Help desk
< September 23	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 25 >

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 24

Expandable table

Is there any way to make a table expand/collapsible? For instance, looking at the summary of my edits to WP-space, I'd like to be able to click on something in the "Test" column and have it expand to show the detail of my edit counts to pages within the "family". Ideally, I would click on the number in the "Sub" column to get the detail, but that might be pushing it too far. Thanks! Franamax (talk) 00:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One can collapse whole tables, but not individual rows and columns (although it is possible to fake it). The syntax for a collapsible table is

{| class="collapsible"
! Header (never hidden)
|-
| Cell 1, Row 1
| Cell 2, Row 1

|-

| Cell 1, Row 2

| Cell 2, Row 2
|}

Basically, you must add the class "collapsible" (to make it collapsed initially, add "collasped"). You could insert a collapsible table into a cell/column in a normal table to do roughly what you need. Calvin 1998 ^(t·c) 01:14, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do you create a new article? (moved from middle of page)

how do you even create a new article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yknarf (talk • contribs) 02:23, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at WP:YFA. – ukexpat (talk) 02:44, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

What are my chances at RfA at the present? GO-PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 03:00, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Extremely high. Nominate yourself and tell everyone what they want to hear. You'll become an admin. This isn't the sort of place where you need to prove yourself and have others nominate you. -- kainaw ™ 03:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't that easy. You will need to show some way in which you deserve to be an admin. See WP:RFA and you'll see that not everyone becomes an admin just for saying what people want to hear. Youth in Asia (talk) 03:07, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I tried that WP:Admin Coaching, but I think my coach has taken some kind of a Wikibreak without notice. GO-PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 03:12, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could try an Wikipedia:Editor review to see what others think of you. Calvin 1998 ^(t·c) 03:14, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dude go for it, adminship is something you should just go for, and if you don;t get than keep on doing what you are doing like it never happened. If you want someone to nom you, I'll do it. Just send me an email of your accomplishments, etc and Ill nom you. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 03:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a limit to the number of times a person can run? GO-PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 03:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, but repeated nominations can be seen as wanting to be an admin too much (something looked down upon at RfA). I believe it's suggested to wait a couple of months after a failed RfA before trying again. Calvin 1998 ^(t·c) 03:29, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I already failed one RfA, and you can find it... somewhere. I'd say enough time has passed since my last one. What do you think? GO-PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 03:32, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is. -CWY2190(talk • contributions) 03:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Email your coach. If they are staying on break for a while request a new coach. Looking at your edit history I think you would benefit from some coaching. Gtstricky^{Talk or C} 14:51, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cubs Win flag main image

Resolved

The main image at Cubs Win flag got taken down at commons for a while because I misread the licensing. I replaced it, but it does not seem to be showing in the article. Is there a problem with renaming an image by the same name as the original after the image has been taken off of commons.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:06, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe my page needed to purge or something, but it is O.K. now.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, if the image was deleted and re-uploaded, there's going to be a small lag. Calvin 1998 ^(t·c) 06:23, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of articles all Wikipedias should have

I remember a page in the project namespace with a title like the above, but I can't seem to find it. Anyone remember/know where it is? Stifle (talk) 08:37, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Vital articles perhaps? Dismas|^(talk) 09:00, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's the one, thanks. Stifle (talk) 09:31, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And see WP:EIW#Vital. --Teratornis (talk) 17:44, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Over Zealous Uncontrolled Rapid Deletion Thru Ignorance

Originally I thought it was due to 'US Politics' as to why Post turtle was tagged within ONE (1) minute of original article commit (originally as 'nonsense' than again after first 'holdon' complaint as another deletion category!) and even before the article was linked to Molly Ivins- and while thus looking around to see why MY contribution was dealt with in such a rude manner, I find that the famous recent "12 Canoes Australia International Award Winning Website related to the original movie" entry had been TOTALLY PURGED within 5 minutes - even before the editor could finish it!

