Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2011 September 25

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.

September 25

updating "Higher Education in Canada"

Hello,

I am a professor at a Canadian university. Several years ago, my graduate class and I created the Wikipedia site "Higher Education in Canada." The site is badly out of date and my current graduate class and I want to update it.

I would like some guidance re: how not to raise the ire of the Wikipedia community while we update the material. Almost all of the students will be new users to Wikipedia. They will be familiarized with the rules of conduct.

I would appreciate any advice you can offer.

HIED ADHE536 (talk) 01:45, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Excellent! What you should do it familiarize yourself with two projects at Wikipedia designed exactly for what you are doing. First, Wikipedia:School and university projects is designed to help professors and students with their projects. Secondly, Wikipedia:Online Ambassadors are people who are willing to volunteer as personal mentors and advisors to professors and students who wish to edit Wikipedia for their coursework. If you work with them, I am sure you will have a positive experience! --Jayron32 02:18, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Pancreatic_cancer_survivors

guys,

this page is extremely misleading and should be deleted, its giving terrible information to millions of people diagnosed with pancreatic cancer.

i've written why in the talk page. please just take it down

As I explained on the talk page, we will not delete the page just because you don't like it. Please see the deletion policy and the biographies of living persons policy.Jasper Deng (talk) 02:51, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I think this needs further clarification. On Wikipedia, people are only added to categories/lists if they are notable by our standards - and since there is nothing particularly notable about surviving pancreatic cancer in itself (fortunately), our list consists of 'notable people who have survived pancreatic cancer' - which is to say people who are notable for other things too. There may be a case for making this a bit clearer on the category page. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:56, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I've added a paragraph to the Category page. See what you think. --ColinFine (talk) 12:18, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

thanks for responding. this is certainly more accurate, however the overall page is still misleading on a cursory glance. if you intend on keeping the page, i think you should rename the page title to be "notable pancreatic cancer survivors". otherwise the "notable" part is basically buried in fine print and will be missed by the majority of readers.

That isn't how we name categories. By definition, if an article exists in Wikipedia, it is supposed to be about a notable topic (person, place, thing, concept, etc.). If a person is not notable, there will be no article about them, and thus no article to go into that category. If we were to do as you'd suggest, we'd have to change the names of literally tens of thousands of categories, all to the same thing: Category:Notable WHATEVERS. That would be silly, or at best pointless. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:26, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

spelling mistake in article "Rattanakosin Kingdom"

Tha following line has spelling mistake.

Group of soldiers stannding on The Royal Plaza waiting for orders during the Revolution on the 24 June.

Thanks - I've fixed this. Wikipedia articles can usually be edited by anyone, which means that the next time you find a mistake, you could try to fix it yourself - we always welcome new editors. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:14, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Henry Joseph Fradelle

Hello, I came across the entry for Henry Joseph Fradelle last night (European time) and tried to change a few things but did not get very far. The big problem you could help me with is to change the very top heading. Henry Joseph Fradelle is NOT the artist that is described in the short presentation. His real name was Henri Jean-Baptiste Victoire Fradelle. I have struggled over the years to straighten this problem: by mistake, biographies gave Fradelle his son's name! I wrote a paper on the subject for Art of England (Art of England, 51, 14-15, 2008) entitled "Fradelle: The artist who was given his son's name". Many biographies as well as the Getty Union List have made the change but it will take time to rectify an error that has lasted some 100 years. Another small point: I am ready to add a bit more information on the Fradelle entry (when the real name has been inserted) but could you already put in the above reference? I'll then use it as an example for other references. I'm wary of writing for Wikipedia though as my last entry, on Cox & King, the yacht designers and brokers was distorted by someone else (I have an entire website dedicated to C&K!). One final point, if I may: Could you please create two now Wikipedia pages: one for the English speaking version and one for the French speaking version, both entitled "Roger Grosjean". The latter was an archeologist on whom I have just written a book. You'll see that there is a German version (not written by me) and I am prepared to write a few lines in both the English and French version based on the information I gathered for my book. Thank you for your kind help with all of this. Francois grosjean (talk) 05:21, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello indeed. Francois, your description of the activities at the article on Cox & King does not appear to be accurate. Since you created that article there have been very few edits to its content other than those you made yourself. In fact none of the information you added has been removed, merely reformatted and reworded. By "distorted" you seem to mean that someone else other than yourself worked on the article, but that is the basis of Wikipedia where anyone can edit any article.

