Help desk
< December 27	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 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.

December 28

Redlink invisible in Edit page.

In Medical school in Canada, there's a "For the..." hatnote, pointing to the redlinked Medical school in Canada (disambiguation). When I try to remove it, it isn't there in the Edit window. What gives? InedibleHulk (talk) 23:54, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is part of the built-in display of the hat note template for the standard disambiguation use. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:07, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The documentation is at Template:About, but it doesn't show what happens for the two-parameter version {{About|USE1|USE2}} which was in the article:

The article improperly said

{{About|institutions that grant Doctor of Medicine (M.D. or M.D.C.M.) degrees only|information on other systems, see [[alternative medicine]].}}

It should have said

{{About|institutions that grant Doctor of Medicine (M.D. or M.D.C.M.) degrees only|information on other systems|alternative medicine}}

. This produces:

PrimeHunter (talk) 00:54, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for explaining, and for fixing it. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:19, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

is it true...

is it true that too much time spent on reading from computer screens causes eye damage to need reading glasses and what are the causes? what types of reading glasses are needed and how do we avoid this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.150.252.80 (talk) 01:16, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know! If you're looking for an answer from someone here on Wikipedia check out the Reference desk. Samwalton9 (talk) 01:31, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

hodgeville sask. elementary school

The new Hodgeville elementary school was opened in 1966. I became principal of the school for the 1996 school year.

Dennis Watson. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.181.135.102 (talk) 01:50, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dennis. If you have an improvement to a page, in general you are welcome to be bold and edit the article; ideally all information in an article should be referenced to reliable published sources: personal knowledge is not enough. (I notice that the article Hodgeville School is sorely lacking in references.) In this case, because of your Conflict of interest, your recommended course would be to post the correction, with a source, to the article's Talk page Talk:Hodgeville School, and let an uninvolved editor make the change. If nothing happens (eg because there are not enough people going to that page, then please come back here with your references (I've just had a quick look, and failed to find any references which mention you and the school; but there may be local reliable sources). --ColinFine (talk) 12:23, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In what cases leads to my wikipedia account will get suspended?

Ram nareshji (talk) i mean i want to create a wikipedia article about some website, but i fear about if i done any mistakes while creating will it leads to my account suspensions? & also in what cases leads to my wikipedia account suspension? so i will be more careful when creating & editing wiki articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ram nareshji (talk • contribs) 04:02, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Terminology used at Wikipedia: Accounts may be blocked from editing and users may be banned.

However, that rarely occurs from a mistake or two by a new editor, rather happens because of repeated instances of active disruption and ignoring warnings.

Note that if you have a connection to the website for which you wish to create an article you have a conflict of interest, and should NOT create or actively edit that article. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 04:12, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Venezuela: IPA

Venezuela claims the Spanish pronunciation to be [be.neˈswela], but also to be [βeneˈswela]. Shouldn't we mark the Castilian and the local pronunciations? (Please any linguistical mistakes in this post...) --92.74.113.25 (talk) 05:12, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is the relevance of Castilian? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:21, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see two conflicting statements as to what the Spanish pronunciation is. Did I miss something? If there are two versions of the IPA statement of the Spanish pronunciation, then they should certainly be labeled as to dialects. If only one is listed, it would nonetheless be useful to label it as Venezuelan Spanish, because it might otherwise be thought to be Castilian. On the other hand, this discussion can be taken to Talk: Venezuela. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:14, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

hey can you help me with bitcoin donations stuff

Can you help me find out why they don't take bitcoin donation? I'm so tired of the constant badgering for money without accepting my sole method of contribution. Are there links to explain why wikipedia won't take bitcoin that someone could share?