Now why is there no way for those eagerly wishing to ~~blow away~~ clean up newly created articles to set a search parameter to allow a minimum time - say 24 hours to allow 'normal' Mature Age contributors (Those with a Real Life) a reasonable amount of time - MUCH longer than 1-5 minutes to work in a rational fashion? Real articles do not spring fully formed from the head like Greek & Roman Gods... And the amount of time wasted in getting the articles 'back' is ridiculous! There are much more rewarding things to do with MY time!

I've been away for a few months, and now find within the first couple of hours back, 2 notable contributions purged or marked for deletion within minutes by those 'ignorant of/unfamilar with' the material!

Ok ok, I KNOW Teenagers know everything... :-P

but seriously, apart from that ...:-)

FoolesTroupe (talk) 10:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about your frustration. :) A delay has been discussed at WT:CSD, but not met consensus there. There seems (in my observation) to be a general perception that some new page patrollers are treating CSD like a race, rushing to tag as many articles as possible. This leads to the system being abused or, at least, misunderstood. But imposing a 24-hour-delay, many people at that talk page seem to feel, would unnecessarily hamper the procedure for those articles that are meant to be dealt with through it. As an article writer, I always use {{inuse}} or {{underconstruction}}. As a CSD deleting admin, I always check to see how long after creation the article was tagged. If it seems likely that the contributor isn't finished, I won't delete it. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is also the option of typing the article as a draft in your userspace before moving the page to the mainspace. This will allow you to get to a point where it can exist in the mainspace with out being quickly tagged. If you'd like you can even collaborate with other editors (because a 'move' will keep the history intact.) {{UserWorkInProgress}} is useful for drafts. Scotty dude _review 14:06, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It should also be noted that this guy has totally conflated the notable and award-winning movie Ten Canoes (which does have a Wikipedia article, as it should) with Twelve Canoes, an obscure new non-notable website inspired by said movie. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As an Aussie well aware of contemporary cultural events, and even some passing personal interest in Aussie Indigenous Affairs a quick "http://www.google.com.au/search?q=12+Canoes"

Results 1 - 10 of about 2,830,000 for 12 Canoes.

reveals that the two concepts ARE in fact - BY DESIGN and deliberate intent - INTIMATELY related ... This new article will of course be linked to the existing 10 Canoes movie article.

"Rolf de Heer Floats 12 Canoes Online - Movies - Citysearch This week, the 12 Canoes website was launched and showcases a dozen separate short documentaries about the Ten Canoes people."
"From the big screen to the web, the Yolngu people of Ramingining now have a place on the Internet following the launch of the 12 Canoes website today."
"Speaking Out - 12 Canoes and the State Library of NSW Language site 14 Sep 2008 ... The new 12 canoes website (www.12canoes.com.au) continues on from where 10 canoes -the movie, left off. You'll also find out about the NSW..."
"ABC Online Indigenous - Arts & Events - Design - 12 Canoes 11 Sep 2008 ... What 12 Canoes achieves in its breadth of knowledge simplicity of education and seamless weaving of 50 000 years of cultural continuity with ..."
"Inside Film - 12 Canoes website to go live Paolo Cherchi Usai, NFSA’s Executive Director said, “The NFSA is pleased to be the access and hosting partner in 12 Canoes as part of our commitment to ..."
"12 Canoes - World Premiere July 1 26 Jun 2008 ... The National Film and Sound Archive of Australia (NFSA) is hosting the world premiere of 12 Canoes to celebrate the creation of the NFSA as ..."

und so weiter...

I still think the poor guy was right royally screwed over in ignorance... and now, since the article was purged, he has to FIGHT to get it back. I will extend 'Good Faith' - I would prefer to say 'ignorance of the topic' rather than imply any racist overtones...

-)

It does seem that some here (in the last few months) ARE in a 'race' - a mandatory limit of a few hours would surely bw useful! and often 'know not what they do'... to tag something you don't understand as 'nonsense' is surely beyond the pale though - and thanks to whoever rescued my new article.