The good news is that this also applies to you. This is a volunteer project and you could learn how to make the edits you request. For retitling a page you could try here, where you will find advice and also a place to make a request if you would rather someone else took a look at it. To learn how to add sources to articles go here where you will find comprehensive advice, and to start a new page you can take a look at the article creator.

You have already shown yourself capable of starting articles and adding sources, so you shouldn't have too much trouble. There are, however, a couple of areas you should pay attention to.

Your website is used as a source for the Cox & King article. Unfortunately I may not access it as I get a "403 error" so I cannot comment directly, but you should be aware of the policy on self published sources, especially if there is no other information available on a topic other than that which you have published yourself, and doubly especially if you are editing the article on François Grosjean, which I see you have done (albeit some time ago) using your other account. On that note you should also be aware of the policy on conflicts of interest and be sure to avoid its pitfalls, and the policy on original research when adding information you have published yourself. Weakopedia (talk) 08:21, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello again. Many thanks for your kind advice. I did go to the page for requests and read that changing the title of an article can be done in the "talk" section (is this the talk section?). If so, would you accept to change the title of the Fradelle article to either "Henri Fradelle" (short form; please note the "i" in "Henri") or "Henri Jean-Baptiste Victoire Fradelle" (long form)? The current title refers to his son who was a part-time painter but did many other jobs and is not the Fradelle biographies refer to. Thanks for your help with this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Francois grosjean (talk • contribs) 12:08, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

To change a page's title, you use move. The policy on the page titles is here, and says you should use the form most commonly used for the subject. In this case, since the painter has been referred to by different names in the literature (even if wrongly), you need to make sure that redirection pages exist from other names used to the actual page - if you use 'Move', this will happen automatically.

The question of renaming is a little difficult. If it were only your personal research that showed that the reference books had the wrong person, you would not be allowed to change the article, as that would be original research. Given that your discovery has been published in independent sources, you may make the change; but since some of the sources still give the other name, you should acknowledge that in the article. Again, since there is a published discussion of the mistake, you may (and should) describe the change in the article, and reference a source, such as your Art of England article. --ColinFine (talk) 12:30, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your helpful advice. I'll do my best. FG — Preceding unsigned comment added by Francois grosjean (talk • contribs) 14:50, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm back since I can't "move" the title. In the Help file I read: "With the page to be moved displayed, choose the "move" option near the top of the page. In the default Vector skin, this is in a drop-down menu to the right of the screen, after "History" and the "Watchlist" star (see picture). In the Monobook skin, it is a tab at the top.", but I have neither the drop-down menu nor a tab at the top of my screen. I am using Firefox on a rather old Mac PowerPC G5 (OS 10.4.11). If someone could create a new title (either "Henri Fradelle" (short version) or "Henri Jean-Baptiste Victoire Fradelle" (long version)), it will be with pleasure that I will (a) say more about Fradelle's real name and how it has been taken up by biographies and lists lately, and (b) give more details on Fradelle's life and his work as well as offer many references. Many thanks for your help with this. Francois grosjean (talk) 19:51, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

You need to make three more edits before you become autoconfirmed and able to move a page. A quick way to make three useful edits would be to visit one of the lists such as Wikipedia:Lists of common misspellings/R. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:09, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind help. I'll do it right away. Francois grosjean (talk) 10:22, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

That's not quite what I had in mind, but thank you for making three useful edits there! -- John of Reading (talk) 21:22, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

dora maria en estos momentos

--208.54.39.224 (talk) 06:06, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 08:39, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments: Photograph a monument, help Wikipedia and win!

