Help desk
< August 23	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 25 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

August 24

Referencing errors on Draft:Henry Miller Memorial Library

Reference help requested. Hi, how do i fix this? Thanks! Thanks, Michaelwhite (talk) 00:21, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit introduced a stray <ref /> tag, which I removed. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 00:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How to create an account for L' Core Paris

Wikipedia keeps on deleting articles about L' Core Paris products but I know that it is a legitimate cosmetic company and would like to know if it is possible to create an article about it. Can someone help me?Merkabaraphael21 (talk) 01:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Read the advice at WP:YFA, particularly the part about notability and citing sources, and then use the link there to to create a draft at Articles for Creation. RudolfRed (talk) 02:18, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Merkabaraphael21: Along with RudolfRed's advice, you should also make sure that the articles are not too promotional in context, which can be especially challenging to do if you are affiliated with the product(s) in any way through a conflict of interest. (or if the articles include too many external links, see WP:PRIMARY & WP:SECONDARY). Hope this helps. MeowMoon (talk) 04:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Laird

Please remove the funny sign and dot near ref number 2 on this page. I have done a bad "cut and paste". Sorry - please fix 123.2.36.6 (talk) 05:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please, Mike, stop being a pain. If you are not capable of using the delete key to correct your own mistakes, you should not be editing Wikipedia. In any case, what you added to the article was untrue and not supported by the reference. You said "The UK Government requests that holders of a Lairdship record their title, e.g. John Doe, Laird of [......], as an "observation" in their passport", but the reference says "The Lord Lyon King of Arms has also confirmed that for Scottish Lairds it is not necessary for the words "Laird of" to appear on any part of a passport." I have therefore reverted your edit, which solves the problem of the spare characters. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David I am sorry for being "a pain". I have really tried hard to use the correct citation RE this Laird article and also I have tried very hard to represent the facts clearly. I hope you like my edit which has been done in good faith as usual. 101.182.30.213 (talk) 09:28, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Formulae do not display on Wikipedia pages - why, and how do I fix

Formulae used to display on my old iPad on pages like this,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-body_radiation

Now they do not display. I have used Safari and Dolphin browsers. Both used to display formulae, now neither does. How can I fix this problem?

Thanks67.180.89.237 (talk) 05:11, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reporting, this is caused by an experiment that is currently running on mobile, which has had some unintended consequences. You can't and won't have to do anything, they will return soon, but you can follow discussion around related problems on the technical village pump. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 07:59, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pirate Amaro Pargo

Amaro Pargo: This article needs a complete overhaul since some erroneous data. They can take as an example the articles in Spanish and French that were recently improved. For example: The King Philip V of Spain named him "Señor de soga y cuchillo" (a medieval institution). This title does not exist.--88.9.101.51 (talk) 08:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for pointing this out. However, such concerns are best raised at the article's talkpage or at the talkpage of a Wikipedia project covering this topic. I have added a few additional project banners with possibly interested editors to Talk:Amaro Rodríguez Felipe (the redirect target for "Amaro Pargo"). When suggesting changes, please make sure to provide reliable sources for your information. Of course you can also add sourced information to the article or correct errors yourself. GermanJoe (talk) 13:55, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Editing toolbar

