Help desk
< July 16	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 18 >

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 17

wrong picture

you have the wrong picture for walter Brennan this id his picture. Rio bravo and whos minding the mint http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://celebgreat.com/pics/23/f5/Walter-Brennan-c93ea.jpg&imgrefurl=http://celebgreat.com/Best-awards-winners/Walter-Brennan.html&h=313&w=279&sz=90&tbnid=68Lt--bQkg1z5M:&tbnh=97&tbnw=86&zoom=1&usg=__AbInegD6tkPKxkToTccK5n9gs5s=&docid=KGMEds-SLWbP4M&sa=X&ei=GPPlUdyPM8TQiwK764G4Ag&ved=0CIgBEP4dMAw

you have Jack albertson. Jack Albertson. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fireslyer (talk • contribs) 01:40, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Fireslyer: I see the image on Walter Brennan looks like the Google image you linked. Am I missing something? That's entirely possible, it happens a lot. ~Charmlet ^-talk- 02:14, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that particular text was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:19, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

picture of Rhonda Sivarajah is off-center in the Wikipedia article Rhonda Sivarajah

Hello -

I uploaded a picture of Rhonda Sivarajah,in the Wikipedia article, Rhonda Sivarajah, Rhonda Sivarajah, however the picture is off-center.

How do I correct this?

Cybermann — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cybermann (talk • contribs) 04:43, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Cybermann. Fixed. Image markup like |thumb and the like are for telling the software how to treat an image when stand-alone. Infobox templates supply the coding for images so you don't include such image markup when you use them. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:57, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Minor correction to the above: Some Infobox templates supply the coding for images.... As it happens, {{Infobox politician}} does.--ukexpat (talk) 13:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Elderwood Gang (Chinese Hacker Group) Page deleted

Like the title says, can a administrator review why this page was deleted. I feel like the gang itself hacked its way into deleting it from an admin's account.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elderwood_Gang — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crutt101 (talk • contribs) 07:24, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Elderwood Gang was moved to Elderwood Group, and that page was deleted because there was only one editor working on it and they asked for it to be deleted. RudolfRed (talk) 07:30, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically, User:M0rphzone was the only contributor and requested deletion with {{Db-g7}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You or others are welcome, of course, to create an article on this topic, assuming notability requirements are met. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:25, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help When Posssibly Dealing With An Overly Agressive / Manipulative Reviewer / editor?

Where Might One seek out others for counsil / help with such matters?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Truth, reality and justice (talk • contribs) 08:27, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and Wikipedia:Disruptive editing. Try to work things out by using the talk pages of the article (s) and of the other editor. If all else fails, Wikipedia:Administrators' Noticeboard is the place to go, but this should be a last resort.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:01, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I get the impression you are seeking help with regard to the article you submitted for creation, "Ronnie Pollock/ DySFUNCTIONAL", which was declined. I'd like to suggest that what you may need help with is the style, format, and content of articles on Wikipedia, not help with managing an overly aggressive editor. You have been given advice and links on these points several times, but until you decide to carefully read and follow them rather than engaging in a battle of wills with more experienced editors, you are unlikely to end up successfully creating a Wikipedia article on Mr. Pollock that will withstand a deletion nomination. You will also want to start spellchecking your text, and being more careful about things like the use of "your" and "you're", even on talk pages, because these things signal that you're not being careful with your writing— Wikipedia is about the written word. Good luck! KDS4444^Talk 13:13, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would have to question whether this is the case. This person hadn't edited the "Ronnie Pollock/ DySFUNCTIONAL" article in months, then made one small edit, posted the question (in the wrong place; I moved it) then started making lots of edits to the article. It's like he/she decided there was going to be trouble and asked before trouble happened.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 16:15, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Interwiki link required

Hi, Can someone add an Interwiki link to Category:Railway stations in Seine-Maritime pointing at Catégorie:Gare de la Seine-Maritime in the Freanch Wikipedia ? I understand my version of Internet Explorer does not provide this facility, Thanks GrahamHardy (talk) 09:21, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done by PrimeHunter See [1] --Glaisher [talk] 10:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What IE version and why do you think it cannot do it? Do you see "Edit links" under the languages? I have done it. The English category already had its own entry at wikidata:Q8630350. I merged that into wikidata:Q9098131 which was linked from the French version. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:34, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why am I listed as active on French Wikipedia?

I checked my preferences for the first time in a long time, and noticed I'm "active on 2 project sites". I clicked the "global info" button, and it lists fr.wikipedia.org along with en and (correctly) notes I've made no edits there.