Hello,

There is one point which starts annoying me, and I am sure I am not the only one in this situation, let me explain :

I am Romanian , I speak Romanian, English and French, and I live in Poland , for the last 2 years. My stay here will be temporal, and I do not plan in any way to learn Polish, there are so many more things I have to focus. I would like to participate to the contest :

Wiki Loves Monuments: Photograph a monument, help Wikipedia and win!

but when I press on the link, the page comes in Polish without any possibility to change the language

Please don't get me wrong, loads of company's are doing the same , Ex: Ea Games , Cannon , etc ,etc

I asked the question why I cannot have the pages and content in English several times without even an answer from the part of company's

Why is this happening? why we cannot have this kind of local content in English too ? there are tons of foreigners living abroad and not always speaking the language, Why in most of the cases there is no possibility to change the language, ex , Photograph a monument page.

It's sad and frustrating, I love photography, I would love to get in to the competition, but I cannot :(

I hope to get an answer from you. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Candear (talk • contribs) 06:15, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

translate.google.com ? I am not sure which specific page you are looking at or the details of the Monuments project to know how much (if any) really is location-specific (where it would be important to be communicating with "the local people") vs involving all places together (so it's just that different languages would have different places to talk to others in that language). DMacks (talk) 08:19, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I assume that the page in question is commons:Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2011 in Poland, linked from Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Monuments 2011? - David Biddulph (talk) 08:44, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

It is not the only time they have used IP based geolocation to second-guess people's language preference rather than simply take the language of the Wikipedia that visitors came from. Seems they haven't learned any lessons from the "donate to Wikipedia" campaign that came in for some criticism about a year ago. Perhaps raising the issue at the village pump page might get them thinking properly about this. Astronaut (talk) 15:09, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

You didn't say which page the link went to from your Polish IP but my guess is http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki_Lubi_Zabytki. There may be a problem with two related pages at the Polish Wikipedia. The page at http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiprojekt:Wiki_Lubi_Zabytki currently contains links to other languages at the bottom of the left pane. The English link goes to Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Monuments 2011. I have fixed the link in the post by David Biddulph so it now goes to commons:Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2011 in Poland. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:06, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I have moved the interlanguage links from http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiprojekt:Wiki_Lubi_Zabytki to http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki_Lubi_Zabytki. I don't know Polish but hopefully this resolves the problem and will not be reversed by interlanguage bots. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:55, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Non native speaker needs help with an article

I am working on the article Demographics of Germany. English is not my first language. I thought may be you could help me. I was writing about studies according to which conservative christains have more children than "worldly" ones. I do however know that the English term "wordly" is considered an insult. How could I say this (I am not a conservative christian by the way, so I really only use the term worldly for lack of a better word here)?--Greatgreenwhale (talk) 07:15, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

The article on Conservative Christianity says that "the term conservative Christian is frequently used by Protestant evangelicals and Protestant fundamentalists as a way to distinguish themselves from the more liberal Protestant denominations", so perhaps "liberal" would be a useful alternative to "worldly". Weakopedia (talk) 07:29, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer. I am not sure here. In my home country the term "liberal" refers to people, who have certain ideas about politics.

Let me give an example. The Millers believe that the world was created in 6 days, they think women should wear modest dresses and never cut their hair. The Smiths on the other hand believe in evolution and think it is okay for a women to wear jeans. How could one call the Millers and how could one call the Smiths?--Greatgreenwhale (talk) 07:35, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

While the word "liberal" is often identified with politics it can just as easily be applied to almost any situation. We have articles on liberal Judaism, liberal religion and liberal Christianity, among others. Another word often used is "progressive", but from what I have seen if you are talking about conservative anything then there is probably a liberal version of the same thing. In your example I would be happy to use conservative for the Millers (who sound like Brethren) and liberal for the Smiths. Weakopedia (talk) 08:44, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree that worldly is not the right term, but the word, in and of itself, is not pejorative.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:57, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

As a Quaker, I can't think of a term that all sides would consider acceptable; I'd suggest that you simply contrast conservative and less-conservative Christians (and stipulate whose definition you are using; I am theologically liberal but still consider myself evangelical - but other self-defined evangelicals would vehemently disagree). --Orange Mike | Talk 17:31, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

How do I get feeedback and edits to a proposed article?

