Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2019 July 14

Help desk
< July 13	<< Jun | July | Aug >>	July 15 >

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 14

Spotting a small edit in a diff

In for example [1] actually seeing what the change was can be annoyingly hard. Is there some tool or trick that can help? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:02, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

With ones like that, I just zoom it till it becomes large enough to see. (I.e. Ctrl and +). Eagleash (talk) 09:10, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

That helps some, sure. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:22, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

I use User:Cacycle/wikEdDiff. Click the green triangle above the diff at [2] to see it for your example. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:41, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Now we're talking. I'll try that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:47, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Here's a more primitive method that might work for you. Look at the screen from a yard or so back (experiment to find what's most comfortable) and cross your eyes (inwards) until the two almost-identical pieces of text merge in the middle to form a combined image — it may take a few seconds before the merged image drops into sharp focus. As you scan that combined image, places where the details do not match will look 'shimmery' as your left and right eye images fight for dominence.

I am able to use this technique for 'spot the difference' picture puzzles quite successfully, but YMMD. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.177.55 (talk) 20:33, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Holy mother mole, it does work! For me, anyway. The first half of your pipelink has a capital S, almost seems to "slither" off the page (or out of the edit window, technically). InedibleHulk (talk) 01:13, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

That's interesting, but it seems I can't make it work. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:39, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Another slightly counterintuitive option might be to use the mobile version of the diff page, which can be accessed by changing "en.wikipedia" to "en.m.wikipedia" in the url (and, as far as I know, should work on any desktop browser). The default text size in the mobile version is larger, and the pastel blue/yellow highlighting of changes is rendered as a brighter red/green, so the changes are at least a little bit easier to see (provided you don't suffer from red/green colour blindness). – Arms & Hearts (talk) 15:44, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

@Arms & Hearts: Instead of tweaking URL you can scroll the page to its bottom and click the 'Mobile view' link there. :) CiaPan (talk) 16:14, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Demographics section of articles about US towns and cities

Greetings fellow Wikipedians! Is there any particular reason that Wikipedia uses the term "spread out" to describe the distribution of population by age? These are just a few examples. I come across it all the time.

• Monroe LA: "In the city, the population was spread out with 29.7% under the age of 18..."
• Monroe GA: "In the city, the population was spread out with 28.7% under the age of 18..."
• Monroe CT: "In the town, the population was spread out with 29.1% under the age of 18..."

While not exactly wrong, the term "spread out" is awkward and unusual in this context. It's hard to believe that this is an actual Wikipedia policy. But it occurs so frequently that I had to ask.... before I launch a broad-based effort to correct this problem wherever I find it. Cordially, BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 11:33, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

All your examples date back to the 2002 article creation by Ram-Man, probably using rambot before it got its own account. A search on "the population was spread out with" gives 32,532 siimilar looking hits, nearly all of them probably from rambot. See also Wikipedia:WikiProject 2010 US Census. I don't know whether the formulation has been discussed. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:49, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. This makes sense.BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 11:57, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

User attacked me, accused me of propaganda for asking a question. Wanted me blocked. I took it to AN/Incidents.

Did I do the right thing? ― Дрейгорич / Dreigorich Talk 12:05, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

@Дрейгорич: Judging by the result of the ANI it looks as though you did as the IP in question has some history. ANI would usually like to see some attempt at discussion first though. Eagleash (talk) 12:20, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Removed plot from comic adaptation

Could anyone please tell me if it's okay if I remove the plot section from The Marvelous Land of Oz (comics)? It's all one paragraph and the article on the source material already does a good job of it. (I already did this edit earlier, then reversed it out of OCD-induced worry. Edit: Sorry to not make that clear in the title of this post.)--Thylacine24 (talk) 12:37, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

If the comic and the book are two different entities, then it makes sense to have the plot in both places – even if as per you it's the same story. Lourdes 14:43, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Translation request

I would like to translate the German lemma Ecovis International into the English WP. To to this, I created this request which has been undone. Can someone tell me the proper steps of how to request a translation? Thanks --Krassissimus (talk) 12:48, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

You accidentally edited the template. Post here next time. ― Дрейгорич / Dreigorich Talk 12:56, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

@Krassissimus: The link posted by Dreigorich is for cases where someone has already posted an article in the main article space that's in another language (which people shouldn't do, and such articles will be deleted if no one translates them to English within a couple of weeks) or when someone has posted a translation to main article space that isn't a very good one and needs attention from someone familiar with the source language. General information about creating an article here that's a translation from another language's Wikipedia can be found at Wikipedia:TRANSLATETOHERE. Let me know if you need any help beyond that. Largoplazo (talk) 13:51, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

@Largoplazo: Was that the right way way to submit a request? Krassissimus (talk) 19:33, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

@Krassissimus: No, it wasn't. See above where I said not to do it that way. What I forgot to mention is that if you do post an article that isn't in English and that article is a duplicate of an article on another language's Wikipedia, it wouldn't even get the two-week grace period—it would be deleted right away under WP:CSD A2. That's why the article was deleted, and that's why your request was removed from WP:PNT.