Now as to the '12 Canoes' article - PUT IT BACK RIGHT NOW you naughty ignorant Teenagers! Or I'll set your Granmas on you!

-)

FoolesTroupe (talk) 15:19, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW - just how many recent gentle 'experts' have been driven away by these uncontrolled rampant hair-trigger 'ignoramuses'? It can take MANY HOURS of hard work to reinstate the damage these Fools do in an instant - qualifies as 'VANDALISM' in my dictionaries...

FoolesTroupe (talk) 15:27, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would certainly agree that excessive speedying of articles is vandalism. DuncanHill (talk) 15:32, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I would consider your comments as verging on an ignorant personal attack. Editing disagreements are not vandalism. And there are processes, such as WP:DRV, for civil discussins on such matters. Corvus cornix_talk 21:35, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"And I would consider your comments as verging on an ignorant personal attack." You are free to feel how you like - but that opinion of yours seems to deny 'Good Intent' - my assumption of 'Good Intent' is that "Assumption of Ignorance" is MUCH nicer than "Assumption of Deliberate Malice". FoolesTroupe (talk) 00:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"editing disagreements are not vandalism" Ignorance is not a legal defence against lawbreaking - but it seems to be a major supporting argument for deleting things about which one knows nothing, and possesses not the slightest interest in learning. Orangemike - I intended you no disrespect. FoolesTroupe (talk) 00:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"And there are processes" Which I have already stated waste enormous amounts of time and effort of those who ARE familar with the material, being frustrated by those who know NOTHING about what they have an opinion (and absolute veto) on. Destroying the credibility of WIKI thru ignorance is not really different from doing it thru intent (currently defined as vandalism), in terms of the results. So why are those who ignorantly rapidly and destroy and obstruct that which they do not understand not chastised for not going thru THOSE processes? Those who VANDALISE are often punished here - sooner or later, the 'patrollers' are eventually going to have be prevented from treating that process as some sort of brownie points earning 'race' with no negative feedback. I found Wiki currently useful - now that I have been personally involved with these 2 articles/debacles, much Wiki credibility has been lost for me. I have a Real Life, I get no cash for contributing here, I need to earn an income, so why waste MY time? SEP - Somebody Elses' Problem Mate! :-) FoolesTroupe (talk)

WP:AGF rules here. And despite repeatedly asserting that there is some sort of deletion "race" going on, that's all it is, unsourced assertions. Corvus cornix_talk 00:42, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AGF - Ignorance is not a motive - just an explanation. "I would consider your comments as verging on an ignorant personal attack" "avoid accusing others of harmful motives without particularly strong evidence"

"Unless there is strong evidence to the contrary, assume that people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it"

Purging something you don't understand in a few minutes is helping in what way?

"unsourced assertions" ROFL...

FoolesTroupe (talk) 01:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that's funny, then just provide some proof that there's some sort of race going on. Corvus cornix_talk 06:48, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go back and read Scottydude’s comment at 14:06, 24 September 2008 (UTC) That is a solution to your problem. Other than that, this thread is pretty non-productive. This page is a forum for how to use Wikipedia. It is not a forum for complaints or for changing process. —teb728 t c 07:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Preparing an article within your userspace, at least to the point where it asserts notability and is ready for collaborative editing, is indeed the best solution to the OP's concerns. Not having your new article in mainspace for a day or two while you flesh it out is no big deal, after all there's no deadline. Franamax (talk) 07:29, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As the original creator of the brefly-lived 12 Canoes article I feel duty bound to comment. My complaint was not with the due process of AFD etc. It was the speed with which it occurred. I didn't even have time to write my hang-on appeal before the page was deleted within less than 5 minutes of its original save. I took this up with OrangeMike and he with me via our respective talk pages. Others have since taken up the torch on my behalf, but not at my instigation. I was just appealing for common sense. There is no point to having the hang-on tag if a page is deleted before the author can even write a brief paragraph justification. --Mat Hardy (talk) 00:24, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever the reason for your complaint, this forum is not the place for it. This page is for questions on how to use Wikipedia. If you cannot write a viable article in one edit, the way for you to use Wikipedia is to write a draft in your user space. —teb728 t c 01:16, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Technical help

