Help desk
< March 6	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 8 >

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 7

Tryign to make a user account

Hello. I am trying to make a user account. I've never had one before. I am not good at writing articles but I think I might be good at organization. The username I wish to have is "Unqualified to write articles but maybe OK at helping with the internal process". I tried to register it but I was told this is already taken. The message I got was, "I'm sorry, but the username you selected is already taken. Please try another. Please note that Wikipedia automatically capitalizes the first letter of any user name, therefore User:example would become User:Example." I looked around but couldn't find this username. Do you think I'm able to have it? Thank you. 140.247.141.165 (talk) 00:05, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe there is a character limit on usernames. What likely happened here is that you got the wrong error message. That is, you couldn't create that username not because it exists, but because it was too long. Try again with a shorter name. --Jayron32 00:16, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just tried to make "Unqualified Editor, Internal Organizer" but got the message, "The user name "Unqualified Editor, Internal Organizer" has been blacklisted from creation. Wikipedia username policy does not allow names that are misleading, promotional, offensive or disruptive. Please select another username that complies with policy, or if you want to seek approval for a username, you can do so by filing a request at Wikipedia:Request an account." Can you help? 140.247.141.165 (talk) 00:29, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As the message said, if you want to seek approval for a username, you can do so by filing a request at Wikipedia:Request an account. Note that "Wikipedia:Request an account" is a link. You could also try another username. "Internal Organizer" can give the false impression that you work at foundation:Staff and is not a volunteer editor. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are probably better off picking a name that means something you personally, like Savannah45shooter or Third_of_Mike or LastkingofSanMarino or u76y555 and then specifying on your userpage that you are a WP:Wikifairy (an unofficial designation) that should tell anyone what they need to know about you without leading to confusion with possible Staff.Naraht (talk) 17:40, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

western weds

i love western weds...i only have bacie cabel and miss it badly... plaies bring it back...there are lots of them you dont need to repet them for yrs. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.35.239.84 (talk) 01:56, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.8 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:02, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nelson Mandela

Please note my comment on mr Mandela on my talk page. thanks, LewisLewishb (talk) 06:24, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. Dismas|^(talk) 06:38, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't the BLP rule also cover user talk pages? The OP's comment amounts to unsourced negative material. Roger (talk) 16:10, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Non-article space: "The BLP policy also applies to user and user talk pages." Dru of Id (talk) 18:09, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted it, with an explanation and a link to the policy in my edit summary. Roger (talk) 18:24, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki article about 19th-century American anthropologist Samuel Haven is in Spanish, but not English

Hello,

Just a short note - the Spanish article link is http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Haven. Nothing comes up on the English Wikipedia site for a search using his name. An article in English about him might be useful to some Wiki users.

Cheers from Canada! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.4.22.154 (talk • contribs) 07:11, 7 March 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

You're right, it might be. Wikipedia is volunteer driven though and since you speak both languages (apparently), you are more than welcome to write the article in English. Feel free to create an account and be bold! --Dismas|^(talk) 08:05, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Challenge accepted. 0_O --Shirt58 (talk) 08:57, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unstable search engine

This has been mentioned before, but it needs to be addressed. The search engine on Wikipedia is unstable. Sometimes it will work fine, other times (like now,as I write this) it will come up with no results. I have tried different computers and different browsers, but it's all the same. Just to clarify the problem, if I search for an article that exists in Wikipedia it will always work. If I search for somebody who does not have it's own article, but is referenced in another, it should come up with search results. This does not happen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eksosrock (talk • contribs) 07:12, 7 March 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

Can you give us any examples of search phrases that you have tried that do not work? Dismas|^(talk) 08:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've encountered this myself a few times, but it seems to only ever be a temporary problem (a search for "tsuki no" a few days ago gave me nothing, but now the exact same phrase returns nearly a thousand results). Possibly a server issue? Yunshui 雲‍水 09:47, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why was my talk deleted?

Recently I wrote a longish comment on the "origin of language", titled: "Problem has been solved". It has been deleted. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luo Shanlian (talk • contribs) 11:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Dominus Vobisdu was pretty clear in his edit summary: "Removed personal essay not related to improving the article per WP:NOTAFORUM." Yunshui 雲‍水 11:10, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Twinkle

Since our last communication I have on several occasions attempted to follow your advice and activate Twinkle, but to no avail. It has now dawned on me that it won't work because I have Internet Explorer 8. What can I do? Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 11:07, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Upgrade to IE9 (Vista/Win7) or Firefox. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 11:15, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or Chrome. In seriousness, there's no getting around that. A few of the accessories for Wikipedia don't work in IE8 (or Internet Explorer at all), so an upgrade will be worth it, if you plan to use any of them. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 21:13, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

