Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2008 October 1

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.

October 1

How to change the title of a Wikipedia Article?

Hi there. How do you change the title of a Wikipedia Article? Sonic99 (talk) 02:02, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

It needs to be for a very good reason. What did you have in mind? Grsz^talk 02:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

This user seems to be a bit experienced and doesn't seem to have done anything wrong in the past, so I don't think there's any harm letting him know. That's what the help desk is there for, after all. Anyway, to rename the article, you have to move the page. See Help:Moving a page. But as Grsz11 said, you have to have a good reason for it. Cheers. Chamal ^Talk ± 02:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Somebody just changed the name of an article in a vandalizing way. I wonder if it was this person. I don't know how to change it back. Original name of article: "Political correctness". Vandalized name "It must be stopped with brute force." Can someone change it back who knows how? I think that whoever it was must be stopped from further editing. Korky Day (talk) 17:59, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Someone fixed it. Can someone discipline the vandal (who is MBoarSidwell according to the "History" of the article)? Korky Day (talk) 18:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

User talk:MBoarSidwell shows an indefinite block. It's logged here. This sort of page move vandalism is unfortunately common. You can report it at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Page move vandal accounts are usually blocked indefinitely right away. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:09, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Image not scaling

Why isn't the first image on the left at Cubs Win Flag not scaling correctly.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:09, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

It shows OK after I purged the cache. —teb728 t c 04:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:41, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

For future reference, this can also be cleared browser side using a cache clear. Neurolysis 10:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Problem with editing. Have I deleted half an article accidentally?

I just made some changes to this article:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moura,_Queensland

After making the changes, I looked at the article and the latter half of it is missing. My immediate reaction is that I have done something wrong. I did a comparison of my edit and the previous version and it looks OK.

I looked at the article with a different browser and the last half is still missing.

I tried to use the "discussion" page for the article but cannot enter anything.

Can someone please check this page and provide feedback as appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mailliwyrrahwollac (talk • contribs) 07:53, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's quite a common problem: if you use a <ref> tag you need a later </ref> tag, or the whole of the rest of the article gets relegated to the footnote. AndyJones (talk) 07:59, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I see you've found it! AndyJones (talk) 08:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

PS:- I found my own mistake. It should be OK now. It was just a referencing command in the wrong place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mailliwyrrahwollac (talk • contribs) 08:02, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

can i add my own content (about my site & buseiness) using wikipedia.

Dear Sir,

can i add my own content (about my site & buseiness) using wikipedia.

Regards,

Shirish kanabar —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shirishkanabar (talk • contribs) 08:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello there. Although we allow editors to contribute anything, it's generally advisable not to write anything about a subject you're connected with. This is because it is very difficult to write with a neutral point of view. Also, before contributing, please ensure that your company is notable, with the notability backed up by verifiable, reliable and independent sources. If it does not meet the notability guideline for organisations, the article is likely to be deleted by an administrator. Please read through Wikipedia:Your first article for more information, and take a look at the tutorial for further editing assistance. Feel free to drop me a note anytime should you run into difficulties. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 08:53, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

And don't forget WP:Spam. – ukexpat (talk) 12:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Why cant I add a page about a band I like??

I tried to add a page. Taylor Australia. but it got deleted. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.236.112.108 (talk) 10:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted?. In your case, it was deleted by User:Akradecki for failing to comply with notability standards, in particular WP:CSD#A7 and WP:GROUP. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 11:10, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Michael Hemmingson

Michael Hemmingson (b. 12 July 1966) is a novelist, short story writer, editor, playwright, and screenwriter who has published dozens of books, produced a handful of plays and screenplays. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Worfpoe (talk • contribs) 12:17, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Do you have a question? --grawity 12:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Does he have a question? Seriously, if you want to create an article about Mr Hemmingson, please read WP:YFA, but you must be autoconfirmed to create an article. – ukexpat (talk) 12:31, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

You don't need to be autoconfirmed to create an article. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 12:57, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Struck by user:Scottydude. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 13:39, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have noted that! Scottydude _review 14:19, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Dang it I keep forgetting that, thanks for the correction. – ukexpat (talk) 17:47, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Is SVG the best format?

