Help desk
< May 8	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 10 >

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.

May 9

2nd nomination of an article--what did I do wrong?

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 15:56, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just tried to create Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John McSweeney (martial artist) (2nd nomination) but it's still in red. I assume that means I messed up the links somehow. I would appreciate it if someone could tell me what I did wrong and how to fix it. Papaursa (talk) 03:10, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When you created Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John McSweeney (martial artist) (2nd nomination), you put the title of the article as John McSweeney (martial artist) (2nd nomination) instead of John McSweeney (martial artist). You probably just got mixed up with the title of the article and the title of the afd page, which are different as it is the second nomination. I've fixed it for you here; my apologies if you wanted to. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 03:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing it. I believe I see my mistake. Now if I can just remember not to repeat it next time. Papaursa (talk) 03:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In case you need it, I'll try to clarify a bit further. I'm assuming that when you created Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John McSweeney (martial artist) (2nd nomination), you used the following template:

{{subst:afd2 | pg=PageName | cat=Category | text=Why the page should be deleted}} ~~~~

The title of the article that you want to place up for deletion goes in the spot labelled "PageName". In this case, that would be John McSweeney (martial artist). However, the title you put there had the "(2nd nomination)" following it, which is for the afd page, not the article itself. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:08, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's how I interpreted your original comment. However, shouldn't there be a link to the original discussion and shouldn't the title reflect the fact that it's a second nomination? When I look at the page (without trying to edit it), I don't see those things. Papaursa (talk) 05:48, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct about having a link to the old discussions. I looked around and found this template: Template:Oldafdlist. This template links to any previous discussions regarding the article. The title, however, remains as is. I've gone ahead and added it. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 17:20, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your help. Papaursa (talk) 00:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replace old material with new.

When I go to edit a section in a Wikepedia paragraph, I cannot replace the old paragraph with my new paragreaph. It just adds my new paragraph but leaves the old paragraph in place. I want to get rid of the old paragraph & replace it with my new paragraph. How can I do that?

Or suppose I want to just insert a few words or a sentence in the old paragraph. How can I do htat —Preceding unsigned comment added by BeverlyHillsMan (talk • contribs) 05:19, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Click on the edit link next to the section heading that is above the text you want to change, or if you are trying to edit the very beginning, click the "edit this page" tab at the top of the page. From there, find the paragraph and change it to how you want it (that could mean typing in the new paragraph and deleting the old). Fill in the edit summary and click Save page. PleaseStand ^(talk) 05:22, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It appears from your contributions that you may want to edit a reference that is not shown in the edit window for the references section. You have to edit where the reference is linked from. See Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and don't remove {{Reflist}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:41, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

login failure

When I try to log in, in the strategic priorities discussion it says I don't have an account. When I go to my preferences page everything is normal. Psturm (talk) 06:19, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's because you have to create an account at wikimedia. White Trillium (talk) 07:41, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you have Single Unified Login set up, the account would be created automatically on Wikimedia when you first log on there -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:47, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know where the strategic priorities discussion is but if it is at wikimedia: then unified login doesn't work there. It is the Wikimedia Foundation's own website which "happens" to run MediaWiki (who would have guessed they chose that!), but it is not one of the Wikimedia projects. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:24, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found strategy:. A unified account does enable login there. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:33, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've got news - I also have a unified account and have been unable to log into the strategic priorities discussion. So I gave up trying. --Kudpung (talk) 05:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting a tech fix

Resolved

Why does this work, but not this?

If this requires making changes to any of WP:Law templates, I think you can go ahead and make those changes, as long as you announce that you did so at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Law#Requesting_a_tech_fix.

-AConcernedChicken (talk) 08:06, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The feature is described at Help:Category#"Related Changes" with categories. Category:WikiProject Economics articles contains lots of pages and therefore has lots of related changes. Category:WikiProject Law articles contains no pages and therefore has no related changes. Do you want Category:WikiProject Law articles to contain articles, or do you want the Related changes feature to include changes to pages in subcategories? I don't think the latter is possible. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:10, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking for changes to talk pages with the "wikiproject law" banner on them. If the set was really zero at the time, then ... I guess that explains it. But that just seems so improbable. AConcernedChicken (talk) 19:04, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, Category:WikiProject Law articles contains no pages currently. Pages in subcategories don't count. You didn't mention pages containing {{WikiProject Law}} in your first post so my reply was not about that. {{WikiProject Economics}} contains | MAIN_CAT = WikiProject Economics articles. The parameter is documented at {{WPBannerMeta}}. Do you want | MAIN_CAT = WikiProject Law articles added to {{WikiProject Law}}? Then all pages with {{WikiProject Law}} would be listed in Category:WikiProject Law articles, and Related changes for that category will show changes to the pages. I don't know a way to directly show changes to pages containing a template, but it can be done indirectly as described by letting the template add a category and then use related changes on the category (this shows changes to all pages in the category whether or not they were added by the template). PrimeHunter (talk) 21:51, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's exactly what I'd like: Please add the MAIN_CAT code to {{WikiProject Law}}. I would do it myself, but I'd screw it up. Thanks. Agradman (until the sky stops falling, A Concerned Chicken (talk)) 00:06, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have done it.[1] The pages will be added gradually to the category as the job queue runs through the talk pages using the template. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:55, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Agradman (while the sky falls, A Concerned Chicken (talk)) 04:05, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copy right of our page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svpnpa

