Help desk
< December 8	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 10 >

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.

December 9

Referencing

Can anyone advise me how to avoid multiple repeats of the same reference appearing in an article's Reference list? I can see from previous articles I've done that either an automatic bot or a very kind person has employed a method which I've attempted to clone but without success. My efforts result in invalid displays showing up in red. What's the secret? The list I am trying to amend occurs on the page Leith Links. Kim Traynor (talk) 00:49, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can use <ref name="name">reference</ref> for the first occurrence. For any subsequent occurrences you can use: <ref name="name"/>. Jarkeld (talk) 00:57, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want everything including a possible page number to be identical then see WP:NAMEDREFS. If you want to change page numbers then see Help:Footnotes#Citing one book repeatedly with different page numbers and Help:References and page numbers for options. If you still have problems then post a link to an attempt so we can see what is wrong. You can revert it or save it at User:Kim Traynor/sandbox if you don't want to leave an article with a formatting error. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:02, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you look at what I did for another user just a few sections up this page - Editing Silurian page, and its talk page. I don't suppose s/he'll mind.

I'll look at yours later - maybe you just have a few typos stopping it working.

John of Cromer in China (talk) mytime= Sun 09:13, wikitime= 01:13, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK it wasn't as bad as I was expecting! Check out what I did.

(I lived in Stockbridge a year, Saunders Street) John of Cromer in China (talk) mytime= Sun 16:36, wikitime= 08:36, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everybody for all the comments. Most helpful and much appreciated. Kim Traynor (talk) 00:15, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

JWoww's birthday

Hi there. I'm a fan of Jersey Shore, and out of curiosity I was looking up there birthdays on your site. I then came across this video on youtube, which states directly from JWoww herself that she was born in 1985, not 86. Here is the link below to cross refernce. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ee1C5FB3ceo&feature=fvwp — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.76.16.164 (talk) 01:48, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know her but http://jwoww.com/custom/about at her official website says "born on February 27, 1986". Our article JWoww says the same. The person in the Youtube video is drinking and starts by saying "by the time I walk out I'm drunk". At 1m13s she talks about "a Land Before Time dinosaur that came out in 1985 the year I was born". The Land Before Time actually came out in 1988. We should prefer a written statement at the official website over a possibly drunken interview talking about something else and mentioning an alleged birth year in passing while saying another clearly incorrect year. All other sources I have seen also say February 27, 1986. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:12, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Purchase of jeans

Resolved

I purchase my jeans at vanity because of my unique size...But in the last year i purchased three pair of jeans and the buttons have come off of all of them...im not a heavy person but am very discouraged...your employees said i cant do any thing about it it if its past thirty days but i do not think this is right...I need to speak with someone one so they can see im not b.s.ing...im a size six with longg legs...please reespond and be respecctful...thank you..carl...[phone number redacted] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.117.89.133 (talk) 02:58, 9 December 2012 (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. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:01, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

General image questions

Resolved

I have a some questions relating to image uploads and couldn't find an appropriate help forum, so please refer me elsewhere if this is not the proper place for these questions:

Which is preferable for uploading: good-quality, medium-resolution images -or- very-high quality (big files)?
Is there a preferred image format for high-quality images?
Often, the high-resolution images on WP have smaller versions available; should I create smaller versions, or is that something that is done automatically?

This relates to a high-resolution TIFF (57.3 Meg) that I downloaded from Library of Congress. This image included handy templates for histogram and temperature optimization. From this, I have derived a high-quality image, and can make copies in just about any size or format. - I will inquire elsewhere regarding uploading / copyright, etc. (This 19th C. print image is potentially useful for the article I have been collaborating on - if interested, details from source: http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2004666374/) ~ Thanks once more for your assistance, and for allowing me to be annoying ;) ~E 74.60.29.141 (talk) 05:22, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Images used in Wikipedia can be uploaded to either Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. Non-free images should be at Wikipedia and then WP:Image resolution applies. Free images are usually best to upload to Commons, and often transferred to there if the uploader chose Wikipedia. Some relevant links: commons:Commons:Maximum file size, commons:Commons:Why we need high resolution media, commons:Commons:File types#Size and scaling, commons:Commons:File types#TIFF, and commons:Commons:Help desk for asking questions. A page using an image will usually specify the display size and then our software automatically scales it. The file page often has links to different resolutions right below the image and these are also automatically made. If you mean cases where there are two similar images with different file names on their respective file pages then they are created and uploaded manually, but this is rare. PrimeHunter (talk) 06:24, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll check out your links. ~Eric F:74.60.29.141 (talk) 08:05, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pedro the Spanish Speaking, Singing, Horse Riding Monkey

