Help desk
< June 5	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 7 >

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.

June 6[edit]

Improve a table[edit]

There is a simple table at Keel_laying#U.S._Navy_traditions. I want to draw a box around it and maybe make it a color other than white. I've played with it, but can't get it done (as you can see, I'm no table expert). I intend to do several more tables like this. If somebody can just make this one as it should be, I can use it in the others. Lou Sander (talk) 00:59, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Lou, I have problems with tables too, and I've no idea if this contribution would be consistent with similar articles, but maybe this is a little closer to what you are looking for?

The Commander, Charleston Naval Shipyard
requests the honor of your presence
upon the occasion of the
laying of the keel of the destroyer
NEVERSAIL
by the Honorable W.T. Door
Secretary of the Navy
at the Charleston Naval Shipyard
on Tuesday, the fifteenth of July
at half past twelve o'clock

Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:19, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect! Unfortunately, somebody has removed the table from the article. I can't argue with him, since it's a pretty insignificant item. I WILL save your table for later use, However. Lou Sander (talk) 17:34, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

{{quote box}} with <poem> to format the text. Gadget850^talk 18:09, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Backlog at the Afc[edit]

Dear editors:

The backlog at Category:Pending AfC submissions has doubled to over 1300 articles in the last week or so. If there are any reviewers out there looking for something to do.... —Anne Delong (talk) 02:18, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

been asked to put up a Wiki page for a local author[edit]

Hello, I have been asked to put up a Wiki page for a local author. He is publishing his books online on Amazon Kindle and would like to have a Wiki page for potential buyers to get an idea of his background. I have gone through the Wizard and have read the Notability section, there are no articles online written about this author. I am not sure that he is considered "notable". I would like to know whether or not I can put up his page or will he be "speedy deleted". Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evette Haddad (talk • contribs) 02:45, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like there is no way he could be considered notable enough for an article here. See also our guidance on conflict of interest. "would like to have a Wiki page for potential buyers to get an idea of his background" translates to promotion, which is despised around here. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:56, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Evette, I gotta give you props for being familiar with the criteria for inclusion, your awareness of notability, and for floating your question by other editors first. That's a good instinct, and I hope you stick around Wikipedia. :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:53, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with Cyphoid's praise of your style, Evette. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:38, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, welcome Evette!Naraht (talk) 14:12, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP terminology[edit]

Hey, was wondering if my fellow editors knew of any specific Wikipedia terminology/expression/slang/shortcuts to describe the sneaky re-submission of contested information days, weeks, months after an objection has been raised and a discussion has been initiated. I don't think it's exactly vandalism, it's more like long-term POV-pushing, or trying to subversively inject specific, preferred phrasing into an article, without actually participating in the discussion. Weird question, maybe. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:03, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a "slow edit war"? RJFJR (talk) 18:05, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That seems closer, thanks. I know it might be a strange question. I'll see if that leads me to a more specific term. I appreciate it, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:47, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How to implement a proposal[edit]

I made a proposal back in April for an addition to the Afc script which would filter the new submissions by reminding new submitters to add references. It went through an RfC and was closed here with near unanimous support. However, nothing has happened. What am I missing? —Anne Delong (talk) 05:01, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From reading the discussion at the end, it seems that the bot creators need more detail. Try leaving another message on the AfC page or on the talk page for Petrb. RudolfRed (talk) 06:27, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No bot is needed at all. There is a detailed flowchart at User:Anne Delong/AfcBox. Messages left in various places. Maybe it's a dead issue. —Anne Delong (talk) 18:50, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If a bot isn't needed, then what you do need is an admin who is willing to edit the existing script. You might start with whoever has edited it in the past (and ask him/her on his/her user talk page; otherwise you might put up a note at WP:VPT asking for someone to help. Or even post at WP:AN, I suppose, though that should be the last resort. (You've obviously put in a lot of work on this; it would be a shame to see it go for naught.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:29, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV help needed for Nimbuzz.[edit]

I have recently written a new article for the instant messenger Nimbuzz from scratch. Being aware that previous variations of the article have been deleted 7 times for NPOV and NOTIBILITY issues, from the start I tried to be neutral in tone. I followed the style of Viber and WeChat among others.