Copy right of our page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svpnpa -this is our own Academy's page. we are happy to work on it to provide the best stuff about it. we are looking for non editable and copy right protected option over it. we are ready to provide any information we need to provide to prove our self for the same.

we need clear information about the same.

please discuss about the same on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svpnpa or mail me at: <email address removed> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.125.104.225 (talk) 08:31, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No one "owns" pages on Wikipedia, even if they are the subject of the article. The information on the page does not appear to have been copied from a website or other copyrighted publication (which I thought might be the case), and so it can be kept as it currently stands. However, unless there is persistent vandalism to the article, it will not be protected - and there is no copyright over the material there, as it is covered by the CC-BY-SA 3.0 and GFDL licenses.

Anyone can edit any article - if you feel that the information is incorrect, there are two ways to correct it:

discuss it on the article's talk page
using reliable sources which are independent of the subject, the information can be corrected using citations.

Finally, I am not sure if the article as it stands is anywhere near encyclopedic - it sounds more like a promotional brochure! I will look at it, and either improve the wording to make it more neutral and encyclopedic, or nominate it for deletion. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not include contact details in your questions. We are unable to provide answers by any off-wiki medium and this page is highly visible across the internet. The details have been removed, but if you want them to be permanently removed from the page history, please email this address. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When I am editing a page and I see informative placards above the edit field ... where do they come from?

Resolved

Is there a way I can display some custom text when people go to edit my talk page? AConcernedChicken (talk) 08:34, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The information for creating 'edit notices' (as they are properly called) can be found here -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:59, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thanks! AConcernedChicken (talk) 19:05, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable content in a notable article

I've searched the archives, and I see this question comes up every now and again, which is: How to deal with non-notable content in a notable article?
Yesterday I removed the following sentence from an article about a living person: "His facebook page has over 100 views." Apart from my personal opinion that this is obviously non-notable, I would like to have some guidelines to fall back upon. In this case, the sentence was unreferenced, so I could have removed it because of lack of reference, but what if there would have been a proper reference? What would you fellow-editors have done in this hypothetical case (i.e., well referenced non-notable content)? Lova Falk (talk) 09:06, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If there is a reliable, independent source for the information, it can be kept (whether you agree that it is notable or not is not strictly relevant - if it meets the criteria for inclusion, then it can be kept) - if there is no reliable, independent source of information, it can be removed. If "His facebook page has over 100 views per hour" had been mentioned in the New York Times, then it would be worthy of mention - if it was mentioned on his Twitter account, it would not. If there is no reference, it can be removed - although common sense is needed too! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 10:02, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is specifically not applicable to content of articles (except stand-alone lists) but only to topics of articles—whether an article entire on the topic should exist. You would look here to other policies and guidelines and should probably not speak of notability at all as citing it introduces apples into an issue on oranges. Probably the most relevant policy affecting this material is neutral point of view, especially its subsection on undue weight. Look also to whether this fails some aspect of WP:NOT (e.g., Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information) and see also Wikipedia:Handling trivia#Connective trivia. We may have cause to mention Henry VIII in an article on Scooby Doo if his ghost haunted a castle in some episode, but we would never mention Scooby Doo in an article on Henry VIII. Indiscriminate, undue weight on a trivial connection.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:18, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But Phantomsteve and Fuhghettaboutit, Phantomsteve says that this should be subject to common sense, and my common sense tells me that (for example) an article about some photographer of slebs does not benefit from a long list of slebs he's portrayed in a workmanlike but utterly uninteresting way -- or so it seems to me, and nobody has adduced any evidence of critical attention -- for gossipy magazines about slebs. Or again, articles about watch brands tend to blather on about which sleb has been spotted wearing (or hawking) which bauble. The "common sense" escape clause aside, you seem to be saying that if the sourcing is there, an article may acquire an unlimited mass of trivia. Is this right? -- Hoary (talk) 12:51, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to be saying the opposite. Please read my post again. Verifiability is a threshold requirement, not a license to keep any trivial material, no matter how tangential to the focus of a topic.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:04, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. To use another example, maybe the individual really likes egg sandwiches. This could be verified by reading his official website biography, or his autobiography. He could even have mentioned it in interviews with the most reliable of independent secondary sources, but it still shouldn't be included here. As far as the facebook thing goes, 100 views isn't exactly something to write home about. Maybe if the NYT had reported that the individual had had an exceptionally high number of page views, much higher than comparable individuals, then maybe that would be worth including (although not necessarily).--Beloved Freak 13:16, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Link goes to wrong place -Public debate

