Help desk
< January 1	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 3 >

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.

January 2[edit]

Deletion of talk page comments[edit]

I am trying to revert some deletions of comments at Talk:Yahoo! Mail so that these comments can be collapsed, instead of deleted, as recommended. However, I am only able to revert the last deletion. Can anyone help? Thanks in advance, XOttawahitech (talk) 01:31, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would try Twinkle and then "restore this version". ///EuroCarGT 02:00, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Given that there appears to be a dispute with another contributor as to whether the deletion was appropriate, I'd suggest that rather than using Twinkly, you should discuss the matter with them. If you really think it is worth arguing over whether off-topic material is hatted or deleted is really that important in the first place... AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:08, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agree! You should discuss as Andy said. ///EuroCarGT 02:12, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @AndyTheGrump: I started a discussion with three other editors on this page on 24 November 2013. I last posted on 23 December 2013 and had no response -- how long should I have waited before being bold? XOttawahitech (talk) 02:27, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see any consensus to restore the deleted material. Is there a specific reason why you think that restoring it and then immediately hatting it is going to be to the net benefit of Wikipedia? It seems rather pointless to me... AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:40, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed the consensus appears to be that the material I removed from the talk page should not be restored.--ukexpat (talk) 14:51, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Ukexpat:@AndyTheGrump: There are wikipedia guidelines dealing with deleting offtopic comments made by others on talkpages: "If a discussion goes off-topic the general practice is to hide it...". Are you saying "consensus" of a couple of editors on a talkpage trumps said guidelines? Just curious. XOttawahitech (talk) 15:14, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Considering that the guideline says that "the general practice is to hide it" and the there is another policy which tells you to Ignore All Rules, yes. Ultimately I don't think it matters either way. In both cases the comment is known not to be suitable for an article talk page and will be ignored. Samwalton9 (talk) 15:42, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The guideline also says " It is still common to simply delete gibberish, rants about the article subject (as opposed to its treatment in the article) and test edits, as well as harmful or prohibited material as described above. " - In this case, technical support questions about Yahoo Mail are equivalent to "rants about the article subject" or "gibberish" - e.g. have no place on the talk page of the article. I think deleting it, rather than keeping it, sends a better message - this is not yahoo mail technical support. If such messages remain, others may be encouraged to post their technical challenges with yahoo mail. Ottawa persists in restoring comments other editors have deleted and that other editors have agreed are off-topic, even though no-one yet has agreed with them. WP:CONSENSUS is a policy that trumps most guidelines...--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 10:19, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

how to edit an article to remove advertisement warning[edit]

Hello I am part of the public relations team at the Indian Institute of Management, Shillong, India. I have been trying to edit Indian Institute of Management Shillong to remove the advertisement warning at the top which is harmful for the repute of the institute.

I have already edited it a number of times but the warning remains. Can you please suggest as to how to remove it??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krittikachak (talk • contribs) 07:19, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

it can be removed when the majority of the content is verified by third party reliable sources and the article reads like an encyclopedia article about the subject and not like a website written by the college. As someone directly involved with the college, you have an inherent conflict of interest and so should not be editing the article directly at all. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 08:09, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've done some work on this, but it still is mainly material that readers could learn by going to the website. Dougweller (talk) 13:49, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I added some additional material and tweaked the article. -- Jreferee (talk) 19:05, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please rewrite an article because I'm not able with my simple English knowledge[edit]

I reverted an edit on Cuisenaire rods because of copyright violation. The information is true. Could someone help me? Please rewrite the introducion because Georges Cuisenaire is the inventor - not Hussein Estahri (see Talk:Cuisenaire rods). Please add some information to article Georges Cuisenaire too (compare with french article Georges Cuisenaire). Thanks --Frze ^{> talk} 08:33, 2 January 2014 (UTC) @John of Reading:[reply]

I've re-instated a version from 24 October, which I think is the most recent good version. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:43, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I added a history section to the Cuisenaire rods article. The Hussein Estahri edits[1][2] may have been test edits. -- Jreferee (talk) 17:44, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Box for Sharedupload-desc-here/it (Italian language interface of en.wiki)[edit]

Could you please edit the Italian version of Sharedupload-desc-here in en.wiki with this box?

Questo file proviene da Wikimedia Commons e può essere utilizzato da altri progetti. Di seguito viene mostrata la descrizione presente nella pagina di descrizione del file.

This is the page I am referring to. I checked also this page and this one, but they don't seem to contain any box. If you switch to Italian language interface in English language Wikipedia (en.wiki) you'll get an ugly line of text, whereas the English, Dutch, German, Norwegian interfaces of en.wiki have all a nice box.--Carnby (talk) 12:52, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you click on "View source" on that page, there is a link where you can post an edit request. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:07, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Schmalkalden from Category:Articles containing potentially dated statements from before 1990[edit]

By which way did the article become a member of that category ? -- Juergen 37.252.106.163 (talk) 14:03, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The category page says it's added by {{As of}}. It's at the end of the lead. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:35, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But the template usage As of 31 December 2010^[update] there should have placed the page into Category:Articles containing potentially dated statements from December 2010 (where it is) and not into the above category. Is there a bug in the software ? -- Juergen 37.252.106.163 (talk) 16:08, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The template {{As of | 31-12-2010}} apparently had a date format that is not read properly by the 'as of' template. The use of {{As of|2010|12|31}}[3] puts the article in Category:Articles containing potentially dated statements from December 2010. The statement "As of 31 December 2010, the town had a population of 19,978" probably can be changed to 'In 2010, the town had a population of about 20,000'. -- Jreferee (talk) 17:06, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find information on an Actor[edit]

I was looking for more details on a British Actor called Michael Wisniewski.