When I edit certain pages, i.e., my userpage, I don't see the icon for adding my sig in the toolbar, whereas on other pages, e.g., this one, I do.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:29, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It happens sometimes. Probably a issue for WP:VPT or is there a simpler explanation Varun FEB2003 ^{I am Offline} 14:44, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Bbb23. According to Phab:T7645, the signature button is intentionally hidden in non-discussion namespaces. - NQ (talk) 15:34, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@NQ: That makes sense generally. However, there are pages that are discussion pages but don't appear to be, e.g., user subpages created for a specialized discussion. Is there a naming convention one could use for such pages that would enable the button? What about creating them off the user Talk page as opposed to off the userpage? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:39, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A naming convention sounds inflexible but Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed might be used to request the button. More generally, there might be a MediaWiki message a wiki could set to a category name. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:51, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: The relevant setting seems to be mw:Manual:$wgExtraSignatureNamespaces. In addition to talkpages, it is enabled by default in the 'Wikipedia' as well as 'Help' namespace on en.wiki. Perhaps extend it to the 'User' namespace as well? I don't see any drawbacks. - NQ (talk) 16:12, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added the hidden cat to User:GeneralizationsAreBad/Clerking, and it doesn't seem to work. Did I do it wrong?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:09, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: That cat only presses sinebot into action when someone leaves an unsigned comment. I don't think there is currently any other way to show the sign button in the toolbar unless it is enabled in the User namespace by the devs. - NQ (talk) 17:14, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23, I'm assuming you are asking for a way for the sign button to appear for everyone. If this is just for you, then it's quite easy. - NQ (talk) 18:05, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@NQ: Just for me unless there's a consensus that it's a good idea for everyone. Based on the phab report, it doesn't like there is.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:09, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: Try adding this to your vector.js

Extended content

jQuery( document ).ready( function ( $ ) {
	if ( !$.fn.wikiEditor ) {
		return;
	}
 
	$( '#wpTextbox1' ).wikiEditor( 'addToToolbar', {
		section: 'main',
		group: 'insert',
		tools: {
			'signature-ns2': {
				labelMsg: 'wikieditor-toolbar-tool-signature',
				filters: [ 'body.ns-2' ], 
				type: 'button',
				offset: [2, -1872],
				icon: 'insert-signature.png',
				action: {
					type: 'encapsulate',
					options: {
						pre: '--~~' + '~~'
					}
				}
			}
		}
	});
} );

Let me know how it goes. - NQ (talk) 18:18, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@NQ: Before I install a script that may cause me to involuntarily block all users who don't like sign buttons, I was hoping you were going to give me something that would allow me to add a button but only for specific pages. Now if on those specific pages it had the collateral effect of other users having the same button, that would be fine. I don't expect to do this very often and the pages probably won't interest anyone but me and at most a few other editors.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:55, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: All it does is add the

button to your toolbar when you're editing a "User:" page. (It's already available everywhere else) Since it goes into your personal script page, it has no effect on other users and loads only for you. - NQ (talk) 20:26, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@NQ: Finally added it. Every time I add a script it makes me nervous. Seems to work, though. Any way you can make it like the others where it's a single line (importscript). It looks "cluttered" to have the entire script on the page. Thanks, if I haven't already said that.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:53, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: Copy the contents of User:NQ/sandbox.js to User:Bbb23/sigbutton.js (you'd have to create it) and then replace the code you added in your vector.js with importScript('User:Bbb23/sigbutton.js'); - NQ (talk) 05:20, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@NQ: You're very kind. Thanks!--Bbb23 (talk) 13:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Some articles

Hello, I saw these articles are they all worth being a different article?

And Each one of them has a corresponding category for them and a template. Can't these be merged together (the articles, categories and templates) in say 1 template (using parameters), 2 categories, and 1 article? Help would be appreciated Varun FEB2003 ^{I am Offline} 14:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I need personal help from some experienced editor. Can anyone lend me a hand? Varun FEB2003 ^{I am Offline} 17:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

VarunFEB2003 I doubt any of these articles would survive a deletion discussion, as they fail Wikipedia's notability guidelines for individual seasons. I'll ask at the football (soccer) talkpage for someone to help, but probably they should be deleted/redirected to Moldovan "B" Division. Joseph2302 17:11, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wait wait I am going to merge them! Varun FEB2003 ^{I am Offline} 17:12, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph2302: I am getting the crux of the story now. They have 3 divisions - A, B and National Division. We can create one article - Moldovan Footbal (or something like that) which contains 3 level one headings - A Division, B Division and National Division. Each will contain info from respective articles in a more encyclopaedic form. Wikipedia is not a scorecard so all pages like those which contain just each yearly scorecards like 2007–08 Moldovan "A" Division (under each division) will be deleted. By this way we will finally end up cleaning almost 30 articles into 1 article! How is my Blueprint? Varun FEB2003 ^{I am Offline} 17:26, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll wait till tomorrow after which I shall perform the grand merger. Varun FEB2003 ^{I am Offline} 17:29, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Almost, but not quite, correct in my opinion. We already have articles Football in Moldova, which is a general page, and Moldovan National Division, Moldovan "A" Division, and Moldovan "B" Division, and all these articles are fine. The problem is all the articles about a specific season, such as 2009–10 Moldovan "B" Division, aren't needed, because Wikipedia only generally accepts season articles about seasons in important leagues, and the Moldovan "B" Division isn't important enough. Joseph2302 20:14, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keeping them in mind I am proposing deletion Varun FEB2003 ^{I am Offline} 07:15, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tool