Does anybody know if the POTD on my userpage can be made to auto-resize to fill in the gap in nearby space until the signpost template? (My problem is that it changed on differently sized monitors thus changing the overall look of the section).) Also can the four CSS div frames (beneath the statistics section) be made to centre in the page? And a final thing - can the redundant whitespace at the top of the page be removed? Thanks. -- Menti sock 10:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I centered the pulldown's in this draft but I was unable to find what is causing the whitespace at the top. I'm also not sure of a way to make the POTD do that unless you made all four of variable width somehow to stretch across (and you can't do that with the signpost). Sorry I couldn't be of more help... Maybe someone else can help with the rest. Scotty dude _review 13:59, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Following request

Hello. I made very unconfortable contributions to Wikipedia where I added my personal informations to several talk pages. Please don't think that I got blocked for vandalism. That's namely not the case. I have to contact an oversight for this. Please leave me a message on my talk page. It should be discussed privately on my talk page. Retrinko (talk) 11:11, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have already replied to your duplicate question at the administrator's noticeboard. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:17, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photo Uploads

Hi there,

I was just wondering if/how it was possible to upload pictures onto articles, for example; i'd like to put a photo i took on the Brand New page rather than this blurred one.. http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Image:Brand_New_Jesse.jpg please let me know if this is possible or to add a picture onto a band page that currently doesn't have one?! Alex —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.23.54.139 (talk) 17:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you will have to register for a Wikipedia account first though (and get autoconfirmation which takes at least 4 days). See Wikipedia:Uploading images. -Abhishek^Talk 17:51, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you took the picture, it is preferable that you upload it to Commons so that it is available to all Wikipedia projects. Commons does not have an autoconfimation requirement. – ukexpat (talk) 19:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Wikipedia so broken today?

Today I am finding the it takes multiple attempts to get any edit saved. I keep getting "Wikimedia Foundation Error. Our servers are currently experiencing a technical problem" many times in a row. What in the heck is wrong with the system? Inadequate bandwidth? Discs full? Virus? Incompetent technicians? Power failure? It is frustrating to do an edit and not be able to save it. Edison (talk) 17:33, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's being discussed here also. TN‑X-Man 17:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chronology

I was editing a particular article called Duo, and I've stumbled onto a bit of a conundrum. Since the album is by the musical artist Richard Marx and Matt Scannell from Vertical Horizon, would I need to use the chronology for both Scannell's band and Marx's discography? If you aren't able to answer this inquiry, could you please direct me toward the information I need? Thank you kindly in advance. --Candy156sweet (talk) 19:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A more general question, if I may. What is notable about this album that it deserves its own article? At the moment it is little more than a track listing and looks like it does not meet the album notability guidelines. – ukexpat (talk) 19:33, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't the editor who created the album's article, and I couldn't seem to find any information to expand the it. Unfortunately there are other articles of that same caliber under this artist's discography. If this and other articles lack proper notability, how would I go about having these articles deleted? Again thank you for your help in this matter. It's greatly appreciated. --Candy156sweet (talk) 19:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The usual way to deal with it is to move anything of use to the artist's page, then turn the album page into a redirect. However as these are two separate artists who do not have a an article dealing with their performances together, and because a redirect can only redirect to one page, it may be better to delete the album page via Afd and have two separate redirects (Duo (Richard Marx album) and Duo (Matt Scannell album) may be, though the former already redirects to the existing album page) or turn the album page into a quasi disambiguation page with links to each artist's article. – ukexpat (talk) 20:07, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Company template problem