On the page Public debate there is one link that is hacked.

'Debating': A free online 'how-to' guide (A free 200-page debating book written by a former winner of the World Schools Debating

Regards A Garba —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.24.143.208 (talk) 11:15, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Now removed. The site itself appears to be hacked; I looked briefly to find the correct site but didn't find an alternative.--SPhilbrick T 11:24, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality

A person born in 1992 in Malaysia to Indian Father. He obtains Malaysian Passport. In 1993 comes to India and stays in India itself. Now what is his nationality

Bvramana1968 (talk) 13:11, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's a question for the Reference desk. -- Hoary (talk) 13:13, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually a question for a lawyer, we do not give legal advice. – ukexpat (talk) 14:44, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Advanced Wikimarkup

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 15:55, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm interested in learning intricate wikisyntax, beyond what is taught in Help:Wiki markup. I'm interested in creating a new citation template similar to {{cite visual}}. Where can I learn what I need to know? Thanks. ɳorɑfʈ^Talk! 14:18, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can find some information at Wikipedia:Template namespace--SPhilbrick T 15:04, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That led me to what I was looking for, which was here: Parser Functions ɳorɑfʈ^Talk! 19:13, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Truck?

Sorry for this kind of question but I want to know the opinions of Wikipedians, not the overall population.

Is the Nissan Pathfinder considered a truck, or at least more a truck than a car? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 15:19, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You would be better off asking this question on the article's talk page Talk:Nissan Pathfinder -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 15:36, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incidently, the article says that it's an SUV. Nissan officially call it an SUV on their website, not even a "crossover". There are no references in the article that I can see, so we can't even see what reliable sources say. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 15:37, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's an SUV, so it's a car in my opinion. --Toontown59153 (talk) 19:59, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A sport utility vehicle (SUV) is a generic marketing term for a vehicle similar to a station wagon, but built on a light-truck chassis.sport-utility vehicle. (2008). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary....Moxy (talk) 20:03, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

... built on a light-truck chassis - often the one used for the pickup version of the model. I say this because nobody mentioned the word pickup which may be more readily identifiable as a vehicle type to some readers, and modern pickups often have the 4WD options and other extras that many light trucks or cars might not generally be associated with. I drive a Nissan Frontier Nevada, just for example.--Kudpung (talk) 05:11, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Viewing a deleted article

I made a documentary about a subject that which the Wikipedia article has recently been deleted due to vandalism (according to the subject). The portrayal of the subject on the internet has been a problematic topic since originally uploading the video to YouTube. To ensure that the vandalism is not related to my film, I was wondering if an admin could retrieve the article for "Luke Hayes-Alexander" from the deletehistory? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam-machiavelli (talk • contribs) 15:52, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let me just look at that article and see why it was deleted -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 15:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One thing that can be ruled out: articles are never deleted because of "vandalism". Every article on this site has been vandalized at least once. It is removed, and life goes on. Rather, most articles about people are deleted because the article does not prove that the topic is sufficiently notable by Wikipedia's definition -- but there are plenty of other reasons why pages are deleted, and non-notability may not be the case here. Xenon54 (talk) 15:59, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for deletion was nothing to do with vandalism, but the fact that the article did not indicate the importance or significance of the subject. There is no mention of internet portrayal, and no references indicating that he is notable 16:02, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Incidently, the article's title was Luke Hayes Alexander, not Luke Hayes-Alexander -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:05, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Luke Hayes Alexander was created by User:Inthewarehouse. After some vandalism in earlier months (not much by Wikipedia standards) Inthewarehouse filed a complaint today [2] against User:ThouShallBowToMe who was blocked indefinitely 8 minutes later. 3 minutes after the block, Inthewarehouse blanked the article (except for {{Orphan}}). I don't know why — maybe an accident or maybe annoyance over the vandalism? The deletion referred to Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#A7. I don't think A7 applies to the content before the blanking, but it could have been deleted per Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#G7 when the creator blanked it. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:22, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Extend the list at MediaWiki:Cite references link many format backlink labels