Which tool do I use to clean the mess out here- Template:People's Liberation Army Divisions Varun FEB2003 ^{I am Offline} 14:45, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe it should be deleted you will need to nominate it for deletion using WP:TFD. -- GB fan 14:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@VarunFEB2003: What mess? It's a template that lists all the divisions of the PLA. - NQ (talk) 16:19, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@GB fan: I really appreciate that and I had done that even before you said so but my pleas was rejected and TFD notice removed! Since you are an admin can you help me out. On this as well as the request in the section above ↑. Thanks And @NQ: if you can't see the 'mess' I am referring to then.....I can't say anything! Varun FEB2003 ^{I am Offline} 16:53, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

VarunFEB2003, You did not nominate the template for deletion using WP:TFD. You nominated it for deletion using WP:CSD specifically WP:G1 stating that the template was patent nonsense. The template does not meet the definition of patent nonsense in WP:G1. If you think it should be deleted you will need to go to WP:TFD and follow the directions to nominate it. -- GB fan 16:59, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I'll check it out. Wonder why Twinkle doesn't provide it!? Varun FEB2003 ^{I am Offline} 17:02, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

VarunFEB2003, Twinkle does do it. You need to select XFD rather than CSD. -- GB fan 17:39, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok! Varun FEB2003 ^{I am Offline} 17:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@VarunFEB2003: Please see similar templates such as Template:British Army Divisions and Template:Soviet Union divisions, if that's the kind of 'mess' you're referring to. - NQ (talk) 17:10, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Followed GB Fan's advice! Varun FEB2003 ^{I am Offline} 17:11, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non-working non-local links

As noted at MediaWiki:Badtitletext, prefix-appended links to certain non-local sites don't work, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/meatball:WikiPedia is an error, because the meatball: prefix isn't set up to send people to the Meatball Wiki in the way that meatball:WikiPedia really is set up. Why doesn't this link, and why don't similar links, merely send people to a mainspace page with a title of "Meatball:WikiPedia", with a talk that would end up at [[Talk:Meatball:WikiPedia]]? I understand that the folks at Meta can set up the table (can't find a link, or I'd supply it) so that one link would send us to another wiki, and I understand how another prefix would be treated as part of the page name, but I can't understand how a link would work in a bracketed link (e.g. [[:meatball:WikiPedia]]) but not in the URL itself. And finally, do we have a list of interwiki prefices that don't work in the URL? I suppose it's probably in the interwiki map table, which I've tried and failed to find while writing this message. Nyttend (talk) 17:16, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Meatball is not tagged as "local" in the table (which btw is at meta:iwm, and local copy at Special:Interwiki), so searches and shortcuts will work, but full urls don't. All that's needed is to "simply" set the variable iw_local to 1 for whichever interwiki is needed. What the procedures and policies around that are, no clue here. Crow^Caw 17:53, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Redirects from Wikimedia sites to non-Wikimedia sites are not allowed and will probably never be allowed. toollabs: wasn't even allowed at phab:T74220 so it still has "no" under "Forward" at Special:Interwiki. meatball: is an interwiki prefix so "Meatball:WikiPedia" would be an illegal page name in mainspace. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:29, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question for administrator

