Help desk
< September 16	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 18 >

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.

September 17

Want to create page for me social contriter friend

Kindly guide me how to create wiki page fir my friend who is doing wonderful Social works & contributing his maximum time with needy for there progress — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nehagzp (talk • contribs) 05:04, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Most people are not eligible for a Wikipedia entry, however wonderful they are, but if your friend has been written about in WP:Reliable sources (that is, they are notable in the special Wikipedia sense), then you need to collect some of those articles about your friend, and summarise them in your own words. You have a WP:Conflict of interest, so perhaps you are not the best person to write the article, but when you have collected the references, you could request an article at WP:Requested articles, or create a draft in WP:Draft space. Dbfirs 06:36, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nehagzp. Please understand that, however wonderful your friend's activities are, Wikipedia has essentially no interest in what he says or what his friends or associates say or know about him: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with him have chosen to publish about him in reliable places (such as major newspapers or books from reliable publishers). If such sources exist, then there can be an article based on them - but as Dbfirs says, you may have a conflict of interest which will make it hard for you to create an acceptable article. The purpose of a Wikipedia article is not, ever, to tell the world about something, but to summarise what people have already decided to tell the world about. Anyone who creates a Wikipedia article for the purpose of telling the world about something is likely to have a frustrating experience. --ColinFine (talk) 09:57, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ricardo Cortez

I would like to add a film under Ricardo Cortez. It is called "Bunko" and he was in it in 1950. But I am not sure how to acknowledge/cite<ref></ref> the source since I'm just watching it right now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrsCano05 (talk • contribs) 05:07, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually called Bunco Squad, and film credits generally don't need to be sourced. I've fixed it, as well as the movie below it. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:22, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

re-apply to have a page allowed

I submitted a page to be created. I thought that it would certainly be allowed. To my surprise it wasn't. How can I reapply? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidmagee9 (talk • contribs) 10:36, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read the comments on your talk page? Your article was rejected because a) it was on a topic covered by an existing article, and b) it was deemed to read more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. I can't see the deleted text, but was it an expression of your own opinions and theories, or was it a neutral recounting of facts about OSH already expressed in existing books and articles? Only the latter is acceptable here. Rojomoke (talk) 10:59, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About the link of :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablighi_Jamaat

Hello Have a wonderful day.

About the link of the top I want to say that Tabligue is an unarmed and non political muslim group distributed worldwide. They do not have any political affair with any country. This is hardly prohibited from the Tabligue leaders not to join with politics of any country by staying on Dawat and Tabligue and do not use the reference of Dawat and Tabligue. So here is the matter of yesterday Sir Donald J trump had been attacked on Pakistan and had been hardly announced that FBI drone attack will destroy all types of Hakkani and Jammat. Here Tablighi Jamaat is not the original group and organization name. The original group and organization name is Dawat and Tabligue. Dawat means invitation to mosque of all muslim and Tab league means Tab=Mouth League means Organization. So its an organization of mouth speak and only for muslim primarily. So may be the link of top had been made by any pakistani: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablighi_Jamaat and they had been used the name of Jammat with Tabligue which we are worldwide muslim feeling risk. Kindly change the name to dawat and tabligue on the Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablighi_Jamaat will be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/dawatandtableague or otherwise please off the link kindly to save pure peace lovers muslim group of Dawat and Tabligue. Dawat and Tabligue is a perfect muslim peace lovers group and unarmed and non political muslim group. Pakistan had bene using it fo9r political reference. We are not liking Tabligue for any political reference on any country. This group main duty is to call the muslim people to mosque for five times pray on a day.

Please help the rest of the Tableaguei muslim people in this world.

Thanks Cent Jhon Joseph — Preceding unsigned comment added by Centjhonjoseph (talk • contribs) 10:41, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

wiki bio notable person

i want to create a wiki notable person page how do I begin to do that: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julialynn424 (talk • contribs) 12:41, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Julialynn424: please read Wikipedia:Your first article. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:45, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dysfunctional navbox

Hello,

I created Template:List of universities in Belarus navbox. When I try to use it somewhere else using the shortcut List of universities in Belarus navbox or List of universities in Belarus between two brackets( {{}}), it looks as follows:

.

Could you help me to fix the issues?

--Les Yeux Noirs (talk) 13:53, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The <noinclude> tag near the end is preventing the final curly brackets from being transcluded; you need to either remove it or add a matching </noinclude> tag. Ppp ery 14:03, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(which was done by PrimeHunter) Ppp ery 14:04, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Fixed.[1] See WP:NOINCLUDE. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:05, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox broken

Resolved

– Lourdes

Could somebody please fix this infobox here? LBJ (film)

Best regards, --Keimzelle (talk) 15:20, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Lourdes 15:51, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Lourdes:--Keimzelle (talk) 17:39, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Quote, Template:Quotation

Would it be possible to change the spacing settings within these templates? They namely appear too large to me as can be seen from here or here for instance. Hoping for your support,--Tuchiel (talk) 15:27, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You can use 'style' parameter to apply custom css styles like I did in Jesus_in_Christianity#Ministry. Ruslik_Zero 19:42, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruslik0: Thanks a lot. Though, wouldn't it be even better to generally change these templates in that manner?--Tuchiel (talk) 21:28, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PS: The same goes for Template:Blockquote, cf. Christ (title)#Usage for instance!--Tuchiel (talk) 17:19, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template issues