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 15:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The list at MediaWiki:Cite references link many format backlink labels isn't long enough: on the page List of allied military operations of the Vietnam War, Footnote #1 goes through that entire list and brings up a bunch of errors. The list needs to be continued like this:
aaa aab aac aad aae aaf aag aah aai aaj aak aal aam aan aao aap aaq aar aas aat aau aav aaw aax aay aaz aba abb abc abd abe abf abg abh abi abj abk abl abm abo abp abq abr abs abt abu abv abw abx aby abz aca acb acc acd ace acf acg ach aci acj ack acl acm acn aco acp acq acr acs act acu acv acw acx acy acz ada adb adc add ade adf adg adh adi adj adk adl adm adn ado adp adq adr ads adt adu adv adw adx ady adz aea aeb aec aed aee aef aeg aeh aei aej aek ael aem aen aeo aep aeq aer aes aet aeu aev aew aex aey aez
I think that's probably far enough. Thanks! --Oxguy3^{[dubious user – discuss]} 16:40, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have done it... I actually went up to anz (the article needed up to and - that's 1044 labels to the same reference - we now have the ability to have up to 1066 labels to the same reference!) - Incidently, I don't know if it's the computer I'm currently on, but it took ages to load that page - and when I purged it to get it to show the new labels, it timed out! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:22, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thanks! That article actually happens to be the longest article on Wikipedia, so that's probably the farthest it'll ever have to be updated to.

See T25455. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 00:59, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:TonyTheTiger/Table

Resolved

Why isn't my table at User:TonyTheTiger/Table sorting in firefox or google chrome?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:49, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am using Chrome and it sorts just fine for me. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 18:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tried it in firefox and it works there also, I guess I am not much help. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 19:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks ok to me too on Firefox and Chrome!! Moxy (talk) 19:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When I press the sort button on a column such as Jazz, it returns in the same order as before.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:51, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't sort correctly for me. It works when the empty cells get non-displayed content, for example <span style="display:none">N</span>. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:13, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you suggesting a fix?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:18, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replace all instances of {{Y}} with {{sort|Y|{{Y}}}} and it will work. This adds a non-displayed sort key like what PrimeHunter mentioned. I think the reason it doesn't work without a sort key is because {{Y}} has only an un-linked image, so the sorting mechanism thinks all cells are empty. — jwillbur 21:59, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was suggesting a fix: For every currently empty cell in the table: Add the code <span style="display:none">N</span> which renders as nothing: . Many other codes in the empty or non-empty cells would also work. My inelegant suggestion sorts the checkmarks at top of the table the first time that column is clicked. jwillbur's suggestion sorts them at the bottom the first time and a second click will bring them to the top. I think it's best if they go to the top the first time but I don't know whether this is possible without putting something in all the empty cells. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:33, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have a spreadsheet with {{Y}} in each cell that is appropriate. Then I use an excel to wiki converter. I don't think it is practical to fill in all the N cells. I will go with the Y solution above and let you know how it works.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:09, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is working now.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:18, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do you make on of these?

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 15:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wanna know how you make on of these. I don't know what they are called but here is a picture example:

Image —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toontown59153 (talk • contribs) 19:42, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They are called infoboxes. They are Wikipedia templates to provide standard information about a certain kind of topic. What do you mean by "make one of those", use one on an article or actually create an all-new infobox? JIP | Talk 19:49, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do you put on on an article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toontown59153 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please reply on my below post replier. --Toontown59153 (talk) 20:02, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes?

How do you put an infobox in an article? --Toontown59153 (talk) 20:01, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is not hard at all see-->Help:Infobox then see -->Wikipedia:Manual of Style (infoboxes)..hope this helps !!Moxy (talk) 20:07, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By editing the page and putting the specific template in. As an example, I will show you the source code of the infobox you showed in the picture above.

