Help desk
< August 29	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 31 >

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 30

Referencing errors on Jay Kim

Reference help requested. I corrected a reference on this page of Jay Kim - by deleting the incorrect phrase. The page had referenced an LA Times article that said that the subject (Jay Kim) was the first Asian immigrant to be elected to Congress. That is not correct, as Dalip Singh Saund met this threshold. I'm not sure what to do to make this complete. Thanks, Stasikat (talk) 00:27, 30 August 2016 (UTC) Stasikat[reply]

@Stasikat: It was soon corrected by a bot, nothing to worry. Thank you very much for pointing out the factual inaccuracy, I'll make a note on the talk page. - NQ (talk)

Infobox Template not working

Resolved

I have tried to format Roy Roundtree like Tyrone Wheatley. I can't get the highlights to work.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:34, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On Roy's page you're using the College Coach infobox, which doesn't have that variable. It would seem logical to add a player-highlights to that template, since there are spots for other playing-career items in it. Crow^Caw 00:42, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Since [1] they use different infoboxes with different parameters: {{Infobox college coach}} and {{Infobox NFL biography}}. The former does not have a highlights parameter. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:46, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is an "awards" param, which looks like what TTT is looking to add. Crow^Caw 00:47, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:29, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How to insert hyperlinks to Wiki pages

How do I insert hyperlinks to other Wiki articles? The article should have blue highlighting of the name of the notable's link. When I tried the first notable link, it showed an arrow box to the web address, but did not turn the name blue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eurydice2016 (talk • contribs) 01:35, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Eurydice2016: [[James Dwight Dana]] produces James Dwight Dana. See more at Help:Link. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:39, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How to check history...and more

Hello, Recently I have been studying philosophers most notably Socrates.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrates

Upon returning to the Wikipedia "Socrates" Web page I have noticed a grevious amount of changes that were made within the last 72 hours.

How can I view the previously in edited version?

Additionally, in my search I attempted to remedy one of the omitted links. The afformentioned link was in (Greek?) "oeuvre" used to describe the complete body of work completed by an artist throughout a career.[2] In an attempt to remedy this I noticed that the site has been set to prevent vandalism. It is in my humble opinion that this site may have been vandalized.

Your urgent attention is greatly appreciated and thank you for all of the wonderful works and contributions. The works within these pages are an invaluable rescource to all.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:387:B:3:0:0:0:C1 01:53, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You could see Help:Page history to understand how to view past edited versions of any page on Wikipedia and retrieve content you might want. Also, thank you for the note on vandalism. Lourdes 04:45, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a "grevious amount of changes". In the last two weeks, an editor has changed the spacing around some em-dashes, and another has added a picture showing Socrates. Maproom (talk) 11:39, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Override NOGALLERY tag

bsd. i edit a lot of logos, which are not free, and therefore have the NOGALLERY tag in all categories specifically for them. In order to identify images that csn be improved, galleries are very useful, so i would like to know if there is a way of manually overriding the nogallery tag, without removing it. thank you. --Ben Stone 03:11, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Overriding that would defeat the purpose. Logos can only legally be used for very specific reasons. 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:4BF:6AED:D301:8167 (talk) 03:21, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Let me clarify: by override i mean just for editing purposes, without ever changing the actual page, exclusively for editing purposes. For example: appending #IgnoreNoGallery to the end of the url, would override said tag, without changing the page, and violating copyright.--Ben Stone 04:09, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The policy is here: WP:Logos, which would supersede anything I say, of course; but it is my understanding that even having copyrighted logos on non-article space (talk pages, user drafts, etc.) is not allowed (without valid justification). If I'm understanding your intent, you want to assemble a gallery of logos for editing purposes? 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:4BF:6AED:D301:8167 (talk) 04:35, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No. I am NOT asking about policy at all, my question is completely technical. I want to know whether there is a feature/function/addon, which would allow me to view thumbnails in categories tagged with nogallery without modifying them. The only purpose would be to quickly identify images for improvement.--Ben Stone 04:44, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've done some checking (e.g: mw:Help:Magic words#Behavior switches), but can't find any direct answer to your question. --Sorry. 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:4BF:6AED:D301:8167 (talk) 05:10, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the time and effort! --Ben Stone 05:43, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can't you just edit the page, erase __NOGALLERY__, and hit show preview? Bruto (talk) 09:10, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried that? Sounds like a good solution (just don't press 'Save'). 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:5121:5CA3:CCCC:2372 (talk) 00:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried it, but it doesn't work well when the category has multiple pages. --Ben Stone 04:30, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I wish to remove an article about me

