Help desk
< November 28	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 30 >

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.

November 29[edit]

Mathematics[edit]

It is very difficult when it comes to multiply Can you help me with it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.116.169.241 (talk) 01:19, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We will not do your coursework for you. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 07:15, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tables with Conditional Formatting? Perform Math? Collapse?[edit]

1) Is there a way to create a table with conditional formatting (cells change color, etc. based on the value)?

2) Is there a way to create a table that automatically averages, sums, etc. values in a given column, for example?

3) Is there a way to add a feature that automatically collapses certain sections of say a table or paragraph? Superb Owl (talk) 03:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Superb Owl: 1) and 2) are only possible if the table is made by calling a template or module with the cell values as parameters. It's complicated. I don't think 3) is possible. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:29, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info - do you know where I can find a template that I could adapt? Superb Owl (talk) 23:58, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Superb Owl: 2) is so complicated that it's rarely done, and it makes it more difficult to edit the table afterwards. I suggest you don't attempt it unless you are an advanced template coder or Lua coder. It's more common to manually copy the values to a formula in the cell where you want the sum or average. See mw:Help:Extension:ParserFunctions##expr for how to make formulas. They cannot pick values from a table cell. 1) is often done with a row template which formats a whole row of a specific table or type of table. See Help:Table#Row template. There are also templates which format a single cell. See e.g. Template:Table cell templates. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:06, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

thanks @PrimeHunter for clarifying - I'll just wait until these features become accessible before adding/updating these articles Superb Owl (talk) 01:14, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feature consideration for adding dark mode[edit]

Wasn't sure where to reach about bringing this to attention, so that's why I put it here. Apologies if doing so was wrong. Thought having dark mode for wikipedia would be sweet. It's already pretty common in many websites, and I'm sure a lot of people would appreciate the addition, including myself. So, please do consider adding this feature. Thanks. 184.65.124.107 (talk) 06:57, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's already present - provided you have an account. (I'm using it as I type this.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 07:14, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have you looked at Wikipedia:Dark mode? - David Biddulph (talk) 07:17, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft deletion?[edit]

Hey, I've come across some pages such as these, currently in AfC reviewing. Would it be best to tag it with a CSD, move on, or do some other action? Thanks. Silikonz (alt)💬 08:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind; it seems CSD was correct for that one. Silikonz (alt)💬 08:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wanna write one[edit]

WP:DENY ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:01, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

My turn. Stupid hackers (fingers crossing) oh im so silly. You live me? Grandma? is that u? i have civilized humman rights so let ME LIVE IN PEACES! let ME LIVE IN PEACES! let ME LIVE IN PEACES! let ME LIVE IN PEACES! let ME LIVE IN PEACES! let ME LIVE IN PEACES! 207.195.80.148 (talk) 15:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

is there anyway to label questions as not meant to be answered or something. Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 15:58, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just ignore the vandal, who has already been blocked. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:05, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Resetting a password for an old account w/ no email attached to it[edit]

