Help desk
< July 28	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 30 >

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.

July 29

New Wikipedia submission posted twice

Resolved

– 115.117.149.250 (talk) 05:43, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just submitted a new entry to Wikipedia then went back to edit it. When I saved the changes and looked at "My contributions" it shows that I have submitted two entries, even though they are the same entry. Is this an error, or do I need to delete one of them. If I need to delete one of them, how do I do that? Thanks, and sorry for the mix up. --Susan Carter 02:37, 29 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by SueCarter (talk • contribs)

Your 'contributions' are the edits you have made. Your comment here is a 'contribution' too. :) Kayau Voting IS evil 02:39, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No Susan, you don't need to delete any entry in this case.115.117.149.250 (talk) 04:23, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia View

Answered

– 115.117.149.250 (talk) 07:03, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way to change the background color of Wikipedia so that the background is black and the text is white when I view an article or other page? I would prefer viewing it that way, and I couldn't find any way to change it myself, so I thought I'd ask here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.53.111.116 (talk) 03:35, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you are using the Monobook skin, you can go to your preference → Gadgets → User interface gadgets → click "Use a black background with green text on the Monobook skin." Otherwise, you can change this in most browsers. In Firefox, go to Tools → Options → Content → Colors, then change the text to white and the background to black, and take the checkmarks out of both boxes below on that screen. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:51, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just realized, you can't be using the Monobook since you are not logged in so ignore that, unless you want to sign up for an account (which has many benefits). Monobook is a few hundred times better than the new crappy Vector skin in my opinion.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:58, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even without creating an account, you can change the background colour directly through most internet browsers (including Explorer, Firefox, using the Options/Tools link). You cannot do that in Google Chrome directly (For Chrome, which you'll be more interested in, click on the 'wrench' on the menu bar, click on Options next, click then on 'Personal Stuff', then on 'Get Themes'. Choose any theme whose background you prefer; and set it. You should be fine after that.).115.117.149.250 (talk) 04:07, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is this allowed?

Resolved

– With exception; read 'further discussion' 115.117.149.250 (talk) 07:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a wikilink in the Virgin Racing article, referring to the Russian car company Marussia. The link, [[:ru:Marussia|Marussia]], leads to the Russian wikipedia.--The Three Headed Knight (talk) 04:03, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it's specifically disallowed in any policy, but it's a bad idea in my opinion because if it was linked regularly it would make a red link which then informs everyone who knows what that means that there is a hole there, that an article needs to be created (of course this should only be done for notable things, but I don't see that as a concern here). By linking to the Russian article, we fool anyone who doesn't follow the link into thinking that an article here exists when it does not, thus inhibiting the likelihood of creation. Also, I don't see much utility in shunting English speaking users to a page written in any language the vast majority finding themselves there will not know.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

<edit conflict> See Wikipedia:Interlanguage links#Purpose. Kayau Voting IS evil 04:12, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Read Wikipedia:InterWikimedia links for additional understanding.115.117.149.250 (talk) 04:13, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bad logic in my opinion at Kayau's link. I'll maybe bring this up somewhere, once I see how much, if any discussion took place before that language was added.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:16, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have to disagree. Its existence in another wiki proves the notability of the subject, justifying the addition of that link to stand-alone lists. Kayau Voting IS evil 04:20, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That it is notable (because there are lots of third party reliable sources on it) is just a threshold reason why a red link belongs. We aren't making it a link because notability is at issue (though existence in other Wikipedia languages alone is generally not a valid notability basis) but discussing whether this method of linking is a good idea and I'm not sure what stand alone lists have to do with this at all.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:48, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

may we add reliable references ?

Hello there,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_pashalik

Here, on this page it say : were three Ottoman pashaliks

but here it say : four Albanian-populated Ottoman vilayets

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_National_Awakening

from the history we know there were 4 but if you need more information here is the map : http://www.perovicgenealogy.org/page18.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dacieurope (talk • contribs) 05:03, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure that particular website is reliable, per say. The book they scanned the map from may have been. But you'd need something reliable.
A Wilayah and a Pashalic do not appear to be synonymous terms; the former appears to be an administrative division, while the latter appears to be a feudal territorial division; like the difference between a "departement" and a "duchy" in France. Also, Subdivisions of the Ottoman Empire indicated that over time, divisions changed due to multiple land reforms. It could very well be that at different times, there were different organizations of the same territory; at some times three and at other times four divisions. It could also be that there were multiple systems at work at the same time; OR that at different times the Albanian population moved, so that at one point in history they occupied three districts and at a different time occupied 4. I don't know much about the history of the Albanian people, but there are many possible reasons why one article uses "three" districts and one uses "four" and it doesn't necessarily mean that either is wrong. --Jayron32 05:20, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian Pashaliks says: "The Albanian Pashaliks (Albanian: Pashallëqet shqiptare) were three Ottoman pashaliks ruled by Albanian pashas from about 1760 to 1831".

