Help desk
< August 18	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 20 >

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.

August 19

Defamatory Wiki Page

Jho Low

read it...

really? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.45.66.115 (talk) 06:49, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is editable by anyone. If you feel that there are changes that need to be made to an article, you can make them. Though before doing so, you should probably acquaint yourself with our reliable sources guideline so that you can reference information you add to an article. You can find more information about what is and is not acceptable in a biography article at WP:BIO. In general, if you have a complaint about a specific article, the best place to take that discussion is the article's talk page. In this case, that would be Talk:Jho Low. Dismas|^(talk) 07:11, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dismas, I do not think that we can dismiss the concerns from an inexperienced editor about possible BLP policy violations so lightly. I have to go to sleep now, but I have posted at WP:BLPN about this "hit job" of an article. I hope that it gets some productive attention. If not, I will take a much closer look in the morning. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:28, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dismas and Cullen328: Immediately prior to the posting of this question, there was vandalism on the article that has since been reverted. I assume that's what the IP took issue with, and quite rightly so. There may still be issues with this article, but I assume the issue that the IP brought up has been addressed. [1] ~ Rob^Talk 10:37, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WebM video

Hello, I have uploaded a WebM video which is about 90mg. I am having trouble getting it to display properly in a thumbnail. The site is Laulasi Island

Would you please advise how I can correctly format this video?

thanks Phenss (talk) 08:18, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Phenss since no one has answered, I suggest WP:VPT.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:05, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Templates and categories

I would appreciate finding out where on Wikipdia the following can be discussed:

I use wp:Hotcat when I do categorization work on Wikipedia. Unfortunately categories of templates cannot be altered using HOTCAT, and the results are poorly sorted categories that include templates.

I have tried to discuss this at:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Templates#Templates_and_categories, but no one there has shown interest. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 09:30, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:HotCat maybe?--ukexpat (talk) 13:06, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Templates are special in several ways. They can add categories to pages using the template, they may add categories in noinclude tags or depending on certain conditions, they may be costly to edit directly because all pages using the template must be rendered again, and template categories are often transcluded from a documentation subpage where new categories should also be placed. I think human inspection of the source code should be required. If Hotcat is allowed to do anything then there should be restrictions, for example that it may only modify existing categories and only if they are in noinclude tags and the template is not protected (protection is often a sign of high use and need for more care). It's simpler to just ban Hotcat from templates and I'm fine with that. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:00, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just to illustrate why I believe it is important to allow HOTCAT users to modify template categories, here is an example: If you look at Category:Graphical timelines you will see several templates mixed in with congtent pages. This must be confusing to Wikipedia readers, and can easily be fixed by adhering to the guideline at wp:SORTKEY which stipulates a sortkey of "τ" for templates. I have tried in the past to go into templates to insert the correct sortkey, but it takes a lot of effort and time, which I am very short of. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:34, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But in another case it could have been a category which is added to both the template and all pages using the template. That's why restrictions like only categories in noinclude tags would be needed if editors don't inspect the source. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:25, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Albert Kitson, 2nd Baron Airedale

Could you please check the last 2 refs on the above page are ok - one is from an old newspaper - have I done the formula correctly? Many Thanks M101.182.221.219 (talk) 11:51, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The basic format of each citation is OK, but in each case the links go to a search page, not to the page where the cited source can be read. When you provide a link to a source, you must make sure that it goes to the exact page you want to cite, not to a search page nor to the home page of a large site. In future try pasting links into an empty browser window or tab and make sure that they go where you want them to. I can't fix this because I don't know what precise page you wanted to cite. If you can't find the proper links, they may be removed and the rest of the cites remain, sources do not have to be online. But if you can provide the correct links, that would be better. If you can find the links but don't know how to edit the page to change them, post them here and I or another editor can help you. DES ^(talk) 12:53, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Top of Psychosis page is broken - don't know how to fix

When I go to the article on Psychosis, a box that says "Hatnote templates" appears at the top of lead, just below the hatnote that says "Not to be confused with Psychopathy. For other uses, see Psychosis (disambiguation)". The "Hatnote templates" box shouldn't be there, but when I look at the code, I can't see anything there. Can someone who knows what is going on please fix it. Darx9url (talk) 12:18, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It was a problem with {{Distinguish-otheruses}}, so it would have affected any article which used that template. I've fixed it. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:27, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New Post

I am a new author and I just created a page, I don't think it is categorized correctly.