173.212.65.146 (talk) 05:36, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can see the Foundation's response to the request of Bitcoin's in their fundraiser FAQ. Basically, Bitcoin is being considered and may be a future option, but for now, Wikimedia's position is to use currencies "backed by the full faith and credit of an issuing government". ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 06:03, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

Good morning, I want to mark all my edits as minor edits. How can I change my preferences to click v = This is a minor edit below the edit box as standard? Here Help:Minor edit I didn't found an explanation. Could you add some words there too? Thanks --Frze ^{> talk} 08:14, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See Should we remove the Preference setting to "Mark all edits minor by default" ?. The preference setting was removed sometime in late 2010, but the discussion notes that users who had been properly using this preference in the past can probably install a javascript to restore the functionality. That discussion also mentions marking major edits as minor being problematic. I found Wikipedia:Vandalism#Gaming the system, which identifies marking bad faith edits as minor to get less scrutiny as problematic. Also, per MediaWiki:Abusefilter-warning-minoredit, making large changes when marking the edit as minor results in editors receiving the notice and added to the Abuse Log. I'm not sure if that warning filter is working, see Change history for Edit Filter #368. MediaWiki:Abusefilter-warning-minoredit reads "If you are logged in and encounter this message frequently, you may want to disable the "Mark all edits minor by default" setting under the Editing tab in your preferences.", so it may be out of date. -- Jreferee (talk) 10:36, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of active Bulgarian military aircraft

What's wrong with this page? >>> References and See also sections appear above wikitable. --Frze ^{> talk} 10:23, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed by closing table.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 10:52, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to be aggressively edited, and am not sure I am doing the talk right to avoid an edit war.

Can you let me know if I am following the process correctly? New to editing.

Wikipedia:ILADS

Thanks

Bob the goodwin (talk) 11:24, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:ILADS does not exist, but ILADS redirects to International Lyme And Associated Diseases Society. I see that you have raised the question at Talk:International Lyme And Associated Diseases Society, which is the correct place for any discussion. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:59, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:International Lyme And Associated Diseases Society is the location of discussions.Bob the goodwin (talk) 06:25, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What if I get reverted without any talk notes given? Should I undo the revert after 48 hours? Bob the goodwin (talk) 23:19, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Best idea would be to leave the reverting user a message on their talk page asking for clarification :) Samwalton9 (talk) 23:22, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I thought about doing that, but when I looked at his user page he seemed to be getting mad at people for writing on his user page instead of the article page. I guess I have to be extra nice to try not to do the wrong thing. Bob the goodwin (talk) 23:28, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, then wait for a reply on the talk page; there's no rush! I've tidied up the multiple RfCs you started to just one by the way. For future reference, when asking questions to determine consensus there is no need to start an RfC unless the topic is hotly debated, just leaving a message there and waiting for replies is good enough. Samwalton9 (talk) 23:34, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I am starting to get how it works. I am a little embarrassed by my rookie mistakes. It is a little shocking at first to have the wolves come after you, but in retrospect they were both correct and helpful once I learned a little. Bob the goodwin (talk) 06:25, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Borrisokane Athletic Club - reference borrisokane history

Hi there ,

I was browsing through the borrisokane web page and upon reading about the athletic club I think it should make reference to the clubs founder , a Mr. John O' Farrell . Mr. O' Farrell founded this club some 30 years ago and has coached and successfully trained athletes to compete at European level . Borrisokane is one of the most successful clubs in ireland with a population of just over a thousand people . Mr.O 'Farrell still runs the club today and should be acknowledged .

Regards his son

John O' Farrell jnr — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.255.101.213 (talk) 13:24, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We cover subjects based upon what third party reliable sources say about the subject. If you have sources that show the impact your father has had on the subject, then you can place them on the article's talk page as potential sources, but as someone with a conflict of interest, you should not be editing articles directly to add content about your father. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:46, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

since we do not have Borrisokane Athletic Club - are you talking about this article Borrisokane#Sport or this one Borrisokane GAA? if you are talking about the first article, mention of the manager of the club in the article about the town would probably be WP:UNDUE weight to a trivial detail in the view of the town itself. If you are talking about the second, the mention of a long term manager would probably be appropriate, if properly sourced. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:57, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Option for using svg images in articles?

