Help desk
< April 25	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 27 >

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 26[edit]

Russian gold rubles[edit]

Can someone tell me how much eighteen million gold rubles would be in both US dollar and euro? This is for an article. --Steverci (talk) 02:02, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Google can do these conversions easily. That amount, according to Google, is about $354,000. Dismas|^(talk) 02:10, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that was the first thing I tried, but does the value take into account that these are gold rubles (I don't know much about how Russian currency works)? --Steverci (talk) 02:23, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! Sorry. I missed that. I don't know enough about the ruble to answer. Sorry for that. Dismas|^(talk) 02:30, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is the sort of question that should go to the Reference Desk. I would in particular suggest the Miscellaneous Reference Desk. However, if you refer to Russian gold rubles, that might be a reference to older, possibly tsarist, gold coinage. If those are actually historical gold coins, then the real question would be what is the gold content of the coin, e.g., one troy ounce or one-half troy ounce, multiplied by the current value of gold. I suggest that you ask at the Reference Desk with as much available information as you can provide. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:05, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2014 Seattle Storm season template[edit]

I am starting the page "2014 Seattle Storm season". I am trying to use the template as was used on "2011 Seattle Storm season", "2012 Seattle Storm season", "2013 Seattle Storm season", etc.

It is not working. It displays the template code exactly as entered, rather than formatting as the template is supposed to do. Wickorama (talk) 07:13, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed missing ]. -- Gadget850^talk 07:18, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!!! Wickorama (talk) 09:21, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello[edit]

I posted an article draft:OptionRally and it is now up for deletion. Right now it has come down to whether my sources are reliable. One reason I gave for the source being reliable, is that is had been accepted in at least 5 other wikipedia articles with no discussion of its reliability. I understand that this cannot be the only justification of reliability but the user who proposed my page for deletion said that: "Using a poor article as a precedent means a fast descent to idiocracy." While I understand his point in cases of arguing an article is notable because other things like it are notable, I do not understand why you cannot use precedence in order to show an source is valid.

I have looked through Wikipedia's guide on responding to deletion requests and also the articles on precedence, and I cannot find an answer to this particular question.

I am also confused because the user who requested my page for deletion has said that he personally can smell a PR piece because he used to write them and that seems like he comes to this article with significant bias. In the case when a user seems biased, is it possible to have a 3rd party, or an actual administrator look at the article? I asked for more help under the request for deletion page but no one responded.

This is my first article and I would like to fully understand the process and what should be happening.

Thank you Mayapalm (talk) 09:02, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Mayapalm: The criteria for whether a source is "reliable" or not can be found here. That fact that poor sources have been inappropriately widely used in other articles is not a valid indication that they should continue to be used in more articles. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:38, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@TheRedPenOfDoom: Thank you so much for your response. I really appreciate it. I have found other ways to show burden of proof but I still wanted to double check. Mayapalm (talk) 06:35, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox edits[edit]

Every time I edit a navbox, my edit is only reflected at the navbox's page and not at the other pages containing it. After the passage of a week or so, the change is reflected at the pages. Why is that?--The Theosophist (talk) 09:56, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It might be because of your browser's cache; try purging the cache. It might also be because of the Wikipedia cache; try purging a specific page with a star-link (shortcut Alt+*). --CiaPan (talk) 10:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's more detail at Help:Job queue. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:53, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See also Wikipedia:Purge. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:55, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page question[edit]

Hi all, I was honestly wondering if an editor can ban another editor from their talk page without an Admin or going through some formal channel. Also if an editor just decided to do this, reporting it to Administrators Notice Board or a similar area would have the ban enforced (by a user block or how exactly?) Thank you for your input.^{Market St.⧏}_{⧐ Diamond Way} 11:31, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Marketdiamond: A user can ask another user to stay off his/her talk page, and usually the polite thing for the other user to do is to honor the request. There's no real formal channel (that I know of) for such requests. If someone is repeatedly posting abusively or disruptively to one's talk page and won't stop when asked, one may go to WP:ANI and ask for an interaction ban. If the consensus is to impose one, violations of the ban may indeed lead to a block. Deor (talk) 11:44, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the detailed quick reply Deor. I was unfamiliar with this.^{Market St.⧏}_{⧐ Diamond Way} 11:47, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

uploading photo[edit]

I am new here in wikipedia and I have been trying to upload a photo in the past couple of months but i couldn't despite of the fact that I did edit some article and I've got the account for two months now . why ? what should I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oromo and proud (talk • contribs) 13:10, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Oromo and proud: If I'm not mistaken, you need 10 edits and your account needs to be at least 4 days old. You have the 4 days old part but you only have 7 edits. Dismas|^(talk) 13:41, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But if your image is freely licensed, it is better to upload it to Commons, which does not have a requirement of being autoconfirmed. See WP:Upload. --ColinFine (talk) 13:59, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Cite errors/Cite error ref no input[edit]

What does this error mean ?? I checked my draft thoroughly but could not find any "ref" as mentioned..