I believe there is a trend in Wikipedia to convert images (especially maps) into SVG format. However, I noticed that SVG files take several MBs while PNG files take few dozens of KBs. So what's the real benefit of SVG? Eklipse (talk) 12:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The articles PNG and SVG provide the details, but in short - SVG are vector graphics, which mean they can be enlarged to (almost) any size, while PNGs are raster images which cannot (without becoming blurry and losing definition). They both have their uses in different situations. — QuantumEleven 14:59, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Also, if SVGs are well coded, they can take up less space than PNGs, not more. It's all about suitability for purpose. — neuro^(talk) 12:54, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Watch my Page

Hi, I was wanting to know if anyone out there would mind watching my page from Oct 2-13. If anyone Could please message me or leave it here or something. Thanks and Happy Editing.

HairyPerry 13:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Could you be more clear? Are you talking about your userpage or talk page or perhaps some other page you edit frequently? Also, what are we watching it for... vandalism? I'd be happy to watch a page if its necessary (for some yet unforseen reason). Scottydude _review 14:11, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Well if you watch a user, doesn't that watch changes made in both userpages and talkpages? But I'm going to be gone one and a half weeks due to me being in HS and I have fall break and I don't have access to any other computer besides the school computer. If both can't be watched then I would prefer my userpage be watched before my talk page. So if anyone could help, please leave here or contact me.

HairyPerry 16:00, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, both page are watched at the same time (user and user talk). I guess my question is: Is there something specific for which I should be looking? Do you just want someone to ensure that your page isn't vandalized? If that's the case, it's no sweat and I'd be happy to do it. TN‑X-Man 16:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

As would I. If any vandalism pops up I'm sure it will get taken care of. You may consider putting a Wikibreak template such as {{Wikibreak}} or {{Attempting school wikibreak}} on your user and talk pages so that other users know that you may not respond to posts and such. Scottydude _review 16:21, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thank you to everyone who is watching my page(s), oh and to answer your question vandalism edits are all I'm looking for because people on wikibreaks are easy targets, you know. Once again, thank you and happy editing.

HairyPerry 16:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I guess inactive users' pages are easy targets for vandalism, but on the other hand, an inactive user isn't actively annoying vandals by reverting their edits. If you are an active vandalism fighter, you might want to ease back for a week or two before you leave, to give any vandals you have scolded a chance to forget about you. I'd be surprised if many vandals have the emotional discipline to live by the mafia saying, "Revenge is a dish best served cold." --Teratornis (talk) 04:39, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, but I see you don't have two weeks before you leave, assuming you refer to October of this year in your question. --Teratornis (talk) 04:40, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

hy

project_ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.104.137.76 (talk) 13:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Well if you have a question feel free to ask it here. Simply click 'edit' next to the section heading ("hy") and then type your question below. Anyone will be happy to answer your questions. Scottydude _review 14:17, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Hope you are ok and didn't have a stroke while typing. 903M (talk) 03:09, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Fixing "edit section" boxes

If you look at 359 BC, all of the edit boxes for various sections are clumped together. How can I fix this and keep the text and the template boxes at/near the top? I've tried a {{clear}}, but drops the text down near the bottom. I feel like I'm missing something obvious. Thanks in advance! TN‑X-Man 14:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

They are not bunched in my browser but see WP:BUNCH. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:52, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I knew I missed something. I've given it a shot, if you could take a look and let me know if it looks OK, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! TN‑X-Man 15:07, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Looks all right in Firefox. Chamal ^Talk ± 16:13, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

It looked better before on my screen in IE7. All the text lines are very short now with 3-5 words per line and then a big blank space before the template boxes. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Arrgh. I give up. I can't get the whitespace to go away. I've restored the old version after trying a couple other things. I think I'll give it another shot later on this evening. Thanks for the help! TN‑X-Man 17:40, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The whitespace in your edits is caused by the top box {{Year nav BC}} being much wider than the other boxes. As WP:BUNCH#Using the FixBunching template says: "Note that the resulting column of objects will be as wide as its widest component throughout." Avoiding the whitespace will apparently require that the first box is not grouped with the others in {{FixBunching}}. There are no bunched edit links in any of the versions for me so I cannot test whether something at the same time avoids bunching and excessive whitespace. Maybe {{Year nav BC}} should just be made less wide, for example by omitting most of the "BC" in the links or reduce the number of links. {{Year nav}} is not as wide. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:09, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) Whoo-hoo! I think I got it this time. Give it a once-over and let me know. Cheers! TN‑X-Man 20:17, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