He can be found on IMDb but not Wikipedia maybe its a new thing just thought most thing could be found here.

Oh I just found him on Google, thanks anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.103.125.98 (talk) 15:39, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OP may be referring to Michael Wisniewski (III). -- Jreferee (talk) 17:00, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Not everybody - not even everybody on IMDb - meets the criteria of notability that justifies an article in Wikipedia. It requires that the subject have been written about at length in reliable sources. IMDb is not usually regarded as reliable for this purpose, because much of the information is user-editable. --ColinFine (talk) 18:58, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How do you update a picture?[edit]

I cannot find out how to update a picture; I only know how to upload one. How do you update a picture? Dustin talk 17:24, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can't update it within Wikipedia. You would need to edit it with some appropriate image-processing software outside Wikipedia, and then upload a new version. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:31, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on what is meant by update. Which picture in which page and which update do you want? PrimeHunter (talk) 18:17, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to update this picture, but it is now too late. (File:2013 United States tornado count.png) I don't need to manually edit the picture, for the picture's source page would change the picture itself; I don't know how to upload a new image in its place, is what I am trying to say. Dustin talk 03:06, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it just a question of following the link from File:2013 United States tornado count.png to commons:File:2013 United States tornado count.png, and then using the link (near the bottom of the page) that says ""Upload a new version of this file"? --David Biddulph (talk) 09:07, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I didn't see that link. Thank you for telling me where it is! Dustin talk 18:32, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template editor user right[edit]

1. I don't know how to do these (from Wikipedia:Template editor – Guidelines for granting):

5. The editor should have worked on the sandbox version of at least three protected templates.
6. The editor should have requested and successfully enacted at least five significant edits at protected templates.

2. How to find "Template-protected"? pages? --Zyma (talk) 18:36, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Zyma. This page (which was actually linked to within the original of the text that you copied above) explains how to create a sandbox version of a template, and Category:Wikipedia protected templates will lead you to some such pages? --ColinFine (talk) 19:04, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just to expand slightly, once you have made a tested, sandbox version of a template with significant edits that you think should be enacted, using the information provided above, go to the subject template's talk page, post there the {{Edit template-protected}} to call an administrator or template editor there who has the ability to enact the edits, and below that advise about your sandbox and the thrust of your edits - why they should be enacted and so on. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:42, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ColinFine and Fuhghettaboutit. If I have more questions about them, I ask you on your talk pages. Regards. --Zyma (talk) 19:07, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Ensoulment" Abortion not permitted in Judaism[edit]

In your article on Ensoulment it says that abortion is permitted in Judaism. This is not correct. Judaism is more lenient than the Catholic Church and permits abortion when the mother's health is endangered. Also, a "morning-after" pill that prevents implantation of a fertilized egg is not considered abortion. But in general, abortion is not permitted. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.108.39.106 (talk) 22:14, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the statement as it was unsourced and smacked of oversimplification.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:42, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Links on templates won't disappear[edit]

I've just redirected the article about Danielle DiLorenzo, because she really isn't that notable. I removed the link to her article from Template: Survivor contestants, but it's still there when viewing the template on another page. For example, if I were to view this template from Richard Hatch (Survivor contestant), the link to "Danielle" is still on the template (under the "Panama" and "Heroes vs Villains" sections). Anyone know how to fix this? Thanks! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 22:17, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The server will get round to updating all the affected pages eventually, but it could take a few days. You can make it happen sooner by "purging" the affected articles; see Wikipedia:Purge for the details. -- John of Reading (talk) 22:23, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"This article has multiple issues" note at the top of the page I created[edit]

I got this message at the top of the page that I created for the filmmaker Fred Barney Taylor:

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. This article has an unclear citation style. (November 2013) This article or section may be slanted towards recent events. (November 2013)

Can someone advise me on how to deal with the two issues. I have had no luck finding out what I should do to correct this.

Lynnfoss126 (talk) 23:09, 2 January 2014 (UTC)Lynn[reply]

Regarding the "citation style", see WP:CITE - all of the footnotes for an article should be consistent in their format. the article has some that start with a # some that dont, some have the author first, some with the author at the end, some where the link is just the article name, some where the link includes other portions of the citation, etc. Whichever of the citation style you choose, use the same for all the footnotes.

Regarding the "recent events" - the lead section is supposed to be a short over view representing a summary of the article content, but it doesnt mention anything before 2007. The filmography shows works going back to 1973, but the earliest mention in the article proper is the 1980s.

And then, just in general, the content in the body itself wanders all over the place rather than an organized presentation which would generally be start at the beginning and follow chronologically (although an organization scheme based on other premises might be appropriate : organized by mediums or by themes for example). -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:26, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]