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dedeepya7 (talk • contribs)

@Dedeepya7: The error that you were getting said that you had ref tags but nothing in them. At the very top of the article, you had this: <ref></ref> So you were using the tags that say "there's a reference here" but then you didn't put anything in those tags. You can see how I fixed it with my edit here. Hope this helps, Dismas|^(talk) 13:39, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of candidates[edit]

Is there any policy, guideline or consensus that applies to the order in which candidates should appear in lists? This arises because there's a general election in the UK on 7 May and we already have lists of candidates in each (I think) of 650 constituency articles. There's been a little discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom#Forthcoming election candidate order. which had settled on alphabetical order, but is restarting now that one editor has edited about 90 articles to place one particular party first. NebY (talk) 13:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure about a policy on the matter, but if someone really wants to, its possible to have a template generate a pseudorandom ordering every time the template refreshes, as we have done for Arbcom election guides in years past. Obviously putting one party first isn't going to fly, but alphabetical seems the easy solution. While individual candidates may be ever so slightly harmed by position, it should average out between parties. Monty ₈₄₅ 13:57, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

However un/fair it is, they appear on the ballot paper in alphabetical order, which is good enough reason to stick with it - Arjayay (talk) 15:54, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

name[edit]

Discussion closed - not related to using or editing Wikipedia.--ukexpat (talk) 17:26, 27 April 2015 (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.

find my id card number — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.21.164.10 (talk) 14:48, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. --ColinFine (talk) 14:53, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ColinFine: why would you even respond to such an ill-mannered sentence fragment? You deserve better. Quis separabit? 16:45, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As the edit window shows, it's a canned response made with {{astray}}. It only takes seconds to post. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you last remember seeing your id card number? Did the first two digits begin with the year of your birth. If so the next three should be the day of the year (between 001 & 866). That is five digits I have found for you. All you need now is the last four. Some where between 0000 & 9999. Hope that helps.--Aspro (talk) 19:59, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Over a nice lunch, I googled around -(I love these sort of questions)... try this: Enter

005010124x and then 000010124v in Identity Card Checker. See how it works? Unless you suffer from dyscalculia you must be able to remember your last four digits (and your citizenship status for the final letter). So now you should know your whole ID. If you still have trouble: email me (do not post here) all of your bank account details and pass-words and I will (after a suitable delay), provide you with your ID ;-).--Aspro (talk) 23:20, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Many of us out here would love to have your help with our id card numbers. Is there a charge for your services? Do you promise to take good care of our pass-words and account numbers? Is Satan's number really 666, and is that in decimal, octal, or hexadecimal? Lou Sander (talk) 02:20, 27 April 2015 (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.

HELP!![edit]

I tried to do an WP:AFD 2nd nomination but I screwed it up. Can someone help? See here)

Thanks, Quis separabit? 16:43, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced what you had there with the standard {{subst:afd2}} and it seems to have resolved the issue. Monty ₈₄₅ 16:48, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request for help[edit]

I just need help with what im doing!!, if I could get someone to check over and see that Ive done it correctly.. Just worried that I make a mess of it.. ive probably even done this wrong Azura81 (talk) 15:40, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just took a quick look at User:Azura81/Nasty P and there is plenty wrong with it, but it looks like the article could be salvaged.

Don't use words like "impressive" and "well known" unless you are quoting a reliable source. If you say "most successful", the article needs to say who said that.

The section "I Love Hip Hop 2011- Present" cannot be used as is. I'm sure you knew that. People who write Wikipedia articles don't usually put notes such as these in sections saying what they plan to do, although I guess at this stage such a thing is possible. This would include "the live set is available on my youtube channel too if that helps with the live set." And I don't think YouTube is likely to be helpful to the article.

I'm not even sure what "Zane Lowe radio 1 it sounds nicer when nasty also akil song was on MTV too" means. It looks like you were attempting a quote but there is no source.

References should be formatted, not just simple links. That way we can find them later if something happens.

External links are not supposed to be used except in the "External links" section, and even then their use is very limited.

Keep trying because there is a chance this could be an acceptable article.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:28, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh hi, Thank you

Those bits you have mentioned, they actually shouldnt be there.. ive just put them there for me to remember later, as for the impressive etc etc, I also know this now and will be removing everyone without a reference to confirm it.. Also my links have not yet been referenced up .. I really really appreciate you having a look at this just now.. I plan to sort all these errors today. I really appreciate you taking your time. Azura81 (talk) 06:54, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Citing ProQuest[edit]

I'm trying to cite an item in a ProQuest database (which I can access through my university) but can't seem to find a url to cite that doesn't include the domain name of my institution, which presumably wouldn't be accessible to anyone without a login for said institution (and which I'd prefer not to use for other reasons). Can anyone advise as to how to get around this? Are there any guidelines on citing online databases of this kind? Thanks. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 23:24, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are not actually citing ProQuest, you are citing the original publication. You just fill in that information on the cite template. [[1]] . If you want, you can go to the original publications site and see if you can find an URL for that particular article, but its not necessary. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:50, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]