragityman, and I think I was doing more good than harm. At first I blanked a few pages, accidently, I swear. I think a few Wikipedians finally decided I wasn't a vandal. I even received one or two emails fm WP.

At some point, I believe I must have changed my password. I had been using the same one almost from the first day, and it WAS a weak one. But I've tried and tried, and I'm not coming up with it.

I have, as I said, received email from Wikipedia in the past, at two different email boxes, so I know email was enabled at one point. I think one said,"click link to confirm," or some such, which I probably never did, as the link was "stale" by the time I saw it, recently. I get a lot of spam, so I don't bother with email so much.

I have repeatedly asked to reset my password, but I never receive a response. Even a negative response is helpful, as it lets me know I can stop wasting my time and effort.

On the subject of time and effort, I made some edits to an article called Sumunumus (which needs to be moved, see my entry on the Discussion page), and they were instantly reverted. Someone is being VERY territorial. And it's not like it's a showpiece article -- it needs A LOT of work: Just take a look at it. But I'm typing with one thumb on a tiny, tiny qwerty, and I'm not going to edit-war with this person.

I can tell you what my IP was for almost my entire editing career. I know my account number for WP, as well as many other of the Wiki projects. I could probably come up with the names of most of the articles I worked on. I could tell you the name of some of the Wikipedians I interacted with (some would remember me, I'm sure, as we tend to remember people who are tedious and worrysome, and I am sometimes both of those, but I mean well.) I know there is a project underway to encourage editors to create an account, and to continue to edit after that first day. I know that other people forget — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.187.14 (talk) 17:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Are you absolutely sure you are checking the correct email address? See this page. If nothing in there helps, there really is nothing anyone can do. You would have to start anew under another account, though you can disclose that you earlier edited under the previous name but lost your password. You would lose your editing history, watchlists, and list of contributions, but they might not be that important to you anyway. The contents of your talk pages, subpages, etc. in your past account can be moved and redirected to your new account easily enough.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 18:42, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Check if the password-reset emails have been filtered into your 'junk mail' folder, or similar.  Chzz  ►  19:24, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation

Why can't any adminstrators create a disambiguation heading, under or above the languages section on the left hand side of a page, instead of having either disambiguation or "for other Eric Johnsons see" because it spoils the BLP, its the first thing your eye is drawn to instead of the artical itself, or if not on the left hand side of the page then at the bottom of the artical, just above Categorys.188.28.200.233 (talk) 17:43, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Not everyone who lands in that page are looking for the same person or thing.

Imagine you were looking for Eric Johnson, the Canadian actor, but every time you type the name you are taken to a page about an American musician. Do you think you should have to scour the entire page for clues on where you might actually find the correct article that you wanted to read? No. You should find your way to the correct article as quickly as possible.

That's why it's at the top and is the first thing all the readers see. See WP:HNP.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 18:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Quick question

I'm new to Wikipedia & need some help. I see an article with a factual error - on Gwent, County. I look up the quoted reference - it contains no mention of the facts claimed. I remove the false claim, it is undone, I insert a link to another, better written article on Wikipedia which explains the point quite clearly - it is also deleted (apparently not permitted?). If I attempt to edit again, the author will simply re-edit again.....so, my question is: what's the point of being able to edit if the author then just deletes it, and who then ensures that the information on Wikipedia is not just a mass of muddled thoughts and misinformation? 12276631 (talk) 18:54, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

If you make an edit, and another user disagrees with it, you need to discuss it - do not keep repeating the edit. Refer to Wikipedia:Edit warring, Wikipedia:Consensus, Help:Using talk pages.

The correct place to discuss it is, Talk:Gwent (county).

If you check the article history, you'll see in the edit summary that that is exactly what the other user (Ghmyrtle (talk · contribs)) has suggested.

I'll let that user know about this discussion, but please discuss it on Talk:Gwent (county). Thanks.  Chzz  ►  19:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Cymrupara. What you did was remove the material you claim is not verified by the citation in the text, but you also removed the citation entirely, when it was appended to other material in the same sentence to which you apparently do not object and which (one hopes) it verifies. When people see removal of a citation (a common practice of vandals) they often revert that type of edit very quickly unless there's a good explanation for removal. Remember that a big problem of Wikipedia is lack of sourcing, so people are touchy about citation removal. This was coupled with your lack of an accompanying edit summary , explaining why you were removing the material. If Ghmyrtle had understood your reason for removal from an edit summary (as opposed to only learning it later when you edited his talk page) he might have fixed your edit by placing back the citation, but not reverting your removal of the material you say the source does not verify. Meanwhile, your later edit adding a reference to another Wikipedia article was properly reverted. We do not cite to other Wikipedia articles because Wikipedia is a user created tertiary source and not a secondary reliable source, because doing so constituted a self-reference and because it is incestuous referencing.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:36, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

My name on the list of Akoko Sons

I am Sunday Olorundahunsi, I am by the grace of God the current Chief Registrar,Supreme Court of Nigeria. My name was written as Idowu Dahunsi. I will appreciate if my name is corrected immediately. Thanks for the good work you are doing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.205.187.107 (talk) 19:15, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I have removed all of the unreferenced names from the article Akoko, with this edit, in accordance with our policy of verifiability, especially regarding living people.

Please supply appropriate references for any information for the article. For help, see WP:REFB.

Any unreferenced information may be removed, at any time.  Chzz  ►  19:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy Deletions...

Our first post was flagged for "speedy deletion" and promptly removed. I did some research and learned that perhaps -- even though we intended for our post to be informative and not promotional in nature -- we were using too many superlatives and making statements that couldn't necessarily be substantiated. As such, we rewrote the piece and posted a new version. However, that was flagged too -- and "speedily" deleted. Is there any way we could get more/better feedback? Again, our post aims to be informative and not promotional. Thanks so much for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rentersguide (talk • contribs) 19:38, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

These issues are a bit complex, but please bear with me, I'll try to explain this as easily as possible.

