Help desk
< July 5	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 7 >

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.

July 6

Adding citations

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asher_Bilu At the top of this page there is a message: "This biographical article needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful. (January 2011)"

Can you please tell me what else is required? Luba bilu (talk) 00:41, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly nothing. Based on the history, it looks like the article has been improved quite a bit in the last 18 months. At the time the tag was added, there were no refs at all. Look at the guidance at WP:BLP and if you think it's well-sourced enough, you can remove the tag. The tags are not automatic, an editor puts them in, and then after the article is fixed someone else needs to remove it. RudolfRed (talk) 00:53, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the sections do need more inline citations, like Early Life Gold Standard 01:03, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Who is the someone else who can remove the tag? And if it is me, how?

You (or someone who really knows what needs correcting) remove the following text near the top of the page after clicking on "edit" at the top of the page. I don't know what you see, but it'll be similar to that.

— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:12, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Immpossible to create correct external link

I am trying to report a small bug in the editing/display Javascript for external links but am finding many roadblocks and difficulties. I don't know if the Wikipedia Bugzilla requires a separate account from the Wikipedia editing account or it just doesn't work but I gave up trying to post there. It should not be so difficult to give feedback.

I ran into a problem while entering external links for an article: Screw-propelled vehicle. The script insists on appending part of the author date [key = date] to the author link [key = authorlink] and destroys the link. I tried a number of variations but nothing seems to work so I just left it. Specifically, the code grabs the "21" from the date key and appends ".+21" to the URL, thereby destroying it.

Please pass this on to whomever is responsible for the Javascript coding.

Also, is Bugzilla broken or does it require a separate account? If separate account, why the roadblock?

Thank you for your assistance. ArtKocsis (talk) 02:28, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the authorlink parameters; as described at Template:Cite web/doc, this parameter is supposed to link the author name to a Wikipedia article. As you saw, it doesn't work if you try to link to an external site. I have also simplified the publisher parameters, removing the http prefix, again following the examples in the template documentation.

But the article has too many external links, in my opinion, and it is hard to see how they pass the Wikipedia guideline on external links. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bugzilla has another account system and requires its own accounts. See Wikipedia:Bug reports and feature requests. It isn't "Wikipedia Bugzilla". Bugzilla is for all the thousands of wikis using the MediaWiki software like Wikipedia. You are a new editor and problems you encounter seem more likely to be due to not understanding Wikipedia yet than bugs in the software, so I suggest you post here and not Bugzilla. {{Cite web}} is a Wikipedia template and not part of the MediaWiki software itself so if the template actually had a bug then it still wouldn't belong at Bugzilla. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:52, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your informative and complete response, especially for the link to the template reference and for your explanation regarding bugzilla. Understanding the underlying infrastructure completely removed the frustration I experienced.

It is not so much that I am a new "editor" but a very infrequent one. The richness and flexibility of Wikipedia comes at a cost of complexity which can be intimidating for infrequent contributors. Having easy and obvious access to reference and help material can alleviate the "pain" considerably. Perhaps highlighting the "Editing help" link would make it more obvious and easier to find for those of us who need it. ;-) ArtKocsis (talk) 00:38, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Citation Style 1#Common issues. I will be adding this to each template doc page eventually. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 11:03, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can this be called WikiHounding?

For privacy reasons I am posting this as an IP user and please note that my contributions are not related to my question. This is about an incident that I witnessed and was involved in.

Let's say for example I ask a question in a talk page of an article. Two users named User 1 and User 2 then follows me into this article. They tell me that its not the right place to ask a question. I tell them that what they are doing is making me feel frustrated and stressed but User 2 tells me that what I said in another page will comeback to haunt me here at Wikipedia.

Is there anything wrong with what User 2 had said? Would User 1 and User 2 be WikiHounding me?119.224.27.62 (talk) 03:56, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My advice is the same as the last time you asked. If you're having trouble with a user, follow the guidance at the page you linked or WP:WQA or WP:DR or WP:ANI. The ANI page also has a list of resources that might help. RudolfRed (talk) 04:56, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks for replying again, I wasn't really having any trouble with a user. I'm not directly involved but I'm worried about that user who is. But I guess I should tell that user to follow the advice you gave me.119.224.27.62 (talk) 06:15, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just to comment on the story, I think User 2 is using a straw man argument. It is best to read through Fallacy of quoting out of context article. But do take careful caution not to apply policy guidelines and articles in a discussion like this. Instead just focus on what's being said and not who says it or what they are violating. I'd advise that you suggest the troubled user to move on and edit articles first to just raise down the suspicion so that hounding can stop. As RudolfRed has stated, you could tell the user to take it to the WP:WQA as well if there is a clear misunderstanding. Bleubeatle (talk) 01:36, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

