Help desk
< April 27	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 29 >

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.

April 28[edit]

toolbar[edit]

hi i used to have wikipedia on my toolbar. i can't seem to get it back there, can you help me with that. missing that access ease thankyou donna — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.161.50.242 (talk) 00:06, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Before anyone makes a rude comment about tools - which browser and which toolbar? --Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:19, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, so I'd also ask the same question as yours. I've never heard of such things before. Dipankan ^{(Have a chat?)} 04:54, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a Firefox add-on toolbar here (see also Wikipedia:Wikipedia Toolbar). Also, without any add-on, you can have Firefox default to searching Wikipedia rather than Google or Yahoo and others. First go to view → toolbars and turn on "navigation toolbar". Now go to the search filed and click on the down symbol in it and choose "Wikipedia (en)". If you have some other browser or you use Firefox but none of this is what you meant, please advise.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 10:27, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The OP may mean a shortcut to WP. I know in IE8, I just go to the favorites menu and select 'add to favorites bar' when I am on a site.--Canoe1967 (talk) 00:21, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New page, need some input[edit]

Resolved

– by Orange Mike CSD (A7)

CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 16:53, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Family_tree_of_Makhdoom_Jahania_Sindh

Patrolling new pages I came across this, is this an article? There is a Family tree of Muhammad article, with context, explanations etc. but this one has nothing, does this qualify under CSD(A7)? Some input would be appreciated. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 09:58, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Senators of Sri Lanka[edit]

Dr.Andrew.Martin.Samarasinghe a Physician by profession was appointed to the Sri Lankan Senate in 1952 and reelected in 1955 for a six year term. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.245.172.52 (talk) 13:16, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And, do you have a specific question? ~This information should be placed on the talk page of the article that you wish to add it to, with your source. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 13:21, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If this person was a member of the Senate of Sri Lanka, then we certainly should have a (properly referenced) article about him. Andrew Martin Samarasinghe and Andrew Samarasinghe are currently both redlinks. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:34, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew M. Samarasinghe (another red link) is listed at List of Senators of Ceylon. —teb728 t c 01:30, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Need some image help[edit]

Yup, a new page again, I have deleted this image from the article Mobile Forces Source, as it would appear to be a copyvio, using the developer's logo etc. on a game screenshot and just (badly) adding "source" in the middle (and also changing the no. of modes from 8 to 9 at the bottom). I checked the FB page and can find no licensing info, my problem is that despite logging in across several wiki sites (commons is listed when I log in), I am not recognized at Commons, even if I type my username and password.

1) if necessary, please delete the file from Commons (I'll AfD the article)
2) why am I not recognized at Commons, despite the logo appearing (alongside wiktionary, wikibooks etc.) when I log in here?

Thanks in advance. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 13:34, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://toolserver.org/~quentinv57/sulinfo/Captain_Screebo says there is an unattached Commons account created 3 April 2011. It has no edits. If it wasn't created by you or you don't have a working password for it then you can request usurpation of the username at commons:Commons:Changing username/Usurp requests. If you can already log in at Commons then use Special:MergeAccount. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:48, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Commons account has a stored email address. It is not visible. If it may be your account but you don't have a working password for it then try commons:Special:PasswordReset and see if you get a mail. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:52, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, I'll give those a try. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 13:54, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Prime, you're a wiz on technical questions, reset the password, entered the provisional one, did the merge thing and now all is fine, so I have nommed the image for delete over at commons. Great! CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 16:13, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Boyer[edit]