• Not everything that exists merits a Wikipedia article about it. Wikipedia has standards over which subjects merit an article and which do not.
• Seperate from that issue, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for promotion of one's own interests. The fact that you are creating this article means you are trying to tell people about your business. That is called "promotion" and isn't allowed at Wikipedia.

The first problem is that the subject of your article is not the subject of extensive, independent writing. That means that people, who have no connection to your business, have NOT written extensively about it, there are no books written about your company, Forbes Magazine hasn't devoted a cover story to it, etc. etc. This means that your company does not appear to meet the miniumum standards of notability that Wikipedia attempt to uphold (see Wikipedia:Notability for more information). This is so that we can assure that all of the information in Wikipedia articles can be independently verified (see Wikipedia:Verifiability) to reliable sources (see Wikipedia:Reliable sources). If there is no independent reliable source material to use to help write an article, then there shouldn't be an article.

The second issue is related to the idea that Wikiepedia articles need to maintain a neutral point of view. To insure that all articles do, people are not supposed to write about things to which they are too connected, such as themselves, family members, businesses they are connected to, etc. More about this can be found at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.

In summation 1) It does not appear your company has been written about by other people before you tried to create a Wikipedia article, thus the article has no reason to exist (at least, not one which is in line with Wikipedia's core policies and values) and 2) Even if it did, you shouldn't be the one writing it. I hope that clears things up. --Jayron32 19:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

As a non-admin, I cannot be of too much help, as the pages you created are now deleted and invisible to me. However, if the pages you created were promotional in nature, then they will be deleted unless you write them from a completely neutral point of view. In addition, if the company is not notable (if there are no independent reliable sources), then it is not notable enough for Wikipedia, and will be deleted. Your username suggests that you might be creating articles about something with which you have a connection - is this the case? If so, I would recommend that you don't - our conflist of interest guidelines warns against that, as it is almost impossible to write neutrally on a subject you are involved in. Also you seem to refer to "we" and "our": are you the only user of your account, or are you editing on behalf of a company? ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Interwiki links are broken

I just noticed today that interwiki links are broken on Wikipedia. For example, the interwiki link to the German Wikipedia at Finnish markka doesn't go to http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnische_Mark, it goes to an English Wikipedia article called "de:Finnische Mark", which doesn't exist. Is this some bug in Wikipedia? JIP | Talk 19:39, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I have filed a Bugzilla bug report about this. JIP | Talk 19:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Seeing some odd interwiki behavior on the bottom of many pages. Links are displaying in the article as a bunch of red links. See January 27. If you don't see it, running this will make it show up. !link to bug report? Swayback Maru ^{Mufka's alternate account (talk)} 19:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

This is being discussed at WP:VPT - pleas continue the discussion there. – ukexpat (talk) 19:55, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

No links to digital pages

Question:

You have a category called "Digital newspapers published in the United States". It seems that is all it is, a listing. All attempts to go to the actual digitzed papers failed. All you go to is the today edition of that paper. Example: I want to read an edition of the 1915 Albuquerque "Journal". But when I click on the link, I get the Feb 1, 2011 edition with no way to reach the 1915 edition as the newspapers themselves either do not have it or do no share it. Comment please? Thank you.

Jerry Jackson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.55.185.189 (talk) 20:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

First, categories are only a listing, and so only link to our article of whatever is in that category. We cannot help with things off wiki, if you want to be able to view old editions of things please ask the people who maintain the website. Rcsprinter (lecture) 20:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The category holds encyclopedia articles about the digital newspapers. It does not hold the newspapers themselves. JIP | Talk 20:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The category should, however, give you an additional term in your search, possibly "in quotes", to narrow your results to information where you're looking. Dru of Id (talk) 21:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Digital newspapers published in the United States says: "Newspapers in the United States which are available digitally (either downloadable or browsable online), format similar to the print version."

It doesn't claim the listed newspapers have digital archives of old editions. Perhaps you are more interested in Wikipedia:List of online newspaper archives. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:34, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle

Hi, twinkle is not really working, i get the dropdown thing but on the diff view i cant get rollback William George Dover [Willdude123] 20:57, 1 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willdude123 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia:Twinkle/doc#Troubleshooting installation says: "You must be registered, and your account must be autoconfirmed (it must be at least four days old and have at least ten edits), to use Twinkle."

Your account is one day and has five edits. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:27, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Libelous writing

Someone today twice has written on my account saying that I am selling cars on Ebay and that I am writing a book about selling fraudulent cars on Ebay. I have deleted the information but they keep coming back. Can you block them from my account please. That goes to Google and is libelous. I am reporting them to the FBI. Please help.

Larry Garrison President SilverCreek Entertainment — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gpinews (talk • contribs) 22:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I have reported the attacker at WP:UFAA. —teb728 t c 01:24, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Just to clarify: the person did not write "on your account" but wrongly contributed to an article ABOUT you. These are two different concepts.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 22:20, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

KBDI-TV

It is unclear where to change the main title name of the KBDI-TV page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KBDI-TV

The foremost header says "KBDI-TV" and can not see under the editing option how to update that to reflect the organizations new name. It should now say: Colorado Public Television (CPT12), Formerly KBDI.

Please help.

Thanks.

67.136.179.215 (talk) 22:29, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

To change the name of a page, it must be moved. Only autoconfirmed users can do this - as an IP editor, you will be unable to move the page. In addition, Colorado Public Television already exists, as a redirect to KBDI-TV. An admin will need to delete the target page so that the move can be performed; I shall nominate that for speedy deletion and try to get the move done. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 22:51, 1 February 2012 (UTC)