It also says I registered on April 11, 2013. I haven't registered for anything with the word "wiki" in it since February 2006. Is it normal to be autoregistered, or do I have a problem? Something else, maybe? InedibleHulk (talk) 11:16, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I can read enough French to get the gist of things, but not enough to write it, speak it or understand it spoken. So I'd rather not be there, if possible. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:18, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia projects have unified login. If you visit another project when you are logged in then your account is automatically created there. Special:CentralAuth/InedibleHulk shows you must have done that 22 April. "active" only means the account has been created. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:30, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) This seems to be a strange one - either you went on the French Wikipedia when logged it to Wikipedia, or some other SUL thing has happened. WP:VPT may know more. Mdann52 (talk) 12:33, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible you altered a file that's hosted on the French Wikipedia and pulled over to here from there, or that you otherwise strayed accidentally without realising it. It's nothing to worry about, but you may wish to head over there and put a redirect on your user talk to direct potential discussions to your English page. drewmunn talk 12:38, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That seems the only conceivable explanation. I can't remember ever visiting French Wikipedia, but I have worked with some images, possibly around April 22, which may have been used there. Thanks! InedibleHulk (talk) 21:38, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a big deal. I have numerous active accounts in languages I don't speak at all (mostly from fixing interwiki links and photos). It is not like you are require to keep an active participation at each site. Rmhermen (talk) 12:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When you haven't edited at the French Wikipedia there is no reason to make a link to your English account. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:14, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, Rmhermen, not a big deal to me, either. Just slightly odd and confusing, at first. And no, PrimeHunter, I don't intend on linking. Pointless, indeed. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note that when articles are transwikied to another language as this one was, the contributions from the English Wikipedia will show up in the history for attribution (as it is as here you can see contributions by long term en editors whom are not active on de). While this case is unrelated to you InedibleHulk, you may find that you have contributions to anther language Wikipedia that you have never edited (although you have no contributions on fr). While this doesn't apply to you on the French Wikipedia, it does for example in German. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 22:26, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How does X work?

i have created a page named Netarpal Deol. i want to know that why this page is deleted.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Netar007 (talk • contribs)

See the message in the deletion tag:

This article may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as an article about a real person that does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject.--ukexpat (talk) 13:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See also Wikipedia:Notability (people). This is an encyclopedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:22, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can't see a user's comment

Can anyone else see this comment? I see the change in the history. If I edit the page, I can see the comment, but I don't actually see it on the talk page. Is it just me? Jauersock^dude?/_dude. 15:31, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. It's showing up now. I don't know what went wrong. Maybe I'm imagining things. Jauersock^dude?/_dude. 15:32, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It may be a caching issue; as I found out earlier today, adding ?action=purge to the end of the URL clears Wikipedia's cache (but not your browser's, mind). Worth bearing in mind in the future... drewmunn talk 16:08, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Editing a box or table that doesn't have an edit button.

On the right of the Wiki entry that I am working on is a box with a photograph and biographical information about the person of interest. How can that box be edited? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rebassistant (talk • contribs) 18:09, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From the main 'Edit' tab along the top. Dru of Id (talk) 18:15, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The section is an 'Infobox' which a template produces, starting from a double braces {{ and ending with them }}. The template will only recognise previously defined fields. Dru of Id (talk) 18:18, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Preferences/ Gadgets/ Appearance includes an option to include an edit link for the lead section. Even without that option, the Edit tab at the top of the page allows you to edit the whole page, including the infobox to which you refer. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:18, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be referring to the article Reb Anderson. You can edit the box by either clicking Edit or Edit source at the page. If you click Edit source, you should see some markup like this:

{{Infobox religious biography

|background =

|name =

}}

There you can edit the infobox by editing this code.

You can also edit it by clicking Edit. In that case, simply click on the infobox after clicking Edit. A small icon that looks like a puzzle piece should appear. Click on it to edit the info in the box. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 18:31, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is an appropriate fair use right?

This image from this page on the BBC website for the article Nightmare in Silver? Thanks ツ Jenova 20 ^(email) 18:15, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If it was reduced in size, a non-free rationale template completed for that article and tagged with {{Non-free title-card}}, it would comply with WP:NFCC.--ukexpat (talk) 18:30, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is inappropriate. Some images like that have been discussed at WP:NFCR (see for example Wikipedia:Non-free content review/Archive 21#Star Trek: Voyager episode images). Such screenshots are usually only appropriate if there is sourced discussion about the specific image, which is implicitly necessary for satisfying WP:NFCC#8. So while this might be appropriate under fair use, it is likely not compliant with NFCC#8. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 18:41, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Without it we are forced to direct users to a different article Cybermen to see the newer incarnation of the 2013 Cybermen, which will undoubtedly change again next series in some way or another. That article will eventually change to the newer image also, which means the reader is disadvantaged. I uploaded it as File:Doctor Who Nightmare In Silver Wallpaper.jpg.