International Reply Coupons

Hi. I have just been reading the article about International Reply Coupons on Wikipedia. I have been trying to find out about getting some here in the UK. I have found out that the ROYAL MAIL have withdrawn this service and do not intend to provide an alternative. This service has been available for many years. Does anyone know an alternative. Thanks in despiration — Preceding unsigned comment added by JAYNEP63 (talk • contribs) 15:34, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried the Miscellaneous section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps. TN X Man 15:44, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

International reply coupons were the means for you to be able to effectively prepay a reply for a correspondent from a foreign land, and of course are famous as the basis for Charles Ponzi's scheme. I don't remember hearing much about them after the early 1980s. I would suggest purchasing some postage stamps for the country you intend to have someone mail you from, and if you fear they would just use them for postage, stick them on envelopes addressed to you and enclose them in your correspondence. If you just want one as a collectable, suggest eBay.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:51, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Units of measure - distance

I think it would be helpful to amend some articles to include the American Football Field (AFF) as a unit of length measure. Many American textbooks and scientific publications do this in certain cases, the intent being to allow Americans (and other sporting fans) a more familiar perspective when considering real-world distance quantities. Some example amendments:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon "The distance between the Moon and the Earth varies from around 356,400 km to 406,700 km [3,248,031 to 3,706,438 AFF]..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soccer "In 2008, the IFAB initially approved a fixed field size of 105 m (344 ft) {0.957 AFF} long and 68 m (223 ft) {0.620 AFF} wide as a standard pitch dimension for A international matches"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen Covalent radius = 31±5 pm (28.25 ± 4.56 ×10−10 AFF)

My goal is not to replace any of the current units of measure used in these and other articles, but merely to add the AFF measure in parentheses. I have attempted to make several of these amendments myself, but the revised articles are always reverted back to their original form after some time. I am confused about why the revisions would be disallowed, since the length values are still true. Can you please advise? Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.141.226.18 (talk) 16:05, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe that a proposal like that would or should be taken seriously. Thank you for your time though.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:15, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(ec):IMNSHO that so called "unit" is a load of nonsense, it does not belong on WP. This is the English Wikipedia, I'm afraid you're mistaking it for the the American-football-fan-pedia. Roger (talk) 16:17, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your IP address is American but note that this is an international encyclopedia with millions of readers and thousands of editors from other countries. American Football is an American sport with few players in other countries. Perhaps this "unit" is occasionally mentioned in American media but it does not belong in Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:38, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is mentioned where it belongs, in List of unusual units of measurement. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:57, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a joke, right? It may make sense to compare distances from about 50-500 metres to a football field, but using it for atomic radii is nonsensical. Wait till April 1 before posting any other nonsense like this. --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:00, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Emmerdale and Coronation Street on Wikepeadia

How do I change the number of episodes of Emmerdale and Coronation Street? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew Gaskell (talk • contribs) 17:20, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Like [1] and not like [2]. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:04, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

HOW TO CORRECT A FACTUALLY STATED ERROR IN A BIOGRAPHY?

There is a bio containing a misstatement of fact that should be corrected. How does one go about getting it changed? The writeup about Teddi King misstates that she got started by winning the Dinah Shore contest in Boston, Mass. She did not win the contest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.55.254.101 (talk) 18:26, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The source cited [3] says that she did - though admittedly it isn't a particularly reliable-looking source. To justify changing the article, you'd need to provide a published reliable source which says she didn't. If you have one, you could edit the article yourself, or make a note on the article talk page. Meanwhile, I'll do a quick check myself to see if there are any other sources I can find - the article needs improvement anyway. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:32, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As AndyTheGrump says you'll need a reliable source to be able to change it. That means you'd need to have something like a book, newspaper article, or magazine article that states she didn't win the contest. Cloveapple (talk) 20:02, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or, more likely, a reliable source that states someone else did win it. Sources seldom report what didn't happen. LeadSongDog come howl! 20:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This source, which may be considered more reliable than AllMusic (being published by Oxford University Press and all), says that she did win such a contest. Deor (talk) 22:40, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also [4] says a contest in Boston, though doesn't specify Dinah Shore. In general AMG is only a slight notch above the average open blog. Ok for hints about where to look, but shouldn't really be cited for anything substantive.LeadSongDog come howl! 23:07, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please help fix a table

The table in Wheelchair rugby#Active countries has a problem; "Switzerland" is misplaced, but I can't figure out why it is happening. Roger (talk) 18:35, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed with this edit -- John of Reading (talk) 18:44, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Now that I've seen how you fixed it, its so obvious I'm slapping myself! Roger (talk) 19:31, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect at Service Data Objects

Is it possible to avoid the redirect at Service Data Objects, link "SDO (disambiguation)" (presuming keeping the same link text)? --Mortense (talk) 18:45, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DoneLeadSongDog come howl! 20:37, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect Information

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

Hi Wikipedia editing community. The following statement on the ZEDO Wikipedia page is not supported with a reliable source - The sentence: "Zedo is often linked to the controversy over spyware[8] " Reference #8 is invalid. It is a non-existent webpage. Can you please remove the statement, or approve the removal, or at least support it with a valid reference.