Hello (and apologies for asking this in the live IRC channel and posting here)! I'm looking for help resetting a password for an account that doesn't have an email attached to it. Per https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Reset_password it says to navigate to Special:Preferences to attach an email to a previously created account. However, one needs to log in to access Special:Preferences which I cannot do as I don't recall my password - I seem to be in a bit of a catch-22, so was wondering if there was some alternative path for help! 76.126.179.195 (talk) 16:52, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I received some help in the IRC channel (pointed me to https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Password_and_2FA_reset), but I don't have wikitech/developer account, so I'm not sure I have a path there via ssh keys (etc). This isn't urgent, so I'm hoping a post here in Teahouse will find other options! 76.126.179.195 (talk) 16:54, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're SOL at this point... You need to be logged in to set an email address, and if you have an old account with no email address set AND you have lost the password, there is literally nothing that can be done for you. As noted at Help:Logging in, "Otherwise you will have to create a new account under a different username. After doing this, it is advisable to explain the situation on the user page of the new account, to avoid sockpuppetry concerns." Sorry! --Jayron 32 16:58, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm assuming there's no path forward to "delete" the old account such that I can re-use that username? I don't have a strong preference for the edits/content under the account (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Acedriven), but I do have a preference to keep/use the username since it's what I use broadly across other platforms / social media. :) 76.126.179.195 (talk) 17:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP! You can't delete the account, however you can take over the username of that account by creating a new account and filing a request at the linked page. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:12, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That only applies for accounts for which there is no significant activity. If the account has made edits on Wikipedia already (and since SUL became a thing, on any linked Wikimedia project anywhere), then account usurpation is not available. Usurpation basically only applies to unused accounts that were created but never did anything. If the account in question was a formerly active account, there's no real way to usurp it unless the owner can log in and grant permission to usurp the old username. For a lost password, this is impossible. --Jayron 32 17:19, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Really? I was not aware of that. I swear I've seen accounts with some edits get usurped but maybe I'm not remembering things correctly. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:20, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK, the only way that happens is if you log in to the old account, make an edit that confirms your identity and granting permission to the new account to usurp it, etc. I could be wrong though. The bureaucrats do sometimes grant extreme exceptions when usurping old accounts, though I don't believe the standard "I lost my password" reason usually applies; if it was that easy to usurp an old account, it could create major attribution issues... --Jayron 32 17:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aww - bummer. I have some sporadic edits / work under the old account, and can't access it, so I think I'm stuck with the new account :( Acedriven1 (talk) 17:21, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll still submit a request and see what happens Acedriven1 (talk) 17:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it. They can only say "no". --Jayron 32 17:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jayron32 You are incorrect here. "The user has made no edits" is only one of the criteria for usurpation. Per Wikipedia:Changing username/Guidelines#Additional guidelines for usurpation requests usurpation requests will also be approved in other situations, e.g. both people agree to the rename, or both accounts can be proven to belong to the same person. Showing that Acedriven1 is Acedriven might be a bit tricky, given the older account hasn't edited in a decade. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 17:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How strange of you to say that I am wrong, and then basically paraphrase all of the things I said. Why would you do that? When I said "if you log in to the old account, make an edit that confirms your identity and granting permission to the new account to usurp it" what I actually meant was "if you log in to the old account, make an edit that confirms your identity and granting permission to the new account to usurp it" I'm not sure why that required you to restate the same thing in slightly different words, such as when you said "e.g. both people agree to the rename, or both accounts can be proven to belong to the same person". If you're going to call me wrong, it would be useful if you actually disagreed with me. --Jayron 32 17:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Would a CU be something that could be done to prove both accounts are the same person? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Even if they were allowed to do so, CU data is not preserved for that long. There's no way to access CU data from an account that hasn't been used in years. --Jayron 32 17:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What's a CU? Acedriven1 (talk) 17:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Short for Check User, see the link for more detail. Jayron32 Ah you are correct, I forget that CU data gets stale. I figured if the user hadn't moved sicne they created their previous account (or hadn't gotten a new IP which is unlikely given dynamic IPs) a CU could see if the IPs are the same (or maybe this isn't even how CU works), but I see now that it's not possible to do. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:38, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Showing that Acedriven1 is Acedriven might be a bit tricky, given the older account hasn't edited in a decade."

I agree this is going to be hard, but can hopfully point out that the contributions Acedriven has made as likely only being made by me (:fingers-crossed:)! Acedriven1 (talk) 17:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The best option I can offer (if WP:USURP is a dead end) is to simply note on your userpage for Acedriven1 that you used to use the account Acedriven, but have long since forgotten the password. --Jayron 32 17:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, I'm sure there are some ways to get your password back (altho I don't think any of them are legal) ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

atxzz11 attribution search per recent Diannaa (@ nuts240) TalkPage request[edit]

@Diannaa: I'm searching for a since-archived HelpDesk item that was in front of what I was being helped. The reason is that it, not my discussion but the one in front of mine, contains items which, for attribution, I'd need to refer. To describe the needle I need, it was about the outcry of Mamazeke, Modu's widow, and it ended with a helpdesk volunteer stating that a new draft could be made, and he gave two citations. I realize that a proper citation should refer to both the discussion and the citations contained therein. I've tried, but it seems that helpdesk entries are not archived in the order in which they originally appeared. Thanks in advance. Nuts240 (talk) 17:18, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to be WP:Help desk/Archives/2022 November 17#locating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 17:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

/* atxzz11 attribution search per recent Diannaa (@ nuts240) TalkPage request */

See Here, which lists the contributions you made from this account to the Wikipedia help desk. That may give you the dates when you asked your question, so you can find it in the archives. The Help desk archives are here and are organized by the date when the question was asked. --Jayron 32 17:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Timothy Syndrome page[edit]

how can I edit the Specialty box on this page? it says Neurology. Can I add other specialties or change this one?

thx,

Andy AndyG322 (talk) 19:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The information is pulled from Wikidata, according to the documentation at {{Infobox medical condition}}. I've never used Wikidata myself, so I am not sure how to use it to correct errors. Perhaps someone who is more familiar with its operation can speak to how to do so. --Jayron 32 19:15, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On the corresponding Wikidata item you'll see a field called "health specialty" which you can change or add to. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 19:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fundraising meta-question: a Groundhog Day feeling[edit]

Well... I don’t think the Help Desk is the right place to ask that, but I do not know what the right place would be. So here goes, feel free to tell me where to move it.