I believe a good model is Fancy Nancy

mine is A Dandelion Girl

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christopher Jude Author (talk • contribs) 13:45, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As noted on your user talk page, A Dandelion Girl has been deleted for being too promotional in tone.--ukexpat (talk) 15:33, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hello @Christopher Jude Author:. while "models" are all well and good, you generally need to understand how the policies and sources shaped the particular model. I would suggest that you begin with the "cliffs notes" version of the requirements for a stand alone article and our policy about conflict of interest and an understanding of the fact that Wikipedia is not a promotional patform. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:35, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why are some short prepositions consistently capitalized in composition titles (like, down, near, etc.)?

According to the Wikipedia Manual of Style, prepositions containing four letters or fewer should not be capitalized in composition titles. However, there are several four-letter prepositions that I always see capitalized despite this rule:

like ("Mighty Like a Rose")
down ("Hasten Down the Wind")
near ("Don't Go Near the Water")
past ("Whistlin' Past the Graveyard")
unto ("Do Unto Others")

There are some shorter prepositions that I frequently see capitalized as well:

up ("Running Up That Hill", "Climbing Up the Walls")
off ("Get Your Filthy Hands Off My Desert")

And conjunctions:

yet ("Seasick, Yet Still Docked")
as - seems to always be lowercase, even when functioning as a subordinating conjunction ("Take 'Em as They Come", "Just as I Am")

Most of these are rare occurrences so I can understand the confusion, but "like" functions as a preposition fairly frequently in song titles and I never see it capitalized. This seems to generally be the case not just on Wikipedia, but across the Internet and on physical media such as CD booklets as well. Is this intentional?

Right now Wikipedia just lists the prepositions "of, to, in, on, for, with, from, etc.", excluding particles of phrasal verbs and the first word in a compound preposition. Other prepositions -- at, by, into, over (unless used as a verb), thru, upon, till (unless used as a subordinating conjunction), and 'bout -- are also usually properly left un-capitalized. It's just the ones listed above that have me a little confused.

Thanks for any help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.45.244.137 (talk) 14:14, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's MOS doesn't trump what things have actually been called in real life. Neither, for that matter, does WP:NPOV: just ask Ladies Love Cool James --Dweller (talk) 14:35, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

... Star Trek Into Darkness. See archives 3 to 8. Maproom (talk) 15:03, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes we tie ourselves in knots when these things are less clear cut. See the entry in Wikipedia:Lamest_edit_wars about The Beatles. Or is that the Beatles? --Dweller (talk) 15:29, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with above, but also keep in mind that not everyone has the MOS committed to memory and things like capitalization are far from uniform around the world. So, you get people innocently wording their titles however they think is best and other people innocently ignoring the mistakes because they don't see them as such. 64.235.97.146 (talk) 19:40, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If an artist calls his own painting "four flowers In a blue vase On a white table" we don't really have the right to "correct" it. The title of a work (movie, book, painting, song, poem, etc) is a proper noun, so it is whatever the originator says it is. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:01, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete my account

Dear Team,

Kindly delete my account since i want to create a new account.

Regards, Kishore Kumar

For technical and licensing reasons accounts cannot be deleted. Just abandon your current account and create a new one. Might be a good idea to put a message on your old user and user talk pages to the effect that you are now editing under your new name.--ukexpat (talk) 15:29, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly Update your Airlines Codes Details

Hi Team,

As I have checked Airlines codes are not all updated on wiki .Would really appreciate if you can updates all the Airlines code with there parental airlines partners.Also if you can provide any updated pdf of all Airlines codes would really appreciate a lot. Thanks in advance if you would be able to implement this.

Regards, Your well wisher. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.113.178.1 (talk) 15:29, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit, and that includes you. If you have a source for updated airline codes, feel free to update the information in the appropriate articles and cite your source. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:33, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Where are my changes/edits?

Hi, I'm new to Wikipedia and I'm trying to expand the organizational profile of Jazz Bridge. I just wrote some of the awards they have won. I saved my work, but when I went to look at it, there was nothing there. Can someone help me with this?

Thanks!!

Suzanne — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jazzbridge (talk • contribs) 17:05, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There have been no edits to that page since 24 January, and your only edit to date is posting this question, so I assume your changes were not saved for some reason.
However, looking at your username, I suspect you have a conflict of interest, so should not be editing that page in any case, but suggesting changes on the talk page. Furthermore, your username appears to be in violation of our Username policy which does not allow names which "represent the name of a company, group, institution or product" so it will need to be changed. I will explain on your talk page - Arjayay (talk) 17:17, 19 August 2015 (UTC) in edco[reply]

