Help desk
< November 22	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 24 >

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.

November 23

Signature

I am trying to make a new signature, but it said that the code was invalid. This is it:
'''[[User:THFSW|T H F S W]]''' (''[[User talk:THFSW|T]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/The High Fin Sperm Whale|C]] '''·''' [[Special:EmailUser/The High Fin Sperm Whale|E]]'')
Anyone no what the invalid character is? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 00:07, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have the with no corresponding - however, adding one would take it over the maximum characters limit, so you'll have to fiddle. Chzz ► 00:33, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking purely hypothetically you could save these characters by replacing your username with {{subst:REVISIONUSER}}, which would expand to your username in 6 fewer characters. Intelligentsium 00:41, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again, invalid sig. New code:

'''[[User:THFSW|T H F S W</font]]''' (''[[User talk:THFSW|T]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}|C]] '''·''' [[Special:EmailUser/{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}|E]]'')
--The High Fin Sperm Whale 02:24, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have a "</font". But honestly, what's wrong with the default signature? Xenon54 (talk) 02:27, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing is wrong with it, I just like playing with code. And I did add "</font". --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:14, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have a "</font" but you need a "" with an extra ">" at the end. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:28, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question about autobiography

If I am the primary source reference, and there's nothing published regarding my birthdate or origins, how can I legitimize my wikipedia page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevkraft (talk • contribs) 01:43, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot. Not everything that exists merits a Wikipedia page. In order for to be the subject of an article, there needs to have been, before the article was written at Wikipedia, a wealth of information in reliable sources such as books, magazines, or newspapers. More information is availible at Wikipedia:Notability If there are no books, magazine articles, newspaper articles, or things like that written about your life, then you are not notable enough for a Wikipedia article to be written about you. Even if you are notable, you are not supposed to write articles about yourself; people who don't know you and who have no connection to you should write them, without your knowledge or input. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. --Jayron32 01:55, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

trouble with another user

I am having trouble with another user. How do I report possible miss use of removing cited posts from a Wikipedia page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Afterrock81 (talk • contribs) 05:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The source that you cite ([1]) does not verify any of the information contained in your edit. You are WP:EDITWARing in order to get unsourced WP:FRINGE material added to an article. This will eventually lead to you being blocked, if you continue. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 06:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The ability to provide factual information

Resolved: Glad it helped! :) Gonzonoir (talk) 08:19, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear wikipedia,

First i would love to say that you are great for factual information. As your information is constantly fact checked i believe you to be a great source of information. However, many professors do not simply accept "wikipedia.org" to be a legitimate source of information. I am sure I am not the first to propose this, but is there any way to make wiki a legitimate source in the eyes of the academic community? Your information seems to be rock solid and if i am ever in doubt (which is very rare) i check to make sure the info is accurate. I just wish that using wiki could be an accurate source according to the academic community as a whole and if there is anything you could do to make that happen that would be great! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.58.129.32 (talk) 07:55, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - really glad to hear you find Wikipedia so useful.

Our page about citing Wikipedia discusses this issue: generally speaking, academics are right to be cautious of information sourced only to Wikipedia, simply because the project's open nature means it's impossible to be certain that any given claim at any given time is definitely accurate. (Even a very high quality page could have been temporarily vandalized.) We lack the central quality control processes that academic publishers, for example, require. (This, though, is what has let the project grow so quickly and cover so much material - it would have been impossible on a traditional publishing model.) Wikipedia itself doesn't actually allow facts in its own articles to be sourced to other Wikipedia articles for exactly this reason. Besides, encyclopedias generally have only a limited role in academic research: they make for good starting points for research, but in higher levels of academic writing you would seldom want to cite a claim solely to an encyclopedia.

I think the solution's implicit in what you've already said: when in doubt about a fact claim in Wikipedia, you already check to make sure the information's accurate. This is often easy in Wikipedia because we strive to supply reliable sources for all the claims in our articles. Wikipedia, then, is a (potentially) great way to access references to the kinds of sources that academics can accept - and these sources are what you should be citing in academic work.

Better still, if you're able to find sources for claims that weren't yet cited, you can add them to the article yourself! Do let us know if this answers your question. Gonzonoir (talk) 08:30, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect. Answered my question very thoroughly and provided me with the exact information I needed to know. Thank you so much! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.58.131.54 (talk) 06:22, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

adding visitors count

I would suggest that Wiki adds "visitors count" at the bottom of each page or article to help the reader form an understanding based on the popularity of the article he/she is reading. Would this be an rational request?

