Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2012 March 16

Help desk
< March 15	<< Feb | March | Apr >>	March 17 >

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.

March 16

Wiki tool: Kiki?

Have you heard of a tool on any other wiki called "Kiki"? After you install it, when you edit a page, a "Format text" link appears in the "toolbox" (if I remember that correctly) in the sidebar. If you click it (you have to be in edit mode), some minor changes get made. It simplifies URLs, removes extra spacing, etc. I utilize it on Intellipedia-TS and WikiInfo, but I cant' find it here. Allen (talk) 02:35, 16 March 2012 (UTC

It doesn't appear as though Kiki is used on Wikipedia, but you might be interested in Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser, which automatically suggests minor formatting changes. There are also many scripts that suggest a limited number of changes, such as GregU's dash script, which is easy and near-infallible. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 11:46, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Usage of tools

How do you use the "LinkFixr" and "Custom regex" links in the sidebar? Allen (talk) 02:44, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

What sidebar? I don't have a "LinkFixr" or "Custom regex" in any sidebar? Did you turn some preference on to get these? Dismas|^(talk) 02:53, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I added scripts to my monobook.js file. I can't click on the "LinkFixr" link. Allen (talk) 03:02, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, it was made by User:Magnus Manske. So I would either look at their userpage to see if they have instructions on how it's supposed to be used or ask them on their talk page how their script is supposed to work. Dismas|^(talk) 03:08, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

"LinkFixr" is apparently made by importScript('User:Magnus Manske/LinkFixr.js') in your User:Morriswa/monobook.js. Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts says:

LinkFixr Adds a link to the toolbox in edit mode to fix "link typos", e.g., [[Stuff,]] => [[Stuff]],

"Custom regex" is apparently made by selecting "Add a sidebar menu of user-defined regex tools, with a dynamic form for instant one-use regex" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. It links to documentation at meta:User:Pathoschild/Scripts/Regex menu framework. I haven't tried either tool. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:09, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Template:Cite video

I have used Template:Cite video for this referencing, but the director's name is not displaying. Could anyone look into this matter? --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 03:10, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. You weren't using the Cite Video template. You were using just {{Citation}}. Dismas|^(talk) 03:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, but the citation template works for news, journal, books etc, then why is it not working for video? --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 05:17, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Template:Citation doesn't have a | people = parameter, so doesn't recognize the field; | others = works with it, but places the field after the title. Dru of Id (talk) 05:41, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for the clarification! --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 05:49, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

help please (public problem)

Relocated from the help desk talk page.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:30, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello

I translate New York Rangers on my first language (Georgian) but I really didn't know how to public and share, it was my first try, but I public and some one from stuf didn't share and just deleted I want to some one helped me about my topic and explain how to do things what I did it by mystake..

Thank you in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beneto9 (talk • contribs) 03:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC) --Beneto9 (talk) 03:09, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

ka:მომხმარებლის წვლილი/Beneto9, Beneto's contributions, show what appears to me to be largely edits to userspace and user talk space, but his userpage history shows that he did the translation in userspace only to have someone else come along and replace the content with a deletion tag. Beneto, I'm sorry: we cannot help you unless we understand Georgian. Most of us don't understand Georgian. I will ask for help at the language reference desk. Nyttend (talk) 03:41, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't know Georgian either, but with Google translate I can see that this appears to be the last draft version on his user talk page before another user replaced it all with a welcome. —teb728 t c 10:13, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

How do you say New York Rangers in Georgian? Type that into the search box and press enter. It should give you a page saying the Georgian equivalent of 'Create the page "New York Rangers" on this wiki!' Click on the New York Rangers link and it will take you to an edit page for your new article. Edit the old version I linked to above and copy wikicode from there into the edit box of your new article. Press the save button. —teb728 t c 10:33, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

"ნიუ იორკ რეინჯერსი" is New York rangers in Georgian (according to Google Translate). That text is the first 3 words from Beneto9's talk page draft. However, it seems another editor, Henry McClean might have some objection to what Beneto9 wrote, saying "...აქ გადმოკოპირება დაუშვებელია" (and this is where Google lets me down - it comes up with "...here gadmokopireba prohibited"); I suspect "გადმოკოპირება" is something to do with copying/copyright.