Please look at the instructions I gave you, WP:TRANSLATETOHERE. Largoplazo (talk) 22:45, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Removing VPN restrictions

Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this.

Later this year, I may have to spend a decent amount of time in a country which has a reputation for intrusive government surveillance. Because of this, I don't feel comfortable traveling without a VPN. However, Wikipedia blocks me from editing whenever I have my VPN on. Hypothetically, is it possible for me to request an exemption to the block for my account?

I know there are ways to request for individual IPs to be unblocked, but it's my understanding that's VPNs don't always necessarily connect to the same IP.

Thank you. Alivardi (talk) 14:59, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

@Alivardi: You can request IP block exemption for the duration of your stay in the country. Danski454 (talk) 15:10, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

But no option to unblock the account itself I guess. Alright, thanks anyway. Alivardi (talk) 19:57, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Alivardi, IP block exemption will prevent your account from being blocked. Let me know when you will need it (dates) and I can grant it to you. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:07, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

@ONUnicorn: Thank you. If the dates get confirmed, I'll let you know. Alivardi (talk) 20:26, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

New article still in draft status

Some two months ago, I prepared the following draft in response to a requested article: [[3]]

It is still only a draft so I wonder how I could further improve it to support its publication. Do you have any advice? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgtepr (talk • contribs) 18:08, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

@Mgtepr: you never submitted the draft for review. If you are ready, add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page. If you copy the code from here, copy it as it appears when viewing the page to make things work as intended. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 21:24, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

OK, I now added the code and hope that it is correct. It would be awesome if you could have a brief look whether the article actually has been submitted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgtepr (talk • contribs) 06:42, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

No. You have not submitted it. You have included code and nowiki tags around the submission. You were told to copy the code as it appears when viewing this page; that is {{subst:submit}}. David Biddulph (talk) 06:48, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Monica Helms Page

I went to the Monica Helms page and someone took out most of the information about her. They even removed the picture of her. There was no inappropriate information on that page. You have tens of thousands of pages about people and much of the information on Monica's page was similar to that. Why was the page gutted like that? When will the information be restored? This is so unfair.

Monica Helms — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mfhelms (talk • contribs) 18:23, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

@Mfhelms: You can find out why each change to an article was made by looking at the article's history page. Click on the "view history" tab of the Monica Helms article. The picture was removed because it had been added as a "non-free" image (i.e., a picture with a copyright and no free copyright license), but with no rationale for use of a non-free image. You may submit an image of the subject if you are the photographer (the photographer owns the copyright), and you license it to us under a free license. This is not unfair: this policy applies to all images. If you object to the removal of other material, then raise your objection on the article's talk page and discuss it with the removing editor. Again, the removing editor was following policy and removing unreferenced material about a living person: see WP:BLP. Again: not unfair, but policy. If you can cite references, then the material can be re-instated if it is encyclopedic. Since you are the subject, you should not edit the article yourself: see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. If we have messed up in other articles, that is no reason to mess up in your article: see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. -Arch dude (talk) 18:56, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

How to find exact color codes used in a template

Looking at the following template:

How can I find out the exact color codes that create that exact shade of blue and that exact shade of red, for the Democratic and Republican distinctions? That is, the little colored rectangle to the left of each senator's name. I am seeking the six-digit codes. I believe they are called "HTML markup" codes or such. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:26, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

@Joseph A. Spadaro: One way is to trace back through the template code by looking at the template source. We end up at Template:Party shading/Republican and Template:Party shading/Democratic. They specify text style="background:#FFB6B6", and text style="background:#B0CEFF", respectively. If you are thinking about using thease colors in a Wikipedia article, you might want to figure out how to use the templates in the "Part shading" family instead of hard-coding the colors, as that will guarantee consistency. Note that the "six digits" are hexadecimal digits. An alternative would be to use One of the screenshot utilities on you own computer to grab a screenshot and past it into a paint program, and then use the utilities within the paint program to examine the colors of the pixels. -Arch dude (talk) 20:47, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. How exactly do I use that template (Template:Party shading/Republican) within a Wikipedia article? The template page/documentation says nothing at all about how to actually use it. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:54, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

@Joseph A. Spadaro: Research for this question is the first time I ever saw these templates. Take a look at (i.e., view source of) Template:Party shading/Republican/block, which uses Template:Party shading/Republican, and then look at the source of Template:Alabama State Senate to see how it is used in turn. You can see that the innermost template just generates an HTML snippet, and next template just wraps it in more HTML, and the outermost template just uses the result as a plain old wikitext template. So, wherever you had intended to use HTML color by using the snippet text style="background:#FFB6B6",, you can use {{Party shading/Republican}} instead. Maybe you can contact one of the original editors of the template to see if someone knowledgable has actually written coherent documentation. -Arch dude (talk) 04:20, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