<User:Ruud Koot according to his profile "a Ph.D. student in computer science" has made several changes to pages related to the Swarm Intelligence area. He removed numerous references and links from the Bees Algorithm page, substituting them with other non pertinent references, and copied and pasted the following statement: "Nature-inspired metaheuristics in general have started to attract criticism in the research community for hiding their lack of novelty behind an elaborate metaphor.[5][6][7][8][9] In response, Springer's Journal of Heuristics has updated their editorial policy to state that:[10] Implementations should be explained by employing standard optimization terminology, where a solution is called a "solution" and not something else related to some obscure metaphor (e.g., harmony, flies, bats, countries, etc.)." The same statement was copied and pasted (always poorly formatted) on the pages regarding the 'Artificial bee colony algorithm' and 'Harmony search', and probably many more. He has also deleted a long list of algorithms, links, and other material from the 'Swarm Intelligence' page, and semi-protected the page to stop changes. There is no way to undo the changes, as he promptly rolls back his version. From my point of view, his changes are scientifically incorrect. The statement about Nature-inspired metaheuristics is at best disrespectful, and ignorant of the impact of such techniques (over 6000 citations on the topic only this year according to WoS). His re-editing of the Swarm Intelligence page shows a very partial view of the subject, and discarded a lot of fundamental work in the area. I tried to ask him not to vandalise the pages, and respect the contributions of other authors to no avail. Would it be possible to have an administrator to look at the issue and possibly undo his changes? I do not mind scientific criticism of a topic which I value and contributed to, but I don't think one author should arbitrarily remove the contributions of many other colleagues. I am not sure how to report him, I reported his behavior at "Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism", I wonder whether the report should have gone to "Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents" How can I ask arbitration from an administrator? What should I do in similar cases?>

--Marco castellani 1965 (talk) 18:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Marco castellani. I get that you are upset about some edits Ruud Koot has made, but you are not going about the issue in a very constructive way. You have put a huge wall of text on this page, which I am not going to wade through to find out if it means anything to me (but the word "vandalise" jumps out at me: in Wikipedia "vandalism" means editing with the purpose of disrupting Wikipedia, and I think it very unlikely that an established editor like Koot has done that).

I see that you attempted to put a similar wall of text on Koot's talk page; but since you did so by replacing the entire content of his talk page by your wall of text, another editor very properly reverted you. Please try again, to post on User Talk:Ruud Koot in a new section, explaining in a more easily readable form how you disagree with his edits, and refrain from accusing him of vandalism. Alternatively, you could talk about it on the talk page of one of the relevant articles.

In any case, this appears to be a content dispute, and WP:Dispute resolution will tell you the proper way to proceed. --ColinFine (talk) 20:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear ColinFine, I am still trying to understand how to have an admin to arbitrate the disagreement. I tried to ask for help, and you replied "You have put a huge wall of text on this page, which I am not going to wade through". I read I should communicate with the other user (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism#Warnings), and unless I cancelled other content inadvertently, I have just added a warning with my view on Koot's page. When I tried to undo the changes on the Wiki pages, I added a motivation for undoing them, and it was ignored. Please be aware that Wikipedia procedures may be a quite confusing maze for non-expert users. Sro23 sent me a warning "you may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia." I can't say I found the whole system and admins to be user-friendly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marco castellani 1965 (talk • contribs) 22:19, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are absolutely correct that Wikipedia can be a confusing maze for new users. You might try playing in the sandbox which is a safe place to learn how to edit. However you've asked twice for the administrator to arbitrate a disagreement. Because you are new you are unaware that this is not a function of an administrator. While admin's sometimes get involved in dispute resolution, most dispute resolution involves non-admins.--S Philbrick (Talk) 00:26, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sphilbrick I don't think my main problem is to learn how to edit on the sandbox. My problem is how to stop a user from making extensive changes and deletions on 6-7 different Wikipages according to his personal views of a topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marco castellani 1965 (talk • contribs) 01:09, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, Marco castellani, at present your main problem is that you are assuming that you are right and somebody else is wrong. That might in the end be what the consensus decides, but the way to handle it in Wikipedia is by engaging with the other person, and only if you cannot get agreement to escalate according to dispute resolution. I realise that you tried to communicate on User talk:Ruud Koot, and I'm sure that you didn't mean to replace the whole page, but that is what you did. In my view the text you did add to it, like the text you added here, is so dense as to make me unwilling to look at it. I suggest that you post to User Talk:Ruud Koot in a new section, asking politely why he made the changes that you object to, and explaining why you think they are not improvements, rather than the combative way you have expressed yourself above. --ColinFine (talk) 12:45, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ColinFine, I tried to communicate my objections to user Ruud Koot in the motivation for the changes, Talk:Swarm intelligence, and Talk:Bees algorithm. He replied on my talk I have a conflict of interest, which is false and I objected to. I know other academics in the field tried to contact him even personally to no avail. When one user removes a significant portion of material, links, and references on several Wikipedia pages to push forward his personal negative view of a topic, I believe we have a 'democracy' problem. When this user is not an expert in the field, I believe Wikipedia has an authoritativeness problem. I do not believe I am right and somebody else is wrong. I believe one user shouldn't monopolise a topic and shut all other voices off. Anyway, I believe we are going off topic here. Marco castellani 1965 (talk) 14:25, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Marco castellani. If you think this is not just a content dispute, but there are behaviour issues, then WP:ANI is the place to raise it. But read the material at the top carefully; I suggest you have a look at WP:BOOMERANG as well (I'm not suggesting you're in the wrong: I simply haven't looked at the dispute you are complaining of). --ColinFine (talk) 15:36, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The mail arrived in the middle of the night. I'll reply to it after I get home. —Ruud 15:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I want to reperted article to deletion on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

