Help desk
< July 20	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 22 >

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 21[edit]

Father Augustus Tolton[edit]

I am writing to let you know that the name of the wife of Stephan Elliott is incorrect. Someone took a picture of the wrong tombstone. It show Stephen Benedict Elliott and Susan Kendrick. It should be the tombstone of Stephen Edward Elliott and Anna Savilla (Manning) Elliott. I know from my genealogy research that what I tell you is true. Stephen E. and Anna S. Elliott were my great grandparents and she was Augustus' baptismal sponsor. Anna Savilla was the only daughter of John Manning. Thank You Jane Elliott Kidd — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.230.145.129 (talk) 01:04, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If the page isn't protected you could edit it yourself. If it is then you can create an account, do 10 edits, and wait four days. That will allow you to edit protected pages.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:21, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That will allow for editing semi-protected pages. Fully protected pages require an admin, if I understand correctly. RudolfRed (talk) 04:33, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Father Augustine Tolton has no protection at all if that is the page the OP is referring to.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:42, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Area on Wikipedia For Debates[edit]

Is there any place on Wikipedia where users can have civilized debates about various political issues? Futurist110 (talk) 01:57, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:Forum should not be any. History2007 (talk) 02:10, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a forum where we can debate the politics of removing this policy?--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can make a proposal and have it discussed at the village pump RudolfRed (talk) 05:06, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

. I was just joking.--Canoe1967 (talk) 05:12, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But there may be truth hidden in that joke... There is a new travel-guide proposal which will open the door to a social network type feature in time... History2007 (talk) 05:33, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please post a link. Arcandam (talk) 05:57, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

meta:Requests for comment/Travel Guide. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:06, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is for Wikimedia though. Not Wikipedia which is what was in the original question. Dismas|^(talk) 14:46, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nor is an online travel guide a social network, at least not anymore than Wikipedia is. BigNate37_(T) 03:53, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my comment there. As the 4 million articles hit a brick wall based on the lack of new substantive items to write about, and as the scientific content struggles for reliability, the new avenue is a new breed of "semi-encyclopedic, social network, experience based" web entity. It is being born as we speak and it is the way for WMF to survive. Organizations always morph, IBM used to be in the business of cash registers, and Autodesk started a desk manufacturer... So time will tell, of course... History2007 (talk) 04:16, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't quite get your point given the context of this section, but I reject the notion that we're in some kind of "end times" state. Specifically, we're not anywhere close to having this encyclopedia finished. Just because articles exist for nearly every important topic does not mean they are anywhere near complete. I will concede that we may be running out of "sexy" content to add, though. BigNate37_(T) 04:26, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that other place is the place for the issues. But as you said, the days of sexy/exciting content are over and most work that remains to be done is less than glamorous clean up... And WMF rightly recognizes that "user engagement" is the key to survival. So they have to find a way to engage users, and janitorial duties are not at the top of that list. Anyway, time will tell... History2007 (talk) 09:22, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Avoiding archiving for a talk page footer template[edit]

Resolved

Is there a way that a template placed at the bottom of a talk page that says: "Please read the FAQ" can be exempted from archiving by the MiszaBot ? Thanks. History2007 (talk) 02:10, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course! User:MiszaBot/Archive_HowTo says: Archiving can be delayed for a particular thread by substituting the template {{DNAU}} into the thread. Use {{subst:DNAU}} to retain a thread indefinitely, or {{subst:DNAU|<integer>}} to retain a thread for <integer> days. See the template documentation for details about its use and function. Arcandam (talk) 02:15, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The result of substituting the template looks something like this:  Arcandam (talk) 02:17, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. But is there also a way to do that without having a thread for the footer? The point is that the FAQ is at the top and most people miss it, and the idea would be to just make them aware of it with the footer that always stays on the talk page. The footer would look better without a section and having a section would just look confusing. Any idea? Thanks. History2007 (talk) 02:23, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, based on your link, I also asked here, so we will see. History2007 (talk) 02:33, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff without a section title won't be archived anyways. And it is possible to have the code in the beginning of the talkpage while the "Please read the FAQ"-thingy is at the bottom. Arcandam (talk) 03:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can also add the following code to the top of your talkpage:

