Help desk
< August 15	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 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.

August 16

procedure to improve an already-deleted page

Hello. This page about an aspect of Williams College history was deleted. There is now a book on this topic. With this book, it would be easy for me to answer the (reasonable!) complaints about sourcing raised in the deletion discussion. So, could an admin re-instate the page so that I could improve it? Or, better, how do I ask someone to do this? Yfever (talk) 00:58, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yfever I've restored it and put it in the draft namespace Draft:Elimination of fraternities at Williams College. It needs a lot of work. It can't have all those pdfs linked in the body - though some of them can be cited as sources. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:45, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yfever (talk) 11:45, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

Sorry - I cannot put back the "redirect to other pages" lines at the top of this page. Please fix up if able 203.132.68.1 (talk) 02:09, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AddWittyNameHere appears to have done this.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:16, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A copy of Salvation Testment

with the Bible there is a portion by name: new Testment. But, with me there is a copy of Salvation Testment, and not new Testment which is a rarity. I need to sell it through auction. please, help me with the work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.48.27.44 (talk) 05:53, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6 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. Yunshui ^雲 _水 05:54, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bad interlanguage links (wikidata?)

I suspect there was none confident enough in physics and in wikidata-wonkery to spot this before. Well, I have the physics, but not the wikidata, so could someone do the appropriate changes?

The problem stems from the subtle difference between incompressible flow and incompressible fluid. Right now, on en:incompressible flow, there are interlanguage wikilinks (probably related to wikidata) to either of the two things in other languages:

fr:Fluide incompressible, de:Inkompressibles Fluid, pt:Fluido incompressível are actually about en:Incompressible fluid (not flow)
it:Flusso incomprimibile, es:Flujo incompresible are indeed about en:Incompressible flow, as well as the (currently unlinked) fr:Écoulement incompressible
I cannot read the articles in Tamil, Russian, Chinese and Japanese, but there could be the same problem.

Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 08:20, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tigraan: Quite funny, we do not have an article on Incompressible fluid – the name redirects to Incompressible flow. And that is a result of the article move. So possibly some of those other-languages' articles were quite properly linked to en-wiki in the past based on the titles, and now (i.e., after the move in 13 March 2006‎) those links became obsolete/wrong. IMO the only way to fix things would be manual removing wrong links in Wikidata records d:Q1663717#sitelinks-wikipedia (Incompressible flow), creating a new Wikidata item for Incompressible fluid and re-linking appropriate articles to a new Wikidata item. --CiaPan (talk) 05:58, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
P.S.
According to results of Google translation, the Russian article is about fluid, while Tamil, Japanese and Chinese about a flow (althought the latter contains a section about a fluid). --CiaPan (talk) 05:58, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tigraan: I found an item d:Q21086925 – it refers to a Catalan article, which is named Fluid incompressible and seems to treat on both, but mostly ...on an incompressible flow. Possibly this Wikidata item could be used to disambiguate the articles...? --CiaPan (talk) 06:04, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

delete a page

Good Day I work for a school in South Africa, Kingsway High School. Someone has created this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingsway_High_School and we would like it deleted please. The information on it is incorrect and someone keeps editing it and putting content on that is damaging to the reputation of the school. Please delete it. Regards Elaine Woor School's Marketer

Elaine Woor (talk) 09:18, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Elaine Woor: Unfortunately, articles are not deleted just because the subject may not want one to be here. As long as information about the subject appears in independent reliable sources, be it good or bad, it can be in a Wikipedia article. If the article is vandalized, it will be corrected and if it is an ongoing issue the article can be protected. However, if there is information that, while not vandalism, is incorrect, we would like to know what it is. In reviewing the article, it does need better sources, but I don't see anything particularly bad in the article. Again, if the article is vandalized, it will be corrected.