I have listed a proposed article for review at COIN, FEEDBACK, RFF, and EAR with very little feedback and no edits or suggested edits to the article. Plus I have a "new unreviewed article" template on the draft article itself. When I eventually submitted it for Afc, they told me to get feedback and edits first. How do I do that? Austex • Talk 12:00, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Let me get you some real quick feedback - I'm guessing but you are writing about yourself right? it stands out in the prose - the first thing you need to do is ditch that career summary section - it's just not suitable for a wikipedia article. --Cameron Scott (talk) 12:05, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Yes, the Career Summary is there SOLELY during review to help more clearly establish notability. It would and should be removed prior to moving to article space. I do recognize that it is very difficult and a long shot to do an autobiography so I welcome comments and edits to take out my personal point of view, such as inappropriate prose as you indicated. I am happy to re-edit with some comments and guidance, etc. I have just not been able to get comments after numerous postings (as you can see above) asking for reviews. Until you showed up. Austex • Talk 23:34, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Frankly, Don, I haven't responded because I don't think you're any closer to being notable as we define it around here than you were the last time you tried. If you're genuinely notable, somebody else will write about you (and more impartially than you can), just as they did about the other, more notable Don Martins. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:34, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Mike. That's why I am putting it out here for review and not in articlespace. I realize autobiographical articles are discouraged. And so I am and will try hard to prove notability. I am concerned about your use of "as we definne it around here," as if there is a cabal of editors that decided what gets in and what doesn't. So please allow me to give you (and hopefully others) my reasoning:

• First, the Wikipedia WP:BIO section on notability says "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." As you can see, the new bio has been much more extensively cited with just these kinds of references since the original draft. The current article has 53 truly excellent, independent, verifiable, high-quality citations.

• Secondly, in WP:BIO, the number one criteria says '"A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published articlces which are reliable, and independent of each other." I HAVE PROVIDED FOUR SUCH BIO ARTICLES. NOT EVEN ONE OF WHICH WERE INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL DON MARTIN ARTICLE. I am really working hard to establish true notability and I hope you will look at these actual bio articles.

• Third, Wikipedia policy says: "The proper way to get your own writing about yourself in if you really think you can meet the inclusion criteria . . . is to make a proposal containing the text you want, instead of just putting it up directly, and seek the consensus of the community through discussion. Not only does this provide independent viewpoints on it that can allow you to discover biases you were not aware of having, it also helps provide an indication of good faith and that you are willing to put the interests of Wikipedia first instead of standing in a position of conflict of interest. That is why I am offered this article on a subpage first for feedback and comment rather than moving it immediately to article space. So far, however, I have received no openly constructive edits, suggestions or assistance which would help me to make it better or to better meet notabiity requirements.

• Lastly, Wikipedia policy says that "the definition of what is valid for purposes of notability should be very broad." I would be most appreciative if you would assume good faith on my part and recognize that I am making a careful and hopefully broader and more well-reasoned attempt to follow policy and to insert a nuetral point of view, and that you or others would read the article on it's merits (rather than recalling the previous attempt without seeing how it differs) and to consider it on its own merit. A huge amount of time has been spent to greatly and significantly improve this article substantially.