Dr. Bader Hakami —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.51.16.74 (talk) 08:08, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whether this information should be added to articles is probably a question better raised at the Village Pump noticeboard, but for reference you can find Wikipedia article traffic information at Stats.grok.se, an externally hosted tool. Hope this is of interest. Gonzonoir (talk) 08:20, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This has been raised several times before, but has been declined for performance reasons. See Wikipedia:Technical FAQ#Can I add a page hit counter to a Wikipedia page? Searching "hit counter" in the archives at the Village Pump gives links to past discussions. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 10:00, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trouble with the {{Harvid}} template

I've tried using this template (along with {{sfn}}) to cite an authorless publication (i.e. the Indian Economic Survey) on the Economy of India page, but it isn't working and gives me an error (visible in the "Notes" section of the page - see footnote 75). Tweaking the parameters has produced no result. Could someone please help out? Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 09:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the documentation at Template:sfn, you'll see that {{sfn}} doesn't want <ref>...</ref> around it. I've fixed it for you. David Biddulph (talk) 10:52, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks :-) Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 10:58, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hugh Arbuthnot (British Army officer)

There is a tilted photo of this man at commons [General sir hugh arbuthnott.jpg]. Can someone detilt it please? . Kittybrewster ☎ 09:54, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, that might be a tough one, but I'll give it a try. – ukexpat (talk) 14:44, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK I took a stab at it, and I think it came out OK. I also adjusted the levels slightly and applied a little sharpening. – ukexpat (talk) 16:58, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do I edit and add text to an 'information box' ?

I seem to be able to Edit general information, however I cannot see how to edit an 'information box' - what I mean by 'information box, for example is the box on the right hand side of JLS 'Love You More' page found here: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Love_You_More_(JLS_song) - The box that has the single artwork at the top and then lists the B-side / Released / Format / Recorded....etc. I want to add a 'Mixer' to this list. Any help appreciated. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hedwards1973 (talk • contribs) 10:30, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If on the page in question you click on "Edit this page", you'll find the infobox data at the top of the page source. For details of the syntax and the intended content, read Template:Infobox_single, and also see WP:SONGS. David Biddulph (talk) 10:39, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

China study critique

Dear,

I have been wondering why the scientifically sound critiques on the China Study (http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/The_China_Study_%28book%29) are always removed? Actually the header Critique has been removed completely.

Gone also are the criticisms from Science Based Medicine’s Dr. Harriet Hall ( http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=385 and http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=6092 ) as well as perfectly sound critiques from Chris Masterjohn (http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/China-Study.html and http://www.westonaprice.org/blogs/the-curious-case-of-campbells-rats-does-protein-deficiency-prevent-cancer.html ) and Denise Minger (http://rawfoodsos.com/the-china-study/).

I've heard the reason for it is that a vegan moderator is in charge of the page. Should this be true, I do not think it is appropriate behaviour of the moderator to mix his personnal opinions with scientific facts.

Can yo please confirm: a: why no scientific critique is being mentioned b: if a vegan moderator is in charge of the page c: if personnal opinions of a moderator can be the only decisive factor in tackling scientific critique, even if it is scientifically sound? Because if so, just close your site down!

thank you very much —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.191.147.133 (talk) 11:18, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not have "moderators". Wikipedia content is not moderated; it is agreed by community consensus. It has administrators, who deal with housekeeping matters and other practical duties, but they are not "in charge" of the content of any page. See WP:OWN.

What is happening in that article is a content dispute. The place to discuss the content of the page is on the article's talk page. Should disputes over the content continue, the next step is dispute resolution. Ka renjc 11:37, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Appears with gltich.

Look at the two screen shots of Wikipedia that I took from my computer:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/54911796@N04/5201575616/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/54911796@N04/5201578990/

It looks like that there's a problem with wiki server.with this type of interference, it is very hard to browse Wikipedia.Help me.Max Viwe | Wanna chat with me? 13:57, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks as though you have the "Simple" skin set in your user preferences. You can change it back to Vector (the default) or to anything else by clicking on "my preferences" in the top right, and then choosing your preferred skin on the "Appearance" tab. Does that solve the problem? Gonzonoir (talk) 14:05, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have been using original monobook skin, not the simple one.Max Viwe | Wanna chat with me? 14:18, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, OK. So to clarify, are you saying that if you go into My Preferences now, the radio button next to Monobook on the Appearances tab is set? Gonzonoir (talk) 14:21, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

yes, it's already set on monobook.Max Viwe | Wanna chat with me? 14:32, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I'm not sure what's causing your problem then - I'm assuming the issue is that the page display style is not as you want it? Perhaps someone else can chip in here? Gonzonoir (talk) 15:27, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Around 21:00 (UTC) yesterday I was seeing very slow loading of Wikipedia pages, and once I saw a page that seemed to have loaded with no skin, a bit like these screenshots. All is well now, though. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:33, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No harm in doing a cache bypass and/or a server purge. – ukexpat (talk) 15:47, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of Not Existing Page Links