Pedro is a monkey (not a scary one either)
Pedro speaks Spanish (it is his native tongue)
Pedro can sing (quite well)
Pedro knows how to ride a horse (enough said)

Pedro was born on January 1, 1999 in Chihuahua, Mexico (a real place). His parents were two very well known circus performers who traveled many Mexican cities bringing joy to young and old. When Pedro was born (on New Years Day), his parents knew he was going to be special. His first words were (well, very hard for you and I to understand) equivelant to the Spanish word of "Fiesta" or "Party." He knew in his heart that he would one day become the life of the party, any party really, because how many monkeys do you know that learned how to sing and ride a horse? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cf.harding (talk • contribs) 07:05, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your post, however is there a question for the helpdesk? Tiggerjay (talk) 07:31, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The only question I could see: "how many monkeys do you know that learned how to sing and ride a horse?" I'm thinking Mickey Dolenz for starters. John of Cromer in China (talk) mytime= Sun 20:24, wikitime= 12:24, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that was Davy Jones. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 12:52, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How to fix problem on main page

I posted about a problem with a quote on the main page in the main page errors. I posted about 4 hours ago. Nothing has happened.

Are main page errors corrected? If not, please don't tell people to post about them, just tell people to ignore them.

Is wikipedia an encyclopedia or what? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.107.131.23 (talk) 07:44, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I cannot locate the error you reported at Talk:Main_Page. Can you describe the problem you are seeing? Tiggerjay (talk) 07:50, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.107.131.23 (talk) 07:51, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As you might have noticed, it was removed 5 minutes ago. It does appear that the main page had some incorrectly synthesized data, but since it is no longer active, I believe the point is moot. Tiggerjay (talk) 08:06, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I just learned that errors on the main page are ignored since there are only there for a few hours. Nice going wikiepdia. It's no wonder the experts don't edit.

However, the article is probably all wrong. The author incorrectly synthesized the information from the one source, attached other information to the source that is not in the article, and did not understand what the reference was saying in the first place. It is not the appropriate reference for this particular article.

I looked at one other reference used by the author in that article, and the little I reviewed is used incorrectly also. The article should probably be deleted.

However, now that I know wikipedia just puts anything into articles whether it is right or wrong and doesn't allow them to be corrected, I assume this information will just stay there and become part of the google wikipedia archive of nonsense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.107.131.23 (talk) 08:17, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, let me encourage you to edit the article as you see necessary. Just before you do so, please read this quick summary on article development then go and BOLDLY EDIT. The power of wikipedia is that anybody can edit the article and it is community reviewed. Tiggerjay (talk) 08:31, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where in that does it discuss the problem I am having with that article being on the main page ever and staying in its present state?

I read the first 5 paragraphs, lists of links to other articles. I'm not looking for an article to create, to translate, or otherwise fix; I already found one that needs fixed. I'm not looking to write a featured article on the topic. It is taking me hours to try to get one bad statement off the main page, at six hours a sentence it would take a year to write one featured article. Do you think you'll get any experts to do this? Probably not.

The research section says articles have to be verifiable, but this article is not verifiable and editors kept restoring the unverifiable information.

I don't need to find relevant articles, as this is a major topic. The lede section of the article is completely off target, and most of the article misses the topic, so this part of the page about how to write has nothing to do with the problem.

I can't fix a broken article, but I'm sent to read a page full of inapplicable information that doesn't have to do with fixing articles. Why? Keep the experts away from editing? I think you're doing a good job at that already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.107.131.23 (talk) 08:41, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Greater involvement by scientists would lead to a "multiplier effect", says Wales. Most entries are edited by enthusiasts, and the addition of a researcher can boost article quality hugely. "Experts can help write specifics in a nuanced way," he says.[1]" They can't if you don't let them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.107.131.23 (talk) 08:46, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You did right by posting to Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors. Please post errors there another time. As the page history [2] shows, many errors are quickly fixed after being posted there. Thanks for trying to get this problem fixed while it was on the main page. Unfortunately your post wasn't reviewed in time by an administrator (Chris857 is not) with the ability to edit the fully protected Template:Did you know. We are all volunteers and it was Sunday 03:41 (UTC), a time with relatively low activity in the English Wikipedia. The DYK hook was in the article when the hook was verified [3], but was unfortunately edited out [4] before it went on the main page. Shit happens. Many DYK nominations are by the article creator who watches the article carefully. In this case the nomination was by somebody else and it was actually the creator who edited out the DYK hook, probably without knowing it was used in a DYK nomination. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:17, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