We would also like to inquire about this: The phrase: "as well as the methods which it gathers information, such as deceptive ads and clickjacking." It is not true nor supported by any reference. Can this be deleted?

Finally, The sentence: "There is no effect at all on the objectionable Zedo functions: the number of ads, profile development (cookies), and their use (spying)." The reference used is a ZEDO webpage (http://www.zedo.com/company/optout.htm) which never talks about number or ads, cookies, or spying anywhere in it. Can this be deleted?

We will not make any changes to the ZEDO page without authorization from the Wikipedia editing community.

Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.135.173 (talk) 19:35, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've marked reference 8 as containing a dead link. That's the first step towards either repairing the link or (if repairing it fails) deleting the reference. I haven't yet looked at the other two issues. Cloveapple (talk) 19:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I marked the phrase "as well as the methods which it gathers information, such as deceptive ads and clickjacking" with a citation needed notice. If nobody has provided a reference for that within two weeks, then I'll go ahead and delete it. (Feel free to remind me if needed.)

As for the third issue, can somebody else who is more familiar with the subject of ads, cookies, etc please take a look at "There is no effect at all on the objectionable Zedo functions: the number of ads, profile development (cookies), and their use (spying)." I looks to me like part of it reflects the source since the source says ads will still be shown, but that part of it is not in the source. However I don't trust my understanding of the subject. Cloveapple (talk) 20:27, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where can I find out about those hidden items after the categories in an article?

I'm merging an article (not the one that the examples are from) and want to handle these properly. At the end, after the categorization there are lines visible only in editing more that look like this:

[[an:Mosica folk]]

[[ast:Folk]]

[[az:Xalq musiqisi]]

What are these? What makes them invisible? Where can I read to learn about them?

Thanks! For an answer to even one of these questions!

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 23:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Interlanguage links. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! North8000 (talk) 23:20, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Katy Perry Uploaded Images

I tried to upload images about Katy Perry and of Katy Perry. They told me that I have to upload my own work, so I went to Microsoft Word and screen clipped a image of Katy Perry that I wanted. Then I uploaded it to Wikipedia. Then they deleted the image. They said that it was a copyright violation. If I can't upload a picture of Katy Perry, then how did all those people that uploaded pictures of her did? I asked someone how to upload a image of Katy Perry without having it to be my own work, but they said that it wasn't possible. I think that it is possible. So how am I suppose to upload a picture of Katy Perry without having it to be my own work? CPGirlAJ (talk) 23:10, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What was the source of that image? Did you took the photo yourself?

I asked someone how to upload a image of Katy Perry without having it to be my own work, but they said that it wasn't possible

- Yes, it is possible, but, if it is a promotional photo, or the photo is under creative commons SA 3.0 license or (there are some more options, see in Wikipedia upload form). The main thing is you need to write description and details well. --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 23:33, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) Generally you can't upload the types of images you are trying to, because pictures of living people are replaceable by a free equivalent. There are essentially three types of images seen in Wikepedia:

Files that are not subject to copyright protection at all but which are in the public domain. Most images one finds somewhere on the internet are fully copyrighted and note that the burden is on the person wishing to use an image to show it is not; an image is assumed fully copyrighted unless a person shows otherwise in a reliable way.
Files that remain copyrighted but bear a free copyright license that is compatible with the free licenses Wikipedia's content is licensed under. Again, one has to show an image they upload is freely-licensed, or it is assumed they are fully copyrighted and cannot be used under such a license.
Files that are used under a claim of fair use. Fair use is a doctrine that allows use of fully copyrighted media for certain educational uses under strict conditions for that use. This appears to be the only ground under which your image uploads could possibly be properly used. To be used here, in addition to a non-free copyright tag, you need to place a properly filled out fair use rationale template explaining why the image constitutes fair use in the manner you are using it. The criteria you must meet for fair use are set out at Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria.

The fair use criterion that matters most here, as I noted above, is the first: "No free equivalent". Since Katy Perry is alive, you or someone can go take a picture of her somewhere. By doing so, that person would own the copyright and could then release it into the public domain of freely-license it. That is what the people meant when they said you had to "upload [your] own work." The person who takes the photograph, paints the portrait, records the song etc. is usually (but not always) the copyright owner. You do not create an image by taking a screenshot of it. You ask how the other images that are present got there. Well some of them were uploaded by people who took the photo themselves, such as in File:Katy Perry warped tour.jpg. Others, such as in the case of File:Katy Perry performing.jpg, were uploaded to flickr by the person who took the photograph, and someone who found it there already freely-licensed, only then uploaded it (at the Commons) for use here. In general, fair use cannot be used for any photographs of living people. A good argument can be made, however, if the person's fame is greatly tied to, for example, how they looked at 20 years old, that a picture of them when they are 87 is not at all equivalent, so a copyrighted picture should be allowed. It would still have to meet all the other criteria for a claim of fair use though.

Hope this helps.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:45, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]