Help desk
< December 2	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 4 >

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 3

qtp 10 when run input ??? in the textbox

my testing project uses delphi language where run qtp10 in the win10 operation system ,it fill chinese with ??? in the textbox

e.g I want the qtp10 input "普通发票" in the textbox ,but when it runs it fill ???? in the textbox how to resovle this problem?

thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caojuanshu (talk • contribs) 08:25, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Caujuanshu. Is this a question about editing the English Wikipedia? If it is, I think you'll have to explain it more fully (or if it is a technical question about how to use the Mediawiki software, ask at WP:VPT). If it is anything else - including, editing the Chinese Wikipedia - then this is the wrong place.

If it is a question about editing the Chinese Wikipedia, try zh:维基百科:互助客栈/求助. If it is a question about computer use unrelated to Wikipedia, you might get some help at the Reference Desk. --ColinFine (talk) 17:49, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Coat of arms in Italian comune

Hi all,

I'd like to add this coat of arms image to the English page of Gazzo. You can see that it was added on the Italian page. When I insert the link to the image (in the format of 'Gazzo-Stemma.png')in the Infobox Coat of Arms field it doesn't show... Does anyone know why and how to solve this?

Thanks in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flautofonico78 (talk • contribs) 08:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Flautofonico78: This is because the file does not exist locally here on English Wikipedia and neither on Wikimedia Commons. (you can see it's a redlink: File:Gazzo-Stemma.png). It only exists on Italian Wikipedia (it:File:Gazzo-Stemma.png) and so can only be used there. If you want use it here, you need to upload it locally, or better transfer it to Commons from there it can used across all Wikimedia projects easily. But before doing that you should know (or ask) if the relevant license of the file allows that.–Ammarpad (talk) 09:11, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot @Ammarpad:, I'll see what I can do.Flautofonico78 (talk) 09:14, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's good. –Ammarpad (talk) 09:18, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Flautofonico78 and Ammarpad: Do not transfer this to Commons!

The description page at it-wp says La composizione di stemmi e gonfaloni comunali è generalmente considerata di pubblico dominio (alcune composizioni, di origini più recenti, potrebbero essere soggette al diritto d'autore). Questo principio si applica solo alla definizione dello stemma (composizione/descrizione). La riproduzione di uno stemma è invece considerata una creazione artistica e come tale protetta dalle leggi sul diritto d'autore/copyright. The general gist is that while communal coats of arms as a heraldic indication/description are public domain (except the most recent), an actual depiction of it is not.

So here, the heraldic description given in the file information (d'azzurro, all'albero di pioppo al naturale, etc.) is PD, but the picture in question is not. It says Gentile concessione di Araldica Civica; Disegnato da Massimo Ghirardi. My Italian is rusty but I am pretty sure gentile concessione does not mean it was released under a Wikipedia-compatible licensing, and I see no such indication on the website either.

This being said, we could consider a local upload on en-wp (Special:Upload) provided it meets the local rules about non-free content (WP:NFCC). That would need to be in low resolution (NFCC 3b), but I am not sure it satisfies NFCC #1: in theory, anyone could make their own rendition of the above heraldry and upload it.

One possible option would be to contact the mayoral office of Gazzo and ask them to release the copyright on the one they use. Wikipedia:Requesting_copyright_permission has the steps to do it efficiently as well as some boilerplate text to use, but of course it would be better in Italian. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 12:55, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another possible solution would be for someone to re-draw the arms (in strict accordance with the written description) and upload their depiction to Commons. That after all is what the written description (blazon) is for – minor differences due to individual artists' styles, and period fashions in heraldic art styles that vary over decades and centuries, are not considered significant. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.202.210.56 (talk) 13:48, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Flautofonico78:You can do this yourself if you have the time and enjoy playing with computers. The Free Inkscape software can be used to create the image in the SVG format. You would own the copyright of the image and you could therefore upload it to commons under a compatible license. -Arch dude (talk) 16:46, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What is original research

What means “original research” if it long since published? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kanejuku (talk • contribs) 09:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is about Graph canonization. You should discuss the issue on the article's Talk page, or on the talk page of David Eppstein, the editor who removed the material you had added. Maproom (talk) 10:52, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to submit article

how to summit the article to main page that is from sand box to where to paste it. complete details — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarvasuddi Bandi Raju (talk • contribs) 11:40, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This refers to self-promoting articles with massive image copyright violation, I've deleted all versions and will warn editor Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:19, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About the "Liancourt Rocks"

