Help desk
< December 31	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 2 >

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.

January 1

Greg Speirs

I am trying to cite a newspaper article. I am using the following template protocol to cite the particular article for my page:

References

^[1] Please tell me what I am doing wrong. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richerthanpratt (talk • contribs)

References

^ "Dead head art scores". USA Today. June 23, 1993. 2C.

You had a misformatted ref tag in the article. I have fixed it.[1] Earlier you also had the ref after {{Reflist}}. All refs must come before {{Reflist}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:51, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

inline Citation

I am a new user on talk. I am lost in the vast information in Wikipedia. Recently I got a response on inline citation query as follows: "When you cite that source, be sure to include as much information as possible - the author or the article, the title, the name of the publisher, the name of the magazine, the date of publication and the place of publication if possible. Also be sure to use an inline citation so that the readers can see what information the magazine article is supporting. That's the best you can do. One day the copyright holder may put the news magazine issues on line, and if that happens a link can be added. —Anne Delong (talk) 07:56, 6 December 2013 (UTC)." I like Anne's the response. But my problem is how do I show a pdf document in the notes? Morahim (talk) 02:19, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot include a PDF in the article, you can only link to a version of the PDF that is posted on the websomewhere. However, something posted on some random Joe Schmoe's website is not a reliable source (anyone can put anything on the web - I have a verified pdf that declares me god emperor of the world for life). And if it is a pdf of something that was published elsewhere, we probably cannot link to it at all as it would be a copyright violation.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:37, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

*feels need to joke about your pdf* Wikipedia:Requests for Supremely Divine Overlordship? - Purplewowies (talk) 03:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

jimbos nomination was only over Wikipedia, while mine grants me unlimited power over this entire sector of space, and is authentically signed by Paul Muad'Dib, Jesus, and Eric Cartman.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:09, 1 January 2014 (UTC)</ref>[reply]

Well, I hope you're using it for more pressing matters than deciding who lives and dies... - Purplewowies (talk) 18:33, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

?!Crashing the sandbox

Help, I was experimenting with a new command, namely "<BIG>", and somehow managed to crash the Sandbox. I didn't mean to, honest! Can somebody get it unstuck? I entered a test string prefixed by about 60 "<BIG>" commands just to see if it could really print that big. Sorry. Kelisi (talk) 02:34, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, never mind! I got it unstuck. Kelisi (talk) 02:36, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

<big> is obsolete. Please use {{big}} or one of the variants. -- Gadget850^talk 13:24, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Change ring tone

I bough a song from iTunes store. Now I want to set up that song as my ring tone. How can I do it? Any advice? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.249.125.0 (talk) 04:39, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 4 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. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 05:15, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing about this question implies the person is astray. It's just a general knowledge question which belongs at the reference desk.

Have you tried the Computing section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps. - Purplewowies (talk) 10:36, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

incorrect map shown, international boundaries of india

Indo-Pakistani border on the above url link the map shown of india is incorrect and shows a false representation of the area of india. i believe it should be changed respecting the sentiments of indians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marshsmith007 (talk • contribs) 04:46, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Questions like this come up frequently. Where two (or more) groups of people disagree about something in the real world, there is no right answer, and Wikipedia cannot avoid upsetting at least one group of people; but it tries to steer a middle path. The sentiments of Indians are neither more not less important than the sentiments of Pakistanis. See Talk:India, and pick "Show" on the "FAQ" section at the top. --ColinFine (talk) 11:22, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The map in Indo-Pakistani border shows the actual border between the territories controlled by each country. The map in India#Subdivisions also shows which territories are claimed by the other country. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:17, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes

There has been contention over whether to add Infoboxes or remove them. Can editors please give their views here ? Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 04:55, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Using Harvtxt with Cite Doi

Template:harvtxt is used to create a short link to a cited paper. The link text is the name of the author and the year, and the link target is the full citation, which should appear somewhere else in the document (i.e. in the bibliography section). This works when the citations use the Template:cite book, Template:citation etc., but, apparently it doesn't work with Template:cite doi (see my most recent edit to Independent set (graph theory)). Is there a way to enjoy the advantages of both these templates? --Erel Segal (talk) 12:34, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The year in the short citation and the long citation does not match. Is the year 2006 or 2009? -- Gadget850^talk 13:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion page