Then create a new page called User:History2007/talkpageheader and put the code for the "Please read the FAQ"-thingy there. Arcandam (talk) 03:42, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean something like this: <div style="position: fixed; right:5px; bottom:5px; display:block;">Please read the [[FAQ]]</div> ? Arcandam (talk) 03:51, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That may be a very good idea, but it did not work on my talk page. I put it at the top. Please feel free to fix it there if you can (at the top of my talk page), so I can see what you mean when it shows on my talk page as a footer. Thank you. History2007 (talk) 04:19, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you modified it on my talk page, but I do not see the footer there. I assume you are working on that. Right? History2007 (talk) 04:27, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you see it now? Arcandam (talk) 04:30, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Where is the documentation for the div marker, so I can look at that and read it? Thanks. History2007 (talk) 04:23, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The nowiki tag I used in the code was a trick to display the code to use without actually using it myself, that is why it didn't work. The div tag is an HTML tag. Arcandam (talk) 04:26, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's one page that describes the div tag: [1]. Google (or whatever) for HTML tutorials, and you'll get more. RudolfRed (talk) 04:28, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I need to learn HTML anew. Arcandam fixed it now, but how does one say bottom with no pixels? Thanks. History2007 (talk) 04:34, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should probably ask that at the reference desk, since it's not directly related to Wikipedia. WP:RD/C RudolfRed (talk) 04:39, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will just play with it and get it that way. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 04:42, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to MFD WP:(VfD)^11 WP WfD?[edit]

The page's full name is Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/WikiProject Wikipedians for Decency. (It's too long that I can't fill it into section title) I want to MFD it but it will create [[Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/Votes for deletion/WikiProject Wikipedians for Decency]] --will it crash? 221.203.139.100 (talk) 03:31, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous. Please do not take it seriously." RudolfRed (talk) 03:34, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How does one make a request to delete a particular article?[edit]

Thank you. Futurist110 (talk) 07:19, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Start at Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Processes. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:34, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Afc Gérard Desbois[edit]

Hi. Please, may I request help for this article : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Gérard_Desbois. I don't understand why it is not accepted : youngest flight test engineer graduate, chief test on the Airbus A380, writters... Maybe I am somewhere wrong? Regards. 90.84.144.65 (talk) 08:14, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are misunderstanding Wikipedia's policy on notability. The rejections are not saying that the subject is insignificant: they are saying that the article does not cite multiple reliable sources that have talked about the subject. There are two points here: first, have multiple sources (newspapers, books etc) talked about Desbois, and secondly, does the article cite those sources. If in fact he has not been written about by several reliable sources, then he is not notable (in Wikipedia's special meaning of the word) and may not have an article. If these sources do in fact exist, but the draft article does not say so, you can fix it by adding citations to those sources.

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A quick google suggests to me that while several news reports quote Desbois, nobody has written about him; but I have only looked very quickly, so I may be wrong. (I haven't watched the Airbus video, so I don't know if it says anything substantial about him, but even if it does it is not independent of him, and so cannot be used to establish his notability.) --ColinFine (talk) 09:15, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a map[edit]

G'day there, How do those maps with the pin get created? I would like to get one of those and also a satellite image of the area I am writing about. Thanks in advance, Ben Benwebboz (talk) 10:28, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It can be made with {{Location map}}. It's often used via infoboxes like {{Infobox settlement}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:47, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

composer/song writer[edit]

i've been searching the net for the the composer of the song "i don't wanna lose you" but there isn't any please help, thank you very much — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.204.134.243 (talk) 11:10, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried the Entertainment section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:17, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone know of a way to show UTC times in page histories?[edit]

