Help desk
< April 1	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 3 >

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

April 2

How to edit

I am new to edit Wikipedia. Please tell me how to edit. - Bunny Sweety — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bunny Sweety (talk • contribs) 00:27, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor has added a welcome message to your user talk page, with many useful wikilinks. --David Biddulph (talk) 00:32, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What to do with this redirect?

I don't see anything wrong with redirecting the redirect to the proper name. Redirects are cheap after all. The copy-paste move is what concerns me. Just want to make sure the proper name is correct.~~If the proper name is "Tip Toe Thru' the Tulips With Me" then the article should be G6-move tagged. Not A10.~~ --Majora (talk) 01:10, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, it seems to come up both ways on Google but the most commons version is "Tiptoe Through the Tuplips". Once the copy-paste move is fixed (deleted) perhaps it should be recreated as a redirect? Or the current one can just be changed into that and the copy/paste can be rev'deled to deal with the copyright issues. Thoughts MarnetteD? --Majora (talk) 01:17, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Thanks for your input Majora. Although I'm not old enough to have heard the song in its original release I am old enough to have watched Tiny Tim perform it more than once. I have never seen it with the "With Me" added on. Here is a Google search to show what is available to back this up. Thanks again. MarnetteD|Talk 01:19, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to leave the same info. Great minds and all :-) MarnetteD|Talk 01:19, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I don't see a problem with changing the redirect to point to the right article. I also don't see a problem with changing the copy-paste article into a redirect or recreating it once it is deleted as a redirect. The later is cleaner as it doesn't require rev'del to fix the copyright issues inherent with all copy-paste moves. --Majora (talk) 01:23, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) As you say Majora the copy/paste has to be deleted after that whatever works for others is fine with me. But I lean towards the "delete article then create the redirect" as well. MarnetteD|Talk 01:28, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~From my experience at RfD it probably wouldn't get deleted but there's no particular need for it either.~~ If you make it the MOS says "with" wouldn't be capitalized - see "Prepositions containing four letters or fewer " Siuenti (talk) 01:31, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When the tune was first published in 1929, it was under the longer title, Tip Toe Through the Tulips with Me. In the 1960s, Tiny Tim had a hit with the tune using the shortened version, Tip Toe Through the Tulips. Copies of the original sheet music are currently available for sale via book-sellers and on E-Bay with the longer title. See, for instance, http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tip-Toe-Thru-the-Tulips-With-Me-by-Joe-Burke-Al-Dubin-1929-sheet-music-/272202514477?hash=item3f6088c02d:g:ObEAAOxyUrZS5HwA OR https://www.abebooks.com/book-search/author/dubin-al-burke-joe/ OR http://www.ebay.ie/sch/i.html?_sop=1&_nkw=tip+toe+through+the+tulips&_frs=1. In addition, Youtube provides access to original versions of the tune with the longer title, see for instance, https://www.youtube.comwatch?v=0k3RCyeOM8E, for an image of an early recording by Nick Lucas who according to the article was the first to record the song. My preference would be to use the longer title as intended by the original composer and lyricist as the primary article. BronHiggs (talk) 01:47, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) *The original 1929 Burke-Dubin song is titled: "Tip Toe Through the Tulips With Me". See original 1929 sheet music cover here: Gold Diggers 1929. However, WP is littered with "Tiptoe Through the Tulips" on the composer and lyricist's page; not to mention those who have made a career in singing it: i.e. Tiny Tim. It's a matter of whether or not editors want to be absolutely 100% correct and change references to the original title throughout WP; or what history has "renamed" the song to be known as today. Even the biography that I have on Dubin (Lullaby of Broadway: Life and Times of Al Dubin - One of America's Great Lyricists) states the song as "Tip Toe Through the Tulips" (1929). I think if a thumbnail had been created from the original 1929 sheet for the infobox, this wouldn't have been a topic of discussion. Maineartists (talk) 01:56, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all of your research [[User:|BronHiggs]] andd Maineartists. Now that the copy/paste has been dealt with you could file a WP:RM to get a consensus one way or the other. Cheers MarnetteD|Talk 01:58, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Messed up part of my pings so BronHiggs here is one that should work. MarnetteD|Talk 02:00, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So pretty soon Tip Toe Through the Tulips with Me should be a blue link. Siuenti (talk) 02:18, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't at all clear to me whether we should ask for Tip Toe Through the Tulips with Me to be redirected to Tip Toe Through the Tulips or vice versa or even if one or the other should be deleted. There seem to be many different opionions even in this short discussion. BronHiggs (talk) 03:38, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BronHiggs: When I did my original Google search I looked for the one that was used the most often. That would be the one without "with Me" (the current name). Per WP:COMMONNAME that seems to be the one we should go with regardless of what the song was originally called. --Majora (talk) 03:42, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because both of them are plausible titles, neither of them should be deleted. Make the redirect, discuss the possible title on the talk page, if you can't reach consensus go to WP:RM. Siuenti (talk) 03:45, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article is about the 1929 song written by Al Dubin and Joe Burke; not what the song has become commonly known as today. WP does not and should not define a horse by its cart. If the original title is "Tip Toe Through the Tulips with Me" and that is the article for which it was created, then that is what it should be with a redirect created for those who think it is called. Example: George and Ira Gershwin's song: "Love is Here to Stay". The original is "Love is Here to Stay" yet it is more commonly know from its last line "Our Love Is Here To Stay" today. However, WP lists it under its original title with a redirect. The same should be for this song; not for what we "call" it today. Regardless, I have opened a WP:RM Maineartists (talk) 04:06, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

