Help desk
< April 13	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 15 >

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 14

Is it possible to easily identify all uses of a particular word in an article?

If I want to see all instances of the word "rock" in an article, instead of combing it line by line is it possible to say have them all highlighted so they stand out and I can clearly see where they are? 2.102.184.154 (talk) 02:12, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ctrl + f? Most browsers have a find feature built into them. Chrome will even do exactly as you want and highlight the words in the text. --Majora (talk) 02:20, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rm category Category:AfD debates relisted 3 or more times from closed debates

Should I or shouldn't I? L3X1 (distant write) 02:49, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello L3X1, could you clarify your query please? I might be missing the obvious query here. (Sorry). Lourdes 03:17, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lourdes. When a debate is relisted for the 3rd time, the category Category:AfD debates relisted 3 or more times is added. I keep an eye on that cat, to help make debates aren't languishing about for weeks on end. While patrolling, I tend to remove the category from closed debates, so as to not clutter up the category. After doing that 3 or 4 times, I began to wonder if this was the proper thing to do. L3X1 (distant write) 03:22, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you like, but surely a bot does it pretty quickly? It's never been a problem and the category doesn't clog up with closed debates, so a bot must be on the job. Herostratus (talk) 03:26, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok then, thank you both. L3X1 (distant write) 03:46, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seoni pin code is not avilable

Seoni mp, India Its pin code is 480661 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:E388:4041:95C7:C8BB:BDA2:D49C (talk) 06:23, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK all set. Herostratus (talk) 06:54, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

photo of the original badge my father Eric Austen made in 1958, it's in ceramic. http://geaausten.deviantart.com/art/FIRST-PEACE-CND-BADGE-ERIC-AUSTEN-180225846

does anyone know how to remove a block from Wikipedia ? I am trying to upload the correct image of my fathers first CND badge.. which was made in ceramic in 1958,, and is used in the photo for CND..the photo used in reference to my father, Eric Austen is completely irrelevant, as its by Gerald Holtom, who did not make the first badges at all,, he did not work in ceramics,, he was a draughtsman, my father made pottery,, this is the block ..User is blocked Jump to: navigation, search Your username or IP address has been blocked. The block was made by Daphne Lantier. The reason given is Creating pages out of project scope after warnings. Start of block: 07:30, 13 April 2017 Expiration of block: 07:30, 20 April 2017 Intended blockee: Gea Jones You can contact Daphne Lantier or another administrator to discuss the block. You cannot use the "email this user" feature unless a valid email address is specified in your account preferences and you have not been blocked from using it. Your current IP address is 2.29.110.112, and the block ID is #291335. Please include all above details in any queries you make — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gea Jones (talk • contribs) 07:23, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The block is not here on the English Wikipedia, but on a different project, Wikimedia Commons. You need to look at commons:User talk:Gea Jones, & contact the administrator there. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:35, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lupton family

I am sorry - but I have stuffed up ref number 151. The red writing is incomprehensible in meaning to me. Please help if you can. Thanks you 101.182.60.171 (talk) 09:53, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed (Line feed character) Eagleash (talk) 09:59, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia_talk:Help_desk#What_is_the_purpose_of_the_help_desk.3F and others. The IP editor is clearly Srbernadette logged off. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 12:09, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If your command of English doesn't allow you to understand the error message which told you that there was a line feed character in the "| quote" parameter of the reference, perhaps you could think again as to whether you ought to be editing the English Wikipedia? --David Biddulph (talk) 11:54, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BITE much? Plenty of native English speakers with years of experience editing Wikipedia don't always undertand the error messages generated by cite errors. Someone made a mistake and asked for help fixing it - that is to be commended, not snidely dismissed. DuncanHill (talk) 11:59, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That comment was not WP:BITE. It is racially exclusive and does not belong at WP or anywhere else. It actually should be called out for what it implies as representative of the WP community. Maineartists (talk) 16:45, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vertical bar in infobox

I'm trying to update an infobox that includes a url. The url includes a vertical bar (|) which causes issues with the infobox since | is a special character for parameters in infoboxes. Is there a way to escape the |? Basically, I want the value to include a |. Ahwiv (talk) 13:19, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ahwiv: Which article? And have you tried putting the URL in nowiki tags? Triptothecottage (talk) 13:36, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Civil Rights Act of 1991 and no I didn't try nowiki tag, thought it would not make it linkable. Thanks for the thought and I will try it in the future. Thanks Ahwiv (talk) 15:14, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried encodimng the | character as %7C ? --David Biddulph (talk) 13:47, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have now, and while it did what I was asking, it also showed me the url was changed/broken, and no longer required the | so it ended up fixing 2 issues. Thanks. Ahwiv (talk) 15:14, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox reference numbers before lead section?