I'm trying to use the infobox company template on the article Stickman Graphics, but it doesn't seem to be working. Can anyone find what's wrong with my syntax? I copied it from the template page itself, and edited the first two items to look like the one in the Microsoft article. — Yavoh 20:48, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You had an unclosed link. That tends to break templates horribly, as you discovered. Algebraist 20:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stub tag and Navigational template placements

I can't find in the MOS info on whether an article's Stub tag(s) should precede or come after any Navigational templates. I've seen it done both ways, and I've done it both ways. But is there a policy on this vs. personal choice? --Rosiestep (talk) 21:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At the end of the article, see WP:STUB#How to mark an article as a stub. – ukexpat (talk) 21:34, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cancel my account

I have been searching for 30 minutes. Why it so difficult to cancel an account. I am user name: sunrisecoming. My email has been changed a long time ago. Just cancel this account. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunrisecoming (talk • contribs) 21:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the fact that Wikipedia content is licensed under the GFDL, all edits must be kept for attribution purposes, and so your account cannot be deleted. You do, however, have the right to vanish, which you can exercise by (1) requesting your user page (found at Special:Mypage) and/or user talk page (found at Special:Mytalk) be deleted, by adding the {{db-userreq}} template to them; (2) requesting to change your username to something that is unconnected with you (possibly a random collection of letters and numbers); (3) never logging in to your account again. If you do this, you are still free to register a new username if you wish to continue editing Wikipedia. Algebraist 21:22, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You've been having difficulty finding it because there is no process for canceling accounts: We legally cannot delete accounts due to our history tracking requirements. (We can delete your username under Wikipedia:Right to vanish, but that's usually not done without a very good reason since it's effectively a ban from the 'pedia.)

If I may ask, why do want your account canceled? You mentioned your e-mail? If it has to do with changing e-mail addresses, that can be done via Special:Preferences, or if you want to change your username to match your new e-mail, at Wikipedia:Changing username. --erachima talk 21:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The top of this page clearly and twice in prominent places says "Please read the FAQ" before asking a question. It is the 5th FAQ question. Still, lots of people ask about this and other FAQ questions. Where did you search for it and what would it have taken to find it in the FAQ? I'm just wondering what we might do to help reduce frequent questions. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:51, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do I start a new article?

Where do I go to start a new article —Preceding unsigned comment added by FiresurferTamer (talk • contribs) 22:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just type the name of the article into the search box and click go. Then click the 'create the page' link in the resulting text. Algebraist 22:04, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) Before creating an article, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines which all articles should comport with. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite to reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.

Articles must also demonstrate the notability of the subject. Please see our subject specific guidelines for people, bands and musicians, companies and organizations and web content and note that if you are closely associated with the subject, our conflict of interest guideline strongly recommends against you creating the article.

If you still think an article is appropriate, see Help:Starting a new page. You might also look at Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. GlassCobra 22:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page Vandalism

How do I stop someone from editing parts of a page? I am the subject of a page on Wikipedia, and someone else keeps changing a piece of personal information on that page. Is it possible to lock certain parts of a page, provided the information can be verified as true? Thankyou. Grahampitt (talk)

It is possible to ask for temporary protection of the page, so that it cannot be edited by IP users, or in extreme cases so it can only be edited by admins. Make your request here. – ukexpat (talk) 22:24, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Administration

Is there anything specific to be done if I would like to become an administrator in the shortest time possible? Please contact me on my talk page.--Archeopteryx (talk) 22:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Make a lot of very good edits :) Will reply on user talk.Pedro : Chat 22:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Over a period of several months. Algebraist 22:44, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And participate reasonably in lots of policy discussions and AfDs. Oh, and avoid making topics asking how to become an administrator in as little time as possible. --erachima talk 23:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help Desk

I have a question about the Help Desk itself. I'm pretty sure that everyone can answer a question. Am I right? Thanks, Genius101 _{T. C.} 23:33, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Please read Wikipedia:Help desk/How to answer if you consider to answer questions. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:43, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]