Hi, I just wanted to ask if you can change the mobile website to when you are previewing your edit, change "Example: Fixed typo, added content" to "Explain your changes in your box" or something like that because the canned edit summaries have caused vandalism. This new thing can reduce canned edit summaries and vandalism.68.228.254.131 (talk) 02:35, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd like to propose changes to the user interface, a good place to start is at the Village Pump. There are several different pages there (e.g., proposals, technical, idea lab) where editors can make suggestions. I have to say that I don't see how the change you're proposing would reduce vandalism, though. Rivertorch^FIRE _WATER 03:29, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Idiotic question

If someone says 15 cm by 10 cm by 12 cm, which is the length, width, and height? Uptoniga (talk) 04:01, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Uptoniga: Maybe try the Reference Desk. The Help Desk is for questions about using Wikipedia. Triptothecottage (talk) 06:03, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

... but the answer depends on which way you are holding the object. Dbfirs 07:08, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the absence of any other information, I would think it most likely that they had specified the height last. Maproom (talk) 13:06, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

how to back to main space? (main space-draft-main space)

Hello? One of main articles was moved to draft. On the main space, it says 'this article is nominated to the 'deletion' because it was moved to 'draft'. How can move this article again back to main space? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.59.3.120 (talk) 04:32, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you tell us what article you are asking about, then we might be able to help. Wikipedia:Deletion policy gives an explanation of reasons. Dbfirs 07:07, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

charuhasan is still alive and u have posed he had died in march 19 2017

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charuhasan

this article shows charuhasan had died when he is actually alive.. it is only chandra hasan his younger brother who died recently in london.. so kindly make the correction — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:205:8103:C4BE:F0B4:8E5D:AF4D:8DAD (talk) 04:53, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is the article now accurate again after recent reversions? Dbfirs 07:13, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think edits should be in a different color from the articles. It's frustrating to read articles, especially if they're long, and not be able to tell what was edited since the last entry.......at least the past year's worth of changes should be in a different color.

Thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.8.117.83 (talk) 08:02, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 24.8.117.83 - you can do that. When looking at an article, click on the "History" tab. This will show you all the changes that were made to the article. You can select any two versions and show the differences between them. So if you just want to see that changed in the last edit, select just the last two versions and show the difference. --Gronk Oz (talk) 10:21, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About a translation

Hello! Some time ago I uploaded an article to the Wikipedia in Spanish about the Spotahome company (https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spotahome). I want to do the literal translation to Wikipedia in English, do you think it will be accepted? (My question is whether the company is notable enough to be on the wikipedia in English). Thanks!--Ane wiki (talk) 08:04, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ane wiki. It looks like you already have a pretty good grasp of WP:COI, so I won't belabor the point here. Looking at the results of a news search, it does look like the company has received some coverage. Unfortunately I'm American, which of course means that I can barely speak one language, so I can't really evaluate a lot of the reliability of them. I would say that if in doubt, it's usually a safer bet to write the article as a draft and submit it to WP:AFC for evaluation in detail by a volunteer. TimothyJosephWood 14:27, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I have had bad experiences making paid editions. Although Wikipedia establishes a procedure, I suffered mistreatment, and worst of all: someone, anonymously, made rough editions in my articles pretending to be me, trying to get me sanctioned. They investigated my IP, and one editor threatened me on my talk page, telling me that he would follow all my movements... (https: //es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usuaria_discusi%C3%B3n:Ane_wiki#No_creo_mucho_en_las_coincidencias) After that he apologized... But this is not the point, sorry; I will do what you tell me and submit the translation to review. Thank you for your advice!--Ane wiki (talk) 05:42, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming Page