Hello. I am a South Korean student, currently a midde school student. My name is Park Keon Min. I want ask all of you people who work in Wikepedia about the false content about "Dokdo", which you call it "Liancourt Rocks". First, its location is not "Sea of Japan", but actually the East Sea of Korea, also called as "동해" in Korean. Second, in 1900/10/21, King Gojong made the Korean Land Law no.41 (대한제국 칙령 제 41호) and announced that Dokdo is officially the land of Korea. Third, even the history of Japan, also tells that Dokdo is not their land. One of the maps made in Japan in 1779 (일본여지노정전도) tells that Dokdo is out of Japan's territory. Another map made in 1821 (대일본연해여지전도) tells the same. The pictures of the map will be shown in this message.

I hope you have all understood about why Dokdo is not called Liancourt Rocks and it is not in the Sea of Japan. I want to tell one last message: If you are the global wiki of the internet, please don't tell the distorted truth. Tell the real truth of the world with exact historical, and scientifically accurate information. Thank you. By the way, the URLs are down below: http://www-user.yokohama-cu.ac.jp/~ycu-rare/pages/WC-1_44.html http://www.truthofdokdo.com/m_reading/view/15/page/1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.137.93.225 (talk) 12:25, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This issue has been discussed to death many times; please see the talkpage histories at both Talk:Sea of Japan and Talk:Liancourt Rocks. It is not going to be discussed again here. Yunshui ^雲 _水 12:37, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is a useful summary of the situation in the section "Suggested Rules of Engagement" at Talk:Liancourt Rocks. Black Kite (talk) 12:38, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to other considerations, the convention in this English-language Wikipedia is to title articles according to how their subject is most commonly known, in English, even if that most common name in English is for some reason not correct. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.202.210.56 (talk) 13:53, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. More info at Sea of Japan naming dispute and Liancourt Rocks dispute. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:01, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to consider a trip to the library, and questioning what's taught to you whilst at school. Fortunately, Wikipedia doesn't deal in the sort of truth you're seeking. RGloucester — ☎ 14:08, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Update org logo

Hi, I'm trying to update my organization's logo on its listing, but although I've been able to change any text I wish, I haven't been able to figure out how to upload a new logo. Can you help with this? The listing is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_of_General_Dentistry

Thanks, AGDComm — Preceding unsigned comment added by AGDComm (talk • contribs) 15:23, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@AGDComm: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You can't upload images until you have 10 edits and your account is more than four days old. You can then follow the process at WP:UPIMAGE. Please see the important message I put on your user talk page regarding your username and conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 15:50, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unknown edits on Simmba

There have been too many edits by IPs on Simmba. Can someone please check them, I am not familiar with Wikipedia's protocols. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:33A8:7036:F484:5C08:A403:AC68 (talk) 16:02, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Importance, indication of (A7)

I'd like to know where to request that the "A7" list be edited to include "product or service"

The reason? My real reason is below, but first... My experience; my NEGATIVE experience. I've been AfD'd and won. I've been AfD'd and (seeemingly) lost, or at least learned,even if the article was ultimately deleted.

I once even made my point that how could the TEACHER of a number of people with articles, many not just a dozen or so lines, be the subject of a SPEEDY delete. The teacher "won." (after not_speedy/became AfD, "Keep")

Yes, Wiki is not the world, and the teacher had much more than Wiki could ever give.

- Now for why I very much feel that "A7" should also list "product or service."

I was researching something called ClassifEye and, in the process, was getting Google matches for "ClassifEYE" (ends on CAPS "EYE" vs. "Eye").I looked at it and thought it worthwhile to, in parallel, research both. (even if the company making "EYE" is named Baader: an ominous message?)

The "EYE"/CAPS stub I made for the "product or service" that is of benefit to less thana billion people (Islamics who eat Hallal, but not kosher, since it involves STUNNING before slaughter, hence not kosher) was speedy deleted, since it's not a person, animal, organization, etc.

"BY THE WAY, what about mineral or vegatable" will be answered under "product or service" in most cases).