I wish to remove an article about me. It's wrong, and I resent being online in any way. Please help me. I find it offensive that someone would upload information about me (some of which is incorrect) without permission. How do I get rid? Lacherlichcat (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:21, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you can click on the link 'contact page' on the left of any page and then the link relating to article subjects. This will take you to a specialist team who have the tools to assist you. As a cautionary note please remember it is Wikipedia's page about 'you' built from hopefully reliable sources, not 'your' page. Please do not take any unilateral action such as deleting text etc. as this will not help you in the long run. Good luck. Eagleash (talk) 10:38, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have looked at what I suspect is the article in question, and proposed it for deletion, on the grounds that its subject fails to meet Wikipedia's idiosyncratic definition of "notability". Maproom (talk) 13:46, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

general user friendliness of wikipedia

I am 63 years old, suffering from a deteriorating muscle condition, partly blind, living in a remote village in a developing country with irregular electricity supply, and FEMALE.

this does not diminish my capacity to help make entries as far ranging as those for Lady Chatterley's Lover and ASIO ACCURATE. the page for which my monograph is the only reference cited with a descriptive citation is still riddled with errors of FACT.

I am prompted to write because I heard on Australian radio this morning about the rather disproportionate number in the percentages of contributing editors who are not men. This is 2016 and I thought that by now the idea was rather that knowledge should be no longer the province of only half the world's population.

If you could be so kind (sic) as to postulate the existence of a person with a very sharp mind who could very easily ( well, at great physical sacrifice) fix a large number of small and greater errors - THE person who ought to have been consulted about one particular page as it happens, a person who without being a Neanderthal having begun using email in 1992, is nevertheless unacquainted with Facebook or any other form of social media, does not go online shopping except under torture, but nevertheless cannot see why SHE should be excluded on ANY of these grounds from helping if we are sincerely talking about accurate factual knowledge, then there needs to be a more user friendly way of getting in contact with people for those who have never done a live chat in their lives or used Facebook or Twitter etc.

if this is the wrong page for these observations, could someone please forward them to were they should be and perhaps think of a person they know in a wheelchair who still keeps trying to contribute. Not everyone is a white male speaking English and under 40 years of age - I say this without bitterness in the least - but again, merely as an observation of FACT

in the 21st Century though I do realize in FACT knowledge is still a club belonging nearly exclusively to the male of the species, if THEORIETICALLY at least, Wikipedia would like to avoid having such a finger pointed at it, it could possibly adopt a more user friendly attitude and postulate the existence of someone as I have described myself to be, and someone could perhaps contact me. I have already made contributions under another name but I am too ill to chase them. Either Wikipedia is committed to accuracy an excellence or it is not

Like Emily Dickenson I do not really care of my name is associated with anything in particular but unlike her, I am a historian and a writer not a poet. I do not know how to watch this page so if someone can work the Oracle and find some way to email me this would be great. Dr Shining J Mountan (talk) 11:30, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr Shining J Mountan: Thank you for your message - I'll address a couple of points:

"cannot see why SHE should be excluded"

How do you feel you are excluded? Wikipedia aims to be wholly inclusive of every person, and although we do fall short in some aspects we are working to resolve that.

"find some way to email me"

Unfortunately we cannot do that - but you can email us! If you pop an email over to info-en

wikimedia.org either myself or another member of our volunteer team will be happy to discuss these concerns with you.