How can I rename page The Axe Valley Community College to Axe Valley Academy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AxeValleyAcademy (talk • contribs) 09:31, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the article to the new name. As per the username policy, please choose another username. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 09:47, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a category to a protected userpage

Could an administrator please add Category:Deceased Wikipedians to these Wikipedia userpages: User:Sheldon Brown, User:Tgarden, User:OdedSchramm.--Nevé –selbert 10:14, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Neve-selbert: Per Wikipedia:Deceased Wikipedians/Guidelines you'll have to provide reliable sources to verify that these users are in fact deceased. Rojomoke (talk) 11:36, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Rojomoke: Their deaths are sourced at Sheldon Brown, Timothy Garden, Baron Garden, Oded Schramm. Each of them had articles of their own.--Nevé –selbert 14:35, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

please help me find and restore deleted article on Clea T. Waite for further editing

Hi -

I joined wikipedia at an Art+Feminism edit-a-thon just now. One of the things I'd like to do is create an article on the media artist Clea T. Waite. I know she had had a page in the English language Wikipedia back in 2007, but it was deleted because the author had pretty much just copied it off a Harvard website.

Could someone please pull that out of the archives so I can clean it up and publish it? She's a very well known artist in media art circles, and really should have a wikipedia entry.

Here's her website: http://www.clea-t.de/

Thanks, Adia Pikichew — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adiapikichew (talk • contribs) 12:19, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As it was a copyright violation we cant really restore it, it was copied from www.radcliffe.edu perhaps you can use https://www.radcliffe.harvard.edu/people/clea-t-waite as a source and starting point for a new article. MilborneOne (talk) 12:43, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Adiapikichew. Thanks for signing up for the edit-a-thon. You probably want to check out our tutorial on writing your first article or consider taking our interactive tutorial at The Wikipedia Adventure. Wikipedia can have a lot of rules sometimes, and these will help you orient to most of the more important ones. If you have follow up questions you're always welcome to ask them here or at The Teahouse and there's always people happy to help. TimothyJosephWood 13:00, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, will do - Adia Pikichew — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adiapikichew (talk • contribs) 09:22, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How to Control the Number of Lines included in the "View History" Old to New Comparison Within a Large Section

On my first Wikipedia edit, I added one period as a punctuation edit in the Plot Section of a novel. However, under the "Prev" link on the "View History" documentation page the documentation for my one-period edit shows all 3 paragraphs of the Plot Section in the old versus new versions.

How can I limit the "old to new" comparison to only the couple of lines where I added the period?

And, should I reverse my correction and re-establish it with the correct "old to new" comparison?

Thank you for your assistance,

RaisinStandish (talk) 13:31, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RaisinStandish, thanks for your edit! I'm afraid you've run into a limitation of Wikipedia's software. Every "diff" page like that one (as they're often called) shows changes by the paragraph, plus the paragraphs above and below the one edited. There is no way to make just a single line show up, even though that can make it hard to see your changes. There's nothing to fix. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 13:42, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@RaisinStandish: See WP:WIKEDDIFF for an alternative way to view diffs. Click the green triangle at [1] to see a much better diff for your example. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:07, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help with template

I would appreciate help with Template:Departments of the Sierra Leone Government The problem is that it adds everything into the non-ministerial category, whether it should go there or not! Leutha (talk) 14:03, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Leutha: I don't see a problem. "Open Government Initiative" is currently the only item at "Non-ministerial". Note that after editing {{Common list of departments of the Sierra Leone Government}} you may have to purge {{Departments of the Sierra Leone Government}} and pages using it if you want to see the edit reflected right away. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:13, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah...I've stared at this for about ten minutes and I'm afraid I don't see a problem. TimothyJosephWood 14:17, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. I think I wasn't purging it, which is why it continued to show up with wrong categories. Leutha (talk) 15:27, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How do you change your username.