cite error

The Torrents of Spring page. Having trouble with citation. Please help for future references too. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.49.65.3 (talk) 05:10, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any errors at Torrents of Spring. Read WP:REFB and see if it helps with your trouble. RudolfRed (talk) 05:13, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how you missed it, although, I am very green. I used your cite tool -which I originally missed- and it looks fine now. Just for you to double check if you feel the need to keep things clean. It was the Baker reference under publication. Thanks again, and I look forward to contibuting more about EH. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.49.65.3 (talk) 05:24, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see no references at all on Torrents of Spring or Torrents of Spring (film) - so I really have no idea what this is about. Roger (talk) 06:44, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Torrents of Spring. - Ka renjc 07:30, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that's confusing! Too many torrents. HiLo48 (talk) 07:33, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's always a good idea to peek at a questioner's recent contributions. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:23, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bangalore Univeristy

Hello!

Why is Bangalore University shown to be located n the Nairobi area of Kenya on Facebook? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.73.100.100 (talk) 05:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If there is an error on Facebook, you'll need to contact them to fix it. RudolfRed (talk) 06:31, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See the Help page on Facebook. We at Wikipedia have no control over what happens there. Roger (talk) 06:37, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook community pages may incorporate content from Wikipedia— such use complies with Wikipedia policies on reuse of content. We at Wikipedia have no control over how the content is included nor can we help to remove it. Facebook does have a topic on Community pages and profile connections on their Help Center.

As you say, http://www.facebook.com/pages/Bangalore-University/103136616393294 claims the location is Westlands, Nairobi Area, Kenya. The page says "Description above from the Wikipedia article Bangalore University". This only applies to the part with heading "Description". The alleged location in other parts of the page is inserted by Facebook and not taken from Wikipedia. I don't know how Facebook generates location information but they sometimes get it wrong. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:39, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

need to attach a news paper article for authenticity

Dear Sirs,

I want to attach a News Paper article which has the biography of mine. It is in pdf format. How to do the same.

Regards

Ganesan Natarajan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.50.68 (talk) 09:39, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No you don't attach news articles, you Cite them. See WP:Referencing for beginners. Roger (talk) 09:42, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Admiral Arthur William Radford High School, Honolulu, Hawaii (vs) Radford High School, Radford, Virginia

Can you please fix the web site for the Admirial Arthur W. Radford High School..It is located in Honolulu, Hawaii.. Not in Radford, Virginia...Please give these two schools two different sites... Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.0.48.67 (talk) 10:05, 6 July 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Please post a link to the page where you see the problem. If it's a Facebook page like http://www.facebook.com/pages/Radford-High-School/110635745624243 then see #Bangalore Univeristy above. It's an error made by Facebook and not Wikipedia, and we have no control over it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:12, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia article is Admiral Arthur W. Radford High School and it doesn't mention Virginia. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:15, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook errors being blamed on WP.

I see more and more of these complaints here, there seems to be a definite escalation. I think it might be a good idea(tm) if someone at WMF could have a word with the powers that be at Facebook. They really need to get their sh#t together and stop making so many simple errors which we get blamed for! Roger (talk) 10:30, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not exactly free of errors. I wonder whether Facebook gets blamed for errors they actually did copy from Wikipedia. The Facebook use of Wikipedia articles was announced in [1] by foundation:User:Kul so maybe he is the person to contact. I guess the location field in Facebook community pages is auto-generated with some algorithm which would be difficult to perfect, and Facebook errors are only our business when we get blamed for them. If we contact Facebook then I think we should only suggest that they make it more clear that the location field is inserted by Facebook and not taken from Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:57, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My question would be how well does their update process keep up with our constant changes? Do they always refer to the current version? Britmax (talk) 12:57, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook is notoriously closed on this aspect. What I do know is that Facebook determines the set of pages that they 'expose'. Then there is a whole lot of algorithm involved to find automated matches, that are then confirmed by users trough the 'report/confirm a duplicate' system. I don't think there has been much work on all this since the original implementation and I have honestly no idea how often and when the information is synced with Wikipedia. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 09:32, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The method to get my username back.