If I am wrong about a possible copyright problem, I propose Beneto9 should revert the changes on his talk page back to a satisfactory version of his Ranger's article and then move it to the article space on the Georgian Wikipedia. Alternatively, since no one else has contributed to the draft itself, he could just cut & paste his draft into a new article. That will create the article and make it public as Beneto9 originally asked. Astronaut (talk) 11:26, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

What I understand (without knowing Georgian) is that Beneto9's translated article ka:ნიუ-იორკ რეინჯერსი needs to be refurbished according to the standards of the Georgian Wikipedia. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 14:03, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

How can I see previous versions of a page.

How can I see previous versions of a page. Some pages of wikipedia I have read have been changed anumber of times and the information I want has been deleted. Please be very specific as to how to see the previous versions. If thier is no way to see the previous versions I believe a simple way to view them is important to add to your software. Otherwise wikipedia is like the book 1984 where the main caracter of the books main job is to edit historical records to match the governments official policy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.14.205.3 (talk) 03:52, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Please read Help:Page history. Every page has a "View history" button at the top, and by following the help page's directions, you can see how other pages have changed through time. Nyttend (talk) 03:57, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Step 1) Click the "View History" tab when you are viewing the page you wish to see an old version of. Step 2) Click the date of the version you wish to see. That's it. You can also compare changes between versions The page Help:Page history and Help:Diff has more details on using the advanced features of the "View History" tab. --Jayron32 04:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

For me, it's called just "History", though an IP is unlikely to have preferences set. Just adding this for someone who might.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:01, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Recent edits by User:213.196.211.166 needs a check

Hello, recent edits by User:213.196.211.166, (see 213.196.211.166) need a more advance check as the user has removed section named Episode Notes from various articles by claiming them to be as pure original research. Thank you. TheGeneralUser (talk) 06:25, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

If they aren't original research, can you provide a link to the reliable source from which they were derived? From a quick sample, I think that the IP seems to be correct... AndyTheGrump (talk) 07:04, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Categorization in navbox

Resolved

I'm creating a template using the {{navbox}} with collapsible groups. For example:

{{Navbox with collapsible groups
|group1 = A
|list1 = [[1]], [[2]], [[3]], [[4]]

|group2 = B
|list2 = [[5]], [[6]], [[7]], [[8]]
}}

However I'm stuck at the point when I want to apply categorization through the template for each group of links:

{{#if:list1|<includeonly>{{namespace||[[Category:A|{{PAGENAME}}]]}}</includeonly>}}

I tried searching for hours on how to do this, it seem so simple, yet I cannot find the solution.--Lizzious (talk) 10:41, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

The parameter name should be enclosed in triple curled brackets: {{{list1|}}}. See mw:Template. Ruslik_Zero 11:42, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. However, I do not really understand. What I want to do is: categorize the wikilinks in list1 (1,2,3,4) in Category A and the wikilinks in list2 (5,6,7,8) in Category B. Now the wikilinks in the entire template (list1 + list2) are all automatically categorized in category A and B. I want to solve this in the template itself without having to edit the pages 1,2,3,4 all manually with a piplelink to tell them that they are part of list1 and should be categorized under list1. --Lizzious (talk) 13:27, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I assume you want the categorization in pages using the template. It's impossible for a template to categorize a page that doesn't use the template. You can add code like this in your template outside the whole {{Navbox with collapsible groups ...}}:

{{#switch: {{PAGENAME}}
 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 = [[Category:A]]
 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 = [[Category:B]]
}}

See mw:Help:Extension:ParserFunctions#.23switch for documentation. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 are the unlinked page names in your list1 and list2. You have to write the page names in both the list parameters of the navbox and the switch, and keep them synchronized if the template changes later. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, Yes! This is exactly what I want! It works perfectly! You're my hero, thanks so much! --Lizzious (talk) 14:24, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

How do we demote and remove moderators? My story.

Story:

I am about 8 years with Wikipedia.

I published several short articles just yesterday on Russian Wiki, which were immediately and permanently deleted by Russian Wikipedia moderator OneLittleMouse (no comments on my page, no attempts to discuss in article's talk, just ref to Wiki rules: 'not important' in comments for deletion). Whereas the articles were on socially important subject which was entirely new (and in support of this there are documents).