SUMMARY:After looking at numerous other biographical articles, I see many that do not have as much grounds for notability as this article does. And Wikipedia provides for a WP:BLPSELF route to an article. My waiting until "someone else writes about you" is one option, but the BIO option is also another allowable and legitimate way to go. I would truly appprecaite you reviewing it in that light as I can say I personally think it meets the notability test (and the original article didn't) hence my placing it out there for constructive feedback. I'd be delighted to revise it to ensure it is not a self-promoting tone. I think (and could be wrong) that I have attempted to write impartially and in the style that I have seen many other articles address business activities, business ownership, publishing, entrenuership, sales of businesses, real estate development, etc. Some hints along those lines would be helpful and appreciated. Even a total re-write would be welcome. Austex • Talk 22:49, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

References

NOTE: I am going to copy and paste this discussion to the actual Article Talk Page as it probably belongs there and not here. This is for Wikipedia questions, not for debating notability, etc. Is that OK?) IS so, plese respond there so we have the running dialog in one place to follow. Austex • Talk 13:46, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

How to place a userbox on a userpage?

I want to place {{My sandbox}} on my userpage at User:217.91.113.188. How can I do this? I don't want to register an account, but I want to have a link to my sandbox on my userpage. Thanks. 217.91.113.188 (talk) 12:06, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

The ability to have your own userpage is one of many reasons to create an account. Unregistered users only have a user talk page, not a true user page. Anyway, I've created a sandbox you can use at User talk:217.91.113.188/Sandbox. I'm not sure whether {{My sandbox}} will work correctly if you place it on your talk page, but you can just add a regular wikilink like the one in this post to your talk page. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 12:17, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, when I look for example at User:217.140.193.123, it seems an unregistered user can in fact have a userpage (which in that case contains the sockpuppet template). So can someone place this on my userpage? 217.91.113.188 (talk) 12:35, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I created a page with the userbox in my userspace at User:Toshio Yamaguchi/User:217.91.113.188. I could try to move it to the place of your userpage, but I have to admit I am unsure about the rules for such a case. I would appreciate if someone could clarify this before I move the page. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 12:45, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, you can have a userpage, but as an IP editor that page is not exclusively yours. It will be shared by all users who are allocated your current IP address. Similarly, the user talkpage will be shared with all these other users as well; as will the user contributions. We cannot tell apart all the individual people who may be allocated that same IP address. If one of the other people breach a Wikipedia policy, a warning could be be placed on that shared talk page and you could ultimately be blocked from editing or accused of sockpuppetry (like User:217.140.193.123) even if you did nothing wrong. And, when your ISP allocates you a new IP address, your carefully crafted userpage will remain on the old IP address and you'll have to go to the trouble of moving it over to the new IP address each time it changes. Registering for an account quick and easy (and free), and comes with other enhanced features (as pointed out by Adrian). Astronaut (talk) 14:44, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I've created the pages for you, on the off case you don't want to create an account. (I don't see any reason why IPs shouldn't have a userspace to work in if they so desire.) You should now be able to edit them. ^Avic_ennasis @ 18:18, 26 Elul 5771 / 18:18, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I see; my mistake. This is quite odd – it seems unregistered users are technically able to have a userpage, yet technically unable to create it themselves. Even stranger, if I log out and visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:182.239.181.20 (the non-existent userpage for my IP address), I get a message telling me the page should be created by User:182.239.181.20, even though there doesn't seem to be any way for me to do that. Entering User:182.239.181.20 into the Wikipedia search box simply sends me to 182.239.181.20's contributions, which is why I'd believed IP userpages couldn't exist. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 02:38, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:182.239.181.20&action=edit&redlink=1 lets me create the page if I go there while logged in, but not while logged out. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 02:56, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

All users (logged in or not) can create talk pages - only logged in users can create non-talk pages. ^Avic_ennasis @ 20:25, 27 Elul 5771 / 20:25, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

doubts in electronics

why pre-emphasis and de-emphasis are used in FM but not in AM? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.61.17.38 (talk) 15:31, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 16:53, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

higher cylinderical number

i have -15 spherical with -3 cylinderical with 15 degree in right eye and -8 with -3 cyl with 180 degree in left eye. suggest the best possible contact lenses for me and eye surgery to correct the sight. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.74.5.110 (talk) 15:45, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

We cannot offer medical advice. Please see the medical disclaimer, and contact an appropriate medical professional. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 16:55, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

• You need to make an appointment with an optician or an optometrist. - 194.60.106.38 (talk) 07:10, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Really delete a revision

I accidentally put something in a Talk page (an email quote) without permission. I have removed it, but I need to get the earlier revisions with it in removed as well. Do I need to get someone else to do this, or is there a way of doing it myself?

