Help desk
< April 16	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 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.

April 17

Delete Account

Delete my account. Due to some privacy concerns, I need my account to be terminated immediately. I have been told that that can't be done, but that is false. Please delete my account and my posts. Thank you in advance for the professionalism Johanna Orchid — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johanna orchid (talk • contribs) 04:16, 17 April 2012‎

Your account cannot be deleted, but it can be renamed to something which is unconnected to your real name. See Wikipedia:Changing username. Textual contributions you have made to Wikipedia cannot, however, be removed. As noted on every single page where you pressed the "Save Page" button: "By clicking the "Save Page" button, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL.". When your account is renamed, your contributions will be attributed to the anonymous account, but they cannot be made to simply "not exist". --Jayron32 05:19, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, once you have requested a rename, and it is completed, you should ask that this entry be revdel'd or oversighted, otherwise it will contain a link from your name to the new name. If you send me a note, I can revdel it (which should be enough.) If the privacy concerns are serious enough to require oversight, let me know and I'll track down an oversighter.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 17:03, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

template for photo gallery

Hi. What is the template for not turning an article into a photo gallery? One of the editors is doing this at Roseville, New South Wales and has reverted my attempt to reduce the photo content. What template can I put on it?

Sardaka (talk) 06:57, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:GALLERY. But does the article for a town really need so many pictures of random houses? Dismas|^(talk) 07:23, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The style guideline is at Wikipedia:Image use policy#Image galleries and there are some likely templates at Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup#Images. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:43, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Culloden

Please add to the Talk page about the Battle of Culloden that 16 April 2012 was the 266th anniversary of the battle. People should remember the fact, regardless of their loyalties to the Hanoverians or the Jacobites.Maclennan123 (talk) 07:53, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see you added it yourself at Talk:Battle of Culloden#Battle of Culloden. Talk pages are meant for discussing improvements to the article. The talk page has never been archived and contains posts back to 2004. The Battle of Culloden is mentioned in 16 April. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:32, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welding Institute link expired

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Hyperbaric_welding The Welding Institute has a link at the bottom which has now expired. It needs to be updated to http://www.twi.co.uk/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.17.162.100 (talk) 09:35, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The existing archive link is specifically about underwater welding; what link do you suggest to replace that? - David Biddulph (talk) 09:52, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

editing an article

How do I add the term "nipa hut" to the English words of Tagalog origin? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.188.192.111 (talk) 11:24, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To add the term nipa hut to List of English words of Tagalog origin, select this, and type. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:05, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

reusing an image

Hello

Please, help!

If I copy such image (http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/File:ASODemo.jpg) into my publication (paper), what EXACTLY should I write under the image or in the legend of the image to preserve the licence or copyright? I am neither an English native speaker nor a lawyer and I don´t understand all these copyright terms and licence transfers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.87.51.34 (talk) 11:34, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia contains information about citing Wikipedia when using it as a reference, while Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content has information on reusing Wikipedia content, like a picture, in another context. --Jayron32 13:52, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

about creating a page on wikipedia

i want to create a page on Wikipedia for a major player in infrastructure in India "Pearls Infrastructure" , this is very big infrastructure company in india ,any information about this company is not available on Wikipedia so want to create a page on the company but Wikipedia removes my created page , please Wikipedia team add information about this company on Wikipedia http://www.pearlsinfrastructure.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.244.49.130 (talk) 15:09, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Pearls infrastructure, and the advice that you were given at User talk:115.244.7.67. Also note that the draft as written is worded in a promotional manner, so will not be accepted. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:24, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Errie Ball Golfer

Dear Sir

In your introduction to Errie Ball the golfer you state that he was the youngest player to have played in the British Open Golf Championship at the age of 15. Can I ask where you got your information? There was an H. Ball and an S. ball that played in the Open At Lytham St Annes in 1926. H.Ball was Harry Ball who was Errie's father and S. Ball was Sydney Ball was Errie's uncle. I have a picture of the score board at the 1926 open and there are two Ball shown one "H" and one "S".

Rgds

David Armitstead — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.120.115.94 (talk) 15:33, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The [3] after the statement is a reference, and in this case it links here. Errie was born in 1910, so it sounds as if you may have the generations wrong. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:40, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has turned blue.