I can't reported article to deletion because I am not very knowlage in mechanism on English wiki. I have got problem to I put in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of countries by length of expressways templates with links and etc.. Is someone who can help me? Dawid2009 (talk) 20:36, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I also am having a hard time getting template in List of countries by length of expressways now. Who can help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dawid2009 (talk • contribs) 20:36, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dawid2009: I have fixed the formatting at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of countries by length of expressways and a bot has added the notice to List of countries by length of expressways. The page WP:AFDHOWTO has a set of step-by-step instructions on how to nominate a page for deletion. clpo13_(talk) 20:46, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article requires current photos

HELP! the photos used in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_library School Library page are old and do not accurately represent current school libraries One is attributed to Minnesota and show a card catalog! There is NOT a single school library in the state of Minnesota that still has one. I have pictures to replace them. I have tried to edit the article, but it takes to me a page the tells me I an not the "right" type of editor.

This photo needs to be changed immediately.

I have tried to attach photos here but I keep getting this message. Please contact me and tell me how I can upload these current photos! {{autotranslate|base=Abusefilter-warning-baduploads}} Rettechlms (talk) 21:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rettechlms, it's time for a reference interview. At the moment, I don't know what the issue is, basically because I need more information. Please go back to the page that tells you that you're not the right type of editor, copy the URL into your clipboard, and paste the URL here; knowing where you're being sent will help diagnose the issue. You link that autotranslate text: are you perhaps getting the message appearing at this page? Finally, have you tried to upload images here, or at Wikimedia Commons? Did you go to this page or this page? The two websites are related (Commons images appear here at Wikipedia), but they're a bit different and have somewhat different settings, so again, more information would help to diagnose the issue. Nyttend (talk) 21:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rettechlms, I suspect you have been trying to upload pictures to en.wikipedia, which you cannot do because your account is not Autoconfirmed which needs a 4 day old account with 10 + edits.
I don't know where your pictures are from - did you take them yourself? or have you copied them from another website, magazine or other third-party source?
If you took them yourself, you can upload them at WP:Commons without your account being autoconfirmed. If they are from another website, magazine etc. they are almost certainly copyright, so we cannot host/include these images. - Arjayay (talk) 08:46, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the pictures in School library I agree that updated pictures would be welcome; but I disagree that the one with the card catalog should be removed. The caption on the image indicates that it was taken in 1974, a time when card catalogs were definitely widespread. Having historical images is valuable, so that readers can see how the operation of a library has changed over time. That said, there need to be more modern images to compare the historical ones to, so your images will be welcome additions. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 13:49, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]