Is there a page somewhere with a long list of pages that have links to them, but don't exist? I was just thinking to myself a couple days ago of how having something like this could really help editors who are looking for something to work on, something that really needs working on. GameSlayerGS (talk) 14:07, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that no such list is currently maintained, though there was once a list of "most wanted" articles, listing those titles that appeared most commonly as redlinks. It hasn't been updated since the database analysis Wikiproject folded but you can still find the list at WP:MWA.

In some ways a raw list of red links might not be the ideal tool for users looking for something that needs work - not every red link should have an article, for example. For editors seeking something to work on I'd suggest the requested articles list, which lists user-requested articles and tries to vet the titles for suitability. There's also Category:Red list, compiling editor-managed lists of missing articles. Does that help? Gonzonoir (talk) 14:15, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that helps. Thanks! GameSlayerGS (talk) 14:57, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Narrector

My entry for Narrector has been deleted as an 'obvious hoax. This is not the case this is a new word which is an amalgamation of Narrator and Director to describe someone who for example is both Narrator and Director or, for example, a film or a play. VCan someone please advise.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.33.216.254 (talk) 14:30, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The word fails the Search engine test. Please read Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary#Neologisms and Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 14:39, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Complaint

Hello. My name is Kim Jang Hung. I work for the DPRK government. The account on your front page saying that DPRK forces attacked is wrong. American Occupied Korea (AOK) attacked us first. Please change this. Thank you. --KimJangHung (talk) 14:49, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so.[2] – ukexpat (talk) 14:52, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the record: when thwarted, this account went on a nasty little vandalism spree and has since been blocked. Of course, in all fairness, we have nothing to show that they are Korean, or that they were acting for the Pyongyang government in any way. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, having looked at his edits, his vandalism seemed to be that of someone who had English as a first language, and included articles on relatively obscure American politicians that don't seem to have any relation to the Korean Peninsula.Naraht (talk) 15:24, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Need help re DVD

The Nixon Library has been kind enough to send me a DVD, in the public domain (joint project of the Senate and the US Navy photographic centers) of the 1969 Inauguration, with sound and commentary. What is the best procedure for getting clips from that so I can upload them? I use a MacBookPro, by the way.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:08, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You will need some DVD ripping software for your Mac, and then rip away. You may also need some video/image manipulation software to convert the ripped content into formats appropriate for Wikipedia/Commons. You will probably get a more detailed response at the computing reference desk and the Commons software page may also be of some help. – ukexpat (talk) 15:43, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alida Vázquez

This article was deleted for lack of importance by Lifebaka. I posted on his/her page November 11 asking that it be reinstated, but I haven't heard anything back yet. Could I get someone else to reinstate this so I can add further evidence of importance? Pkeets (talk) 15:50, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Restored and moved to your userspace at User:Pkeets/Alida Vázquez. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Pkeets (talk) 16:01, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Am I able to update my own company's webpage or is that a conflict of interest?

Hello,

I'm looking to update a page on my company but as I am in the process of creating an account to do so, I've read that it seems to be a conflict of interest as I am an employee of the company in question.

I was also planning to create an account the company could use to contribute information to relevant pages (in a non-promotional way) and continually update our own pages as we evolve. Similarly, does the statement "Accounts that represent an entire group or company are not permitted no matter the name" mean we can still use one account that more than one person could use to log in as long as we have the appropriate name?

Finally, if I am not able to edit or create my own company's pages, is our only option to "make a request for someone else to post one at Wikipedia:Requested articles"?