Charles Boyers son was 20 at the time of his death. Not 21to as you have listed in charles Boyers page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.252.7.150 (talk) 14:43, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This type of information goes on the talk page of the article, with a source, thank you. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 14:49, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, he was at least 21 and maybe 22 (see here). CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 14:56, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A Google search ("Michael Charles Boyer" OR "Michael Boyer") (1943 OR 1944) suicide (20 OR 21 OR 22) (1964 OR 1965) finds many conflicting sources. He was apparently born in 1943 or 1944 and commited suicide in 1964 or 1965 when he was 20, 21 or 22. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:01, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to update, improve this bit, his gravestone states 1943-1965 so he was at least 21, there is no dob, have added a ref for the suicide. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 15:37, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have provided dates of birth and death, citing to a reliable source. He was indeed 21.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:54, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tidied and removed my obsolete ref now. Good work! CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 18:50, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Avoiding displaying of non-defined parameters[edit]

I created a template which is still located in my userspace at User:Toshio Yamaguchi/Template:Unsolved. As can be seen the template includes several parameters to state individual problems. A test transclusion of the template with all but one of the parameters defined can be seen at here.

How can I achieve that if fewer than the 10 problem parameters are defined, a line such as * {{{13}}} for an empty parameter will not be displayed on the page the template is being transcluded onto? -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 14:46, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Normally, you would simply add a pipe after the number: {{{13|}}}.

But you have formatting on this field, so you need to use a conditional: {{#if: {{{13|}}} | ''{{{13}}}'' }}. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 14:53, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it and now it seems to work. Thanks for your suggestion. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 15:20, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Copyrights and using and citing of such material[edit]

Dear Sirs, A colleague and Wikipedia editor/user out here, recently created two new articles (stubs) i.e. St. Luke's Church, Abbottabad and Old Christian Cemetery, Abbottabad. I know he is a good editor and a competent and serious and responsible scholar. In both these articles he has cited material from and made reference to some recently-published material (from UK) and has also given some names and examples, historical information and other data from these new articles/material, which I understand is copyighted to various journals in the UK. I must stress that he has nowhere directly copied or otherwise abused copyright or plagiarised anything -- but all the same, I wonder if the societies/organisations publishing articles from which information has been drawn and used (with appropriate citations) might not object? Is there any way (apart from references and citations already made by the creator in the article) i can indicate or show that copyrighted material hs been utilised/referred to? And do i need to, or is it ok as it is? Im not a very experienced editor and am not sure what to do about this and how to proceed. Id request help please. Thank you.AsadUK200 (talk) 17:07, 28 April 2012 (UTC)AsadUK200[reply]

Facts themselves are not subject to copyright. As long as only the facts were used, and there was no direct copying of text, no close paraphrasing of text, and no copying of structure/format of the source, then it wont be a copyright issue. Citing to the the source(s) used is all that is expected. Monty ₈₄₅ 17:15, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to express our thanks, though, for your effort to keep these things clean. So many inexperienced editors are careless about copyright (I got my own wrist properly slapped early in my career here myself), and this kind of thoughtful query is much appreciated. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:31, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I join OrangeMike in thanking you for your concern. I took a quick glance at the first of the two articles, and don't see any red flags regarding copyright, but sometimes checking that out requires close review of sources. If any of the societies/organisations have some concerns, they can write to us and we will take a more formal look, but frankly, there are many other examples needing more attention, so I don't plan to investigate further, unless asked.

On a related point, it did take me some time to realize that "Tarin" was referencing to a comment in another reference. It isn't the ideal style. The author is using references both as informational footnotes and as proper references, which leads to some confusion. --SPhilbrick (Talk) 19:16, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Due weight beyond just viewpoints[edit]

Is there a policy that states that articles should roughly reflect the sum total of secondary sources about the subject? WP:DUE (naturally, as part of NPOV) only talks about viewpoints, but not about the overall weight given to all content. So I'm asking about "due weight" as in accurately reflecting the weight attributed to all aspects of the subject rather than the rather narrow focus on minority views discussed in WP:DUE. --87.79.211.105 (talk) 18:35, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That policy states "in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint", where the prominence is (implicitly) that reflected in sources. Do you think something more definitive is needed? If so tweaking of Policy wording is carried out at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy), but I think the current wording is consistent with your statement.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 19:05, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is the word "viewpoints", which considerably narrows the focus and thus the "jurisdiction", to NPOV-related issues. My question is whether there is a policy outside of NPOV and NPOV's purview that addresses due weight apart from viewpoints. --87.79.211.105 (talk) 20:04, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If I want to have an article rated for quality...[edit]