Hello, I was wondering how I to change my username because of privacy concerns. --Cass

Please see the information page Wikipedia:Changing username. Rivertorch^FIRE _WATER 15:03, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New to wikipedia edits

warm greetings,

             I am new to making edits in Wikipedia. initially i made two seperate minor edits(one relating a cactus-mammilaria elongata and other relating an insect-oleander hawk moth caterpillar). but they were reverted automatically. The facts that i added were observed my me and are true. But they were considered as "unconstructive"! So what shall i do further?

                               Thanks in advance.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sksiddhartthan (talk • contribs) 16:15, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sksiddhartthan, welcome to Wikipedia. I believe your edits were labeled as nonconstructive by mistake; you were acting in good faith to improve the page, and a bot mistook your edits for vandalism. That said, personal observations are not enough to support information in Wikipedia. You need to cite your additions to a reliable, independent source so that readers of the article can verify that the information is true. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 17:16, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Sksiddhartthan: To add to the information above, if you look at the History tab of the articles in question, you will see the edit the bot made to revert yours - it includes a link to "Report False Positive" (i.e. when the bot reverted something it should not have(. It happens - the bots are very helpful in keeping down vandalism, but they aren't perfect and sometimes they make mistakes. Sorry it happened to your first edits.--Gronk Oz (talk) 00:19, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading poster

Hello. A while ago I attempted to upload a poster for a film. However, I'm not so sure if I done it correctly. Can someone kindly take a look? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Treysand (talk • contribs) 16:58, April 2, 2017 (UTC)

@Treysand: Close. Fair use media cannot be that large so I have reduced it. I also used the more specific {{non-free use rationale poster}} which helps in completing the required fair use rationale. It is all set now. --Majora (talk) 19:52, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, thanks. Treysand (talk) 11:59, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

Hello, I am in need of a bit of help. I'm a relatively new user here on Wikipedia and am looking to create my own custom signature. I have tested it in my Sandbox and it functions as expected. However, when copying it into the Signature part of the Preferences settings AND checking the wiki markup box, I get the error that "Invalid raw signature. Check HTML tags." I've checked it and cannot find what went wrong in the HTML tags. Here it is below. May you please help me with this? Thank you in advance!

Geo ^talk —Preceding undated comment added 17:56, 2 April 2017 (UTC) [reply]

This is how I intended it to look like but this is the actual one that gets rejected.

'''''[[User:Geojournal|Geo]]''' [[User talk:Geojournal|talk]]''''' (talk) 18:06, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Geojournal: Try this:'''''[[User:Geojournal|Geo]]''' [[User talk:Geojournal|talk]]'''''

You had two span tags, the first for the color, and the second one for the font. You did not end with two tags. I just removed the second span tag, and combined it with the first. Thus, only one tag is needed now. Hope that helped! RileyBugz ^{Yell at me} | _Edits 18:13, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geojournal (talk • contribs) 18:24, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content

@Geojournal: Also, you have exactly zero edits in the mainspace. Are you really here to build an encyclopedia? RileyBugz ^{Yell at me} | _Edits 18:29, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am, but this is my way of working. I like setting things up first properly and then proceeding to edit the Wikipedia. FIrst, I like to get my user page and other essentials ready and then to edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geojournal (talk • contribs) 18:44, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Umm... that suggests you have editing Wikipedia before... RileyBugz ^{Yell at me} | _Edits 18:46, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, how is that relevant to this case? Second, yes I have had experience with Wikipedia. At one point in my life, I moved and was forced to have an IP change. So, for a somewhat long period of time I was inactive and retired (4 years), finding other interests. As I stated before, I needed a refresher on Wikipedia and so educated myself again about 2 weeks before creating this account. Unfortunately, I do not recall that period of time before relocating since I was not a Wikipedian for longer than about 8 months. Through those 8 months I gained a lot of experience. 4 years later now, equipped with a modern Windows 10 running PC (for reasons I don't enjoy the OS X interface) I begin my editing again. Geo ^talk 20:53, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can I ask you for the account? RileyBugz ^{Yell at me} | _Edits 20:55, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is completely unnecessary, and it's getting toward harassment. Many longtime editors made their first edits this way; I did, for example. Nyttend (talk) 23:56, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]