hi

[2] I was left this on my talk page without any response? (this is the same individual who is Talk:Dyslexia/GA2 for some reason and has not responded, I feel harassed by this person what should I do?.--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 18:26, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ozzie10aaaa: It is certainly not actually WP:HARASSMENT, even if you for some reason perceived it as such. It is a completely WP:CIVIL and appropriate method of making you aware of our policies such as WP:NOTCHAT . -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:45, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I concur, however it is the same person that for unknown reasons has my GA reassessment in limbo and has not responded to it even though I finished some time ago... One wonders why these questions weren't raised at the time of the original GAR, which wasn't that long ago [3] is what the GA reviewer who passed the article originally had to say? ...(I think this person is not acting with good faith, --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 18:50, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To my knowledge, GA reassessment takes a fair while to get through. A bit of patience wouldn't hurt... --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 19:09, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Keilana posted on Talk:Dyslexia/GA2 only six days ago. @Ozzie10aaaa: you don't appear to have even tried asking her about the article - your suggestion of bad faith seems to be based on very flimsy evidence indeed. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:15, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

if not here , then ill try ANI later, thanks--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 19:19, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And I'm willing to bet you will get a similar response to here, but knock yourself out. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 19:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ozzie10aaaa: have you tried just contacting Keilana? It's entirely possible that she's simply forgotten that she has a GA review ongoing, and a (polite) reminder on her talkpage is probably all that would be needed to get it underway again. However, I don't see any evidence that you've done this. Why not give it a try? Yunshui ^雲 _水 00:21, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greater Saskatoon Catholic Schools has incorrect address and phone number

Greater Saskatoon Catholic Schools Board Office has incorrect address and phone number. Address should be <Redacted>. Phone number should be <Redacted>. The address and phone number that is currently there belongs to Ecole St. Paul Elementary School. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.83.241.139 (talk) 18:34, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is no address or phone number anywhere in our Greater Saskatoon Catholic Schools article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:37, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that particular text was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information, but Google's Knowledge Graph has a "Feedback" link where anyone can mark a field as wrong.--ukexpat (talk) 18:41, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pre -1940 bicycle

My friend was telling me of a bicycle she had when she was young, (1930's I think) and it had an extra handle bar that you pumped to help you get up a hill, it helped push the front wheel round. I have never heard or seen this before, can any one remember this on a bike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.23.132.237 (talk) 20:31, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.--ukexpat (talk) 20:46, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

men's V-Neck T-Shirts

I have been wearing your V-Neck T-shirts for several years with great pride and satisfaction. It's a well designed shirt with an appealing wide V-neck and long body design that most other shirts lack. I have noticed that the V-neck is designed much narrower now loosing it's appeal and appearing to have less quality. The material also appears a little thinner as well. It looks cheep.

I've been modeling these shirts with positive results for a few years now and am disappointed with the change. I've compared both previous shirts with the new one I just purchased. There is a difference.

Please bring back the shirt I used to purchase. I'll pay a few dollars for the quality.

Note: a better quality shirt actually looks great with dress pants and dress shoes (a dress down look) in the summer months.

Thank you for your consideration.

Greg Polk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.183.164.168 (talk) 20:44, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 4 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck.--ukexpat (talk) 20:46, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds to me more like it's referring to an item sold at Wikimedia's store.

Greg Polk, this help desk is watched by random volunteers with no relationship to the Wikimedia Foundation. It's for questions about using or editing Wikipedia, not really about financial details and we certainly can't do anything to change the T-shirts Wikimedia choose to sell. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 21:03, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikimedia Shop has changed name to the Wikipedia Store (the old name is still seen in some places) so it would be natural to assume that Wikipedia's help desk is closely connected to it. We are not but they have a "We ♥ Feedback" link at the bottom of their pages, for example https://store.wikimedia.org. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:09, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OTOH, there don't appear to be any v-neck T's at all on the Wikipedia store. Rwessel (talk) 04:25, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was banned unjustly while trying to engage with an individual.

Dear Sir,

I was banned unjustly from your Wikipedia CHAT facility while trying to engage with an individual, who did not answer a simple question. My question was, "What are the trees in this image".

I am now blocked from creating a Wikipedia page for I WANT TO BELIEVE JOEN ASMUSSEN.

I have conducted much research that can be verified. My research is ongoing and no premature conclusions have been made.

Primarily I am a Security Consultant - Currently unfit for work due to health : https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5787H3vA6vDTUJBdEwwUzVKUl9qQVVfY0RMcUxkS0FVd2pz/view?usp=sharing :

Yours Sincerely,

Nathan Paul Handley 2015 Parliamentary Candidate : Witney - UK http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14001046 Film Producer http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3211628/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.225.77.166 (talk) 22:00, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please clarify the problem. If you have an account then name it. With which method are you trying to create an article? Do you literally want the article to be called "I WANT TO BELIEVE JOEN ASMUSSEN"? Why? PrimeHunter (talk) 00:10, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, research that you have conducted is explicitly identified in one of Wikipedia's core content policies as not being appropriate for Wikipedia. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:53, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]