It looks good to me. The excessive whitespace between text and templates is gone. The first heading is below {{Year nav BC}} (and there is no lead) but that doesn't matter to me when {{Year nav BC}} is relatively low. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:31, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

WP colour

Does anybody know the exact grey colour that's underneath the toolbox etc. (or even in the general background, but not the blue) and its hex digits? -- Mentisock 15:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I think it's #FBFBFB. That's what's described as "background" in monobook.css Fribbler (talk) 16:13, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Yup, that's the colour in the toolbox. But if you're talking about the background behind the toolbox, that's not this one. An image is used as the background, so it's hard to find the exact colour there. Chamal ^Talk ± 16:18, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Isn't the colour in the toolbox not white, as opposed to #FBFBFB which is shown here? Fribbler (talk) 16:22, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

transclusion of page with categories without duplicating category count

For ease of editing, and keeping pagesize reasonable, I have several pages transcluded onto my user page. One is this one, of userboxes. However, in order to avoid having the transcluded page appear in all the categories assigned by userboxes which do so, I have used <noinclude> and <includeonly> to avoid that, while allowing my main user page to be so categorized. However, as a consequence of that, when viewing the transcluded page, the main content is necessarily invisible.

So my question for help: is there a way to make the content on the transcluded page visible somehow, without triggering its categorization? Many thanks, Baccyak4H (Yak!) 15:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The best way is to fix the userboxes so there is an option to suppress the category. See User:Willscrlt/commons/Category suppression in templates (en). --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 15:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, at first glance that page looks quite relevant and useful. Baccyak4H (Yak!) 16:33, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Warning Vandals

If a vandal defaces the same page multiple times successively, lets say at 16:02, 16:03, 16:05 etc. and nobody reverts in-between vandalism, would that count as one case of vandalism in terms of warning the user? Also, let's say I notice a vandal has defaced Page Z, I revert it but then looking at their contribs I see they also have vandalised Page X, Page Y, and Page Foo, all of which were reverted by other users without the vandal being warned. Should I give this user a level 1 warning or a final warning? Fribbler (talk) 16:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, there is a chance that he might be doing it just for fun and without knowing the consequences, so it's best to let them realize what they are doing with sufficient and appropriate warnings. But if it's multiple and blatant vandalism, with the user fully aware of what he's doing and intending harm, then I guess it is appropriate to issue an only warning. But unless it's an extraordinary case like that, I would give them sufficient warnings before reporting. But according to WP:VAN: "...warning is not an absolute prerequisite for blocking; accounts whose main or only use is obvious vandalism or other forbidden activity may be blocked without warning." As for the successive vandalism, generally a single warning is issued, since the vandal has not been made aware of what he's doing and given a chance to stop. Chamal ^Talk ± 16:31, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

That makes sense. Thanks! Fribbler (talk) 16:35, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I would be surprised if many vandals are "fully aware of what they are doing." The modifier "fully" would imply more knowledge of Wikipedia than I suspect most vandals have. For starters, how many vandals know we call them "vandals"? A "fully aware" vandal would probably be difficult even for humans to detect. I suspect the majority of vandals (especially the majority of those whose work is visible) probably know very little about Wikipedia other than that it is a site which to a rational but unempathetic person invites defacement. A large fraction of the human race appears to think in such terms, as becomes obvious during times of calamity, when many people will loot with impunity when they realize the police are absent. For a lot of people, fear of punishment seems to be a greater motivation toward civility than actually caring about strangers. So, anyway, given that a previously-unwarned and easily-recognizable vandal probably doesn't know much about Wikipedia, it's reasonable to start the warning process at the bottom. Of course if the vandal edits under one IP address, the vandal might have edited under others, and we cannot easily determine that. So in keeping with assume good faith we would give the vandal all possible benefit of the doubt. Maybe the vandal is merely stupid and does not realize the harm in vandalizing Wikipedia. This is common in adolescent males, because the portions of the brain responsible for judgment have not fully developed yet. (Most older males can think back to their adolescent days and wonder what they were thinking at the time. At the time they actually could not think the same way they can now.) --Teratornis (talk) 17:40, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