... and the WikiProject related to it seems a bit... dormant... can I get the article rated elsewhere? If so, where? The WikiProject is WikiProject Deaf and the article is History of deaf education in the United States. I've done a large amount of work on the article since it was last rated. - Purplewowies (talk) 18:52, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly some WikiProjects are asleep at the wheel: (Wikipedia Music Project), this is intensely disappointning as one expects expert replies, and there are none.

If anyone is tempted to reply "we're all volunteers", bullshit, yes we are, but I don't advertise a service that I don't do (even for free). This is very frustrating as <WP seems to be filling up with bullshit by the minute and the so called "projects" are noticeable by their absence. GRIPE! Basically, why should I try to edit to quality when there are loads of fanboy, trivia and basically "mymatesaysso" articles, and it's a fucking battle to get them deleted, and where's the time to do quality editing and create articles? CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 19:29, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, wait. You seem to have very strong feelings about this. I do want to say that WP:DEAF isn't necessarily inactive, more that everything posted to the talk page of it in the past year never seems to get a response. I am a member of said project as well. - Purplewowies (talk) 19:37, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Er you misunderstand me, I am talking about noticeboards being inefficient and giving people the impression that there is some wiki-authority listening. I am a relatively new user (2 years) but I see WP going to shit as there is a huge influx of fan material and less and less editors prepard to defend, correct to wiki standards. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 19:53, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well... depends on the noticeboard... but yeah, there are several inactive WikiProjects I've happened across. And the assessment pages on several that are active never receive ANY edits, even though they include a section where you can list works you would like to be assessed (which leads people like me to end up posting to the main talk page of the Project instead). I'd assess the article I asked about myself, except I feel I'd be a bit biased in favor of my own writing (the article was practically rewritten from its former state by me). I know it's likely not start class anymore, but I can't say whether it's C or B. - Purplewowies (talk) 20:22, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry about the outburst, not directed at you at all, as I linked above, I have been hoping for some input on a music related article that is (almost) pure OR, well, I could look at the article and copyedit for grammar, syntax, readability, but as to rating the quality, wouldn't know where to start. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 10:51, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

True Blue[edit]

When I zoom out so that the page is less than 100% of its actual size, most of it turns a neat shade of blue. This is not actually a problem, but I find it rather curious. Does anyone know why this might happen? I am using Google Chrome on Windows 7. Inter change able 19:58, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a bug in the latest version of Google Chrome that shows a blue background if the browser zoom level is set below 100%. Reset the zoom to 100% with Ctrl+0 or adjust it with Ctrl++ and Ctrl+-.--ukexpat (talk) 20:08, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's the 1 pixel blue border which becomes background due to a Chrome bug. See http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=113711. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:15, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My sandbox[edit]

I have a link to it (through Gadgets) on my "personal toolbar area" (who knew it was called that?). Is there a way to change the link so when I click on it, it goes to the sandbox without opening an edit window?--Bbb23 (talk) 20:15, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:My sandbox, or try adding the line in User:Equazcion/NoEditSandbox.js to Special:Mypage/skin.js. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:46, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I added the script (not sure if I did it right), reloaded the page, but it still doesn't work. I even tried exiting the browser completely, no success - when I click on the link, it still opens an edit window. So, what did I do wrong?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:24, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Try this instead:

importScript('User:Equazcion/NoEditSandbox.js');

PrimeHunter (talk) 21:41, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That worked (although the reload didn't do it, only the purge did it). Thanks for the help and resisting any comments about my lameness in this area.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:30, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Equazcion's method is simpler, so I updated Help:My sandbox to use it. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 21:52, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]