Here’s a bit of context (if you need it, you probably cannot answer the question...): this year, the en-Wikipedia community had the strongest complaint to date about the yearly fundraising, with an RfC that concluded that the WMF’s proposed fundraising banners should not run. (I am not asking whether it is possible, or desirable to block WMF banners from running, and I am not asking whether the WMF’s budget / use of funds is reasonable: I am decently aware of the various thought currents of the community on those questions.)

Why does this happen every year?

The yearly fundraising discussions follow the same exact pattern. Each time, the community objects to Evil Banners™ because they’re evil. (Today’s "evil" is "donate or we’re going to die"; yesterday’s was "donate or we’re going to have to put up subscriptions"; before that we had "donate or we’re going to have to put up ads"; and I assume there were more and more before and in-between those. The community’s definition of "evil" can be more or less reasonable depending on the years.) After that, some poor WMF spokesperson(s) is/are sent to placate the mob, by convincing them the banners are not so evil, but if you insist we will change that next year. The discussion dies down after the campaign. The next year, the mob comes back complaining about a different kind of evil; rinse and repeat.

I assumed that the reason for that kabuki dance was that each time, the fundraising team had internal data to show that evil banners are effective. I believed the WMF had said something to that effect (in polished language: "we have to take into account effectiveness when designing banners etc."), but I have just spent half an hour searching for that and not finding it. If that is true, then the WMF behavior is entirely understandable - it is not possible to convince the mob, but running non-evil banners would make a large gap in the finances, so let’s run the evil ones and hunker down.

Well, this year, the WMF has proposed new banners. In particular, banner #2 entirely backtracks on this year’s evilness, and goes quite far in the opposite direction. I do not think the WMF was quite forced to propose that, and in fact banners #1, #3, #4 have been well-received (so far), while being much milder in their messaging.

That seems to forcefully disprove my hypothesis of "evil is efficient, let’s do that". But then, what is the alternative explanation? Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 19:18, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So here's my take; do with it what you will. Fundraising needs to be regular to be effective. Annual pledge drives are necessary not because WMF (or any other organization that runs on donations) are broke; rather there needs to be a regular, dependable stream of income that allows the budgeting and planning process to work efficiently. It's a rather short-sighted (and stupid, IMHO) way to run an organization to only seek income when they are on the verge of bankruptcy; living "paycheck to paycheck" is a bad way for individuals to survive, and doubly so for complex organizations. It doesn't matter how much money the organization has in savings, or how much it spends, it matters that income is regular and predictable. Running savings down to near zero, and then asking for a handout is not the way any organization should run. Fundraising is not done because WMF needs money NOW, it is done because WMF needs money in a predictable manner so as to be able to plan and organize and budget and all of that. The specific wording of the banners aside, much of the anger and vitriol towards WMF seems to be that they are fundraising at all, most of it is centered on the notion that WMF is "swimming in cash" (irrelevant to the need for steady income as a good organizational practice) or that they aren't spending the money they have wisely (which may be a reason to not donate one's self, but seems like rather rude to extend that into blocking the organization from getting any income). It would be helpful to separate the discussions so that we can get the difference between "I don't like the wordings of these banners and think we need to change them" and "I don't think WMF should be seeking donations". The former is a reasonable discussion to have. The latter is unreasonable. --Jayron 32 19:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

: @Tigraan: Did you see the post "Banners and changes at the Wikimedia Foundation" at WP:VPM? changes are coming, according to the Wikimedia CEO. RudolfRed (talk) 19:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose the best folks to ask why Evil Banners™ appear if Evil Banners™ are not, in fact, particularly effective, would be the fundraising team, who I assume are the ones writing banners and evaluating effectiveness. There's a post on the talk page of this very help desk from JBrungs (WMF) who (as of 6 Oct this year) is/was the Community Relations person at the WMF Advancement Department which includes the fundraising team. They also said, perhaps incautiously, Generally speaking, you can ping me with anything fundraising related and I will come and help!. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:12, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't the campaign supposed to start today? I haven't seen a single banner. Hmm. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all,

Thanks for the thoughts here, I think Maryana's post that was pointed out by @RudolfRed if a useful one to look at, and as @Tigraan mentioned, the foundation is looking for banner messaging ideas on wiki as well, please feel free to participate. And yes, as mentioned when I shared the Donation Template on the talk page, I will come and help or find answers when needed, just ping me. Best, JBrungs (WMF) (talk) 08:32, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

External link[edit]

I added an external link to Hiroshi H. Miyamura that was reverted by a bot (here). I've read the relevant guidelines, and believe the link to be relevant, important and reliably sourced (Congressional Medal of Honor Society of the United States of America). I'm tempted to revert deletion, but am seeking advice instead. 136.56.52.157 (talk) 22:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit was reverted by a bot, apparently because it linked to Vimeo, and most targets there are not reliable. But yours may be acceptable. Please see User:XLinkBot for how to proceed if you think the Bot has a false positive. ColinFine (talk) 00:26, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]