Hugh.glaser (talk) 16:25, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Requests for oversight. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 16:51, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Revision deletion as well. It hides the revision temporarily immediately while waiting for an oversight to remove it completely. Simply request a revdel from an admin and he/she will hide the revision for you.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 17:23, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

What does the mathematical symbol ⊙ represent?

Hi, I recently found the symbol ⊙ (represented in LaTeX as \odot), and I am not familiar with it. Wikipedia does not appear to have an article on the subject, and a Google Search comes up with absolutely nothing. What does it do, and what is its formal name?--82.113.103.164 (talk) 16:40, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Pasting into the 'Characters' box at [1] reveals it is called "U+2299 CIRCLED DOT OPERATOR". Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 17:02, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

You can probably get a quicker and more thorough answer at the Mathematics reference desk. This page is really for questions about Wikipedia itself. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 17:12, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

A quick Google search turned up http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U2200.pdf. You can find the symbol on page 2263. As Adrian says above, please ask such questions at the Reference desk in the future. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 17:17, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

You say that Wikipedia doesn't seem to have an article, but see circled dot and solar symbol. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:03, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

sortname and linking

When using sortname, you enter the first and last names, and it links to that article, eg, "{sortname|Robert|Byrne}" links to Robert Byrne. Is there a way to get it to link to Robert Byrne (chess player) but not show "(chess player)"? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 17:38, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

You can use {{sortname|Robert|Byrne|Robert Byrne (chess player)}} which produces Robert Byrne. See Template:Sortname for the documentation. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 17:53, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you.

Resolved

Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 19:44, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

New Article Request

How do I request an article? I've gotten to the part that says "Add your request in the most appropriate place below." but once I find the appropriate category I'm not sure how to add the request to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.82.120.127 (talk) 18:47, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Click the [edit] link located on the right side of the appropriate section and add your request to the list by inserting the following at the end:

* [[ARTICLENAME]]

Replace ARTICLENAME with the name of your article. You can see how the others do it after you click edit. Then save it. However, I have to tell you that article requests are very rarely filled (if at all). All those red links are unfilled requests. It's far better if you write the article yourself. You can do that by registering and looking through the Article wizard for instructions.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 20:18, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Very minor diff

Can anyone tell what changes are being made with this diff? —Akrabbim^talk 18:59, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Did you mean the diff starting from that one? Looks like changes in whitespace (article went from 21,136 bytes to 21,127 bytes). DMacks (talk) 19:09, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

if that is the diff you mean they took out double spaces after periods. GB fan 19:19, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I see now, the wikiEd diff tool makes it evident. —Akrabbim^talk 21:07, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

The editor who left no edit summary should get in the habit of leaving them. Making unobvious edits and leaving no edit summary can confuse other editors. Also, another way to see such subtle changes is to open two revisions in edit windows in separate browser tabs, and switch between the tabs repeatedly to create a blink comparator effect. If you line up two edit windows to position the same chunk of text in the same position on screen, switching between the tabs will cause any text that changed to appear to jump. The human visual system is highly sensitive to motion. This can make it easier to see what changed than by comparing two very similar chunks of text side by side. --Teratornis (talk) 22:14, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

The only difference between the two revisions in this case was double or single spaces in the source. They are rendered exactly the same so your method would not have worked here. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:01, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

This tool shows these types of changes directly.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:11, 26 September 2011 (UTC)