Help desk
< December 15	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 17 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

December 16

Signature not working

Problem solved. Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 08:54, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

For some reason, whenever I add the "~~~~" to my posts, it lists the date but not my signature...and I don't recall ever changing any of my preferences. Can anyone figure out what's wrong? 03:11, 16 December 2014 (UTC) (User:Erpert)

Hey there @Erpert: Your signature code is currently this:

'''<span style="background-color:Erpert; color:red;"></span><!--
--  Two parameters --
-->''' <small><sup><span style="background-color:[[User talk:Erpert|blah, blah, blah...]]; color:green;"></span><!--
--  Two parameters --
--></sup></small>

It's pretty convoluted - the text is mixed in with the HTML syntax. Not sure what you wanted exactly, but I'm going to assume you wanted red text. The code for that is:

'''Erpert'''[[User talk:Erpert|blah, blah, blah...]]

This should appear as Erpert^{blah, blah, blah...}

You can change that accordingly to what you want; if you want help, feel free to ask! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 05:01, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Based on [1] it looks like you have a lot of junk in the signature field at Special:Preferences. Here is an old signature which worked so you can copy the code from there:

'''<span style="color:orange;">Erpert</span>''' <small><sup><span style="color:yellow;">[[User talk:Erpert|blah, blah, blah...]]</span></sup></small>

. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:05, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Erpert: Does your signature use the {{font color}} template? I believe I've just fixed an error in that template that would have caused your signature to fail. Please see if it is any better now. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:21, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My signature always worked fine before and then suddenly it didn't. Oh, well; it does work now. Thanks! Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 08:54, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Download As PDF

I am a very old user of wikipedia. Recently when I download a page as pdf the pdf file seems to have 2 columns but earlier it had only 1 column. I don't like the 2 columns view. It feels like I'm reading newspaper. Is there any settings or options by which I can fix it & get it like the way it was before ? And if I can't can you help me out in this problem ? Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.97.142.150 (talk) 04:46, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@58.97.142.150: those who would know how to help can be found at WP:VPT.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:14, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance Dogs Australia

Hi there - I recently set up a page for the Not for Profit I work for- Assistance Dogs Australia and submitted it for review. i was looking to go into the page today to add some info / edit but when I am logged in i am unable to see the page. Is this deliberate? Am i unable to see / make changes to my page until I have had a response?

Please advise.

Thank you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hayleynissim (talk • contribs) 05:10, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can find no evidence that there has been an article (or draft) under that name since one was deleted back in 2009 for copyright infringement. Are you sure you have the title right? And are you sure you actually saved it? AndyTheGrump (talk) 05:16, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was deleted as "Blatant advertising, blatant copyright infringement -- http://www.assistancedogs.org.au/". [2] This is an encyclopaedia, not a platform for free advertising (regardless of the worthiness or otherwise of the cause), and we cannot accept material copy-pasted from elsewhere. AndyTheGrump (talk) 05:21, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hi there @Hayleynissim: Your draft was located at Draft:Assistance Dogs Australia; it has since been deleted. Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted content, as all our text is licensed freely under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license. Technically, a company can donate their text under a free license as outlined at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. However, official company text is often useless for Wikipedia, as it tends to be promotional and non-neutral. Wikipedia articles need to contain information taken from a variety of independent and reliable sources; as a result, simply having text taken from the company website will almost surely result in the declining of the draft. Let us know if you have any more questions. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 05:23, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hayleynissim. It might help to realise that "setting up a page" is something you do in a social networking site or directory. It is not something you do in Wikipedia, where you "write an article" (but you shouldn't do so about something you are closely associated with). --ColinFine (talk) 10:19, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

i got warnings that my wiki account will be blocked soon.

i got warnings that my wiki account will be blocked soon. please help me i using this wiki account since 2012, i never done vandalism on wiki articles.

i just posted questions from other sites in reference desk to get answers that's all i done, so User:AndyTheGrump decide to block my wiki account soon. please some one help me. i don't want to lose my wiki account. Ram nareshji (talk) 06:53, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See response here [3]. AndyTheGrump (talk) 07:37, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The key phrase is: "If you copy-paste any more questions then..." [emphasis mine] —Simply stop doing that!