Hello,

Wikipedia in its entirety is now blue. The background is blue everywhere, except under the sidebar and pictures. The lack of contrast makes text very difficult to read. I don't know why it is this way or how to change it, how can I get the background back to white?

Thanks,

Jetset59 (talk) 16:47, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a bug in the latest version of Google Chrome that shows a blue background if the browser zoom level is set below 100%. Reset the zoom to 100% with Ctrl+0 or adjust it with Ctrl++ and Ctrl+-.. Goodvac (talk) 16:57, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)The exact same thing happened to me. It is caused when you zoom out on your computer. Use your browser's zoom controls, crtl+mouse scroll wheel, or multitouch on the touchpad of a laptop to zoom in. Ryan Vesey Review me! 16:59, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I accidently messed up this page WQTL

Hi i was trying to update the page about the new format on the radio station but i accidently screwed up doing it. See what i was trying to do is upload a pic but I saw no way to do it, The example pic said do it at the sidebar section when there isn't a sidebar section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tojeh (talk • contribs) 19:40, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, it's been fixed.--ukexpat (talk) 19:47, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Persistent vandalism of two pages - plus threat placed on my Talk page

User Denhaagandy keeps removing properly-sourced material from the Downside Abbey and Downside School pages and when I revert the changes they have left the following rambling text on my Talk page. I would appreciate some advice on how to proceed. Thanks, Peteinterpol (talk) 20:41, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Downside The reasoning behind my edit is quite sound. It's positioning on the page is not good. Firstly, it must be remembered that Downside is a monastery where children are sent to receive a catholic education. Monastery first and then school second. Your source is not reliable since it is a newspaper. Dom Nicholas was not known as Fr Nick. I think this is a poor attempt to call him Satan. He was known as Hittler or Peck. The source is not good because it requires us to pay for a subscription to a News International publication, an organisation which is of dubious reputation and parts of which are under ongoing police criminal investigations. Reporters all have the same stories and so are paid to put their own spin on them. It would be an idea to list sources that we can click and verify immediately. This is the whole point of wikis policy of sources - so that we can immediately look them up. Fr Nicholas was wrong and his misdeeds were actually referred to the police who at the time decided not to take any action. The fourth monk mentioned is Dom Antony, and the allegation against him had no substance especially since the victim told police it was all lies. Mind you the alleged victim did not actually make the complaint! Last year Downside indeed received an "inadequate" rating from Ofsted because it did not meet new criteria set. This would relate in allowing access to monastic gardens and the Abbey church unsupervised. This reasoning is obvious because the community does receive many guest and I am sure people such as the Dalai Lama have not had criminal record checks. Improvements were also needed for the reporting abuse thus aiding in its prevention. In November 2011 there was a followi up inspection and Downside was compliant in all areas. The Independent Schools commission went a little further and so there are further improvements to follow. Whilst child abuse is repugnant and Dm Nicholas is right to be punished, the prominence of your piece is not correct. It would find a better place towards the end and edited. Your piece is the largest I the entry. We want an encyclopaedia not a personal crusade. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Denhaagandy (talk • contribs) 16:44, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

MI5

Whenever I come into the UK I get interrogated by MI5. Why would they do that? It is bloody inconvenient.... Aaaah they must be scared of something, but cannot prove. That is the way we work. But then if MI5 are frightened, don't they have a reason to be. Without proper sources that we can all see, do not amend the Downside page. The Times is not a proper source since we cannot check it. As i mentioned other users unless they subscribe to the Times ie pay cannot check your source. As per rules of wiki newspapers are not reliable sources although they are ok to use.