I have noticed that Wikipedia rasterizes all vector images before inserting them into articles. Is there any option for telling Wikipedia to insert the original (vector) versions of the images instead of the rasterized ones? —Kri (talk) 13:45, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No. Media:Example.svg links directly to the original file instead of the file page File:Example.svg which displays a png for svg images, but the svg cannot be displayed in articles or other pages. See more about svg files at commons:Help:SVG. A link like Media:Example.svg would often break license conditions by not letting the viewer see the file page. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:57, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

failure to add relevant page

There seems to be no one responsible for much of anything at WIKI. I have asked repeatedly for a site to be added, but it has not happened. This was a originally a site that was taken down when we added it ourselves, but a page that would provide information about a university college, identical to those of other, similar colleges. It was removed as being too commercial, but that makes no sense given that it paralleled other non-profit universities' college sites.

This lack of professional and appropriate decision-making on the part of WIKI only confirms my growing belief that it is an unreliable and mercurial source of information. As a professor, I steer my students away from it and do not allow at as a source of any kind for research papers.

This is simply for someone's information, but since there is no one to talk at this peculiar institution, I do not imagine that anyone will pay attention or that it will result in any improvements in the current process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.119.40.26 (talk) 14:25, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. It appears that you may not fully understand how Wikipedia works. The encyclopedia is written by volunteers and no editor (other than relatively little employed at the Wikimedia Foundation) is paid for their time here, so please do not accuse the site of being unprofessional and unable to make good decisions. As for your concern, I'm not sure which university college page it was since you haven't mentioned but you should understand some of Wikipedia's policies. Firstly, and assumedly the reason that the article was deleted, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia which means that the content must be written from a Neutral point of view; this means that articles which appear to be blatant advertisement will be removed. Your argument that other university college's articles are similar in nature to the deleted one is irrelevant, Wikipedia is not perfect and there are an incredible amount of bad articles on the site which editors have simply missed.

As for the comment on steering your students away from using Wikipedia as a source, I would think that as a professor you would understand that the sources Wikipedia uses should ALWAYS be used before Wikipedia itself for a research paper, that you would say this only because of your opinion that Wikipedia isn't reliable surprises me. Hope I helped, feel free to respond here or on my talk page if you are still not sure on any of the above. Samwalton9 (talk) 14:51, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only edit by your IP address and you didn't mention which page it is about so we cannot see the appropriateness of the page or whether you asked for its addition in the right place. A look at this help desk will show that posters usually get replies quickly, just as you did. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:57, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

as a professor, you SHOULD be steering your students away from citing Wikipedia as a source. Good for you! Incidentally, we do not consider Wikipedia a reliable source, either. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:27, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Wolf Ticket" photo has been removed

At the request of my close personal friend, Dr. Herbert Foster, I recently submitted a photograph of the "Wolf Ticket" (also labeled "woof ticket") to be included in the Wikipedia write-up of Wolf Ticket. The article described the ticket and the fact that it first appeared in his book. But I neglected to include any copyright information. That information is shown below. This information, along with the information contained in your write-up should be sufficient to allow the picture to remain intact. Earlier this week, it had been removed. Thanks for your help in this regard. Howard Kight

c. 1986 Ballinger Publishing Company, a subsidiary of Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. ISBN #0-9624847-0-9 Library of Congress #89-092549 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hrkight (talk • contribs) 19:40, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:File:Wolf Ticcket.jpg was deleted because it included no copyright tag. If the image is free of copyright it can be loaded to commons again, or if another suitable copyright tag is available it can be loaded to Wikipedia. Details are at Wikipedia:File copyright tags/Comprehensive. You need to ascertain who owns the copyright to the image, and they would need to grant the appropriate release of copyright. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:08, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For most purposes, images cannot be used in Wikipedia unless they are either in the public domain, or have been explicitly released under one of the CC licences (which allow them to be used by anybody, for any purpose, with proper attribution). To release an image, the copyright holder should follow the procedure in Donating copyright materials. There is a limited possibility of using non-free material, provided such use complies with all of the Non free content criteria. --ColinFine (talk) 21:43, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Citation template error