Right now page revisions are being shown in my local time. I would like to have them shown in UTC so I can see how long ago it happened when I check the UTC clock at the top-right corner of my screen. Right now I can't think of a good way to do this without changing my local time in preferences. Floating Boat (the editor formerly known as AndieM) 14:20, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have been searching for the same feature for three years to no avail :). I don't think you can specify which timezone your watchlist or page histories run on without changing the local time in your preferences. Happy editing, hajat vrc with WikiLove @ 14:33, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why not ignore the UTC clock top left, and compare the history time with the clock on your computer? For example, on Windows you can put a clock readout in the system tray. YMMV. Cheers! Woz2 (talk) 14:38, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is suitable in many cases, but there are many times that are displayed in UTC, the most obvious being time-stamps in user signatures. If a person has no problem using two time systems, then there is no problem. I would just rather, as a preference, to have the option of all the times on Wikipedia being displayed according to the same local time (UTC). Happy editing, hajat vrc with WikiLove @ 14:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also appreciate having everything in UTC. I'm not a fan of having to remember which WP feature is in my local time and which is in UTC. Dismas|^(talk) 14:56, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind; I'll just change the local time in preferences. Thank you for trying to help! Floating Boat (the editor formerly known as AndieM) 15:00, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, wait , wait. What about asking at the WP:Village pump? Floating Boat (the editor formerly known as AndieM) 15:02, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dismas, you can set "Use wiki default" in your My Preferences/Date and time tab, then everything will be in UTC. hth Woz2 (talk) 15:06, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Doesn't that answer the original question as well then? Dismas|^(talk) 15:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had asked if there was a way to do it without having to change the settings, but I'm fine now. Thank you again! Floating Boat (the editor formerly known as AndieM) 15:22, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template assistance[edit]

I'm looking for assistance with modifying an existing template. Is this the right place? The template in question is {{Infobox Tennis Grand Slam events}} and I'm trying to add links to the previous and next year's event identical to what the {{TennisEventInfo}} template shows at the bottom (see e.g. 1993 Australian Open with links to the 1992 and 1994 edition). I printed out the code for both templates and while I can understand parts of it I just don't have the level of template knowledge to make this adjustment. The creators of both templates appear to be no longer active. Obviously the modification will be proposed to the WikiProject Tennis before implementation but I don't foresee any issues. --Wolbo (talk) 18:55, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at User:John of Reading/X2, which is adapted from 1999 US Open – Women's Singles. The second infobox there manages to display links to 1998 US Open (tennis) and 2000 US Open (tennis). Is that good enough?

I suspect that readers would prefer to see links to 1998 US Open – Women's Singles and 2000 US Open – Women's Singles, but I can't see how to do that without first editing every article that uses this infobox. Currently, the template does not "know" that it is being used in a "Women's Singles" page, so it can't provide links to the relevant sub-tournaments. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:42, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

John, many thanks for your assistance. It looks exactly like intended but in terms of functionality I agree with your assessment that links to 1998 US Open – Women's Singles and 2000 US Open – Women's Singles would be preferable and probably what most readers would expect. Basically there are two levels, the Grand Slam tournament itself, e.g. 1999 US Open and, one level lower, the individual competitions, e.g. 1999 US Open – Women's Singles or 1999 US Open – Men's Singles. On the highest level the infobox navigation to the previous and next tournament works splendid but it's absent on the lower level, where it is equally needed. Currently if you want to go from 1999 US Open – Women's Singles to 1998 US Open – Women's Singles you either have to edit the URL (cumbersome) or go up one level, go to previous tournament and select the Women's Singles tournament (equally cumbersome). Your setup does remove one step from the latter method so it is an improvement but I think it would also confuse readers who would expect to stay on the sublevel. Can you inform me what adjustment would have to made to the articles to make the infobox aware of it's location? Depending on the change it might be worth the one-time effort. Also could you explain why the infobox on the highest (Grand Slam) level does know on what page it is used but the infobox on the lower level does not? Thx in advance. --Wolbo (talk) 14:27, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the required change isn't too bad - have a look at the markup for the third infobox that I've just added to User:John of Reading/X2, which displays links to the correct individual competitions.

Have a look at the first line at 1999 US Open – Women's Singles, which reads {{GrandSlamEvents|1999|US Open|. This is how the template knows the year and the tournament name - it doesn't try to work them out from the article name. Templates are notoriously bad at working with character strings such as the page name. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:03, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that looks perfect! The {{GrandSlamEvents|1999|US Open}} code as the source for the template's year and the tournament name was actually one of the few bits I managed to decipher but I couldn't figure out where the template would get the "Women's Singles" or "Men's Singles" string from that it would need for it to work as well on a lower level. I see you used the 'before_name' and 'after_name' variable for that which gave me a 'Doh! moment' because I used that same variable on the higher, Grand Slam, level to indicate the name change of the U.S. tournament (between amateur and Open Era) in 1968. Do I understand correctly that all we need to do to make this work is add the 'before_name' and 'after_name' lines to the {{Infobox Tennis Grand Slam events}}? --Wolbo (talk) 19:34, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much. You need to copy about 20 lines of markup into {{Infobox Tennis Grand Slam events}}. If you copy them from {{Infobox tennis event}} you'll also need to change the "colspan" parameter from 3 to 11; if you copy them from User:John of Reading/X3 then this has already been done. If you can't see which lines to copy then I can do it for you. -- John of Reading (talk) 19:58, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just briefly running it by WikiProject Tennis to see if there are any objections to this update. If not then I'll have a go at the update on my sandbox page. Perhaps you can then have a quick look to check if everyting is correct before the change is implemented. Again thanks for your help.--Wolbo (talk) 19:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Production information[edit]