The "TONE" may have been "WP:FAN" - I was impressed - and I could understand AfD, but not SPEEDY. Anything that can lower the cost of feeding people, even those with "friend of friend of friend" murdered by ONE of them, still has value. (The quote is more or less a translation/rewording of "Chavrah... " (the saying is I have a friend, and my friend has a friend). Feeding is He-avenly work. Pi314m (talk) 17:45, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, P1314m. I am not going to attempt to answer your main point, partly because I'm not familiar with that bit of policy, and partly because the sprinkling of capitals and underlines above makes me think "this is somebody who thinks that they can win arguments by shouting". I may be wrong about you, but that's how that comes across, and I don't wish to engages.

I will pick up a couple of points where I think you misunderstand what Wikipedia is about. First, you did not "win" or "lose" an AFD. Wikipedia is by design collaborative, not competitive. Disagreements do occur, and certainly editors sometimes behave combatively; but the goal of us all is to create the best online encyclopaedia we can. Of course you are free to interpret your experiences as you wish, but if you see them as part of a competition, you are likely to have a frustrating time here.

Secondly, notability is not inherited (a subject is not notable just because their relatives, or their students, or their works, or their companies, are notable), and it has nothing whatever to do with virtue, or even with value. We have lengthy, well-referenced articles on some vile and some trivial subjects: these are possible, because there is ample material published on these subjects. If there is little or no independent material published on a subject, however worthy, we will not accept an article on that subject because it is impossible to write an article which meets Wikipedia's criteria, of being a neutral summary of reliably published, and mostly independent, material. This is unfortunate, in that there are some worthy and important subjects which cannot be written about here; but it is a consequence of a fundamental policy. (Almost all policies are set by consensus, and you are welcome to try and change this, but I don't think you'll have much success. WP:VPP is the place to pursue this if you wish).

Thirdly, if you wish to continue a discussion about the details of the speedy deletion criteria, the place to do so is at WT:CSD. --ColinFine (talk) 18:19, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Google not indexing the page

Hello, I've created a page 2 days ago, it was moved to the mainspace successfully but it's not indexed on google yet. I wanted to understand what's the indexing process? Is the noindex code removed automotaically or it's subject to a manual review? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MariamGreen (talk • contribs) 19:05, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MariamGreen Wikipedia don't get indexed until either 90 days from page creation, or the article has been reviewed by a new page patroller. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:12, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Joseph2302 - I shall wait patiently then. I assume after 90 days it's an automatic process?

@MariamGreen: Yes, review or 90 days, whichever happens first. Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 19:21, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Eagleash MariamGreen (talk) 19:27, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to search Wikipedia

Hello - I would like to do search for sailing vessels that are mentioned in Wikipedia and builder is Deptford Dockyards in London from 1513 to 1869 . How do I run this query please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.235.42 (talk) 19:28, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia itself is an encyclopedia, not a structured database, so you cannot perform an purely automated search like that here. (Some values of this sort are kept in our wikidata sister project, but "which shipyard" is apparently not one of them.) Therefore, your best approach is to use a search engine (e.g., google) to find all articles in Wikipedia that mention "Deptford Dockyard" (note: Deptford Dockyard is apparently singular, not plural). You will then need to manually find the ship articles in the resulting list, and then manually check dates. -Arch dude (talk) 22:14, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Or write "Deptford Dockyard" in Wikipedia's search box and click "containing..." in the box that appears below. You can click "500" at the bottom of the search results to see all 362 results at the same time. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:37, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Submission for review

Hello!

A while back I made my first page entry (the first of many I hope!) and yet it's already been several months since I've seen any activity. I messaged this board 3 months ago, and a gentleman- Robert McClenon- responded saying it should be up in about 2 months. I can only imagine the backlog, including the holidays, however I wanted to check in and see if this is something that will be up by the new year?

I'm eager to make more posts ( I am an independent curator and use Wiki all the time for research, and have noticed a huge lack of contemporary artists represented, which of course I would like to correct) but am hesitant to make more entries until I see the first approved.

Any insight would be hugely appreciated! Thank you, Alexandra — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexbuko (talk • contribs) 21:11, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexbuko: Hello, on the assumption that this relates to Draft:Joe Sola, I cannot see that it has actually been submitted for review. If you feel that it is ready for submission, please add the text {{subst:submit}} at the top of the page which will add it to the review list. As previously noted, there is a backlog, reduced from the period you noted, but you may need to be patient. Good luck. Eagleash (talk) 21:48, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that Robert McClenon was confused in his reply at WP:Help desk/Archives/2018 September 14#Joe Sola. As Eagleash says above, you haven't yet submitted the draft for review. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:23, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]