Hi, in Crusades, I tried to apply the option state=expanded for the Template:Campaignbox Crusades included at the very beginning, but for some reason that doesn't work. Besides, why is there a divergent spacing above and below that template?--Tuchiel (talk) 16:05, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Concerning the last point (spacings), there is a similar thing with Template:Portal and Template:Commons, e. g. if you have a look at Jiří Třanovský: the spacing after the See also headline's underlining, before the Poetry Portal link box is slightly bigger than the one after the External links underlining, before the Commons link box, isn't it? I must say that I'm not very familiar with template formatting – since otherwise I would try to fix those hiccups myself, of course. Best--Tuchiel (talk) 16:35, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Tuchiel: Templates have different parameters. {{Campaignbox Crusades}} has no state parameter and doesn't claim to have it. Image thumbs may have a little more space below them than some other things. That seems unimportant to me. I think Crusades and Jiří Třanovský look OK. Does 1 or 2 mm more or less space around templates really matter? PrimeHunter (talk) 18:24, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: Thanks a lot for answering! "Does 1 or 2 mm more or less space around templates really matter?" — Well, admittedly, there are certainly more important issues around. However, I thought it would be somewhat in the interest of the project in itself to have a more or less coherent layout / design / typography. And thus, I had the notion that the mentioned issues would be something one could consider to harmonize things... I hope that helps at least a bit to explain my concern. Best--Tuchiel (talk) 18:37, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Regarding Crusades, I think it would really make sense to have the campaignbox opened by default here. Is there a way to include that option?--Tuchiel (talk) 19:20, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the option.[2] PrimeHunter (talk) 19:43, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: Thanks a lot! Referring once more to the spacing problems, I'd like to add that there seems to be another (related?) inconsistency which can be seen e. g. at History of the United Kingdom: Why is there a regular spacing after the "See also" section, but not after the "References" and before the "Further reading" section? Also, there are different spacings between the subsections within the "Further reading" section. And if you look very carefully, you will be surprised to see that at the beginning of the latter, the second column begins slightly higher (!) than the first one... Now, wouldn't those be issues basically improvable for the benefit of a harmonized layout?--Tuchiel (talk) 08:29, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The spacings look the same to me. If a section is split into columns then the spacing to the next section is determined by the longest column. If the left colum is shorter then the spacing from that column becomes longer. The distribution between columns depends on the browser, window size, font size and so on, so don't try to avoid this effect by making the left column the longest. I don't know why the second column begins slightly higher or whether it happens in all browsers (it does in my Firefox). Maybe it has to do with refbegin definitions in MediaWiki:Common.css. I don't think it's important. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:06, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pornographic Material

My daughter is doing a research paper on the 1960's. She loves the Beatles and somehow came across the page of John Lennon and Yoko Ono's, "Two Virgins" album. You have pornography posted! I realize that the original album cover included John and Yoko naked but for this particular website (that is used like an encyclopedia by children) the photo should be censored. That's not something I want my 13 year old daughter seeing. You have a responsibility. Please fix it or take down the picture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.123.16.134 (talk) 17:11, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia, not a children's book. We do not believe in censoring. We believe in sharing knowledge. Your daughter can also empower herself by reading on sexuality, for example. This is what Wikipedia is for.--Keimzelle (talk) 17:42, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED. MarnetteD|Talk 17:47, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Right. We generally limit images of nudity to articles where it's relevant but the album cover is relevant to an article about the album. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:09, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

IP 74, you can also read Wikipedia:Offensive material, Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Images#Offensive_images, and Help:Options to hide an image. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:D8E:D6F3:A7EA:C247 (talk) 18:14, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please also note that the image is nudity, NOT pornography there is no sexual activity involved just a lack of clothes. Theroadislong (talk) 18:19, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Correct.--Keimzelle (talk) 18:40, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Theroadislong, although the image is appropropriate for the article and you are correct that it is not pornography, you are misunderstanding what constitutes pornography. Sexual activity doesn't necessarily need be involved for something to be pornography. In fact, it doesn't even need to be an image. Pornography can be in the form of photos, videos, writings, sculptures, paintings, video games, and others. And in order for it to be pornography, its purpose needs to be to elicit sexual arousal. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:D8E:D6F3:A7EA:C247 (talk) 18:46, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, so how is it our fault that Lennon and Oko decided to pose nude for an album cover? Because an article about an album is obviously going to include the album cover. Or is it our fault that your daughter is doing a research paper on the '60s? I'm not seeing how Wikipedia is responsible for this. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:54, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ian, please calm down. There's no need to attack a concerned parent who's simply misunderstanding this enyclopedia's purpose and rules, and what constitutes pornography. Good faith inquires should receive civil responses and clear explanations. You are administrator, so you of all people should know better. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:D8E:D6F3:A7EA:C247 (talk) 19:01, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can reply with a degree of sarcasm calmly and while assuming good faith. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:07, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Help Desk doesn't need sarcastic replies, especially from administrators. Read your own words on your user page: "there are rules to make sure that...editors are civil". 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:D8E:D6F3:A7EA:C247 (talk) 19:08, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You say "in order for it to be pornography, its purpose needs to be to elicit sexual arousal". Clearly that was not the purpose of this album cover, who could possibly be sexually aroused by that! Theroadislong (talk) 09:46, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Two Virgins is from 1968 where pornography was illegal and people weren't so used to images of nudity, and a lot of women and girls had a crush on John Lennon. I suspect many people were aroused. Not so many today. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:04, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]