However, other editors disagree. The article now has a {{advert}} tag, and the DYK I submitted has stalled with the same issue. I require assistance as I can not see how to improve the text any further. JoltColaOfEvil (talk) 06:21, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have made some changes, to make the article look a bit less like an advertisement. Something which needs adding, which I can't do myself as I don't know enough about it, is to explain that the company generates its revenue from the advertisements it delivers alongside the messages. Maproom (talk) 06:50, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help!
I have re-cited the 150 million users claim from another source.
I have expanded and provided two additional citations for the companies source of revenue.
I'm unsure why you have completely removed the awards section. I spent some time putting that together. Several of the previous deletions of this page were done due to lack of proved notibility, and thus showing that the product had won several industry awards seemed important.
My submitted DYK hook you have altered to "to be closer to the majority of its anticipated users". Isn't that a bit crystal ball gazing? As it was it was directly cited, now it is not. JoltColaOfEvil (talk) 07:48, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your choice of following the examples of Viber and WeChat was a unfortunate as Viber is barely a C-class and WeChat hasn't been rated yet. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:24, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well that was mostly for layout, but I take your point. JoltColaOfEvil (talk) 09:43, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the "advert" template; I think the article is reasonably neutral, albeit positive in tone. As mentioned on the article's talk page, awards should go into the narrative (in the History section) if they are important enough; limit yourself to three or (at the most) four, and under no circumstances use the Nimbuzz blog or website, or a press release issued by Nimbuzz (no matter where it is republished) as the source/citation for the information.

As for DYK, the Help desk really isn't the place to appeal a decision of editors who work on that feature. It's best to discuss issues with them directly, or indirectly on the article talk page. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:25, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A private sandbox?[edit]

Is it possible to test out and save the coding of Wikipedia in a page inaccessible by the public?--Cobalt174 (talk) 12:15, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It would have to be off Wikipedia - on your own computer, because as a matter of principle almost everything on WP is fully accessible, except for actively running server code of course. The "coding of Wikipedia" is the Mediawiki software. You can download your own copy from the link in the bottom right corner of practically every page here. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:29, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) No. There's no such thing as 'a private page' on Wikipeia.
You can create a page, say User:CiaPan/mytestpage, which will not be linked in any other Wikipedia page, neither in main space or in User space (see Special:WhatLinksHere/User:CiaPan/mytestpage), however one can still find it by the global index (see appropriate part of index [1] or the filtered contents [2]) --CiaPan (talk) 12:36, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is mostly due to the principle that we are not here as a webhost; all of your content should be here as part of the project of building an encyclopedia, and private testing pages don't conform to that goal. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:41, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can stop Google from indexing a user page by adding two underscores, then the word NOINDEX, then two more underscores at the top of the page. Not all search engines honour this though. And don't forget to remove it when you are done! —Anne Delong (talk) 13:48, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

'twould look like this: __NOINDEX__. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:17, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Or you can use the container template {{NOINDEX}}.--ukexpat (talk) 14:47, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

International Golf Federation page[edit]

Hello,

I work for the International Golf Federation(IGF) and would like to edit the page. Part of its content is not accurate. I have been trying to edit many times but my changes are being rejected by User:Tewapack. I wrote to him a few times but nothing has changed. Please let me know how I should proceed.

Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aurelia 78 (talk • contribs) 13:35, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the reason for the reversion of your edits is that you gave no explanation in an edit summary. You also gave no references to support the changes which you proposed. As you have a conflict of interest, the safest bet is to propose changes on the article talk page and to include with such proposal a reference to reliable sources to support your proposals. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:52, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see that Aurelia 78, who works for the IGF, and International Golf Federation, have made many changes to the International Golf Federation article, including removing all mention of both The R&A and the United States Golf Association. The articles about the two latter organisations both claim it is they rather than the IGF who form the governing body for golf. So I assume that there is some strong POV-pushing here. I have absolutely no interest in this most boring of sports, so I am not going to get involved any further. Maproom (talk) 16:20, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

HotCat[edit]

Why the HotCat disabled? I have a slight problem of adding and removing categories with it.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What specifically is the problem? And you might want to post at WP:VPT instead - if it's a technical issue, you may find help more quickly if you go there. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:04, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaning question[edit]

I have a feather filled comforter & would like to know HOW TO CLEAN it before I store it for the summer. I don't feel comfortable putting it in a washing machine. Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.166.68.95 (talk) 19:39, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Helpdesk is for asking questions about editing and using Wikipedia. Try over at the Reference desk - most likely the Miscellaneous section where someone may be able to point you towards the information you need. - Ka renjc 20:00, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tables help[edit]

I went through Help:Tables and I simply cannot figure this stuff out, so my apologies if this is really basic! I would really appreciate it if someone could do this for me. At Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Nomination procedure/sandbox, there are three "Steps". I would like each one separated into blue-outlined boxes that look like the "Step" boxes at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Header/Sandbox (scroll down a bit). Don't touch the latter page—the boxes are horizontal. But for the "Nomination procedure" sandbox, I would like each Step box to be vertical, instead of horizontal. It's the dang {{fpipages}} that's messing me up I think, and depending on which browser I use, the Step 3 box will stretch out to the full page. Is there anyway of keeping all three Steps the same width? Feel free to be creative and do what's needed! THANK YOU so much!! – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 20:15, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Keraunoscopia. Done. I have tweaked the width of the inputbox to make the boxes more equal in size and to fit with the amount of text.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:01, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. But is there a way to make the three boxes stacked on top of each other, to the left of the template? That's what I meant by vertical. Would putting {{fpipages}} in its own cell keep things looking clean? – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 22:09, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A failure of reading on my part. Yes, vertical would mean ... vertical. Let me take a look again.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:13, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, next version is up.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:39, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh perfect, that's what I was looking for. Thank you so much Fuhghettaboutit! – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 00:42, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think I get it... horizontal version = one table, three cells? And vertical version is three tables... hopefully I'll remember this. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 00:45, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. All I did was make three separate single-celled tables which then naturally stack if there's nothing interposed between them. It may be that there's a way to do it in one table that someone who really knows this stuff would have done, so don't take what I did as the best way (I'm at best a dabbler), but it works:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:37, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ULRICH surname vs ULLRICH[edit]

To: Wikipedia [Help Desks]. The spellings are not all in the same as you say on internet Wikipedia links. Ulrich is germanic; however Ullrich is Swiss. Switzerland territory was under german rule, not part of Germany. Living in Peoria, IL, there are 100s of Ulrichs from Germany. There are 100s of my family tree back to 1790 here who spell as Ulrich also whereas we should spell as Ullrich. There is a distinction being our tree originates in Switzerland with direct migration out of Egypt depicted in encyclopedias before german rule 250-500 years prior. My family came to America via France to cut connections of immigration in early 1800s during Napoleonic years. Proof is our ancestry book from 1832 has not one of the other Ulrichs in our book to 2000. By tracking local newspaper obituaries for 30 years from parents of, sons of, very possible link, there is no link between Ulrich and Ullrich. I use Ullrich but most of my tree still use Ulrich. ULLRICH is Swiss and Egyptian people, w/lookalikes. No relatives of the ULRICHs of Germany here. I have suffered locally needless to say!... being someone that we're not. That's all. We still carry many close Egyptian genes and habits. We are definitely not pub people like most Germans. Please add this distinction "originating in Switzerland are Ullrichs". Thanks. Larry A. Ulrich, Peoria, IL — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.114.227 (talk) 22:09, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be more specific about where you think we need a change? We have separate articles on Ulrich and on Ullrich. The latter page is much less well developed (although the former needs much work itself) and makes no mention of the derivation of the name. If you want that added, well why don't you go boldly fix it? All of Wikipedia's content has its origins with someone noticing a gap and filling it. We are all volunteers, and we were all once, like you, just someone coming to this site for the fist time. I would suggest you first take a tour through the tutorial to learn about our policies and how to edit. You can make your changes without having a username, but I suggest that you first sign up for one (totally anonymous and takes about 1 minute). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:13, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PLease note though that articles need to be based on published reliable sources - neither personal knowledge, nor unpublished family trees are acceptable sources. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:29, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I accidentally uploaded the wrong photo[edit]