~E, aka:71.20.250.51 (talk) 08:17, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

trying to create page

im new to this and im having a hard time creating a page for Lubella Gauna, Please help me create this page and who to go for help on this because i feel that im doing everything ok just that i'm new to this and these people need to give me a break and help me out instead of deleting the page... what should I do? PLEASE RECOVER My the page I created LUBELLA GAUNA — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guerrca78 (talk • contribs) 09:06, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think you would do well to take another look at the guidance you have already received on your talk page. Yes, there's a lot to read, but there is a lot to learn about editing Wikipedia - probably more than most people realise before they start! Before starting another new article you need to decide if the subject is notable: here is a brief guide to help you decide this. Because if the subject is not "notable", no article on that subject, however well-written, will ever be accepted. Then if the subject really is notable, that means there are several independent published sources: summarise in your own words what these sources say and give references to them, but never copy-paste from them: Noyster (talk), 11:01, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Against heavily biased article with title Ashutosh (Spiritual Leader)

The above given article is heavily biased against Shri Ashutosh Maharaj Ji. Ashutosh (spiritual leader) This article declares some person as chauffeur of Ashutosh Maharaj Ji and another person as son of Ashutosh Maharaj Ji. Both of these facts are incorrect. And both of these lines are added to malign the image of a great Indian saint. Recently Chandigarh high court has declared both the persons as fraud. Any reference to any article and newspaper is thus meaningless if its intended to proove that both of these persons as close to Ashutosh Maharaj Ji. Another thing that the organisation has how much amount of property should be told objectively, because there is no money stacked in any money chamber etc. and honorable high court of Chandigarh has declared that there is no property dispute or property stacked as money. Another fact that Shri Ashutosh Maharaj Ji has tried to create controversy related to Sikhism is false. There is no proof for that. Previously too honorable court has declared that no single evidence or recording(written or spoken) has been found which can indicate that Shri Ashutosh Maharaj Ji or his preachers have tried to malign any religion including Sikhism.

I request every user and readers of Wikipedia to protest against this false article and report the users who have created it. And also help me on how to make this person/these persons apologize and remove this article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Priyeshndixit (talk • contribs) 15:42, 16 December 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

The place to make comments regarding an article is on the article's talk page. Be sure to support your comments with references to reliable sources published independently of the subject. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:01, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss on the article talk page, Talk: Ashutosh (spiritual leader), citing reliable sources disagreeing with the article content. Your demand to make editors apologize is not constructive, and is not likely to achieve your real objective, which should be improvement of the article. If discussion on the talk page is not successful, read dispute resolution, and follow one of the various dispute resolution procedures. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:04, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Terrorist

Hi, all. When is it appropriate to use the label 'terrorist' to describe someone? I know that Wikipedia discourages this via Wikipedia:LABEL, but I suppose I'm looking for something a little more in-depth. I'd like to be able to cite firm policy rather than argue with others on who is exhibiting better judgement. Specifically:

Is the label terrorist considered properly sourced and defensible, if one provides an RS that uses it?
Is an individual's conviction by a country for terrorism or membership in an organization that another organization has labelled 'terrorist' sufficient to use the label?
What if one is killed perpetrating what reliable sources later refer to as a 'terrorist attack'?

I know that this is a highly-charged issue that inflames passions, which is precisely why I would like firm guidance backed by enforceable policy. Thank you all for your help. Rustandbone (talk) 16:20, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Rustandbone: perhaps this question would get a response on the Policy Village Pump.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:22, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will try it there. Thank you. Rustandbone (talk) 23:19, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Submission Question: Draft: Cherzong Vang

I attempted to submit a draft article for submission and review entitled: Cherzong Vang

Draft:Cherzong Vang

Has it been reviewed or deleted ? Cannot seem to find it in the Articles for Submission date of December 14, 2014 when it was first submitted.

Has it been deleted ? If so, for what reason. Or is it still under review ?

It seems to have mysteriously disappeared completely.

thanks Publico2020 (talk) 17:28, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft is there in the review queue. I converted the partial url in your question into a wikilink which you can follow. You can also find it in your contributions page. It is listed at Category:AfC submissions by date/14 December 2014, so I don't know why you couldn't see it there. As it says in the review box on the draft, "There are 2987 submissions waiting for review.", so you may well have to wait for more than a month. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:37, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The page history [4] shows an unregistered user removed the AFC submission templates.[5] I restored them [6] before David's post and will contact the user. Thanks for posting the problem. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:42, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you David Biddulph and also Prime Hunter for your thoughtful response and efforts to explain and assist. Much appreciated, since I am still rather new to how these things work and the various processes.Publico2020 (talk) 20:29, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Cite errors/Cite error included ref

I was editing the page on Sharabha.I can't seem to insert the reference link properly.please help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ankisur2 (talk • contribs) 18:41, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm looking in the right place, all you needed was to remove one character: <ref name=Sharma> instead of <ref> name=Sharma>. I've changed it for you: Noyster (talk), 21:27, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

why is this a post?