I hope I've managed to answer at least some of your concerns -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 11:38, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Samtar. What exactly are you complaining about? If you're merely angry that more women don't contribute to wikipedia, there is nothing that can be done except for more women to contribute to wikipedia.74.70.146.1 (talk) 14:50, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It may be that the OP does not realise that ALL Wikipedia contributors/editors/administrators are unpaid volunteers who spontaneously offer their time and (intellectual) labour, and that Wikipedia/the Wikimedia Foundation does not select them in any way. Why these volunteers are disproportionally male (and also white Western English speakers – like myself) is a matter of sociological interest, but not something correctable without a corresponding shift in global sociology.

The OP mentions several facts about herself as if, perhaps, they would be discriminated against by Wikipedia, but none of them would be known to anyone else if the OP becomes a Wikipedia contributor, with or without an account (I myself have been contributing regularly for over a decade without an account) unless the OP chooses to disclose them. "On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog." {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.202.211.191 (talk) 23:30, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

{{Expand section}} template not using full width of article

Anybody know why the {{Expand section}} template in the File_Allocation_Table#Concepts article is only a fraction of the width of the article, and so is all bunched up? Chaheel Riens (talk) 13:02, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That is the default width of {{Expand section}}. I have added |small=no.[2] PrimeHunter (talk) 16:43, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bajrang Dal Page

Dear Sir,

Please remove the page on Bajrang dal or make is fully editable, the page owner is not displaying the correct info. The page states bajrang dal as an Militant Organisation, but it is not an militant organisation its a nationlistic orgnisation working todars devlopment of Indian youth. If it is militant organisation then govt of india have to take the decision not somebody who thinks than its a militant organisation. Its a shame on crore of its followers by calling a peacefull organisation an militant organisation, i immedetely call for bannig of this page and other link related to bajrang dal as it portray bajrang dal in a bad light, also for your info it is not a banned org and a fully legal organisation, Pleas remove the word militant and remove the page and the moderator from wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sk234 (talk • contribs) 16:02, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @Sk234: Please sign your post by typing four tildes (~~~~) or clicking the signature button above the edit box which looks like this:

. Do not sign in articles. Additionally, this is not the place to request deletion of, unprotection of, or edits to a protected page. If you would like the page deleted, please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Deletion process. To request that the page be made "fully editable" (aka unprotected) you would first ask the protecting admin, Ruslik0, and then, if that fails, post on Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for reduction in protection level. Your other concerns belong on the talk page of the article in question, possibly as a semi-protected edit request.
Additionally, you will be able to edit it when you become autoconfirmed on September 9 or whenever you make your tenth edit, whichever comes later. Pppery (talk) 16:20, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sk234: Wikipedia does not use words like "militant" without evidence from reliable sources. If you read the references at the bottom of the Bajrang Dal article, you will see that both The Times of India and The Indian Express have used that word in describing it. Maproom (talk) 21:05, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The OP might like to read the article Militant: the term does not necessarily imply the use of violence or that the organisation so described is not peaceful. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.202.211.191 (talk) 23:36, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving talk page

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADawid2009&type=revision&diff=736882151&oldid=736877524 - is someone who can help me? Dawid2009 (talk) 16:17, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dawid2009: You appear to have successfully set up automatic archiving on your talk page. However, it may take up to a day before the archiving bot actually gets aroung to archiving it - see User:Lowercase sigmabot III/Archive HowTo#After you have set up archiving Pppery (talk) 16:26, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help with tags

Can someone point me to the help section on tags? I'm specifically looking for information on how to use the {{about}} tag.

Thanks!

It was a dark and stormy night. (talk) 19:49, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@It was a dark and stormy night.: I believe you are looking for Wikipedia:Hatnote - NQ (talk) 19:52, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is indeed! Thank you so much. It was a dark and stormy night. (talk) 19:56, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]