Rome Catholic School (Rome, New York) has an error with its citation template, but since I never use citation templates, I don't know how to fix it. Code is

{{cite web|url=http://www.romecatholic.org/PAGES/tradition.htm|title=Rome Catholic-Proud of Our Tradition|accessdate=2007-07-31|publisher=Rome Catholic Schools website|author=RCHS}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}

Here, this produces a result of

RCHS. "Rome Catholic-Proud of Our Tradition". Rome Catholic Schools website. Retrieved 2007-07-31. ^{[dead link‍]}

However, in the article there's a big long space like a tab character between "07-" and "31". Any idea what's wrong? I deleted the last few characters in the accessdate and retyped them, in case we had a no-width character in there, but nothing changed. Nyttend (talk) 21:54, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see this issue in the article. Samwalton9 (talk) 21:59, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh. Are you sure it isn't because the reflist is columned, and combined with the width of your browser window you see the 31 on the next line? Samwalton9 (talk) 22:01, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see a large gap between the words "Catholic" and "Schools", but can't see the reason why. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:07, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Has my edit fixed it for either of you? Samwalton9 (talk) 22:17, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes --David Biddulph (talk) 22:24, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, fixed. Nyttend (talk) 00:44, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: Site-wide CSS was recently added to prevent widows and orphans in columns, but it won't work when an extreme situation like this is forced. -- Gadget850^talk 15:21, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PROBLEM: New Template:Comets Edit.

A new Template Edit (ie, at Template:Comets => new edit) displays correctly on the Template Page (ie, Template:Comets) but the new edit does not seem to display at all on an article page containing the template (as examples => the Comet and the Comet Hale–Bopp article pages) - Solution(s) Welcome - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 22:34, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you've got a caching problem? --David Biddulph (talk) 22:42, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment - I cleared my Chrome browser caches on several PCs but the problem doesn't seem to be solved - any ideas as to what to do next? - in any case - thanks again for your comment - and - enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 22:48, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

UPDATE: PROBLEM SOLVED - after a *very* thorough Chrome browser cache cleaning - thanks for the comment in any regards - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 23:11, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's often Wikipedia which needs purging when template edits don't propagate. See Wikipedia:Purge. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:16, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter - Thanks for the comment - and link to WP:Purge - it's appreciated - added { {purge}} to several template pages (ie, Template:Comets and Template:Extrasolar planet counts) - seems to work well - thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 02:27, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Drbogdan: It has no effect to purge the templates. It is pages using the templates which may have to be purged if you want them to update faster. Usually it's better to just wait for them to update automatically at some time. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:53, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: Thanks for your comments - they're appreciated - for some reason, at least in the case of Template:Extrasolar planet counts, a "null edit" (or equivalent) seems needed to propagate the edit - not sure if this problem is the same (or even related) to the one with Template:Comets - if interested, a discussion of the Template:Extrasolar planet counts concern is here => Template talk:Extrasolar planet counts#Template caching issue - any suggestions/workarounds/etc welcome of course - in any case - Thanks again for your earlier comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:19, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote to the administrator of the page and listed books which ought to appear in the bibliography. This was deleted. No answer. Why?

I listed several books that are not on the bibliography. I explained their importance, that they have been confirmed by many able people. I asked for reasons for the deletion (which has occurred in the past). I have received no information of any kind and the text I produced has been deleted — Preceding unsigned comment added by Achilles496 (talk • contribs) 22:37, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Achilles, first thing to mention is that no page on Wikipedia is owned by any one person, including administrators; the person may not be an administrator on the site and definitely doesn't own that particular page. It is, however, next to impossible to answer your question because I don't know which page you're talking about, this appears to be your only edit to Wikipedia from this account. If you can link us to the article I'll help you out. Samwalton9 (talk) 22:41, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Achilles496: If you edited a bibliography previously using an IP address before creating a user ID, and didn't provide a reliable source or an edit summary, it is likely that your contributions would have been reverted. As Samwalton9 says, we need to know what page you are referring to. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:17, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]