Albanian National Awakening says: "On June 10, 1878, about eighty delegates, mostly Muslim religious leaders, clan chiefs, and other influential people from the four Albanian-populated Ottoman vilayets, met in the Kosovo city of Prizren."

This definitely sounds like different things many years apart. The former is about pashaliks which were ruled by Albanian pashas at a much earlier time. Whether or not your source is reliable, it doesn't say anything about the number of pashaliks which were ruled by Albanian pashas from about 1760 to 1831. By the way, only two of the three pashaliks from that period are in your 1878 map of four vilayets. The third is Pashalik of Berat which was apparently defeated by Pashalik of Janina in 1809 and merged. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Providing or adding references

How does one access the reflist of an article to add new items? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.197.230.50 (talk)

The reference must be added in the section where it's used. See Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:07, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Editing without logging in

I recently amended an article but realised after saving the edit that I'd inadvertly forgetton to log in. As such my IP address is now showing on the edit which I'm not chuffed about. Is there anyway to have the edit retrospectively assigned to my user name so that my IP address is not showing? (I suppose the giveaway was the anti-spam question that I'd not seen before) Thanks Selector99 (talk) 08:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The edit cannot be reassigned to an account but the IP address can be hidden. See point 1 at Wikipedia:Oversight#Policy. You can make a request at Wikipedia:Requests for oversight. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:24, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Hunter. I've mailed oversight and am awaiting a reply/correction action. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Selector99 (talk • contribs) 19:53, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All sorted! How cool is that! Thanx. Selector99 (talk) 20:08, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Someone take a look at Bernadette Hall please?

An article I created about a living poet Bernadette Hall got flagged. I think it's OK, but clearly another editor thought differently. I've converted some of the links into references and corrected some grammar. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:57, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Widely published' is a vague phrase. As language teachers always say, you should make it more detailed by telling people why he is widely published. The way it's better to say, 'This dog barks every time you come near it' than 'This dog is scary'. See WP:PEACOCK. Kayau Voting IS evil 12:58, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've added more content and more references and converted all old links into references. Could I get some more feedback please? Stuartyeates (talk) 08:27, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

115.117.149.250

Out of curiosity, who is this IP? Kayau Voting IS evil 11:40, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At a guess, a staff member doing some kind of IP community-interaction thing. The "public policy" thing is something I've seen appended to Foundation account names. However, given that the IP geolocates to India and that it is unlike anything I've seen, I'm just as confused as you are. so nia^♫♪ 11:46, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OTOH, the message on the talk page seems, at least to me, to perfectly normal USA-ian english at the appropriate level of formality. If it hadn't been for the geo-location, I wouldn't have thought anything odd.Naraht (talk) 12:52, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Um, what does OTOH stand for? Abbreviations.com is down. Thanks Kayau Voting IS evil 14:16, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OTOH (the soft-redirect to wikt is the meaning you want:) DMacks (talk) 14:18, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As in OTOH. – ukexpat (talk) 16:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Using Unicode in signature?

Is the usage of Unicode symbols in a user signature recommended or appropriate? I'm not very sure about the compatibility issues with it - are there OSes or browsers which do not display it? I was doing some tweaking to my signature. Oh and here's just a sample of it → ANGCHENRUI ✍ 13:00, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It shows as a blank square with my current combination of OS and browser; but we can't assume that this is what you wanted. More to the point, Unicode is still not supported by all browser/OS combinations. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:39, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Think I will have to change it. Thanks, ANGCHENRUI ✍♨ 14:30, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with Tenditious Editor

Hi, I have a problem with a deletionist editor. Despite showing him that the European go Championship (which has been running for almost 50 years) has had national media coverage, he keeps claiming that it is non notable. How can a continental championship of a game played by millions of people worldwide, which attracts over 1000 partipants in many years, be non notable? It's ridiculous. When I show him the references he ignores them. I don't know what to do.--ZincBelief (talk) 13:43, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List article on WP:RFC Gerardw (talk) 14:56, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Special:NewPages talk/discuss page

Where's the (equivalent of) the talk page for Special:NewPages? Gerardw (talk) 14:51, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry there isn't one. Special pages don't have talk pages. See Help:Special. – ukexpat (talk) 16:06, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no exact equivalent. What do you want? Many Special pages have a link to Wikipedia talk:Special:Pagename. For example, Special:PrefixIndex links to Wikipedia talk:Special:PrefixIndex. Many others can be seen at Special:PrefixIndex/Wikipedia talk:Special:. But Special:NewPages has no link to Wikipedia talk:Special:NewPages which says with a template that it's the talk page but only has posts from one user in February 2009. Maybe MediaWiki talk:Newpages-summary is the place for your unstated purpose. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:55, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notability help