having my article reviewed and published

I have followed the directions- & have created a page in the sandbox- for LOU GRANT POLITICAL CARTOONIST however it has not posted and i sent it for pre publishing review now at least twice. What do i need to do to resolve and have it reviewed and published?thanks-18:41, 9 December 2012 (UTC)108.203.139.23 (talk) 18:41, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What article? Can you provide a link? Did you do it at WP:AFC? If you did it at Wikipedia:Sandbox, that is frequently overwritten. - Purplewowies (talk) 18:55, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably User:Jo-zgrant/sandbox? I've deleted a <gallery> tag which was stopping the rest of the page from being displayed. The article isn't in a state to be published. For one thing you have provided no references. Please read WP:1st and WP:Referencing for beginners. - David Biddulph (talk) 19:37, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor moved your sandbox article to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lou Grant (editorial cartoonist) but then declined the submission. - David Biddulph (talk) 22:04, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WMOO-FM "Moo 92" Full-Sized Logo

I have learned that there is a planned "Transfer of Ownership" that's gonna occur between Nassau Broadcasting Partners and Carlisle Capital Corporation (to be acquired by Vertical Capital Partners) and then ultimately into the hands of the Vermont Broadcast Associates. The bottom line is that the current website for WMOO-FM "Moo 92" is probably gonna be taken down soon and replaced by a brand new website on the same exact URL extension. As this switch happens, probably the Full-Sized PNG of the WMOO-FM "Moo 92" logo will get retired from the Internet. I'm wondering whether the anticipated retirement of the Full-Sized PNG of the WMOO-FM "Moo 92" logo might fall into the category of image grandfathering, in which case it might be okay to use this PNG for this article. Maybe, even, if the WMOO-FM "Moo 92" logo gets changed under the ownership of Vermont Broadcast Associates, this Full-Sized PNG Image might be able to get used as a "Previous Logo" listing within the Wikipedia article for this station. Here's the link to the Full-Sized PNG file for the WMOO-FM "Moo 92" logo. WMOO-FM Full-Sized Logo

98.229.132.126 (talk) 19:21, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no expert, but it's generally the case that previous logos get to stay in articles with that description. I remember reading that the fair use rationale needs to be changed when that happens.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 22:35, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Closing

If i started an rfc am i allowed to personally close the rfc in the light of a new compromise? Pass a Method talk 20:07, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on what the status of the RFC is, can you please tell me what page the RFC is for? Tiggerjay (talk) 06:36, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Juby

I have just uploaded 4 images to go in to the JUBY file but they seem to have gone into a black hole.

Where do they hide them please and how do I get them into the article?

Bernard Juby — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anketil (talk • contribs) 20:42, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have uploaded four images to Wikimedia Commons. You can see them, and read their names, here. To include one in the article, you would write something like

producing this result seen to the right.

I assume that, by "the JUBY file", you mean the article Juby.

I notice that you have written on the article's talk page, "This is a page to allow members of the wider family to post questions or just keep every-one up to date." That is not the purpose of an article's talk page. It is for discussion of issues associated with the Wikipedia article.

Your name "Bernard Juby" and username Anketil imply that you are associated with the subject of the article. You should therefore read Conflict of interest before you do any more work on this article. In any case, the article is likely to be deleted soon, as it includes no verifiable references. Moreover, it is about the surname "Juby". As far as I am aware, Wikipedia does not have articles about surnames. Maproom (talk) 21:19, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would Speedy A7 (non notable person/people) do it? Roger (talk) 07:21, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of Unter der Linden

I am unable to make a copy of your beautiful photo Centre strip in Autumn - photo of Unter der Linden. Iwould like to either 1. Know how to make a copy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5459807m (talk • contribs) 23:06, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a copy on your own computer: Click the image in Unter den Linden to get to File:Unter den Linden im Herbst.jpg. Then click "Full resolution" to get to http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/Unter_den_Linden_im_Herbst.jpg. If you right click the image there then your browser will probably present a menu where you can choose to save the image.

If you want to add the photo to another Wikipedia page, see Wikipedia:Picture tutorial. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:16, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]