@Joseph A. Spadaro: Example: <span {{party shading/Republican}}>This text has a republican background</span> Yields This text has a republican background -Arch dude (talk) 04:27, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

You can also use Special:ExpandTemplates to see the final wikitext produced by code. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:55, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, all! Very helpful! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:20, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Templates being expanded or collapsed

Looking at this article: List of U.S. state senators ... I specifically designated that all of the Template Boxes be "expanded". Yet, when I go and review the article, some of the Template Boxes become "hidden". (Hawaii, Illinois, Mississippi, Nevada, etc.) Why is that? And how do I fix it? I don't just want to hit the toggle key for "show/hide". I want all of the 50 boxes to always "show" (i.e., be expanded; not hidden) by default, when anyone opens the page to read. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:32, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

You forgot to pass through the {{{state}}} parameter in some templates. I fixed the error in one template. You can do this in other templates yourself. Ruslik_Zero 20:42, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. But, I did not understand a word that you said. Please re-phrase your reply. Also, it seems like the problem is not with the article that I created (List of U.S. state senators) ... but with the templates that are included in my new article. Is that correct? What seems to be the problem? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:28, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

|state=expanded and any other template parameter only has an effect if the called template is coded to recognize the parameter name and do something with it. In this case each of the used navbox templates must be coded to pass on the parameter to {{Navbox}}. This is what Ruslik0 did for one of the templates by calling {{Navbox}} with | state = {{{state|}}}.[4]. It varies whether navbox templates do this. You often have to do add the code if you are the first editor who wants to display the navbox expanded by default. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:29, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. But, I really don't understand all of this technical / computer code talk. More directly: ... In this article (List of U.S. state senators), what do I need to do for the following four states (Illinois, Mississippi, Nevada, West Virginia)? And do I need to do anything for the other 46 states or no? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:25, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:55, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

creating a new page

Hi I'm trying to create a new page. Whenever I make the URL link, I am redirected by Wikipedia to a New user landing page. The page actually says..."you are trying to create a new page...You can create it, but... ..But there is no option to create the article. It just has links to sandbox and article wizard. I don't want to use them. I want to create the page myself. How can I do this?Gumlau (talk) 20:45, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

@Gumlau: Probably the best way for a newish user to create an article is in fact via the article wizard. This just helps you 'kick-start' the page... you still have to do the work yourself. This way you can work on the article in draftspace (where there is less chance of deletion or other interference) and submit it for review when you consider it ready. Please read WP:YFA together with the notability guide and the guide to reliable sources. I will also leave some hopefully useful links at your talk page. Eagleash (talk) 20:53, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

@Eagleash: Hi, is it mandatory to submit articles for review before publishing? Gumlau (talk) 21:13, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

@Gumlau: No, but I would not recommend that a first article (or even a second) be created directly in, or moved to, mainspace. In fact you will not be able to move a draft to mainspace until your account is four days old (tomorrow). All new pages are subject to new page patrol where more experienced editors review them before they are indexed by search engines. Your draft in respect of Po Hla Gyi although 'on the way' is not yet really in a condition to be accepted into mainspace. Eagleash (talk) 21:30, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Unsettling PHP7 tag

I recently made five edits to Dysgeusia. Four had similar summaries beginning with "un-" and functioned normally. One, to the "Normal function" section, referred instead to a CN "tag" and was tagged. Is this as "random" as the Wikilink in the tag claims, or what? I've seen these things before, but they used to stick around for entire sessions, not just trip me out for a literal minute before vanishing. Do I need help (technically)? InedibleHulk (talk) 22:29, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

InedibleHulk, the PHP7 tag means your edit was made using the 7th version of the PHP interpreter, which is currently in beta. I'm not sure why one random edit is made using this beta feature, but there is no need to worry. The tag is simply there to make sure MediaWiki developers can identify the edits to check for performance, etc. --MrClog (talk) 23:01, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

I also remain unsure why, or what "etc" is being checked, but if you say it's resolved, I guess that settles that. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:36, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

InedibleHulk, Mediawiki.org says: This will help us identify performance, functional, and stability concerns specific to PHP in comparison to HHVM. You can ignore the PHP7 tags. I don't know much more, but there is nothing to worry about, as long as you don't enter the MediaWiki basement or check behind the curtains. --MrClog (talk) 23:40, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh yeah, for sure. Nothing clears up confusion like vagueness. Far be it from this user to maintain specific functional concerns or disenhance relative stability. Or you know, whatever. Cheers! InedibleHulk (talk) 23:50, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

I figured it out, I think. Edited Odds (band) with the summary "Tagged for 45 years" and blammo! Speaking of the devil might be enough (truth be told, though, the part I trimmed was only tagged for eleven years). InedibleHulk (talk) 02:10, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Didn't work when I tried to force it here and now, though. False hope! Maybe need to delete an old tag to create a new one. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:15, 18 July 2019 (UTC)