Please review the paid editing policy, which is required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use of editors who are editing as part of their job duties. 331dot (talk) 09:42, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for you reply. We have to keep looking at this page as someone edits it. The information is out of date and there was recently a comment on drugs at the school. This is damaging to us.41.162.91.58 (talk) 10:05, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed that, and watchlisted the page so that I'll notice any further vandalism - if there is any, we could semi-protect the page so that IP editors can't vandalise it. Black Kite (talk) 10:06, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, appreciate it. Have a good day. Elaine Woor (talk) 10:12, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would suspect that most of the history content although not referenced appears to be a copy and paste from somewhere so possibly a copyright violation. MilborneOne (talk) 10:42, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have just tagged it for citing no sources at all. Without any references the notability of the subject is in doubt. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:52, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Change language in infobox

How do I add a language to a journal that is currently only showing in English (it publishes in French too)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.90.145.214 (talk) 13:13, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox journal#Usage notes, but the article probably needs a source for the statement that the journal is published in both languages. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:36, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to transalate some English infoboxes for use on the Tw Wikipedia but it is not working please advice.--Rberchie (talk) 13:44, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Published author with a Wikipedia page

To whom it may concern,

I am writing on behalf of my boss, a published writer with a new book just out. We've gotten very good reviews on the book and the question is is it permissable to insert short "blurbs" from the reviews into the page? We would have gotten Permission from the owners of the reviews - the publisher and our author.