I'm not sure if this is a style request or a (maybe) a technical one. Recently I was looking at a page and it was quite jarring that the reference at the end of the first short sentence of the lead was [4]. This was because the page has an infobox which has three quite valid references in it. However because that infobox was a decent size, the 1,2 & 3 were considerably farther down on the page. In short nothing on the page contradicts the style guide and yet it looked weird. I *guess* my idea is that infoboxes (if placed right as almost all I've seen are) should be in the source *after* the lead in order for this not to occur. (or *maybe* that the wikicode should treat it as if it should?) If it weren't for the possiblity that this has a technical solution, I'd post at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes. Ideas?Naraht (talk) 14:27, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The references are numbered in the order they are encountered in the source not the displayed version. The Infobox is defined before the intro paragraph so the infobox references are numbered first. There really isn't anything that can be done to tell the wiki software to number the intro first. (Theoretically you could move the infobox definition after the intro paragraph but then the infobox would start lower on the screen and the text wouldn't be in standard format.) RJFJR (talk) 16:11, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with all of this, which is why I thought this might have to be a technical solution. (The cleanest would probably be to have infoboxes (and templates) have an argument allowing them to slide up to the top of whatever section they are in and then have infoboxes placed at the end of the section). Sounds like my next stop is the Village Pump Idea lab.Naraht (talk) 17:45, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Verse translation

Hi, why is there such a great spacing before the verse translation in Ēostre#De_temporum_ratione? Also, the translation is not on the same height as the original. The section uses Template:Verse translation, but I couldn't find the bug there.--Hubon (talk) 16:36, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed some spaces, which has I believe improved the layout. Maproom (talk) 16:51, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maproom: Thanks for trying, but this cannot be the true solution. There must be something wrong with the template itself. Best--Hubon (talk) 17:16, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, I believe, with this edit. DonFB (talk) 03:51, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@DonFB: Yes, indeed! Many, many thanks for your help and Happy Easter!--Hubon (talk) 15:36, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Link problem

When clicking on the link ("This proposal") inserted in this section, why does one end up on the bottom of the linked page, although the link should actually lead to a specific (and still existing!) section? I've experienced that on German Wikipedia, too, by the way.--Hubon (talk) 16:48, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I end up in Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Function_.22upright.22 when I click it... CTF83! 18:45, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not positive but I think there is a collapsed block of text above that causes this. When it loads the page it isn't collapsed yet, it figures out how far down the page to be and THEN it collapses the block and moves where things are on the page. RJFJR (talk) 19:27, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@CTF83: With your copy of the link here, meanwhile (it did work first!) the same thing SOMETIMES happens as in Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Function_.22upright.22 AND SOMETIMES IT DOESN'T. ??? As maybe indicated by RJFJR, it first moves to the right section indeed, but then simply jumps down to the bottom of the page. How come???--Hubon (talk) 20:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PS: By the way, now the same thing happens when I edit the linked page: after saving, the position jumps down! In find this really strange, in fact...--Hubon (talk) 20:16, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mathematical equation sizes

First I must apologize as I am a first time user of this site. Perhaps I am not even at the right place to ask this question. I have an old I-pad and when I read math or physics articles the equations and identifying symbols are only about 1/4 the size of the words and sometimes symbols just have a blank space. I have no specific pages to point to: All of relativity or quantum mechanics will serve equally as models. I know nothing about coding. All I want to do is to enlarge the equations so they are readable and comparable in size or slightly larger than the text size. How can this be easily, easily done just from the browser? All I want to be able to do is push a few buttons-no esoteric coding possible for me. Thank you for any answers received. Hersheyboy 18:27, 14 April 2017 (UTC)18:27, 14 April 2017 (UTC)18:27, 14 April 2017 (UTC)18:27, 14 April 2017 (UTC)~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hersheyboy (talk • contribs)

