Help desk
< June 28	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 30 >

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.

June 29

Display of English units after conversion

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 15:32, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm converting English heights to metric, so that they can be used in a sortable table. I'm using a template {{height|m=1.52|precision=0}} I can't easily control the precision displayed of the metric number, so I rounded to two places. I worried that the round trip might cause a problem, so I checked a range of reasonable heights.

I get odd behavior with an even five feet. 5 feet and zero inches converts to 1.524 meters. Rounding to 1.52 converts back to 59.8 inches, large enough to round correctly. However, the display is 1.52 m (5 ft 0 in), not what I expected. (for the wags out there, yes, it is correct, but not standard.) I looked to see if there was a talk page associated with the template, but I may not have looked in the right place. Is this a good place for this question?--SPhilbrick T 01:34, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good place to ask the question if someone here knows the answer. If you don't get an answer, this was not a good place to ask. Nobody can fault you for not knowing whether this was a good place to ask, because if you did know that, you'd probably also know the answer and not need to ask the question (sorry, that got a bit Rumsfeldian, actually I'm not sorry at all, as I rather liked his observation on the difference between known unknowns and unknown unknowns). If nobody else here knows, you might want to ask on Template talk:Height. I haven't used that template so I have no idea how it works. I've only used {{Convert}} but I don't really know how that one works either. Unit conversions tend to have rounding problems such as you mention, which an intelligent human would automatically tidy up, but the computer doesn't necessarily know the difference between 2.0 and 1.999999999999999999999 for example. --Teratornis (talk) 03:02, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - you pointed me to the right place - I found the template, looked for a discussion page, but didn't find it - obviously, wasn't looking in the right place. Good news, bad news - the most recent question is exactly my question. The bad news - it was asked in May of 2008, and there's no decent answer. Thanks for the pointer, though.--SPhilbrick T 11:51, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, this issue is resolved in the sense that I have been pointed to the right place to ask questions, but the underlying issue is far not resolved. Templates such as:

{{m to ft in}}
{{height}}
{{convert}}

all produce flawed output in some cases, so should be used with caution. Hopefully, some template gurus will address the problems.--SPhilbrick T 16:14, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

article deletion?

Hello..I recently created an article about journalist "Nina deVries" and it says that the article has proposed deletion but I am not sure why....I cited 2 sources..please help..thank you. NinaLadybug101 (talk) Ladybug101 (talk) 01:44, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Simply mentioning two domain names "Sources- aptn.ca , jhr.ca" isn't enough, they should be URLs that point to specific webpages where the person is discussed in detail. The references should be reliable as well to satisfy the notability criteria. --59.95.102.213 (talk) 02:46, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia view is suddenly quite large

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 15:30, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've used Wikipedia for a few years now. Suddenly whenever I click into Wikipedia, the view is huge and I can't find any preferences or options that control it. My other Internet views remain the same. I've not gotten a new monitor or changed the settings on my monitor. In fact, the monitor settings make the Firefox fonts quite small -- maybe ten times smaller than the Wiki font. What's going on? Where's my old view? I don't like this at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pnoble805 (talk • contribs)

This may be an accidental setting in your browser. Does it help to hold Ctrl down and press the '-' key or scroll down wheel on your mouse? PrimeHunter (talk) 02:01, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cntl - helped oodles. Thanks ever so much! --Pnoble805 (talk) 05:34, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How can I resubmit a revision that has been deleted?

I am trying to use Wikipedia. I have submitted a revision to "Monosodium glutamate" and it was quickly deleted. I replaced an obviously industry-driven section of "Monosodium glutamate" with well referenced, verifiable information.

I submitted another revision. This one for a section of "Glutamic acid (flavor)". It, too, contains data. Verifiable data. It, too, was deleted almost immediately.

There is no information about either deletion in the deletion log.

Truthinlabeling (talk) 05:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Click on the tab HISTORY on the top of the article, then you will see all old edits, including yours. MaxPont (talk) 09:29, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion log only lists cases where entire articles have been deleted, which is not the case here. The person who undid your work did not specify a reason in the edit summary, but I believe the concern was that the topic you tried to develop was already covered in another article (see the Main article tag right above where you inserted your contribution), and your addition should be contributed there instead. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 15:10, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than engage in an editor war, I suggest that you discuss on the article's talk page the changes that you think should be made. – ukexpat (talk) 15:29, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

share it

Hello! I think it would be great if there were a share function or button so it could interact with facebook ,tweeter, or blogs, it would increase the number of users. I daily post wikipedia articles for my students and so do they xD so a shortcut would ease this task. Sorry if i'm too blunt, i don't know if I'm asking in the right place. Thanks a lot :D and thanks for doing such a great work here.