When edited OneLittleMouse's page, as well as two other pages of people which awarded him signs of recognition of his contributions, moderator AlexSv blocked me from editing for one week, accusing me of 'vandalizing personal pages'. If leaving messages to users and moderators on their personal pages is vandalizing, my page was also vandalized and the vandal was not punished.

In other words, the problem is that in Russian Wikipedia we have double standards, bias and moderator mafia censorship, the situation when moderators support and promote each other and limit the freedom of prolific yet low in ranks Wiki users actually contributing to the content creation. This takes place for quite long time and many prolific bright and well educated editors has left the project as a result. Whereas moderators, often people with limited education and based in remote location across Russia and former Soviet Union states prosper and flourish.

I am elevating this major issue to the project founder. In the meantime, as far as my minor trouble with the Russian moderators is concerned, I demand removal of awards to OneLittleMouse, restoring my editing rights, restoring the deleted articles and demoting OneLittleMouse and anyone else supporting him in his deleting and scaremongering endeavors, including revoking the moderator status.

P.S. Take OneLittleMouse for example: this guy does not write content, he prefers to focus on deleting and editing out and invented warning tags to scare editors from contributing and encourage deletion of content. If this abuse of Wikipedia spirit is in line to the rules, the rules must be changed, but the spirit should stay intact.

P.P.S. I attempted to contact OneLittleMouse directly via Skype and left messages on his and his friends pages, but in vain. The moderators concerned are hiding their identities behind the perceived anonymity of internet. The Wikipedia spirit is on my side, so let us investigate the rules and correct the deformed situation with the Russian WIkipedia moderator mafia strangling the freedom of contributing for years.

Yuri Kozharov

<blanked> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yuri Kozharov (talk • contribs) 14:33, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear about your experience, but unfortunately, the English Wikipedia has no say on what occurs on the Russian Wikipedia. You may want to discuss this at Meta, but I'm not sure if there's any recourse there, either. TNXMan 15:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)This sounds like an internal matter for the Russian Wikipedia to deal with. It might be appropriate to bring this up on Meta, or possibly User talk:Jimbo Wales, but not here. You might try emailing the Russian arbitration committee, but without knowing more about the situation I can't judge whether it's premature to be doing that. It sounds (to me) like you posted on someone's user page instead of their user talk page, and that might have annoyed them enough to block you; an apology might go a long way. But I don't know ru's internal policies, so I can't really help with this. --NYKevin @668, i.e. 15:02, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yuri, you are currently at English Wikipedia. You're going to have to solve your problem at Russian Wikipedia over there. They are seperate and independent projects. They have no control over what goes on here, and likewise no one here can help you with anything over there. You're going to have to work within that project to solve your problem as no one here can help. --Jayron32 15:03, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

You have very few edits (around 20 non-deleted) and don't know basic rules like that posts to users go on their user talk page and not user page. See Help:Using talk pages. A Google translation of your edit [1] says "If [username of administrator] continue their inventive activity to remove my articles and other damage under the guise of anonymity, it may happen that someone will remind him that the anonymity of the Internet does not exist a very long time." That sounds like a threat. I don't know the Russian Wikipedia but I assume administrators are allowed anonymity like the English Wikipedia, and outing is not allowed. See WP:OUTING. Be glad your block is only a week and just wait it out. You had not edited for two years before yesterday so I think you can wait a week. This issue is not suitable for meta or the founder. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:33, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

See below. Thanks for translating, though you omitted the humor in my post.

I was going to say the same thing as PrimeHunter after looking at machine translations of your edits to Участник (user) space pages (which really belonged on the Обсуждение участника, or user talk, space, if they belonged anywhere). So, since PrimeHunter and others have basically covered the whole issue, all I can add is that the Russian WP's policy on outing can be found at Википедия:Не преследуйте участников under the heading "Раскрытие личной информации". - Purplewowies (talk) 15:58, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, I didn’t know that I cannot voluntarily disclose my info if I so wish.

Russia: I am accused of threatening and insulting moderators, my page was deleted as 'created for vandalizing. USA: my article was deleted as unimportant, yet it IS important enough to keep it

Yet moderators cannot explain how my comments are threatening or insulting.