You failed to mention that Downside has been inspected in November and the report in published in January shows that Downside is compliant in all areas. This was 6 months after the previous one. The OFSTED report prior said that Downside was good in all areas. Continue along your current lines I can only see one outcome. Please for your own sake do not continue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Denhaagandy (talk • contribs) 20:00, 17 April 2012 (UTC) "

Um. He's completely wrong on the "newspapers aren't RS" thing. News reporting can generally be considered reliable for statements of fact (WP:RS). Whether or not the newspaper's article is reliable is something that should be decided on a case-by-case basis. If there is doubt, you could discuss it on the article's talk page or at WP:RSN. Also, there's no hard-and-fast policy against citing material behind a paywall, though if the same material/facts are available in an equally reliable free source, it's probably better to use the free one. As for the threat, it's not outright but implied, IMO. If this is the first/only time he's done this, it may be best to ignore it, but it may also be good to bring it up at Wikiquette assistance or one of the other dispute resolution methods. - Purplewowies (talk) 21:04, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Having trouble putting together the pieces for an article

I'm having trouble putting together the puzzle pieces for my article, State Bridge - specifically, finding reliable sources, especially related to its history, location, and the related lodge. I've certainly found sources, (many of which are not listed on the link, but rather on a text document...) but not many of them are really "reliable" to contain essential information that is only in those less-reliable/unverifiable sources, which have information that can't be found in other sources. Thanks, An apple and orange (talk) 21:31, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The idea behind Wikipedia's verifiability policy is that all information on Wikipedia must be sourced by reliable sources so that personal bias isn't incorporated into Wikipedia. An editor isn't supposed to insert information that is just his own opinion or his own observations because he may be biased or wrong on the facts. For the same reason, unreliable sources reflect the biases and risk the errors of the unreliable source's author. So reliable sourcing really is a must. There are many good places to look for reliable sources, though. Some of the usual places to go as a first step include Google News, Google Books, and Google Scholar. These search engines can often help to find high-quality reliable sources, but there are sure to be other reliable sources available elsewhere as well. It looks like you've made a good start on the article. Good luck. -Thibbs (talk) 14:57, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for a Wiki to track promises politicians make in public

A wiki-style site devoted to documenting promises (where, when and source) that politicians make. The purpose would be to have a non-partisan site open to the public rather than depend upon whatever press agent or political detractor wants to say about said person. All too often the public only sees the competing claims made by one side against another, and seldom knows the source.

The difficulty is finding the appropriate software to accomplish such a goal and as important motivating someone or some organization that has the interest and capability to maintain such an activity.

I hope that someone can take the idea and run with it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.191.181.175 (talk) 21:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want something done, do it yourself, [1] is the wiki software, or else you could try and get a Wikia I guess, but Wikipedia is not the place to organise such a thing--Jac16888 ^Talk 21:42, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TheyWorkForYou pretty well does this. You haven't said what country you're in, though, so if you're somewhere foreign that won't help much. --ColinFine (talk) 11:01, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please define "foreign". In the context of this global site the word is basically meaningless. Roger (talk) 16:19, 18 April 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Adding Texas to the article on Brevet Military Ranks

The State of Texas has had a recognised reactivated "Texas Army" since Gov. Preston Smith "Reactived the Army" from the deactivated 1836 Texas Army of Sam Houston and David Crockett, in 1969. It is not the Texas Army National Guard or State Guard. It was activated for ceremonial & educationsl purposes. How do I include The "Texas Army" in you article on Brevet Rank?76.31.104.26 (talk) 21:52, 17 April 2012 (UTC) COl. John W. Martin.[reply]

See Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources; once you have found one that covers the topic, you can post it at the article talk page and discuss adding it, or Wikipedia:Be bold and add it yourself, but be prepared to discuss it. I've looked in Texas State Historical Association online but did not find it; if you're unable to locate a Reliable Source yourself, you might still post to the article talk page or Wikipedia:WikiProject Texas. Dru of Id (talk) 23:00, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question about removing a section

I have a question about Wikipedia's editing policy. There is an article titled "Neartown Houston" which has a section that I want to remove. The page is about a neighborhood in the city of Houston, yet there is a section in it about a crime that happened 6 years ago. The crime is not a major incident, it's not noteworthy and it is not representative of the neighborhood either. I posted on the talk page a week ago and so far one person has responded agreeing with me. I am new to editing Wikipedia and I want to make sure that there are no other steps that need to be taken or if maybe I should head in a different direction than just deleting the section. I can't possibly think of a way to edit the section to make it relevant to the topic and there is no author to contact. Does anyone have any advice? Gmios (talk) 23:11, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the section. My edit summary gives the gist of my reasoning and the policy basis for removal.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)

Awesome. Thank you so much! Gmios (talk) 04:08, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anytime.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:22, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]