Help desk
< April 23	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 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.

April 24

Articles on Tebuke Rotan and Rotan Tito

Hi, i have been browsing the internet for the above subject on this site but no record has been found. Could you please look into this or maybe perhaps make an article in more descriptive details, i have found some but really interested on why was it the longest court case in UK when these 2 guys plus others took british governtment and the British Phosphate Commission into court —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rotan007 (talk • contribs) 00:41, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia articles are written by people like you, who are really interested in a topic. Why not take a stab at it?--SPhilbrick T 01:30, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New ad

Hello, I added an ad for WikiProject Waterfalls (File:File-Qxz-ad208.png) to Template:Wikipedia ads, but it doesn't seem to be working right. Could someone who is good with templates, please try and fix it? Thanks in advance, --The High Fin Sperm Whale 03:05, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I'm looking at it right now, and it seems to be working just fine. I've placed the ad in my sandbox if you want to see it. Perhaps you could give a little more detail about the problem if it still exists? ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it seems that when my ad comes up, it just has an error message (try copying the source to a sandbox and erasing everything except my ad). --The High Fin Sperm Whale 04:35, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:SuperHamster/Sandbox contains {{wikipedia ads|ad=208}} which works fine for me:


Wikipedia ads	file info – #208

What exactly do you do when you get an error message and what does the message say? "erasing everything except my ad" is not specific enough. I don't see a sandbox test in your recent edits. If you make a sandbox test then save it and link to it. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:08, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reason was is I was editing the actual Wikipedia ads template, then using the preview button, which said there was an error. When I clicked save, it worked. I don't know why. Thanks. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:19, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the preview button is often not very satisfactory when editing a template, because parameters, magic words etc. May not have useful values. ---80.177.170.180 (talk) 21:13, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

school supervision

what is meant by features of school supervision?113.199.167.141 (talk) 08:50, 24 April 2010 (UTC) 113.199.167.141 (talk) 08:50, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean. This is the help desk of Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, where we answer questions about Wikipedia itself. If your question is about something in one of our articles, do feel free to ask at the Reference desk or at that article's talk page; if it is about Wikipedia, please clarify. Thank you. SS✞^(Kay) 09:19, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Source markup syntax highlighting issue

The following is not being highlighted correctly:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<烏語>Китайська мова</烏語>

As you can see the <烏語> and </烏語> are displaying wrongly.

I was thinking of filing a bugzilla report, but not sure how this could be categorized? - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 11:35, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is done by the by meta:Extension:SyntaxHighlight GeSHi, so you can report it as a GeSHi issue. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 11:59, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That link doesn't really go anywhere... is that the correct meta link? - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 13:33, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's the prefix for meta: but the page is at mw:. The link should be mw:Extension:SyntaxHighlight GeSHi. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:21, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 11:33, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help, tabs

Can anyone help me making tabs as issued by comments from • ɔ ∫ → (the last comment), please. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 11:57, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean like the tabs in Wikipedia:Tutorial? If that's what you want, just copy and edit the wikitext from those pages. Each tab's content is really a separate page, and there is a Wikipedia:Tutorial/TabsHeader subpage that acts like a template to display the row of tabs with the current page's tab highlighted. You could experiment on a set of user subpages to create your own set of tabbed pages. If you want more specific help, make an explicit list of the pages and tabs you want. --Teratornis (talk) 00:02, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Enquiry regarding Journal of Pharmacy and bioallied sciences

Dear sir

I search for "Journal of Pharmacy and bioallied sciences". The search show no results. Then I submit information about it.

But I am not able to upload journal cover page and other details. Sir, I want you to please put up details on this journal on wikipedia. It willbe useful for all. Please visit website www.jpbsonline.org for more details.

regards Himanshu <email redacted>

I've removed your email address per policy to prevent it being used by spammers. Questions to the help desk are answered here, not by any off-wiki medium.

You have created a draft article in your user space, at User:Himanshu18in/JPBS. However, it has a number of issues which make it unsuitable for Wikipedia at this time. Firstly, it appears to be a direct cut-and-paste assemblage of material from parts of the website www.jpbsonline.org. This website has a copyright tag, and Wikipedia cannot use copyrighted materials from other sources. It needs either to be completely rewritten, or to be released to Wikipedia by the copyright holder under an appropriate license - see Wikipedia:Copyright violation and Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.