Thank you,

Mark Geier

```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Titta1920 (talk • contribs) 14:45, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Titta1920: Are you sure it's not WP:TOOSOON...? Why not wait for independent, verifiable sources?
Please remember There is no deadline at Wikipedia to add information, and Wikipedia is not for promotion. --CiaPan (talk) 14:54, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Titta1920: Please also familiarize with our policies about WP:COI. --CiaPan (talk) 15:31, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Titta1920: reviews and blurbs are promotional and do not help establish the notability of the book Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:03, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are subject to a stronger form of WP:COI. It's called WP:PAID. Please read it and adhere to it. Basically, a paid editor must declare paid status to meet the terms of use of this web site, imposed by the site's owners. This is a stronger constraint than our policies and guidelines, which are promulgated and enforced by consensus among our hundreds of thousands of volunteer editors. See Terms of Use, which is linked to from every page footer and from the sentence immediately above the "publish" button on the edit page. When an editor without a COI chooses to add material about the book, the editor will probably read those reviews and cite them and summarize them. The book does not need to be notable to be mentioned in the article about the author: it would need to be notable to have its own article. If you choose to recommend changes to the article per WP:PAID, I recommend that you look at some other author's pages as worked examples. I do not recall ever seeing quoted reviews. -Arch dude (talk) 17:27, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It used to be that the default for displaying table of contents was "hide"; now, it always is "show" -- which is annoying, especially for long articles. Is this something that changed at my end, or something that changed at WP? And, how can I get it back to "hide" by default? —107.15.157.44 (talk) 16:18, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That must have been long ago. I've been an editor for ten years, and don't recall that change. You are free to propse a change, butit sounds like a waste of time, as it sounds like a bad idea.--S Philbrick (Talk) 20:21, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Only about a week or so ago ToC changed from default "hide" to "show" (at lease for me: Firefox/PC). (Same OP, new IP:2606:A000:1126:4CA:0:98F2:CFF6:1782 (talk) 06:13, 17 August 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Matthew Falder

These edits were intended to be construtive. 86.128.2.145 (talk) 16:24, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The place to discuss this is on the article's talk page (Talk:Matthew Falder), or on the talk page of the editor who reverted your edit (User talk:CLCStudent). —107.15.157.44 (talk) 17:03, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Professor Correct Spelling

Dear Sir,

Under the music notation and counting page there is an error for the spelling of a professor. The correct spelling is LAURDELLA FOULKES-LEVY formerly at the University of Mississippi. She is now retired. Please make the correct spelling for her name.

Thanks!

Former music student of hers at UofM — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.226.158.50 (talk) 18:43, 16 August 2018‎ (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit", so you can change it yourself. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:51, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ASCII Art strangeness

Two questions:

First, why did I have to mangle the spacing of the following ASCII Art to get it to display properly on Wikipedia?

EXAMPLE ONE:

    |                                            .--.
    |                              ______.-------|  |
    |                             (_____(        |  |\\\\|
    |    __..--``--.._               __/ `-------|  |---,
    |                 ``--..____.--'| \    ___   |  |  ||
    |    __..--``--.._         |    |  |  |   |  |  |  ||
    |                 ``--..___|    |  |  |___|  |  |  ||
    The plug is pulled.         `--.|_/          |  |  ||
    Ignored is the disruptive one. ____\ .-------|  |---`
    Feed him I will not.          (_____(        |  |\\\\|
    |                                    `-------|  |
    |                                            `--`

(Compare the displayed page with what is in the edit window)

Here is what displays when I don't mangle the ASCII Art:

EXAMPLE TWO:

    |                                            .--.
    |                              ______.-------|  |
    |                             (_____(        |  |\\\\|
    |    __..--``--.._             __/ `-------|  |---,
    |                 ``--..____.--'| \    ___   |  |  ||
    |    __..--``--.._       |    |  |  |   |  |  |  ||
    |                 ``--..___|    |  |  |___|  |  |  ||
    The plug is pulled.         `--.|_/          |  |  ||
    Ignored is the disruptive one. ____\ .-------|  |---`
    Feed him I will not.          (_____(        |  |\\\\|
    |                                    `-------|  |
    |                                            `--`

(Again, compare the displayed page with what is in the edit window)

Second question: does everyone see example one aligned properly and example two not alaigned?

--Guy Macon (talk) 19:20, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No idea about your first question, but I can answer the second one: I can indeed see example one aligned, but not example two (both in Firefox and IE). Now I'm curious as well... –FlyingAce^✈hello 20:05, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This help desk is for using or editing Wikipedia. Did you intend to add some ASCII art to a Wikipedia article? If so, I advise that you avoid it and instead use images from commons, even if you generate those images using ASCII art. There are just too many ways for ASCII rendering to go wrong. The reason that your images get borked is (I think) that the font used in the edit window is a fixed pitch font, while the font used in the display window is a proportional-pitch font. To force the use of fixed pitch in the display ("article") rendering, you would need to force the HTML to use "preformat". I've forgotten how to do that using wiki markup. -Arch dude (talk) 20:20, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arch dude, the OP was asking about the article ASCII Art. That's the one place where ASCII art might be appropriate. Rojomoke (talk) 23:08, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rojomoke, there is no evidence in the OP's question that they were asking about that article. The OP linked to the article, but did not indicate any desire to edit it. I considered that before I answered the question. -Arch dude (talk) 23:40, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arch dude, Ach, sorry. I misread their first sentence. Rojomoke (talk) 05:50, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That was tricky. A leading space on a line causes a fixed-width font but it does not cause wiki markup to be ignored. Your examples have lines with consecutive apostrophes which are interpreted as italics markup and not displayed as apostrophes. The italics are outside the words and not noticed in the other characters. Use <pre>...</pre> around a block of text of you both want a fixed-width font and want wiki markup to be ignored. Below I added <pre>...</pre> to example two so it displays the same in edit window and rendering. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:33, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