How can you find "Production" for an episode of a television show. The "production" is really needed expanding in "The Little Guy". I've search everywhere, and that is all I can find. Thanks for the help. TBran dl ey 20:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

miserable CAPTCHA[edit]

What is the company responsible for this miserably USER UNFRIENDLY handicap to business operations? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.65.89.77 (talk) 21:08, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A good starting point might be Luis von Ahn and Manuel Blum. - Ka renjc 22:12, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As this is the help desk, not the reference desk, I'm going to assume this IP user is talking about the captcha on Wikipedia when trying to save changes to a page without being logged in. The responsible company here is the Wikimedia Foundation, but might I suggest creating an account so you can edit without the hassle of captchas? It's easy, anonymous, and provides other benefits compared to editing from an IP address. BigNate37_(T) 03:35, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

However, if the question is about editing Wikipedia, then the phrase "business operations" rings warning bells for me, and suggests the poster should read WP:ORGFAQ. --ColinFine (talk) 11:00, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More intense version of Template:Plot?[edit]

Looking at the plot summary section of Dil Se Di Dua... Saubhagyavati Bhava?, which already has a Template:Plot tag, is there a more intense version? Something like, "Really, guys, there's no reason to write every single detail of what happens in the show in the article. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, for crying out loud, not a personal fan site or blog of the series"? The more I look at the plot summary section, the less salvageable it seems. I'd get rid of it and write a new plot summary myself, but the problem is, I have never even seen the show. JIP | Talk 21:21, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's Template:Overly_detailed or Template:All_plot, but I don't think either of those is better than the existing tag. I see you've already left a note on the talk page. If you're not going to tackle the fix yourself, then that's probably all you can do. RudolfRed (talk) 21:31, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox looking weird in one article. The template is OK, but in article it is different.[edit]

Resolved

– Vanischenum^Talk 10:19, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the article Polymer physics, the footer navbox looks very expanded. But in its own template it looks normal. Is this only to me? What must be the problem? Only on this article, not in any other one! Vanischenum^Talk 21:35, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed it with a null edit though I'm not sure what was broken. Dismas|^(talk) 22:22, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! Vanischenum^Talk 23:42, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

/* Edit request */ Hello - Guns controversy and other incidents- added correctly or not please? Nick D'Arcy[edit]

Hello Wikipedians, I've added (?) some news references in article "Nick D'Arcy" bio - Australian swimmer. I've tried to be objective, neutral etc, but article is "semi-protected" . Have I broken wikipedia rules again? Sorry if so. Who do I ask for permission? What should I do? My editing widgits / symbols and <ref> grammar is below standards, SORRY for this also. Purple colour in reference section means I've done something wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ern malleyscrub (talk • contribs) 23:15, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Use {{Edit semi-protected}}. Put this template on the talk page for the article you want to change. Be specific about what change you want. "Change X to Y". But, Nick D'Arcy does not appear to be protected at all. What makes you think it is semi-protected? RudolfRed (talk) 00:08, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I look at it, I see that you have already edited that page. Can you explain what help you're asking for? RudolfRed (talk) 00:14, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to edit the lead section or the whole page at once then click the "Edit" tab at top. Was that your problem? PrimeHunter (talk) 09:12, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you've done anything wrong. "Semi-protected" means that IP users (not logged in) can't edit it, but once you have an account and are autoconfirmed, you can edit it. Of course, if it's a controversial matter, people may disagree with your edit, and in such cases it's a good idea to discuss it on the talk page first. I don't see any purple in the references section. --ColinFine (talk) 11:04, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]