Where is the article discussion page fro an article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RCP110 (talk • contribs) 15:24, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion page is more often referred to as the "talk page", and you get at it by clicking the "Talk" tab at the top of the article. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:28, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Margaret V Clark, which you have been working on, is not an article. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Margaret V Clark itself is a Wikipedia project space talk page. Wikipedia does not have a Margaret V Clark article. -- Jreferee (talk) 16:06, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is another draft, still with the same apparent copyright violations, at the similar title Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Margaret Varnell Clark. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:39, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How Is Editing Done on Wikipedia And Who Does The Editing To Correct Or Update Information

I have been told by several people in recent years that Wikipedia information is able to be edited by anyone who reads it. I like Wikipedia, so I would like to know once and for all if this is true. If not, who or what group of people officially update Wikipedia's information. The information, to me, has been a reliable source. And, certainly, anyone with any sense of wisdom would know that it would be unwise to have any source viewed as a reference, unreliable if anyone can just come to it and change it. Please help me with an answer. I thank you. From Miss Pinkie Lee Davis--72.156.115.249 (talk) 16:23, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In general, yes, anyone can edit Wikipedia, and yes, you can too!. There is no "officially updated" version or review- all content is created and curated by volunteer editors. In fact the subjects of the articles are strongly discouraged from directly editing the articles about them or having agents do so on their behalf. The best of Wikipedia articles, such as those that appear on the main landing page, have gone through an internal Wikipedia review process and been labeled "good articles" or the higher rating of "featured article". Many of your questions may also be answered by the WP:FAQ-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:34, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) The main page has a link to Wikipedia:Introduction, which should give you an answer. In summary, because in general anyone can edit then it is possible for errors to be introduced, so you should not use Wikipedia itself as a reference, but you can back that up by looking at the references, hopefully to reliable sources, which are included in the Wikipedia article. When errors are introduced it usually isn't long before another editor who has the page on his/her watchlist sees it and corrects it. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:36, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stone Art of a Lost World

See the content of the facebook page <Stone Art of a Lost World> which can also be reached at <Facebook.com/stonespeaker>. That is the only published source for this material.It is my page, so I am available for any questions.This is an extremely important discovery in its infancy. Have your best people in the field review it. Thank You, Tom. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stonespeaker (talk • contribs) 17:25, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This help desk is for asking questions about using and editing Wikipedia, and it isn't clear what you are trying to ask. If you are suggesting that your "extremely important discovery in its infancy" should be the subject of a Wikipedia article, the answer is very clearly no. You have said yourself that it has no sources in published independent reliable sources. See also WP:42. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:38, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

8 Foot Sativa page changes 2nd Jan 2014, mistake

Hey there,

I was trying to apply some changes to this page and by mistake i have deleted something which has messed up the page layout, completely.. if these few recent edits can be un done, that would be great and can adjust once back to normal. thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.148.251.146 (talk) 18:42, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Don't worry about it. In altering the members, you deleted the }} which closed the infobox template, so it wasn't complete. I re-added them. In general, you can always look at any previous version of a page, and revert it to a former state, by picking the "History" tab at the top. On another subject, I see that you have changed some information which relates to living persons (which of them are in the band). All information about living persons in a Wikipedia article should be referenced to a reliable source (see WP:BLP). --ColinFine (talk) 19:10, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help for Submitting a New Bio

I need Wikipedia for Dummies. There is so much information on what to do but I'm confused on where to start. I need a 1. 2. 3. list. Help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nancyprancy12 (talk • contribs) 19:32, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Your first article, WP:Articles for creation, WP:Tutorial, WP:The Wikipedia Adventure, WP:Article wizard, also Help:Contents. - Purplewowies (talk) 19:49, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c)

Hello, I left a message on your talk page with a bunch of helpful links. But given your specific question, I would say start with this, then look at this, then this and this and then head to here. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:51, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk page patrolled

I posted on User talk:Qanungi613 and saw "Mark this page as patrolled". Why do we need to patrol user talk pages? Debresser (talk) 23:26, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May sound weird but according to Wikipedia:New pages patrol/patrolled pages, Any page that is appropriate for Wikipedia, even if it requires significant work. has to be mark as patrolled. Also according to Meta, Patrolling edits is a way to indicate that the edit is beneficial, and to aid collaboration on filtering spam and vandalism. ///EuroCarGT 00:56, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds weird to me, as you say. Debresser (talk) 12:41, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

a check of new users' new userpages will identify a lot of them spam-vertisements. New users will frequently not make a distinction between a user page and a user talk page. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:46, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[1] "Dead head art scores". USA Today. June 23, 1993. 2C.

[1]