Stevan Lieberman

I feel this bio of a living person has been made to serve as a pamphlet for the subject. Nearly every lawyer could have a similar page. How do you request removal — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.91.249 (talk) 18:51, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blimey I have seen plenty of WP:Yet another lawyer pages but that one is way over the top.--ukexpat (talk) 20:17, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I attempted to delete it under G11, but there was some sort of server error. Let me check back later. 71.178.91.249, look at our criteria for speedy deletion if you're curious; G11 is the criterion meant for blatant advertising. PS, hmm, the deletion went through after all. Nyttend (talk) 20:41, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What does a strike-through signify?

When I look at an edit revision history, what does it mean when a specific entry date has been stricken through (like ~~this~~)? See this example: Talk:2014 Sydney hostage crisis: Revision history. (I am not sure why that entry comes out as a red link?) Or the dates of December 15 and 16 on my User Contributions page. See the "contribs" link here: Joseph A. Spadaro (talk · contribs). Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:53, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That talk page history shows that it has been subjected to revision deletion. Although there was nothing wrong with your revision specifically, the detail has been lost because all intervening edits are hidden to prevent visibility of the content concerned. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:04, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot make a wikilink to a history page. You can post a url like [7] instead. You can also use {{History}} but that is cumbersome and not necessary. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:39, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. But, I am still confused. What circumstances would typically warrant the need for a revision deletion? And all of the intervening edits are "lost"? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:50, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:REVDEL. When it's a talk page, it could be a matter of copyvio if someone dumped a big chunk of infringing text, but that's rare. Much more common is the situation here (see details at WP:AN#Could we check this possible link between the Australian terrorist and a wikipedia account?), where people were discussing whether a Wikipedia editor were the perpetrator of the crisis. People at WP:AN were suggesting that this was a case of outing. A bunch of revisions were removed because the username apparently was present in a lot of revisions; for the revdel to be effective, they had to remove the one where it was added, the last one before it was removed, and everything in between. PS, this is oversight, not simple revision deletion. As an admin, I have the ability to look at revisions that have been subjected to revdel (they're stricken, but still linked), but when oversight is used, it's stricken and greyed out without a link, appearing just as revdelled and oversighted revisions do if you're not an admin. PPS, it's still possible to access the revisions themselves (see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=638362289), but you can't look at the contents, and there's not much point. You have to access a visible revision and then navigate backwards with the "Previous revision" or "Newer revision" links. Nyttend (talk) 19:56, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:07, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Dranga

Hello Wikipedia,

The name that performer Peter Dranga is known for outside of Russia is Peter Dranga, Please could you help us to solve this issue and change the name of page "Pyotr Dranga" to "Peter Dranga. It is his personal will and also would help people to research information about this performer.

Thank you, Sincerely, Dranga Team

The article is currently entitled Peter Dranga, and Pyotr Dranga is currently a redirect to it. Nyttend (talk) 19:53, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Episcopal Diocese of Minnesota page

Hello,

I am working on editing the Episcopal Diocese of Minnesota wikipedia page (Episcopal Diocese of Minnesota)

Initially, I joined just to make my ten edits and wait four days so that I could change our name to Episcopal Church in Minnesota (which we are now called) but since decided to do some further editing.

I am specifically needing help with the little info box summary thing on the right hand side. I am hoping to change the word "congregations" to "faith communities" but it doesn't appear that I can simply replace it, as when I do the entire statistic appears.

I appreciate any help you can offer.