     |                                            .--.
     |                              ______.-------|  |
     |                             (_____(        |  |\\\\|
     |    __..--''``--.._             __/ `-------|  |---,
     |                 ``--..____.--'| \    ___   |  |  ||
     |    __..--''``--.._       |    |  |  |   |  |  |  ||
     |                 ``--..___|    |  |  |___|  |  |  ||
     The plug is pulled.         `--.|_/          |  |  ||
     Ignored is the disruptive one. ____\ .-------|  |---`
     Feed him I will not.          (_____(        |  |\\\\|
     |                                    `-------|  |
     |                                            `--`

@Guy Macon: It's because a doubled single quote character: '' in the cord part got interpreted as an 'italic' switch and disappeared from the rendered text. See a copy of your first example with a column of letters added at ends of lines:

EXAMPLE ONE (plus some letters):

    |                                            .--.                  A
    |                              ______.-------|  |                  B
    |                             (_____(        |  |\\\\|             C
    |    __..--``--.._               __/ `-------|  |---,            D
    |                 ``--..____.--'| \    ___   |  |  ||              E
    |    __..--``--.._         |    |  |  |   |  |  |  ||            F
    |                 ``--..___|    |  |  |___|  |  |  ||              G
    The plug is pulled.         `--.|_/          |  |  ||              H
    Ignored is the disruptive one. ____\ .-------|  |---`              I
    Feed him I will not.          (_____(        |  |\\\\|             J
    |                                    `-------|  |                  K
    |                                            `--`                  L

Note also how vertical bars in respective lines got slightly slant (in my Google Chrome browser, at least).
HTH. --CiaPan (talk) 12:35, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Moving fair-use images from Commons

Hello! New user Vsunbeach has updated a few articles on films with the corresponding posters ([1]). It looks like the correct fair-use rationale was provided with the images, but they were mistakenly uploaded to Commons instead of en-wiki ([2]). What is the easiest way to move these images from Commons to here? –FlyingAce^✈hello 20:01, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey FlyingAce. There are like five different tools that semi-automate transfers to Commons, but as far as I'm aware, none of these work the other way round. May have to manually transfer and then tag for deletion there. GMG ^talk 20:25, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

microcytosis

This is the only bad article I've ever seen on Wikipedia. Poor, incomplete, and lousy grammar and punctuation. Someone needs to look at this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.130.161.6 (talk) 20:43, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. If you can do better, then please by all means do so. If you do not wish to edit the article directly, then make specific suggestions for improvement on its talk page. If you think the current article is hopeless, then create a proposed replacement article as a draft. See WP:YFA for how to do this, paying careful attention (really, please) to citing reliable sources. -Arch dude (talk) 21:01, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Changing an article header

Hi, it seems that this person's name has changed since the article started (from Nina Fallenbaum to Nina F. Ichikawa). How do we go about changing it?38.125.168.178 (talk) 22:05, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The answer to your question is that article titles are changed by moving them. But in the absence of any reliable sources which report that she has changed her name, the article should not say that she has changed her name, and should not be moved. A Wikipedia article, especially one on a living person, should not contain one single fact that is not referenced to a reliable published source. Since at present the article does not cite a single independent reliable source, and so does nothing to establish her notability, it should possibly be deleted; at the very least have some independent sources added. (See notability and BLP). I am also concerned about your use of "we": are you connected with Fallenbaum/Ichikawa? If so, you have a conflict of interest, and should not be editing that article directly. In addition, if you are in any way paid to edit this article, then it is compulsory that you declare the fact according to the policy in Paid editing. --ColinFine (talk) 10:49, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alas, not paid. I meant "we" as Wikipedia editors. Thanks for the response.--38.125.168.178 (talk) 17:18, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mobile Formating

As of a few days ago I've been pretty much unable to use Wikipedia on my IPhone through the mobile page. Basically the caption text below an article's images runs over (or under) the first paragraph below it making it unreadable. I tried using different apps (Safari, Chrome, Firefox) and tried changing the phone's text size in settings as well as the cache but the problem is still there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:D3A0:C5F0:3C47:393A:AAA7:23A3 (talk) 22:17, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are many limitations of mobile view, and the normal advice in such cases is to use the link at the foot of the page to switch from "mobile view" to "desktop view". --David Biddulph (talk) 23:01, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Really? I loved my mobile view and have used it on the same phone now for months without any problems (desktop view also not being conductive to reading). This just suddenly happened, affects any article with pictures, which are pretty much all of the good ones. Didn't update anything on my phone. What is different now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:D3A0:C5F0:3C47:393A:AAA7:23A3 (talk) 11:14, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote linking to wrong reference

At Ponte Morandi#Victims and rescue efforts I've added an explanatory footnote with a reference. However, the footnote is linking to reference 1 (New York Times) rather than reference 3 (CTV) as it should. I can't see anything I've done wrong but I'm very inexperienced with footnotes so I suspect an error on my part is more likely than a bug. Thryduulf (talk) 22:44, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You applied the <ref name ="CTV"> label to the New York Times ref, not to the CTV one. Does this change look like what you intended? --David Biddulph (talk) 22:55, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your link to the change doesn't work, but looking at the article history that is indeed exactly what I intended. It seems I was looking in completely the wrong place for the error! Thank you. Thryduulf (talk) 23:04, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Link corrected. Thanks for pointing it out. Too long a day! --David Biddulph (talk) 23:13, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]