Secondly, there is no indication that the journal, which is published online only and is new in 2010, is independently notable yet by Wikipedia standards, and your draft article cites few independent sources that cover the journal. Take a look at Wikipedia:Notability (web) to see the notability criteria for websites. (There is also a discussion underway to establish notability criteria for periodicals: it can be see here, but as the journal in question is a web-only publication, the web criteria are probably more appropriate).

If you want to request that someone else write an article on this subject, you can do so at Wikipedia:Requested articles. If you'd like some help getting your draft article into a format suitable for Wikipedia, complete with images, citations and any copyright issues, Wikipedia:Editor assistance is a good place to ask. Ka renjc 16:05, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hatnote

Resolved

– helpful people helped DuncanHill (talk) 13:23, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone help me find and use an appropriate hatnote template please? I want to add one to the article Handcuffs, and it needs to say "Manacles redirects here. For the rocks off Cornwall, see The Manacles" I've had a look at some of the hatnote templates, but the documentation is so poor that I can't work out what to do with them. Thanks. DuncanHill (talk) 13:05, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{Redirect|Manacles|the rocks off Cornwall|The Manacles}} should work I think. --Onorem ♠Dil 13:18, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done with exactly that code before seeing your post.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 13:21, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both! DuncanHill (talk) 13:23, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. The documentation can for example be seen in the third example at Template:Redirect#Redirect:

{{Redirect|REDIRECT|USE1|PAGE1}}

Where did you view documentation and what was the problem? PrimeHunter (talk) 13:28, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find anything that actually listed hatnotes and what they did - was reduced to looking at each of them in turn via the category to try to see if they were the one I was looking for. I have to say, most templates of any kind have documentation which I am sure make perfect sense to the people who understand how templates work , but don't mean much to the rest of us. DuncanHill (talk) 13:44, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think I had actually looked at that template, but given up reading in despair before I got to where it says it can be used to do what I was looking for. DuncanHill (talk) 13:46, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the documentation is backwards - it says "Do thus to get this" - it would be more user-friendly to arrange it "To get this, do thus". DuncanHill (talk) 14:04, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The display of a template depends on the value of the parameters and the documentation has example parameters where other example parameters could have been chosen. I think it is most logical to show the example parameters first and then what they produce. Often the same or similar display can be achieved in different ways (for example by reordering template parameters or omitting parameters with default values) and your method might give the impression that something is the only way to get a result.

The documentation at Template:Redirect is transcluded from {{Otheruses templates}} which should also be transcluded on other hatnotes and is transcluded at Wikipedia:Hatnote#Otheruses templates. Maybe it is confusing that each hatnote template transcludes the same long documentation which describes all hatnotes. Did you look at a hatnote with the long documentation of all hatnotes and if so, would it have helped if it started by saying that this is the common documentation for all hatnotes and not only for the hatnote you may be looking at? PrimeHunter (talk) 14:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's logical at all as a user. I don't go to a template page to learn all the different parameters that can be used with it, just to find out how to do a particular thing. It would help to have a list of example hatnotes, with each one then having the explanation of how to do it. In the example which started this thread - there is no way for a user to know that that paricular template is used unless he reads through all the hatnote templates and happens to spot the particular example on that one page. Even then, the example comes after the description of how to do it - just like you don't give someone a long list of things to do with spanners, and at the end tell them that it will result in a changed wheel. DuncanHill (talk) 14:27, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

People read documentation pages to look for different things. I often want to know what is possible and find extra useful possibilities I wasn't looking for in advance. Suggestions can be made at Template talk:Other uses templates - documentation. The system of first showing a code example and then what it produces is very widespread in Wikipedia (and almost everywhere else I have seen) so I don't expect consensus to change it. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:13, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Then I'll just keep asking here when I need to use an obscurely and confusingly documented template. A lot easier and quicker. DuncanHill (talk) 15:23, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving

I have seen discussion somewhere regarding copy/paste archiving of user talk being subject to MfD process. As I am technically challenged, I have been making use of copy/paste for years. Do I need to be concerned that my archived talk pages are in jeopardy? If so, is there some action I can take that would prevent possible deletion? Thanks for any help. Tiderolls 15:04, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't seen anybody describing copy/paste archiving of what is in your user talk as a problem. I and many others use the method and your archive looks fine to me. Perhaps you have seen MfD being mentioned about things that some people think should never have been in userspace to begin with. The way it was archived seems irrelevant. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I personally think that the idea of deletiong any userspace , even that of an indef blocked user, should not be done (obviously with some exceptions like copyright violation, pure vandalism, nonsense, and an attack page). Immunize (talk) 15:31, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there must've been some content related issues in the thread that I didn't notice. Thanks to all for your input. Tiderolls 15:40, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article

What is the process for deciding what article becomes featured? Immunize (talk) 15:33, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates and Wikipedia:Featured article criteria. You can often find information about something by entering WP: before it in the search box, for example WP:Featured articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:41, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How can I nominate an article? Immunize (talk) 15:51, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read Wikipedia:Featured article candidates? If you are unsure about the procedure after reading that then ask a more specific question. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:06, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am considering nominating Leukemia. How do I go about in doing that, and do you feel that article would be a good choice for a featured article nomination? Immunize (talk) 16:24, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to Talk:Leukemia, that article is B class at the moment. First you should make it into a good article. Did you read the friendly manual pages PrimeHunter recommended? Everything on Wikipedia revolves around reading the friendly manuals. If you don't read the manuals, you will just make problems for the people who do read them. --Teratornis (talk) 17:07, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I should point out that the word "featured" can mean two things. One, it's a quality rating, a basic incomplete and poorly referenced article might be C-class, a much better article might be A-class, and the best articles are featured-class. The other meaning of the word is when an article is "featured" on the main page. I'm guessing that you were using the second meaning and that you want to see the article on the main page. However, to do that you first have to improve the article so that it is featured-level quality. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 18:05, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dates around broad statements?

Should I put dates around statements likely to change, or is that against accepted style?

I keep seeing statements that are time sensitive. Say, in an article about the United States, we might see "The President of the United States is Barack Obama". In a few years, this may be inaccurate, and the article may or may not be updated. However, when people add date modifiers ("As of April 2010, Barack Obama is the current president of the US"), the dates often get removed. If they are removed, the reader has no way to know how up to date the info in an article is, and is relying on other users to correct it. For a page like the US, this will of course happen, but what about less popular pages? Is it a style guideline to remove time modifiers and to allow blanket statements to stand? Or is it acceptable culturally to include date modifiers around things that are likely to changes (political offices, "best of" or "most frequent" statements, etc.)? --Mwexler (talk) 16:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Updating information ({{Update after}} is useful for politicians with fixed terms) and Wikipedia:As of. Things like "best of" and "most frequent" should preferably have a dated inline source to be verifiable, and the year of the source may also be mentioned in the article body, especially if the information could easily change. Statements can contain wikilinks to articles with more information and more likely to be updated quickly, for example "... the American president Barack Obama ...". Then interested readers can quickly find out whether the person is still in office (most readers would probably know it in this particular case). I wouldn't say "As of April 2010, Barack Obama is the current president of the US". This is too well known for as of clutter, and wikilinks and possibly {{Update after}} can be used instead. The biography of an elected office holder should usually mention the election term. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:37, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also see WP:DATED for the general guideline on statements that will date quickly. Whether such a statement is likely to pose a problem later depends on how often its containing article gets edited. Important articles such as United States and Barack Obama undergo frequent edits, so they will probably get updated when the time comes. There is probably little need to mark them with templates, but doing so will not hurt anything. In contrast, an obscure article that gets few edits is much more likely to get stale and stay that way, so any statements that will date quickly in such articles would warrant the "as of" or "update after" machinery. If you see an extended passage in an article that will need updating later, you might leave a note on the article's talk page explaining what will need to be done. That might allow you or someone else to update the article more efficiently, because the editor who does the updating won't have to re-think the problem at the later time. --Teratornis (talk) 23:54, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

database dumps

i need a complete database dumps of cooking.i.e recipes .I am planning to open a site on recipes .so i need info on ingredients,method of preperation etc ..can you please provide the link so that i can downlod it from your site —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.193.0.154 (talk) 18:32, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a cookbook. There aren't many recipes on Wikipedia. You will find more of what you're looking for in the Cookbook section of Wikibooks. --Mysdaao ^talk 20:24, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]