Is there any method I can retrieve my `universal` user name back? sorry, but the thing is I forgot my password for Wikipedia and it happens to be an account without setting a e-mail. So the option of `forgot the password` will also not work. Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.161.131.210 (talk) 12:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have to create a new account with another name but you may be able to request renaming to the old username depending on the circumstances. What is the username? PrimeHunter (talk) 13:03, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply, username is thommasmathew — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.161.131.210 (talk) 13:07, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Thommasmathew has no edits so you can probably get the name. commons:User:Thommasmathew was created today. Is that you and can you log in to that account? If so then I suggest: 1) Make an edit (any edit whatsoever) at commons: while logged in. 2) Go to commons:Special:MergeAccount to unify the account. 3) Request the username Thommasmathew for the English Wikipedia at Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations. If the precise username is not important to you then it's easier for both you and us to just create a new account and ignore the old. Usernames can contain spaces and capitals. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:24, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

hi there ,thanks for the info.. as advised and instructed , i had made requests and is available in the link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Changing_username/Usurpations#None_.28SUL_request.29_.E2.86.92_TARGET_NAME_:_thommasmathew_.28for_English-wikipedia.29 hope this will work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.161.131.210 (talk) 14:25, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed the formatting of your request. You haven't unified the account at commons:Special:MergeAccount. Don't you get that option there? PrimeHunter (talk) 14:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:MergeAccount&action=submit Ref to the link given & assuming you talking about this, i reached in a stage where the system is asking for the login password for the other account(wikipedia.org) to finish the merging. As stated earlier , i am not having the password for it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.155.42.64 (talk) 16:14, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://toolserver.org/~quentinv57/tools/sulinfo.php?username=Thommasmathew shows you have created a unified account now. I know the English Wikipedia is missing but you now own the username at all other Wikimedia wikis. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:09, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But I still cant login to my Wikipedia.org ; Do I still need to wait for some action from your side ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.155.42.64 (talk) 23:13, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You must wait for your request at Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations to be reviewed. I don't have access to change usernames. You cannot log in at en.wikipedia.org but you can log in at all the around 280 other Wikipedia languages at wikipedia.org. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:39, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

play videos

how to play videos on wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.180.11.142 (talk) 12:53, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Media help. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:00, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can't patrol pages

When patrolling pages I get a page titled "Error" with the text "There seems to be a problem with your login session; this action has been canceled as a precaution against session hijacking. Go back to the previous page, reload that page and then try again." Doing as instructed doesn't solve the problem. This seems to be the case on all unpatrolled pages. Any thoughts? – Arms & Hearts (talk) 15:09, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You could try to use Special:NewPagesFeed and see if that fixes it. Otherwise, I'd try logging out and then back in. Ryan Vesey Review me! 15:13, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Logging out and logging back in seems to have worked. Thanks! – Arms & Hearts (talk) 15:20, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How can I delete/remove my date of birth? Jdobisz (talk)

When anyone enters my layperson name "Jane Dobisz" into google, my religious title appears along with links to other religious people in the zen community and information about my date of birth etc. I would like to remove the date of birth how can I do that? Jane Dobisz (Zen Master Bon Yeon) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdobisz (talk • contribs) 15:14, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you removed the DOB from the Wikipedia article. In this case, that is appropriate because it is unsourced. If it had been properly sourced, likely it would be restored because it is publicly available information. As for Google, Wikipedia has no control over what happens at Google. Cresix (talk) 15:22, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article doesn’t appear to meet our guidelines for notability. Also, Google just comes up with Advertorials promoting this individual. No authoritative sources appear mention such a person. Would it not be more appropriate to nominate at AfD. --Aspro (talk) 15:45, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The claim that she is notable seems to be based on her being (former) abbot of the Cambridge Zen Center. But the current abbot does not have a wikipedia article. I agree with Aspro, the Bon Yeon article should be deleted. Maproom (talk) 17:05, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Name spelled wrong

My husband has been on Wikipedia for along time however recently his name is showing up spelt wrong. I would love to have his correct spelling so when people search him it is correct. I was able to change the spelling myself in all the content however not the name on the article. His name is Brian Haynes and it is coming up as Bryan Haynes. If you could please let me know how to get this changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeannehaynes (talk • contribs) 15:34, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done See Brian Haynes (soccer). --Orange Mike | Talk 15:49, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

banned

I was banned for 3 months from aspartame controversy. After the 3 months were up i tried to ask further questions and was quickly banned with no opportunity to defined myself. My question is am I now a black sheep that can be banned at the whim of an administrator with no ability to defined myself. What is the policy on banning? What do I do when Wikipedia does not follow it's own rules? Please help.