OK, I hereby remind the moderators in question that anonymity on the internet is non-existent. If the fact that anonymity on the internet is threatening for Russian Wikipedia moderators - and I promised to remind about that fact and fulfilled my promise here - what the hell they are doing in Wikipedia? I hope they are not distributing child porn for example? What they are afraid of if anonymity is non-existent? I am not afraid myself to reveal my identity, just google for Yuri Kozharov and you will have all on me, so what is their problem? I have even given them my cell (no one called). They seem (and you, PrimeHunter), to be afraid of their own imagination. There is neither threats or insults, although regarding the latter I was struggling not to tell how I call people doing things like these.

And besides, English Wikipedia still sets the standards, so do not just tell me its my job to deal with the Russians, do your job to deal with the Americans: my article was deleted for violation of WP:Academics yet the person in question is in fact a very notable public figure. He is invited to Israeli Knesset (Parliament) round tables, he is invited to UN to discuss involvement in UN educational initiatives, he founded internet educational archives which were awarded Britannica prize ten years ago and more, and more. But no, just some don't-know-how-to-name-out-of-fear-to-offend who must be lazy to google deletes it again and again.

This IS an issue for meta and Jimbo.

P.S. They now took my right to edit own page with the last comment that I insulted by adding (mysterious) category. ROFL, wasn't it the Dangerous Potheads category? This is actually history already. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yuri Kozharov (talk • contribs) 16:20, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Yuri Kozharov

Then take it to Meta and Jimbo. It is nothing to do with the English-language Wikipedia. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:16, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I did. What's Meta? Yuri Kozharov —Preceding undated comment added 16:21, 16 March 2012 (UTC).

You've already referred to it: Wikipedia:Meta. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:25, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. They now extended the ban to 2 weeks. Doesn't want others read this story on my page? Why? Yuri Kozharov —Preceding undated comment added 16:40, 16 March 2012 (UTC).

Let me tell you plainly: The reason you were blocked was that you posted to Участник:OneLittleMouse and other pages in the Участник (User) space instead of Обсуждение участника:OneLittleMouse and other pages in the Обсуждение участника (User talk) space. The Обсуждение участника space it the place for messages to another user. The reason your block was extended is that you refused to acknowledge that mistake and agree not to repeat it. —teb728 t c 23:17, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I think the block was extended because you repeated [2] your thinly veiled threat to reveal the identity of an administrator. I don't know the Russian Wikipedia but you might end up with an indefinite block if you continue this. Many administrators have received death threats from users not knowing their identity. Administrators are unpaid volunteers and I can understand why they often want to be anonymous. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:59, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

First, you are not suppose to edit someone else's page unless you have a question for them and you want to ask it on their talk page. Second, you shouldn't worry about the things he likes to delete or edit on Wikipedia. Third, anything that happens on the Russian Wikipedia has nothing to do with us. You should ask this question on the Russian Wikipedia. CPGirlAJ (talk) 20:28, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

FreeRepublic.com in footnote

I've been updating some deadlinks in the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami article. Why am I prevented from using freerepublic.com in a footnote? When I try to add it, I get a message about a spam blacklist but I don't see freerepublic.com on the list. Any suggestions? --Kenatipo ^speak! 16:46, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I found the right "spam" blacklist discussion here: [3], where someone decided that freerepublic.com should be blacklisted because it's not an RS. I don't see what that has to do with "spam". Surely it's not appropriate for one or two editors to be making this kind of blacklisting determination. --Kenatipo ^speak! 17:15, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

If you want to have a particular link be removed from the blacklist, please see the advice at Wikipedia:Spam blacklist#Requests for delisting. I agree that the spam filter can be a pain in the ass and is one of the things at Wikipedia really pissing me off, as it already prevented me from performing some particular tasks that I generally regard as useful. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 17:46, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

The blacklist is also for non-reliable sources of a non-commercial nature, such as the Freep. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:29, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

And for sites with lots of copyvio,like freerepublic.com. Dougweller (talk) 21:10, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Just looked at the link in the reference above. That's the reason it's blacklisted, a copyvio copy of a newspaper article. Then there's the other issue - how do we know it hasn't been changed from the original? You won't get it unblacklisted with that I'm afraid.Dougweller (talk) 21:17, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the responses. I would have separate blacklists: one for spam, one for copyvios, one for non-RS, etc. --Kenatipo ^speak! 22:56, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I just looked for the original Mainichi article on the Wayback Machine and it's not there, yet. Maybe in a few months. (The archived articles of this sort stop in about July 2011). I'll keep checking Wayback. --Kenatipo ^speak! 15:56, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Template docs lacking helpful info

This template doesn't indicate that text can be added after a 'pipe'. The 'contentious' template is lacking as well. I used the template recently, and just tried text and it works.