The article SquirrelMail was marked for notibility in March 2010 by User:Tedickey. Since then, it seems like he is the only one advocating it's deletion. I feel a Wikipedia:Consensus has been reached and feel that it would be appropriate to remove the notability template. I don't want to start an Edit war. Is there something special that needs to happen in order for me to remove the template? I know I CAN remove it. I don't know if I should. sohmc (talk) 15:24, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk Page Archive

Can someone archive my current talk page and make me a new one as I don't know how to do it?,Gobbleswoggler (talk) 15:24, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just did this yesterday. It's VERY easy: Help:Archiving a talk page. If you still need help doing it, let me know. sohmc (talk) 15:27, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template for Federal Bureau of Prison Inmate Search

For a number of articles for criminals held in the US Federal Bureau of Prisons, there is a reference to the Federal Bureau of Prisons Inmate Locator (http://www.bop.gov/iloc2/LocateInmate.jsp) for the inmate's expected release date, where they are being held and/or their register number. These links include the arguments used to search such as (http://www.bop.gov/iloc2/InmateFinderServlet?Transaction=IDSearch&IDType=IRN&IDNumber=12013-021) or(http://www.bop.gov/iloc2/InmateFinderServlet?Transaction=NameSearch&needingMoreList=false&LastName=rudolph&Middle=&FirstName=eric&Race=U&Sex=U&Age=&x=15&y=19)

I'd like to do a couple of things with this. First build a couple of templates to enable the searches to be done in a more friendly way something like {{USBOP-IFS ID|IRN|12013-021}} and {{USBOP-IFS Name|FirstName=Eric|LastName=Rudolph}} and secondly, I'd like to know after these are instituted whether it would be create a bot that A) converted the bop links to the templates and B) Convert the name search templates to ID search templates on the grounds that they are more likely to remain unique (note that the second would require the bot to actually follow the link). It seems like the best Wikiproject to consult on this would be Wikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography , does anyone have any other suggestions?Naraht (talk) 15:45, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quickly checking: there are currently 547 links to http://www.bop.gov/iloc2, many of which are just to the main search-page (i.e., not specific person search) even though they are used as ref-cites for info about people. I think getting them to be specific to the person is very important on BLP grounds. DMacks (talk) 20:33, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most of them though are for specific names or for specific register numbers. I agree that they need to be fixed, I'm just worrying that I'm being too ambitious with the template.Naraht (talk) 23:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you've got a template that's easy to use, people will hopefully start using it:) Assuming it's "obvious" how to convert the bare URL to the template form (and it seems like it is, from your two examples), would be easy to bot it. WP:AWB does regexp find-and-replace, might be a good one. DMacks (talk) 03:10, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

Im just wondering for the future how would i delete a page Twbruins (talk) 16:38, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only admins can delete pages. There are several methods of requesting deletion and they are explained at WP:DELETION. – ukexpat (talk) 16:44, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

HELP: PLS.UN-DELETE!

JULY 29 NOTE/CONCERN:

To Whom It May Concern,

I am working on JoAnne's page ( joannelorenzana.com ) as I'm a friend but very new to Wikipedia and I have been allowed to work on it. In hind sight, I should have studied the steps in proceeding first (which is what I'm doing now) and should have began with the sandbox and created sippets from there. I also apply changes on her existing website, with permission. I will revise said article as soon as possible but desperate for help creating redirects to pages of reference, I will also note the web designer who created her main page for additional resource.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely, Eric Koolfish (talk) 16:41, 29 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koolfish (talk • contribs) 16:35, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

JoAnne Lorenzana has been deleted as a copyright violation. If the copyright owner of material from the website is prepared to release it under a suitable license, they must follow the process set out at WP:IOWN. Note though that material copied directly from the website is almost certainly going to be too promotional in tone for an encyclopedia article and of course the subject must be notable per WP:BIO. – ukexpat (talk) 16:50, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, before doing any further work on her page, please read WP:COI: it should not be you who creates or writes the article. --ColinFine (talk) 19:25, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

help please 1989 yj fuel prob.

What gives power to the injectors on a 1989 yj 2.5 engine? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.1.248.224 (talk) 17:01, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. – ukexpat (talk) 17:17, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Accidental History mistake

I accidentally posted part of an email as the editor reason on Gogi Grant talk page. Any way to remove that? --DThomsen8 (talk) 17:56, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the text from the talk page and then request Oversight. – ukexpat (talk) 17:58, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do I delete the text I added to the talk page, and then request the oversight? --DThomsen8 (talk) 22:19, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and in your message requesting oversight it always helps to provide a diff for the edit in question. – ukexpat (talk) 00:52, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Flag a page as "written as an advertisement"

Is there a page describing when and how to flag a page as "written as an advertisement"?