With so many articles on episodes for multiple shows and films having a Fair Use image this is certainly up there with a good reasoning i believe. What do you think? Thanks ツ Jenova 20 ^(email) 18:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, this is not an "episode image", it is a "title card" and we have hundreds if not thousands of articles where title cards are used pursuant to WP:NFCC without a problem, and as I mentioned above we even have a specific template for such use.--ukexpat (talk) 19:03, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have not placed it in the article after seeing the message by Toshio above. Have i tagged the image correctly UKexpat? Thanks ツ Jenova 20 ^(email) 19:09, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I moved it to File:Doctor Who Nightmare In Silver title card.jpg which is a more accurate title and tweaked the info page. However, a non-free image must be used in an article - orphaned non-free images will be deleted.--ukexpat (talk) 19:18, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have added it.--ukexpat (talk) 19:22, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. What did you mean by "However, a non-free image must be used in an article". I thought non-free images were to be avoided if a free version was available? Thanks ツ Jenova 20 ^(email) 19:23, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Ukexpat Mea culpa. I admit I haven't looked carefully enough at the image, as I became distracted off-Wiki. My apologies. That use is probably okay, as Ukexpat pointed out above, as it is like cover art of a CD, where such images usually can be used. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 19:27, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Jenova See WP:NFCC#7. It is used in an article now, so that is no longer an issue. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 19:27, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes free images are preferred, but the only basis on which a non-free image can be uploaded is if it is used in an article - unused, non-free images are not permitted.--ukexpat (talk) 19:41, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know that bit, I just suffered a momentary lapse of brainpower with the phrasing and the heat. Thanks a lot for the help Ukexpat ツ Jenova 20 ^(email) 08:54, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help! Another editor is threatening to block me over a good faith edit.

I made an edit to Noah (movie), noting that Russell Crowe and Jennifer Connelly who are playing husband and wife had also played husband and wife in A Beautiful Mind (and Connelly won an Academy Award). User:Elizium23 said, despite the fact that the information was right there on those two wiki pages (in the Cast lists), that not only was this unsourced but if it happened again, I would be blocked. I have made hundreds of edits on Wikipedia and never been threatened like this before. And it was our first encounter.

I looked at his Talk Page archive and there were a lot of unhappy people responding to similar blocking threats. Unfortunately, all of them were now red-link accounts, showing that they had deactivated their accounts.

It's absurd threats like this (I'm not even sure whether User:Elizium23 is an admin or not) which cause people to abandon their efforts to improve Wikipedia.

I have no way of finding where to file a complaint so I just came here and maybe I can get an neutral third party to stop these hasty and drastic threats. 69.125.134.86 (talk) 18:38, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have you attempted to discuss this with the other editor? In any event, sourced or not I don't think your edit is encyclopedic. It smacks to me of movie trivia.--ukexpat (talk) 18:40, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I concur that the information is completely irrelevant to the article. More to the point, we do not use other Wikipedia pages as sources for articles, so Elizium was in the right on that matter. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:44, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I see on a lot of other pages that when certain actors and directors work together (Scorsese & DeNiro, Del Toro & Perlman, etc.) that this fact is noted on their articles. How could the cast list that is posted on Noah be considered an unreliable source...or who has been cast in the movie? And A Beautiful Mind is a 12 year old film, that Jennifer Connelly won an Academy Award for...this is all on the Wikipedia page that has been worked on for over a decade. I can't refer to the page itself for having accurate information?

But even if you think this is trivial, that was not User:Elizium23's complaint...his complaint was that this fact didn't have adequate citation. My question is what else is required?