I tried editing the template usage section but I failed. --Canoe1967 (talk) 17:56, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

The documentation is at Template:Missing information non-contentious/doc. The documentation appearing at Template:Missing information non-contentious is a transclusion of that page, so you have to edit Template:Missing information non-contentious/doc if you want to edit the documentation. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 18:03, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I found that and edited, but couldn't get it to show up as 'Missing information non-contentious|text here' so I just added a note above about the syntax. Is it known by most that text is to be added after a pipe in templates?--Canoe1967 (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I updated the documentation and included a usage example. I noticed that the template markup includes two parameters, but parameter #2 doesn't seem to have a purpose. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 18:56, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I think that is a date stamp to categorize by date. A bot came by and dated the one that I had used. I also added the text option to the contentious template and cleaned both up a little. We may need to figure out how the date option works as well, to save bot resources from stamping them.--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

The explanation at the 'TagDater' task description at User:AnomieBOT#Current says that if no date information exists the bot adds the current month and year. The second parameter might just act as a beacon for the bot so it knows where to place the date, but I don't know how the bot works exactly, so this is just a guess. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 19:36, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I mentioned it on the bot owner's talk page that had dated my tag. They responded that they would prefer the bot to date them which is better than users trying to date them and make an error.--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:57, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Using a track on an album as a reference

Resolved

The SPACE Tour album was recorded live from one of the aforementioned tour's concerts. Although the exact concert isn't stated in printed media, it is referenced in one of the album's tracks as 'the last show of the tour'. On the article, you may notice that I've used this as a reference. My question is a) are tracks on album a citable source to start with; and b) if so, is there a better way to format the reference? Eladkse (talk) 16:30, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

You can use {{cite video}} and put the track in the "time" parameter. That's what I was told to do when citing it on Dylan and Cole Sprouse (see the last two references in the list). - Purplewowies (talk) 20:24, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Eladkse (talk) 20:40, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Image title

I can't come up with the phrase the system will accept. "Jonathan McCormick Novelist JPEG Image"21:10, 16 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lazeejjs (talk • contribs)

What are you trying to do?--SPhilbrick(Talk) 21:12, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

If you are trying to upload a jpeg file then the name must end in .jpg or .jpeg. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

If you are trying to search Wikipedia for a photo of novelist Jonathan McCormick, Wikipedia does not seem to have any information about him much less a photo. —teb728 t c 09:54, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Racism in talk page?

I've found an edit in File_talk:Phil_and_Marlene.jpg which I think could contain a racist opinion against a particular group of people, but I'm not sure. The full text is "Stupid picture that adds nothing to the article except for further highlighting the stereotype that Mormons behave oddly and smile far too much". First of all, saying that a former edit is stupid it's not right. But then comes the rest: so the editor says there is a stereotype according to which a particular group of people behave in a particular way and that picture enhances that stereotype. Is that what the editor is saying? I don't know whether there is such a stereotype. Even if there is, I do not see how that picture could enhance that stereoptype in any way. But couldn't the editor's comment be rather interpreted as an affirmation of that stereotype? Besides, the edit is in a talk page. Is such a comment allowed in a talk page? I insist about this, because I already had an experience with talk pages and it seems one is allowed to write there almost anything, and the worst that can happen is to have one's edit archived, but never reverted. The end of all is that I do not like much the edit in question, but I don't know exactly what to do about it. Garsd (talk) 22:39, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello. The wonderful thing about Wikipedia is that it is run by consensus. This means that the dissenting opinions of one editor are not reflected in the encyclopedia, and essentially they do not matter. True, it is not acceptable for an editor to make personal attacks on other editors, but sometimes it is easier to just ignore rude editors unless their rudeness becomes a pattern. Happy editing, hajatvrc with WikiLove @ 22:55, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I've removed it per WP:NOTFORUM though it probably falls under a few other reasons as well. Dismas|^(talk) 22:57, 16 March 2012 (UTC)