{{Infobox VG
|title=Super Mario Bros.
|image=[[File:Super Mario Bros box.jpg|250px]]
|caption=North American box art, NES version.
|developer=[[Nintendo Entertainment Analysis and Development|Nintendo EAD]]
|publisher=[[Nintendo]]
|director=[[Shigeru Miyamoto]]<br>[[Takashi Tezuka]]
|producer=[[Hiroshi Yamauchi]]
|composer=[[Koji Kondo]]
|series=''[[Mario (series)|Mario]]''
|released={{Vgrelease|JP=September 13, 1985|NA=<!--Don't change without discussing first-->by March 1986|EU=May 15, 1987|AUS=1987}}
|genre=[[Platform game]]
|modes=[[Single-player video game|Single-player]], [[Multiplayer video game|multiplayer]]
|ratings=[[Entertainment Software Rating Board|ESRB]]: E<br>[[Office of Film and Literature Classification (Australia)|OFLC]]: G
|platforms=[[Family Computer Disk System]]<br>[[Nintendo Entertainment System]]<br>[[Game Boy Advance]]<br>[[Virtual Console]]<br>[[Game & Watch]]
|media=320-[[kilobit]] [[ROM cartridge|cartridge]]
}}

I've used "pre" and "nowiki" tags to make this reply show the exact source code that is used to put an infobox in the article, not make it render it into an actual infobox, which would not help you to learn how to put an infobox into an article. First you need to know what sort of infobox you want. The above is "Infobox VG" and is used for video games. Then you basically copy the text, either from another article that already has the infobox, or from the infobox itself, and replace all the bits after the "=" signs with the values relevant to that particular article. If some aren't relevant, or you don't know them, just leave them out. JIP | Talk 20:12, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! Can you tell me how to put a line across the box? I'm really confused by the Infobox guide. --Toontown59153 (talk) 20:16, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "a line across the box"? A horizontal break line? I'm not sure if this is possible by editing the infobox parameters alone. You would probably have to edit the entire infobox, and that would require first getting consensus from other editors who have edited the same infobox. JIP | Talk 20:31, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you make an infobox for a video game article then you should use Template:Infobox video game (Template:Infobox VG redirects there). The documentation for the parameters is at Template:Infobox video game. The article Super Mario Bros. uses it. Click "edit this page" at Super Mario Bros. to see which parameter assignments that article uses to produce the infobox. Don't use Template:Infobox for a video game. Template:Infobox is a generic infobox which may be used if there isn't already a specialized infobox for a purpose. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:05, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Need help with "Shirley, Illinois"

I have just posted a brief history section under "Shirley Illinois." However, the references, present on the edit, are not visible in the entry, and somehow my new entry has altered the order of the original entry so the map now appears before the original words. I would appreciate it if someone to take a look at this entry and help out. Elkmilok (talk) 21:27, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the missing code that is ..

==Notes==
<references /> OR ==Notes==
{{Reflist}}

..I have removed the coordinates as they were not working ..i will try to find the right coding...PS good job!!!Moxy (talk) 21:39, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

coordinates added --> {{coord|40|24|26|N|89|3|45|W|zoom:6_region:US-IL_type:adm1st|display=title}}..Moxy (talk) 21:53, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Geobox River

Something just went wrong with the coord thing in the river geobox template, anyone have an idea how to fix it? Shannon ^talk _contribs 21:55, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no Template:Geobox River or Template:river geobox. Can you be more specific about the template name and what went wrong on which page? PrimeHunter (talk) 22:13, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've been trying to fix this, but I haven't found any way. On Kootenay River, "Expression error: Unexpected numberExpression error: Unexpected number" is appended after each coordinate in the infobox. The documentation is at Template:Geobox/type/river. Perhaps you can look at that and see how to fix it. On a side note, Columbia River's infobox works, but when you go to the template that they created to preserve the ease of editing the article, the same errors show up. Goodvac (talk) 22:18, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

She means Kootenay River odd the same thing is happening to the page talkabout in the post before this one [3]...Moxy (talk) 22:20, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It shows up fine in the current revision. Goodvac (talk) 22:31, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The version of Shirley, Illinois only worked because the coord parameters in the Geobox were commented out. I have fixed the problem by reverting a recent edit to Template:Coord.[4] I guess you looked at Columbia River before it was automatically updated after the problematic template edit. Columbia River was wrong when I first looked at it but now it is right again. Affected articles may have to be purged to be fixed before the job queue automatically gets to them. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:19, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I meant all river articles with geobox (and apparently, also Geobox Valley), because after seeing the odd stuff on Kootenay River I took a look randomly at the Mississippi River article where the same problems showed up, then at the article for Aliso Canyon where there was also red letters in the geobox. But apparently no one has edited the river geobox template since February (at least since I last checked) Shannon ^talk _contribs 23:30, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]