.czr —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.156.182.42 (talk) 05:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Village Pump: Proposals desk would be the best place to suggest new features or functions. Livewireo (talk) 14:45, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

Can you please tell me who edited/ moderated the 'Nelson Mandela' article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacker40 (talk • contribs) 06:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To see who has edited an article just click the "history" tab. To learn more about history see: Help:History, hope this answers your question Spitfire^Tally-ho! 07:13, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Curriculum Vitae as a source

I created the article Hans Einstein and populated it with facts from Dr Einstein's curriculum vitae, which he gave me after I told him what I was up to. What's the proper way to cite that document as a source for the facts in the article? The CV contains personal information and I don't consider it proper to put it up publicly. Frotz (talk) 09:41, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

a person's cv doesn't normally qualify as a reliable source by Wikipedia's standards - see WP:RS, WP:BLP and related links for more information. Sssoul (talk) 09:59, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is a tertiary source of information, which means that, apart from the obvious, its content should be based on secondary sources. A resumé is usually considered a primary source, so unless Dr. Einstein's resumé has been cited in other papers it cannot be used. (Should that be the case, then it would be better to cite the secondary source, not the resumé.) -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A published CV, such as at a persons own personal website, which is publicly availible, may be a reliable source in a very limited capacity, for example, for the facts listed therin. However, an unpublished CV is impossible for anyone except the author to look at, and thus fails the basic verifiability requirement of Wikipedia. It should also be noted that, even if published in a publicly availible form, self-published information like a CV may NOT be used to establish the notability of the subject, even if it can be used to cite in an an article where notability can be established by other means. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

editing "catagory" pages

I have been adding to the University of Brighton's notable alumni page, which has been fine. but when i click on the Category:Alumni of the University of Brighton link many of the people from the original list are missing and there is no option to edit. is it possible to get all the people onto the category list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BGAoffice (talk • contribs) 12:40, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Category. Algebraist 12:41, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can do that by adding [[Category:Alumni of the University of Brighton]] at the bottom of their biography article. Red links can't be added to categories, though. --59.95.118.120 (talk) 13:36, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Triangle

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 15:27, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see this button with a slanted green triangle in it when I go to the split screen between two revisions in the middle, is this an improvement to the Wikipedia or is it a gadget? Feel free to look at my monobook ---Scarce |||| You shouldn't have buried me, I'm not dead--- 13:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Cacycle/wikEdDiff - part of the wikiEd bundle.--59.95.118.120 (talk) 13:30, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that's neat! Thank You! ---Scarce |||| You shouldn't have buried me, I'm not dead--- 13:35, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And that green triangle is a Delta, shorthand for "difference". – ukexpat (talk) 15:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, that's really cool - I've just installed it and it works great. Secondly, Scarce, how did you manage to not know you'd installed it? ;-) Cheers, TFOWR^{This flag once was red} 14:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Identifying foreign-language Wikipedias

If you come across a Wikipedia article in a foreign language, how can you identify which language it is from the page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.74.11.25 (talk) 16:15, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page can help you identify the language. TN X Man 16:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can also use the "detect language" function in Google Translate. TheLeft orium 17:32, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean you are on a page of a foreign Wikipedia then you can see the language code in the browser address bar. A url starting with http://xx.wikipedia.org has language code xx which can be looked up at meta:List of Wikipedias. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:38, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Pages needing translation contains a list of tools that can be used to identify foreign languages, and to get a rough idea of the topic of a foreign-language text. Also, if you come across a foreign-language article within the English Wikipedia, that article should be listed at WP:PNT, and, if after two weeks no progress is made in the translation, a deletion process may be initiated. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can a content topic be linked in 2 spots?

Can I add a content topic (such as UHM data) linked in 2 spots? I ask this because the data content needs to be under the companies products on the companies' wikipedia page but also should be under another link. Please help! Thank you!64.129.167.42 (talk) 21:08, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you are asking about. Can you name the pages involved and give an example of the type of data and how you want it to be linked? Maybe the answer is to make a template and transclude it on two pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:44, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I too am not 100% sure what you are asking, but possibly you are seeking a method to use a single reference twice in the same article? If so, the first time you use the reference you give it an intuitive name, like <ref name="author">reference details</ref>. The next time you want to use that same reference, all you need to do is type the first part with an ending slash, like so: <ref name="author" />. See also {{Refref}} and WP:CITE.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:56, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NAMEDREFS. – ukexpat (talk) 00:37, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]