youtube as a source

I was just wondering,

can say, a lecture or video clip, from You tube or Google Video be used as a source? (Im assuming the clip satisfies copyright laws of course). How do things like wp:verifiability or reliability apply to them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by زرشک (talk • contribs) 17:53, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

In short, no, YouTube is not a reliable source. See Wikipedia:Reliable source examples#Are IRC, MySpace, and YouTube reliable sources?. Same would apply to Google Video. – ukexpat (talk) 18:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I found an error

Under the section about Al Davis it states the following: "Along with appearing in 5 Super Bowls, the Raiders have also played in their Conference/League Championship Game in every decade since their inception" The Raiders though have only appeared in 4 Super Bowls. They won 2 as the Oakland Raiders, 1 as the Los Angeles Raiders and lost 1 as the Oakland Raiders. This should be corrected on the Wikipedia page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.43.32.87 (talk) 19:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, you can correct it yourself. :) That is why this is a free encyclopedia - you don't need an account to edit. —La Pianista ^{(T•C•S•R)} 19:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

But please only add or change things when you have a reliable source. According to List of Super Bowl champions they have appeared in 5 Super Bowls: 1968, 1977, 1981, 1984, 2003. They lost as the Oakland Raiders twice, in 1968 and 2003. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Which Came First?

If one of our articles is a "near duplicate" of text on other websites, are there ways to determine whether "they copied from us" or "we copied from them"?

Wanderer57 (talk) 21:16, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

There are a list of sites that copy our content at WP:FORK. (And the chicken, by the way) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:48, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

A dated page in the Internet Archive#Wayback Machine can sometimes settle it. You can also try looking at the Wikipedia article history to see whether the near duplicate content is the result of multiple edits by different editors, making it unlikely that it was all copied from the same source. And you can try asking the editors who added it by posting to their talk pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:02, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

If I conclude that we plagiarized material from elsewhere, who can I tell about this (aside from a priest)? Wanderer57 (talk) 23:33, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Spotting possible copyright violations and Wikipedia:Copyright problems. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I have put a note HERE. You might be interested to have a look. Wanderer57 (talk) 00:31, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

You may wish to note that 'copying' does not infer 'copyright violation'. Any website with a GFDL-compatible license is able to have text copied directly from it without causing copyright infringement. — neuro^(talk) 10:38, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Editing content that has no edit link

On the Wikipdeia page for Battleship Texas BB35, I wish to edit - The section above the "Contentx" box - Box titled "Career (US)" which is at the top-right - Box "General Characteristics" - which is below "Career (US)"

There are no 'edit' links to the above areas ” —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.180.136.23 (talk) 22:19, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

You can click the "edit this page" tab at top. See also Wikipedia:Lead section#Editing the lead section. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:27, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Note that the box is generated by a template so changes must use the parameters documented at {{Infobox Ship Begin}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:34, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Can I find out why a particular article has been deleted from WP?

I'm curious to know why Shean McConnell has been removed from the encyclopedia. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.171.124 (talk) 23:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

It was not an article but a redirect to Robert Shean McConnell. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The deletion summary here says why, though it's somewhat cryptic if you don't know wikispeak. csdr1 refers to 'criteria for speedy deletion, redirects, criteria 1'. Richard001 (talk) 02:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Essentially it was deleted because it was a redirect to an article which had also been deleted. If you wanted to know why the article itself (Robert Shean McConnell) was deleted, then the reason on that page's log (click the red link) cites WP:Notability and WP:BLP and claims that the subject had requested deletion. Does that help? Olaf Davis | Talk 14:04, 2 October 2008 (UTC)