Any help would be greatly appreciated! 195.171.4.131 (talk) 15:58, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's a major conflict of interest. No, you can't "own" or otherwise control articles about yourselves. No, we don't permit accounts that more than one person could log in to. Only individual human beings can have accounts here; we forbid "role accounts" like that. Yes, you should ask for somebody without that conflict of interest to create an article about your company. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:01, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, that helps- so I'm not allowed in any way to update the company history even if written with a Neutral point of view? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.171.4.131 (talk) 16:16, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If something is incorrect, post a note to the talk page of the article, with a citation to a reliable third-party source of information, and disclosing your own conflict of interest as an explanation of why you're not doing the edit yourself. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:48, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Placing {{Request edit}} above the note will also place it into a category of requested edits, which will call further attention to it. -- Bk314159 (Talk to me and find out what I've done) 17:15, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also my response at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Business#Updating companies. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 09:25, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you post your corrections on the talk page of the article I will be happy - as an independant editor - to make the corrections for you. What's the title of the article? I will ask you there for third party sources to verify your corrections. Hope this helps Mark^Dask 12:44, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Constantly getting mobile site on Wii

Is there anyway to make the site distinguish between a mobile phone and a Wii. I'm tired of have to go through the process of permanently disabling the mobile settings every several hours. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AnonymousFriend80 (talk • contribs) 19:57, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your question has been up for a while with no response yet. Maybe nobody who is watching the Help desk knows about this problem, but keep checking back here. I don't have any experience with your equipment setup. Have you read Help:Mobile access (which mentions the Wii) and its talk page? If that doesn't help and nobody answers here, you might have to ask on WP:VPT. --Teratornis (talk) 22:35, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are timelines useful

Is it a good idea to have timelines in a biography? Harryj2198 (talk) 20:38, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's a really subjective question and difficult to answer without some sort of context. What article? Why do you think it would help? Why do you think people may view it as a hindrance? In general, I like timelines but depending on the circumstances, a table may work better. Dismas|^(talk) 21:09, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe generally they are discouraged in favor of a more encyclopedic narrative style. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:43, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might find an answer that applies to the biography you have in mind, in the links under WP:EIW#Timeline. Also see Wikipedia:Featured articles where you will find examples of biographies rated as the highest quality by Wikipedia editors. You can probably rely on featured articles as a reliable guide for developing articles about similar topics, but referring to explicit rules is better if you can find them. --Teratornis (talk) 22:45, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Making Large Edits

Hi,

My company's wikipedia page has not been edited for some time and has become extremely outdated. I would like to edit it and bring it up to date but I am worried that since the edit will be rather large that it may be flagged or be called "unverified" or "questionable." I have been told that once a page gets these warnings it is very difficult to remove them. I do have sources for most of the information that I want to post but not all of it. Could someone tell me how to avoid getting these types of warnings put on my company's page? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.199.1.50 (talk) 21:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If something is incorrect, post a note to the talk page of the article, with a citation to a reliable third-party source of information, and disclosing your own conflict of interest as an explanation of why you're not doing the edit yourself. Placing {{Template:Request edit}} above the note will also place it into a category of requested edits, which will call further attention to it. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:12, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To add to Orange Mike's advice: the difficulty of removing a warning depends on the difficulty of fixing the problem that prompted someone to place the warning. Some problems are easy to fix, some are not. One of the most common problems is the un-sourced assertion. On Wikipedia we do not just write what we know (or believe) to be true, but only what we can verify is in reliable published sources. If you are not familiar with Wikipedia's rules, you should not make large edits all at once, but try changing just a few things and wait a few weeks to see the response. The most important thing you can bring to Wikipedia is not your personal knowledge about a subject, but your knowledge of what has been published about the subject. If you know of such references, you can mention them on the article's talk page. Since you are associated with the company, please read WP:COI and WP:BFAQ. --Teratornis (talk) 22:27, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Holden Commodore

Hi, On the bmw page of the E36 3 Series range, it has a column of the engine, top speed, torque etc.. i remember seeing this on the holden commodore page but now i cant find it. can you help me at all? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bridges.4 (talk • contribs) 22:03, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which model do you have in mind? The Holden Commodore article is general; look in the model specific articles such as Holden VB Commodore for more detail. --Teratornis (talk) 22:21, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Human name disambiguation page

How do I create a human name disambiguation page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fgrinnell (talk • contribs) 22:09, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are some pointers at WP:DAB. Please be careful around the issue of a primary topic since that can affect the location of the disambiguation page; feel free to post at my talk or at WT:DAB if you have any questions. --AndrewHowse (talk) 22:13, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if all you wanted to do was to distinguish your new article Frederick Grinnell (biologist) from the already-existing Frederick Grinnell, I have added the usual note at the top of the latter to point to the new article. We don't tend to create disambiguation pages for just two names. Bencherlite ^Talk 22:16, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quite. I should've looked at the contribs. Thanks! --AndrewHowse (talk) 22:30, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]