--Mortense (talk) 18:28, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SPAM. – ukexpat (talk) 18:33, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TV Series not following normal layout

The TV series The Colony U.S. TV series season 2 & The Colony U.S. TV series do not following the standard layout other pages about TV shows. A user is trying to have different pages for each season and removing the main TV series hub page. Instead I recommended that the initial TV series page remove the Season 1 seaction and have it moved to a List of Episodes.

I do not want to go against another user and have it turn into a battle, especially since there isn't a consensus of what to do. -- (Mrja84 (talk) 18:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC))[reply]

The folks at the Television WikiProject may be able to help if you ask on their talk page. – ukexpat (talk) 19:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your links don't work. Please write exact page names. I guess you refer to The Colony (2009 TV series) and The Colony (U.S. TV series) season 2. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:32, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading a picture of a painting.

I own a painting of The Hendre and wish to upload a photo of it to the aforementioned , I'm having trouble finding the relevant copyright tag. (If it helps the author has been dead for over 70 years) Any suggestions? Thanks in advance! --Ithundir (talk) 20:32, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The editors that hang out at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions are very knowledgeable--SPhilbrick T 23:27, 29 July 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Using a photo from the internet (newbie)

I would like to use a photo from the following website:- http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/support/registry/graduation/fellows/fellows03.asp (specifically of Roger de Haan). I am also new to this site and do not wish to take my first decision on copyright just yet...! Should I contact Canterbury Uni, will they just refer me to the man himself. Would it be better to use the one below instead.. http://www.lord-lieutenant-kent.info/kent%20lieutenants/index.html is this one in the public domain already? Help, instruction and comments would be appreciated.. I want to build an Infobox along the lines of the one used for "Sir Ian Kennedy" Jus naturae (talk) 22:27, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As neither page appears to specifically state anything about the copyright of the photos (coupled with the rather fickle British copyright law), unfortunately any of those images would fall afoul of the non-free content criteria. Criterion 1 states that the photo must have "no free equivalent". Generally photos of living people do not qualify, as there is still the possibility of there being a free photo somewhere, or in the most extreme case, it is still possible to go to the person's next public appearance and take a photo yourself. (note that this is "free as in freedom"). See #12 under "Images" here. Calvin 1998 ^(t·c) 22:36, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You could try contacting Canterbury to see if they would be willing to release a photo. Donating copyrighted material contains an overview of this, WP:COPYREQ explains how to do so, and gives an example of a letter/email you can use, and WP:CONSENT provides a template the copyright owner can fill in which satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for release. However that photo on the website looks more like it could be a corporate image than something the university produced, so if you're keen to get an image of him, you may be better off approaching the man himself (possibly the Roger de Haan Charitable Trust might be a primary contact point?). --Kateshortforbob _talk 16:01, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion sought about possible BLP violation

I was editing List of Old Boys of Sydney Boys High School#Medicine and science earlier today to add a new entry, and I noticed the section below had an entry for Marcus Einfeld. That entry describes Einfeld as "judge of the Federal Court of Australia and currently serving two years at her majesty's pleasure". Now, I know that Einfeld is presently in gaol following his perjury conviction in March 2009, so the comment about "currently serving two years at her majesty's pleasure" is true (although unreferenced). However, it seems to me that mentioning his incarceration on a list of notable alumni of a school when he was notable for his work as a Federal Court Judge and as the President of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission is gratuitously unnecessary. What I would like to know is whether it would also be considered a BLP violation? I have no idea who added the comment, nor do I propose that anything be done if there is a policy violation, I'm just interested in whether my view of the comment is shared by others. Thanks. EdChem (talk) 22:52, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Remove it, with prejudice, and without waiting for discussion first, and cite WP:BLP in your edit summary. Any contentious or negative material about a living person that is not sourced with a reliable reference should be removed immediately.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:41, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done, I wasn't quite sure about the policy issue as the statement was actually true - plenty of references on his biography attest to this fact. It was gratuitous, though. Thanks for the quick response. EdChem (talk) 23:57, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Your use of "gratuitous" is well put I think; I'm not sure if this would be appropriate even if reliably sourced, though it would not longer be a BLP violation.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:02, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PeopleQuiz

I'm the co-owner of a trivia site called PeopleQuiz and would like to submit a short summary about our site to Wikipedia. Here's the link to the site: http://www.peoplequiz.com

Do I have permission to submit the short summary? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bill brauer (talk • contribs) 23:59, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Almost certainly not. Any article about the site will be deleted unless there are multiple independent reliable sources which give it non-trivial coverage. Furthermore, as the co-owner of the site you have a probably conflict of interest, and so are strongly discouraged from writing about it in Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 00:14, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]