Thanks Arydberg (talk) 16:12, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have looked into the many archives relating to aspartame controversy on administrator notice boards as well as the talk pages involved with you and the issue. It seems, though I may be wrong, that you were blocked because when editors approached you civilly with concerns about your conflict of interest relating to the matter, you only said things that increased, and increased, and increased their suspicions until it became apparent enough that you were blocked for a sort of "cool-down" period. Upon returning to your fight, you showed no remorse or signs that during that period you had read-up on Wikipedia's policies, guidelines, and related past discussions that involved oh-so-many editors. Therefore you were blocked again. You made numerous accusations that Wikipedia has been infiltrated by designing corporate goons that have brain-washed editors into not listening to your arguments. These are not the attitudes that the Community looks for. I believe (perhaps facetiously) that Pat Robertson is one of the most evil people in recent years, yet I stay away from that article and all related articles completely because it is only natural to be further polarized in one's attitudes when met with dissent.

Therefore I simply suggest that you spend some time in other areas of Wikipedia until you have a better understanding of what the place is all about. This understanding can be garnered and augmented by simply reading the discussions of other editors, the help desk, the reference desks, the Wikipedia:Centralized discussion area, the Administrator noticeboards, and many others, without actually becoming involved with those discussions. You will get a better feel of the climate and see many good and bad examples of conduct. You will see how other editors respond to that conduct, and you will better your understanding of what Knowledge is all about. Happy editing, hajat vrc with WikiLove @ 18:10, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Outside Commission

Has there ever been in history an outside commission to investigate Congress and the Senate for accountability suspected of outside interests as elected officials?

How can one address this problem as a citizen? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.169.94.133 (talk) 17:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6 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. Cresix (talk) 17:44, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

problem with "designation list" template

I've tried to fix the top of St. Roch (ship) without success. I can't seem to get the template "Designation list" to work. Samw (talk) 17:47, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Templates only use {{two sets}} of curly brackets - you're using {{{{four}}}} there, which appears to be breaking the template. Hersfold non-admin^(t/a/c) 18:36, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that seemed to do the trick. (Note I just stumbled across the problem; I wasn't trying to use that template.) Samw (talk) 19:58, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Articles???

I do not have a Wikipedia account, yet somehow my 7 year old son was able to accidentally edit articles he was reading. This should not be allowed! He thought he was just making comments about an article, not editing it! Now, I am getting messages from Wikipedia asking to stop making inaccurate comments or be banned from the site. WELL- don't allow just any random web surfer to edit your articles then! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.252.94.164 (talk) 18:05, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but no harm was done to Wikipedia, as all changes can be reverted. Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. If edits are made from your IP address and a block is placed on that address, that does not stop you from reading an article or registering for a Wikipedia account in order to edit. I think if you check around the internet, you'll see many websites on which anyone, including children, can place comments. I think the best solution is for you to place some kind of parental controls on your computer so a child cannot access certain websites. That's what most parents who try to actively manage their children's internet activity do. Cresix (talk) 18:13, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, a 7-year-old is able to make edits like this? My BS filter is activating. 69.62.243.48 (talk) 03:01, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, and other editors come along and are able to do this. The model may not strike you as able to work on paper but it has amazingly led to this! There are both problems and advantages to the model. See Reliability of Wikipedia, Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia is not so great, Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia is so great, and Wikipedia:Replies to common objections.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:30, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively, don't allow your seven-year-old child to access the internet without supervision. It's not a suitable place for children – even Wikipedia has some content that you wouldn't want your child to be exposed to. Brammers (talk/c) 17:17, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Troy Anthony Davis Photograph

Was the Troy Anthony Davis photograph used for his entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy_Davis) taken in some detention center? GERUTLEDGE7 (talk) 18:36, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Click on the picture and it will display our information on the picture. In this case it describes it as a mug shot and tells where it was obtained. RJFJR (talk) 19:00, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have added photos to a page, but they don't show up as thumbnails in FaceBook posts

what is the likely problem behind this? Did I enter the code wrong? They were the first pictures uploaded at: http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edif%C3%ADcio_Esther — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vincent Bevins (talk • contribs) 18:40, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We cannot advise you here about how to use Facebook. If you would like to ask that part of the question, I would advise visiting the Computing reference desk. As far as your code on that article is concerned, it looks accurate. Happy editing, hajat vrc with WikiLove @ 18:50, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but the question is now about how to use facebook. I'm just under the strong impression that I didn't code the photos into that page as thoroughly as possible. Is there a way to do a better job? Thanks Vincent

The photos show up. It is on the Portuguese Wikipedia, where we have no oversight. I have looked into how Facebook imports Wikipedia pages, but had not discovered any details on how they do this nor how often it is refreshed. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 19:09, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The photos were uploaded to Commons, where everything appears to be in order. I think any problems you are having are at Facebook. Cresix (talk) 19:14, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notices at the top of articles beginning wit "!"

