Help desk
< August 21	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 23 >

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 22[edit]

Days of the week in articles[edit]

I'm under the impression that adding days to dates in articles is discouraged in most cases, but is there somewhere that this 'rule' is actually codified? -- saberwyn 00:16, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I scanned through this guide and didn't see a ruling one way or the other. Are you referring to adding day names (Saturday, August 21, 2010)? If so, I would think it's overly detailed and should be avoided in a general sense, although specific exceptions would apply. TN X Man 01:54, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, yes, I meant day names.-- saberwyn 21:45, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would avoid using the day of the week, unless it is directly relevant. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 08:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed this a lot with IPs who update articles with recent events. Some of them seem to think that they should just tack on things at the ends of articles as if the article is a running chronicle of events in the life of the subject. In the end, it's almost always trivia. I know I was born on a Tuesday but to all but the astrologers, that info is useless. Dismas|^(talk) 08:52, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Graham Chapman[edit]

I'm a bit iffy on the whole biography thing on Wikipedia. Isn't the image in the infobox in violation of some fair-use guideline, simply because the image is of Graham Chapman as a character? Also, the image is copyrighted and no permission was granted to have it shown representing Graham Chapman as himself. On the other hand, the image could be moved down into the article if it supports a discussion of, say, Monty Python or the sketch or the character being performed by Chapman, with a caption specifying it as such, correct? In which case, the infobox should have no image in it, unless a suitable one is found. But because Chapman is no longer living, I also don't know if that affects any of the guidelines. I'm asking because I feel like I'm correct to question the image in the infobox, but I'm not sure where I would find the guidelines supporting or arguing against my claim. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 00:43, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As Monty Python might say, Chapman is an ex-human. Fair use images are allowed for dead people because there's no way to get a picture of them anymore. Dismas|^(talk) 02:31, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and yes, I believe it should have a fair use statement for the reason we're using it in his article. Dismas|^(talk) 02:35, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha, I watched the parrot video on YouTube. Nice reference. Thank you very much for the clarification. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 07:09, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I love that sketch!.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 07:34, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid this is all getting very silly! – ukexpat (talk) 13:30, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do I capitalize a title???[edit]

I am a regular editor; but with this page; rhinoceros Party I have been unable to capitalize! Someone help please! Outback the koala (talk) 02:15, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the {{Lowercase}} template at the beginning of the page, below the infobox. I'm not sure why this title should be lowercase, but there is a reason for it, feel free to restore the template. TN X Man 02:21, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks alot! You guys are good! Outback the koala (talk) 02:26, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do I add Company Wikipedia[edit]

I'm trying to add webhosting company at wikipedia

How do I do that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwmti83 (talk • contribs) 03:24, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave some standard advice below, but please remember that Wikipedia is not a place for advertising of any kind.

A Wizard is available to walk you through these steps. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

Before creating an article, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines with which all articles should comply. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.

Articles must also demonstrate the notability of the subject. Please see our subject specific guidelines for people, bands and musicians, companies and organizations and web content and note that if you are closely associated with the subject, our conflict of interest guideline strongly recommends against you creating the article.

If you still think an article is appropriate, see Wikipedia:Your first article. You might also look at Wikipedia:How to write a great article for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. An Article Wizard is also available to walk you through creating an article. TN X Man 03:31, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCompany may suit your needs better. It has no inclusion criteria, apart from existence. – ukexpat (talk) 13:40, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reference fix?[edit]

Hey guys, on the article D12, I added a reference, but for some reason it didn't come out right. It's reference 16 from MTV.com, could someone fix it up for me? I'm not sure why the brackets are there and why the external link isn't the title I gave it. It's probably an easy fix, I just can't figure it out...

Anywho, thanks in advance! — Xcalizorz (talk) 10:24, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed – the line break inside the template confused it... Bencherlite ^Talk 10:48, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... strange, because on my computer that line break was not visible to me. Oh well, at least it's fixed. Thanks. — Xcalizorz (talk) 10:50, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was a single newline in the wiki source. It doesn't increase line spacing but just starts a new line which is hard to see if it happens to be near the right margin anyway. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:57, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Layout Problem[edit]

Resolved

– Courtesy of Northumbrian

On the Heads-up display (GUI) page all the text under the heading Video Games is pushed over into a narrow column on the right hand side of the page.