@Hershyboy: You can likely just zoom in on your iPad. This can be done by placing two fingers on the screen and then moving them away from each other. I hope that helps. RileyBugz ^{Yell at me} | _Edits 20:13, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No magazine reference urls

I have just finished submitting my first article, and I have used several magazine references. These references were mostly published in the early to mid 90s and have not been archived anywhere online. Is it possible for me to scan and upload them to wiki commons in order to link the references? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Finishedfirst (talk • contribs) 21:59, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, offline references are perfectly acceptable. Use Template:Cite magazine. Eagleash (talk) 22:06, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great, but I would really like to increase the likelihood of my article being approved. Would a link to a Wiki-commons scan help, or is it pointless? Finishedfirst (talk) 22:10, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Where the references are obtained from (on- or offline) would not affect approval as long as they are reliable and correctly 'created'. Eagleash (talk) 22:19, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c × 2) Hi Finishedfirst. No it is not. That would be blatant copyright infringement (barring the truly rare situation that those references were released into the public domain or released under a suitably-free copyright license; this is very, very unlikely). That being said, we do not require that sources be online. Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability#Access to sources; Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Cost; and Wikipedia:Offline sources. Just do a good job in citing the sources transparently so that anyone who wished to check them would be well situated to find them, such as in a library or newspaper archive. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:11, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Finishedfirst. I have taken a look at the article. I'm sorry but to be blunt, it is a blatant commercial; it is hagiography; it will never be accepted in its current state. Please go back and remove all the peacock language, buzz words, marketing speak, evaluative content presented in Wikipedia's voice, etc. Just the facts. No gloss. But before you do that, since its written that way, I must assume you are involved with this subject, so please comply with our mandatory disclosure requirements for editing on subjects in which you have a financial stake.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:25, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am actively removing the peacock language. What would be considered buzz words and market speak. I have been adding wikilinks to any type of words related to the jewelry industry and I have tried to source the evaluative content as much as possible. Would it be possible for you to point out some examples please, I would like to get this approved the first time around. Finishedfirst (talk) 23:04, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Start with dumping crap like, "Over the years he has made huge footprints in the jewelry design industry with his innovations in diamond cutting and setting." That sort of language has no place here. We seek a tone of fact-centered neutral sobriety, using hard information drawn from reliable sources. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:15, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, clearly, I seemed to have overlooked the obvious. Thank you for the help Finishedfirst (talk) 22:21, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Marjoribanks, 2nd Baron Tweedmouth

Reference 24 is all wrong. Please restore. Thanking you.2001:8003:4F76:A00:8849:8B3B:9DE0:166A (talk) 22:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have linked the reference to a page which contains various articles in a search result. Select the one you want to add as a reference and redo the reference appropriately. Eagleash (talk) 22:14, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

please help if you can I have failed again. I added in a line and did the date separately...but no good ref number 24 is still all wrong. I will just leave in there rather than seriously stuff it all up. 2001:8003:4F76:A00:8849:8B3B:9DE0:166A (talk) 22:37, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This (click the blue link) is the page you have linked to. I do not know which of those articles listed there is the one you want to use as a reference. If you can identify it, click on the link to it from the search results, then add the title to the title parameter, add the correct url and add the date to the date parameter. Eagleash (talk) 22:47, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. The article on the page which is the ref. has only the date - same as the one given in the title. There is no way of knowing the real title of the original article or even of there was a title. Please help. So sorry. 2001:8003:4F76:A00:8849:8B3B:9DE0:166A (talk) 22:56, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is an error because you have both the date and the page information on the same parameter. date=14 April 1908 - Page 6 isn't going to work. Fix that and you'll be fine. Try to fix it first yourself, please don't say you can't without at least attempting to do so. --Majora (talk) 22:59, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The page you have linked to has several articles listed with blue links to the individual items. Which of those items contains the quote? Wikipedia should not just link to a list of search results as it is not always possible for the reader to identify the source which is what is required for verifiability. Eagleash (talk) 23:06, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed I have identified the article and viewed the content...I now have a subscription to the site! Ref fixed. Eagleash (talk) 23:22, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2017 April 14