Sincerely, Annie

Snide034 (talk) 19:12, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct: it is not possible. The infobox is a separate page, a template, that gets "transcluded", or basically made a part of this one; Help:A quick guide to templates will explain the basics. The only way to get it to say "Faith communities" would be to edit the template page itself, and that would cause "Faith communities" to appear on every page that uses it, not just on this one. You can start a discussion about editing the template by going to Template talk:Infobox diocese; I would be willing to help you if you wish. By the way, please note that moving the page would not be a good idea; our naming conventions for Christian dioceses are always "FAITH (Arch)diocese of PLACE". A page entitled "FAITH in PLACE" is used for overview articles without regard to ecclesiastical polities, e.g. "Episcopal Church in Pennsylvania" would cover the five dioceses here in PA. Nyttend (talk) 19:45, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Inserting images

Hello,

I am currently having some issues with uploading photos with accurate copyright information to my article on John W. Cooper. I uploaded three different photos with the appropriate information, but received a message that the information I provided did not fulfill the copyright requirements. How do I go about uploading these images with the appropriate information? I have tried to find information regarding these images on the websites they were posted on but was unable to find certain aspects.

Thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isabel Sarah Mitchell (talk • contribs) 21:00, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You need to be able to demonstrate that an image is in the public domain or that the author expressly released rights to it under one of several copyright licenses that Wikipedia calls "free". The latter is very unlikely in this kind of situation, so you need to focus on finding a public-domain image. Can you find an image of Cooper that was certainly published (not just taken, but actively published) in 1922 or earlier? If so, it's in the public domain. Can you find an image of him that's included in a post-1922 publication with insufficient copyright information? If so, it's in the public domain, but there are plenty of details to check. If you have a picture that you think came from a document with insufficient copyright information, I can try to help you decide whether it really is lacking some of the important information; please don't just assume that a source doesn't have enough information. Final note I can't give you a full answer because I can't see everything you provided. I've asked for help from the administrator who deleted some of your images. Nyttend (talk) 21:28, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Boundary Dam Power Station page - journalism/agenda as an entry

Hello! The page Boundary Dam Power Station was recently amended to read like several opinion columns printed in Saskatchewan media. Those opinion pieces are even used as citations. Some of the information presented also contains a fair amount of speculation or citing sources that are not specifically saying what this entry states or is flat-out 'withheld at the request of the author'. In the past, there was a way to flag articles or portions as 'questionable' or 'containing speculation'. I was just wondering if that was still an option. World CCS experts have tried to modify the article with a balanced view, but user Sktaxpayer, who has grown this article five-fold in the past few weeks, has reverted any change to his journalistic view.

Further to this, the same journalist used as one of the only sources in this entry printed another lambasting article today, citing this Wikipedia entry. The entry now uses that new article as a source... I'm wondering if there's an abuse of the system here.

I'm not looking for censorship in the slightest. Just a bit of balance and to keep Wiki as the online Encyclopedia it is, not a forum to pursue an agenda.

Thanks for any insight. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SKcontent99 (talk • contribs) 21:10, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some possibly useful tags are at Category:Neutrality templates. Rmhermen (talk) 21:19, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to placing tags, you should consider stating your specific concerns at the article's talk page. This is always the recommended first step in resolving disagreements over an article's content, rather than reverting and counter-reverting. It may help if you can identify how parts of the article are not written in a neutral and balanced way, or if they are not soundly based on reliable sources, and thus contravene WP policy: Noyster (talk), 21:47, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the article back to the October 21 version - all of the substantive edits since then are non-neutral and read like an opinion piece. Further discussion should take place on the talk page.--ukexpat (talk) 22:19, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have just reverted again - the user in question doesn't seem to understand WP:SYN and WP:BRD - need additional eyes on this one please.--ukexpat (talk) 15:54, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects from main space to draft space

Is there any simple way to search for all redirects from main space to draft space? There should be zero such redirects, as it kind of defeats the whole purpose of the draft space. But anytime a non-admin moves something from main space to draft space, a redirect is left behind, and they aren't always tagged for speedy deletion by the mover. I'm hoping the solution is (a) not really really simple, so I look like an idiot for not knowing it, but (b) not so difficult that I can't easily be done without knowing how to create a bot or use AWB or something. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:07, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen Wikipedia:Cross-namespace redirects#See also? PrimeHunter (talk) 22:58, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't seen that, no. I knew about the existence of the database report from some previous issue, but it's now 11 months out of date. The first tool there looks like it would be exactly what I'm looking for, except it doesn't seem to be working right now. I'll try it later. But thanks, @PrimeHunter:, for the pointer. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:05, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the tool finally worked, and it is, indeed, exactly what I was looking for. There are currently about 2 dozen of them. Gives me a chance to renew my gnome license. Thanks again. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:10, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]