It uses <table> and <td>[[File:Halflife ingame.jpg|200px]][[File:Doom ingame 1.png|200px]][[File:Two huds.png|400px]]</td>, which I am unfamilar with. Deleting these Wiki 'commands' makes it readable, but I'm not sure what layout the editor was trying to achieve. It appears to have been like it since May 29!
nb. I am using IE 7, ver 7.0.5730.13. & Windows XP, SP3. 220.101 talk^\Contribs 14:51, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The editor who did this put the images in the left column of a two-column table, and the accompanying text in the right column, using standard HTML tags rather than Wiki markup. Here's what it looks like on my display in Firefox 3.6.8 on a Windows 7 box. Similar in IE8. Legible enough. Not what you're seeing? Northumbrian (talk) 14:59, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just checked again on the built-in display on a MacBook, and the thumbnails take up almost half the width, compressing the text horizontally and making it "taller" and, yes, a bit more difficult to read. I can see why the editor did it this way, to keep the accompanying text level with the images, but the output appears differently as described above on each user's display according to the resolution settings of the monitor.

I've rescaled the thumbnails a bit smaller, that should help the text display a bit at the cost of losing thumbnail detail (nothing stopping the user from clicking to see the larger version, of course). Northumbrian (talk) 15:26, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your assistance Northumbrian.

It's a lot better, as before it was actually also going off the side of the screen, (I only have a 1024x768 LCD display), so I had to scroll across to see the text. My view does not look like your Firefox version, the 2 graphics are side-by-side, not above each other. The text is about a 5 cm column on the right with heaps of white space above and below the the graphics. However they formatted this seems a bad idea, as I have never had this 'problem' before.

Perhaps the HTML needs to be replaced with Wiki 'code'? 220.101 talk^\Contribs 16:23, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done; I've set the width of the left column only fifteen pixels larger than the width of the thumbnails; that's drawn the text further left. How does it look now for you? Northumbrian (talk) 17:19, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and temporarily set my display to your resolution; there's still a bit of white space above and below the image thumbnails, but the text doesn't scroll off the display and is much more legible. Hope that works for you (and everyone else out there!). Good idea on replacing the markup too. Northumbrian (talk) 17:44, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed Yes, it looks much better Northumbrian. Thanks, well done!

220.101 talk^\Contribs 09:18, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Main image problem[edit]

At The Heritage at Millennium Park the main image is not appearing in Firefox, Opera, Chrome or Internet Explorer, but it appears when I go directly to File:Downtown Chicago Illinois Nov05 img 2483.jpg.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:03, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How strange. If I remove the size parameter, the picture displays. As soon as I try 200px or thumb, it stops displaying. TN X Man 18:16, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes' image= field usually take just the simple pagename, not full embedded-image wikilink syntax. Most infoboxes also have separate caption= and/or size= fields for their associated items. DMacks (talk) 18:27, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Singapore Karate-Do Federation[edit]

This is just a test as I am unsure on how to submit the article.

If this is successful, I will continue and write the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.14.221.74 (talk) 18:17, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, unfortunately, you cannot create an article, as you do not have an account. I'll leave some standard advice below this to get you started.

A Wizard is available to walk you through these steps. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

You will need to first register an account, which has many benefits, including the ability to create articles. Once you have registered, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines which all articles should comport with. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite to reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.

Articles must also demonstrate the notability of the subject. Please see our subject specific guidelines for people, bands and musicians, companies and organizations and web content and note that if you are closely associated with the subject, our conflict of interest guideline strongly recommends against you creating the article.

If you still think an article is appropriate, see Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. An Article Wizard is available to walk you through creating an article, but you will need to create an account to use it. if you don't wish to do so, you can submit a proposal for an article at Articles for Creation. TN X Man 18:23, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

slightly odd one - drawing of BLP[edit]

I don't think I've come across this before - where do we stand on the use of drawnings of BLPs being used in articles about them? for example - Denise Milani (model). --Cameron Scott (talk) 19:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First, it doesn't appear to be a BLP. Neither L or P. But I would think drawings would following the usual rules, with some exceptions. You can take a picture of a living person and use it (subject to some exceptions) but if the editor creates the drawing, I don't think it would be allowed, unless it were published in a reliable source, and then proper permission would be required.--SPhilbrick T 22:13, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An edit claiming she's a fictional person has just been reverted. Cassandra 73 (talk) 22:15, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had a similar discussion fairly recently about some (rather unflattering in my opinion) drawings of Geoffrey Boycott that were used in that article. After some toing and froing I removed them, and no-one has put them back. WP:BLP applies to all namespaces, including files, so I think I was justified in so doing. – ukexpat (talk) 15:27, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

problen with photo[edit]

I uploaded this photo earlier today, but for me it doesn't show up, unless I click on "full resolution". What is wrong? Bubba73 ^{(You talkin' to me?)}, 23:35, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a widespread problem for new images, and has been causing some problems for a few days apparently. See this thread at the Commons Village Pump. Bencherlite ^Talk 23:43, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I uploaded another photo earlier today, but didn't have the problem. Bubba73 ^{(You talkin' to me?)}, 00:22, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When these problems occur (as they do from time to time) it can take a few days for image thumbnails to be regenerated. – ukexpat (talk) 15:29, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]