There are two notices beginning with large white exclamation points inside red circles that are located at the top of an article I wrote. Does anyone know where these came from and how I can eliminate them from the article. They are suggesting that the article appears to be promotional, but site no specifics. I believe that the article is factual and neutral. How can I either address these comments of get rid of them as they unfairly detract from the credibility of the subject matter. Can anyone please help me find out whats going on" Dkolarek (talk) 19:22, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is very true that the user who added those tags should have added an explanation to the article's talk page to cite the specifics of what they are hinting at. After a quick look over the article I don't see the alleged promotional "words" that impair the article's neutrality. I would highly suggest contacting User:Dthomsen8, who added those tags, and ask them to cite specifics. Happy editing, hajat vrc with WikiLove @ 19:30, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) These notices were placed by an editor who thinks the article is written like an advertisement and is promotional. If you disagree, discuss on the article's talk page, but do not remove the notices unless there is clear support for doing so on the talk page, or no one responds to your talk page comments in a reasonable period of time. You might also click on the links in my response and read the policies on which notices are based, then try to change or remove the objectionable material. Cresix (talk) 19:32, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote issue

Something is odd with Aliquippa School District. If you click on footnotes 1–39, as expected, you are brought to the relevant foot note in the references section.

However, clicking in footnotes 40-75 does nothing.

I'm not seeing what is happening to prevent those footnotes from appearing in the ref section.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 21:14, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This edit seems to have fixed it. I don't understand why those missing brackets should have that side-effect, though. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:31, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Arghh, makes sense, and I should have seen it. I was looking closely at footnote 40 to see if a cite template wasn't closed, but, of course, it is the one before. Thanks--SPhilbrick (Talk) 00:21, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template help

(Don't know why the {{Tl}} template won't display a link to the actual template.)

I've been using this template for a while on my user page, although it doesn't do quite I want it to do, namely, not displaying a link to an article. A no doubt well-intentioned IP edited the template and then also edited my user page. It screwed up the user box on my user page, and even when I reverted the edit on my user page, the template's results were screwed up. So, I then reverted the IP's edits to the template.

I then stared at the user box to see if I could do it so I had a link to the Law article but the words in the user box would be "legal articles", as they are now. Couldn't figure out how to do that. For all I know, that's what the IP was actually trying to achieve because I didn't look at their edits, I just put it back to the way it was.

Any ideas or comments from those who actually understand the code in templates?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:54, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am still not entirely sure about the parameters, but {{User:UBX/interest|#E0CEF2|Bla|Blubb}} produces

Blubb

This user is interested in Blubb.

where the wikilink goes to Bla but displays as Blubb. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 22:57, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think you rendered the template after Monty845 changed the template. That said, I canNOT get it to work the way I want. Here's the way I would like it to look and act. On the left side of the user box, it should say (no color) the word "law". On the right side there should be the equivalent of legal articles. Either you or Monty can feel free to edit my user page to make it like that, and then I can see how you did it.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:13, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How is

User:Toshio Yamaguchi/Userbox

(it's in my userspace at User:Toshio Yamaguchi/Userbox)? -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 23:38, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is substantively what I want, but it's not as pretty as the current userbox. You really don't have to continue trying to create precisely what I want. It's very kind of you, but I've lived with it the way it was for quite a while and never even noticed the redlink until today.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:57, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{Tl}} adds Template: to the name. That doesn't work for User:UBX/interest which is in userspace. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:46, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. When I use the upper righthand search box and put "template:" before it, it finds it, and it kinda looks like a template. Is it not a template, and if it is a template, is there a reason why it is in userspace?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:54, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot find User:UBX/interest in a search with template: in front. Pages in other namespaces than Template: can be transcluded. The only special thing about the template space is that the namespace is optional when transcluding. For example, {{Citation needed}} and {{Template:Citation needed}} both work. They produce ^{[citation needed]} and ^{[citation needed]}. Help:Template says: "A template is a Wikipedia page created to be included in other pages." By this common definition, User:UBX/interest is a template. Userbox templates are often placed in userspace. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:02, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

wrongly accused of vandalism

i got accused of vandalising a page about agnosticism. apparently i removed some text and put this in its place GRIMDIGGER

GRIMDIGGER

it says i did it on august 20th 2009 i didnt do this so i think you owe me an apology. i edited wikipedia for the first time in 2012 and it was constructive — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.182.238 (talk) 23:01, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That warning is for whoever had your IP address at the time. If that wasn't you, you can ignore it. If you create an account, then no edits will be wrongly attribitted to you. RudolfRed (talk) 23:10, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The box at the bottom of User talk:78.148.182.238 also explains this. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:42, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]