I was trying to edit the page "georgetown district high school" and when I tried to upload a photo, I thought that you were supposed to put the file name of the photo on your computer, but apparently not. A photo I had never seen of a man and a dog came up, instead of a photo of volleyball, and I cant figure out how to get it off. If you could simply remove it, as it is not supposed to be on that page, and the caption does not correspond to it, that would be great,

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.204.213.133 (talk) 23:11, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's difficult to track down what happened because you're editing unsigned in, by your IP address, rather than by the username you had to have been logged in under when you uploaded any photo. I'm not sure what happened on the upload but I do know that what you added to the article was File:Matt1.jpg. Anytime you upload, try to choose a specific, descriptive name. File:Matt1.jpg appears to be a redirect to a Wikimedia Commons file by the name File:Matthew Woodring Stover.jpg, and what you are seeing in the article is that picture. Can you expand on whether you were logged in when you uploaded or attempt to upload the image, what your username is, and whether it was here or at the Commons?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:29, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the file in the article. See, what you have to base the image name on is the file name on Wikipedia or the Wikimedia commons. If an image is not at either of those places, it won't work on a Wikipedia page. Howicus (talk) 23:32, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you can't use a picture in Wikipedia until you, or somebody, has uploaded it to the Wikipedia or Wikimedia commons. see WP:Images. --ColinFine (talk) 23:51, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

may I post a comment in a different language?[edit]

Hello -

This can't be a new question! I read an article in German, understood about half of it, want to leave a comment in English on a German language page. Is this considered rude?

The thing is, the page is about "mohr in hemd," a Viennese dessert my late aunt described to me. What is popularly baked as a dessert under that name now is not what my aunt described. I'm interested in the history of this, and whether anyone has any memory of there being another version of this dessert. The dessert my aunt described to me would actually answer the question people seem to be asking in the wiki-article (where is the 'hemd' -- the 'shirt' -- in this dessert?), but I can't write well enough in German. I have to contribute my little bit in English, or I just won't have time for it. So what do you think, can I just go ahead and post in English on this German language page of yours?

Secondly, another part of the article is discussing the political correctness of calling this dessert "moor in a shirt." I'd like to post, in English, that when my aunt explained this dessert and its name to me, it didn't come across as a racial slur at all. Rather, she seemed to be thinking about the wonder and romance of that first exposure to a really exotic person. And also, the dessert originated when the opera "Othello" debuted in 1888, so the dessert and its name is pertinent to Viennese history. But I'm not sure I should put my opinion on this page, especially my American opinion (of course, if everyone dumps on it, I'll only be able to read half of it). So, what do you think, should I post in the 'political correctness' section of this page?

Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nightgardener (talk • contribs) 23:47, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Each language Wikipedia is a separate project with, to some degree, different rules and customs. I don't advise you to post in English on the page in German Wikipedia; but I don't think anybody will object if you post on the talk page (Diskussion:name of page) in English, explaining what you would like to add. Alternatively you could try at the newcomers' question page de:WP:Fragen von Neulingen.

On English Wikipedia, you should never ever put your opinion on an article page, unless you have a reliable source to support it. Articles are for referenced encyclopaedic content, talk pages are for discussion. I don't know that the rules in German Wikipedia are the same, but I would guess the are. --ColinFine (talk) 00:04, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]