But regardless of how you view this edit, should a well-intentioned addition merit the threat of a block? That's what bothers me more. I've had very constructive conversations with other editors to improve an article. But I've never been threatened (and in our first encounter). I don't know whether he is an admin or not, but I don't this is assuming good faith in other editors and it just seems like the result of the threats have been editors deactivating their accounts. 69.125.134.86 (talk) 18:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The first thing to do in a case like this is to discuss with the other editor. Have you done that? If not, you should.--ukexpat (talk) 18:58, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've pointed User:Elizium23 to this discussion and asked why they used a template threatening blocking on a good-faith editor. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 19:03, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty obvious -- this IP editor has been warned several times already for similar actions. A warning that continuing the same behavior will eventually lead to a block is entirely appropriate. Looie496 (talk) 19:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. They've been warned for adding unsourced content to a BLP, deleting something without explaining in an edit summary, linking to YouTube, and adding poorly-understood content. And in a recent thread they're reading unpleasantness into comments where there is none. None of that is exactly what they're being warned for here. But, given all that, fair enough. IP, be more careful and support any changes you make with reliable sources. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 19:36, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)This is just a guess here but the user may have seen all the other editors on your talk page who had reverted your edits and just used a higher level warning template. (That warning is a standard template, by the way). Dismas|^(talk) 19:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OP, just to address your specific question: no, Wikipedia cannot be regarded as a reliable source by definition, regardless of how long the article in question has been under development. See WP:RS for the definition of reliable sources. - Ka renjc 21:16, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, regarding "Unfortunately, all of them were now red-link accounts, showing that they had deactivated their accounts", that is incorrect. Red links to the name of a registered editor shows that an editor hasn't created a user page, typical of brand new or novice editors; red links to a user talk page (rarer) show that there is no talk page for that editor, either. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:19, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have retracted the warning per WP:AGF and his claim here that he was never threatened before. I took that to mean he has never been warned, perhaps he inherited his IP address from a more disruptive contributor. Elizium23 (talk) 05:38, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Printing articles about mathematics

What is the best way to print mathematical articles? Formulas often appear in a graphic-like format that is difficult to printed properly, at least from my browser (IE 10, Windows 7). There are two problems:

(1) The text comes out in gray scale with inexact borders. Small symbols, like subscripts, have broken, fuzzy shapes that are difficult to read.

(2) More serious, a plus sign can print as a minus sign. The problem goes away if you use the IE print dialog to change the DPI setting to 1200 from the default of 600, but this is hardly an obvious thing to do.

Example: Print the article "Goodstein's theorem". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsewsi (talk • contribs) 19:08, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saved that article as a PDF and it appears to have worked OK. Have you tried that?--ukexpat (talk) 19:13, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also try changing Preferences → Appearance → Math. I suggest trying MathJax first, then the others. -- Gadget850^talk 16:20, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quickie aircraft

The Quickie Aircraft was an original design by my brother Tom Jewett, not Burt Rutan. My brother was an aeronautical engineer and designed planes from the age of 3 years old. I witnessed his designs and this is his plane and he won the Outstanding New Design Award at the Oshkosh Fly In-I was there that year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.173.250.18 (talk) 19:57, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The involvement of 3 designers is mentioned at Rutan Quickie. If you have references to published reliable sources to support further information, please feel free to provide it, either directly to the article or on its talk page. Note that your personal knowledge, if unpublished, can not be used to support information in Wikipedia, as it needs to be verifiable. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

John Langdon

My Wikipedia page is: John Langdon (typographer)

My web assistant and I added quite a bit of new text a couple of months ago, and tried a couple of times to load several images to illustrate information covered in the text. Last time, we thought we were successful, but a couple of days later the images were no longer on my page.

I am an artist. It's important to me to have images of my work on my Wikipedia page. All the images I want to load are ones that I hold the copyrights for.

Neither my web assistant or I can figure out what the problem is. We believe we have followed all the guidelines and instructions. Can you help?

Thanks, John Langdon JohnLangdon (talk) 22:44, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to use copyrighted images that you hold the rights to, you can follow the guidance at WP:IOWN to licence the images in a way that is allowable at Wikipedia. Also, you and your assistant should make sure to read WP:COI and WP:AUTO for guidance on editing this article. RudolfRed (talk) 23:04, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) It appears from the messages on your user talk page that the images were loaded under a non-free use licence, claiming a fair use exemption. As shown in those messages, Wikipedia has tight restrictions on the use of non-free material. To avoid that problem, the material would need to be given a free licence, by the process described under donating copyrighted material.

Even then, it is possible that other editors might consider that the use of the images would be excessive. In your question above you say "I am an artist. It's important to me to have images of my work on my Wikipedia page". It might therefore be thought that you are trying to use the Wikipedia page for advertising or self-promotion. I would therefore recommend that you read Wikipedia's guidance on autobiography, and on conflict of interest. - David Biddulph (talk) 23:12, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]