Help desk
< June 15	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 17 >

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.

June 16[edit]

New copy/paste problem about extra spaces.[edit]

I noticed today that when I highlight and copy an article title (in the article), it comes pasted out with a slightly large space on each end. Like Typesetting , not Typesetting.

The space can be deleted with one backspace, so that's a silver lining, but it's still a cloud. Anybody know how to chase it away? InedibleHulk (talk) 00:00, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Moving a sandbox page[edit]

I have moved an article on Dr. Eric Rasmussen from my Sandbox to Wikipedia. Originally I titled it Eric Rasmussen. However, it conflicts with a baseball player of the same name. So I then moved it to Dr. Eric Rasmussen, MD, MDM, FACP. The movement is reflected in my sandbox, but I can't find it when I search Wikipedia. Is there a wait time before the file shows up in the search? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linwells (talk • contribs) 04:46, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at your contribution history you'll see that you moved the article to the Wikipedia: namespace, whereas it should have been moved to the article namespace (no prefix). I think you'll find that your chosen title doesn't agree with the Manual of Style. Wikipedia:Article titles links to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people). You may find that something like Eric Rasmussen (physician) would be the preferred option. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:31, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Linwells, I moved it to Eric Rasmussen (physician) and did a bit ofcleanup, mostly on the citations. Please remember, you don't cite Wikipedia articles, you wiki-link to them only. Too many of the cites are to primary sources, or rather, more secondary sources are needed here. DES ^(talk) 11:28, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've done some additional clean up.--ukexpat (talk) 12:52, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see that a proper hatnote was added to Eric Rasmussen. Has someone tried doing a Google search on "Eric Rasmussen" to verify whether the baseball player and coach is more notable than the physician? If they are approximately equally notable, then the primary page should be the disambiguation. (As it is, with one article primary, there is no need for a disambiguation, only for the hatnote.) Robert McClenon (talk) 17:37, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tables[edit]

Hi, at List of roles and awards of Arshad Warsi the "Awards and nominations" section has years as the first column. I have centered it using | style="text-align:center;"|. When I replace it with !scope="row" align="center"| the years don't appear in the center. What to do?--Skr15081997 (talk) 07:09, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Skr15081997, does the table appear as you want it to now? The information has to be entered in the order that it appears. | style="text-align:center;"| won't do anything except position the text in the area where you put it.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:08, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Vchimpanzee: thanks for your help. I have added !scope="row" align="left"| at the beginning of the awards.--Skr15081997 (talk) 04:34, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Citing independent interviews[edit]

Howzit,

I was wondering about the policy for citing personal interviews with celebrities, notable academics, etc as sources. I haven't been able to locate any information outside Wikipedia:Interviews, which is an essay that mostly deals with the citation of interviews conducted by other persons such as professional journalists. Suppose one manages to wrangle an interview with a celebrity oneself. If backed up by a recording and transcript, wouldn't it hold the same weight as any other interview published by a multi-million dollar news agency? Or would this fall under the sphere of original research?

PS: if this is a policy issue which would be better answered at the Village Pump or elsewhere, kindly let me know where to direct this inquiry.

Thanks, --Katangais (talk) 13:48, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly original research. If it hasn't been published it isn't an acceptable source. See Wikipedia:No original research. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:12, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Katangais, the primary concern is that all reliable sources must be verifiable. This means that if a reader wanted to find further information, they could find the source material. So, the documents need to be published or be archival materials that would be housed in a library and would be accessible there. Original research is considered any information, material or analysis that is created by editors and is unpublished and on Wikipedia that is not acceptable as source material. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:05, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pointless spaces added when copying words on Wikipedia[edit]

The last couple of days I have experienced something unfamiliar and unwelcome when copying words on Wikipedia. To be exact, when I, for example, copy a category in order to paste it into an article, the result is like this: " Category:British military personnel killed in World War II ". In other words, all of a sudden I get a space on either side of the copied text. This is something I've never before come across in ~~close to~~ exactly 10 years on the project, and it's pretty annoying. Any reason why this has started happening now? Surely, this is some sort of technical malfunction? Cheers. Manxruler (talk) 14:50, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I had something similar the other day when copying an article title with a bunch of spaces added at the end when I pasted it. Not sure if this is related. Sam Walton (talk) 14:53, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article titles I get like this when I paste them: "Wikipedia:Help desk ", with an extra space at the end. Less annoying than spaces on either end, but still a negative thing. Seems very much related. Manxruler (talk) 15:03, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I started a section on this a few notches up, but will keep my eyes on this one instead. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:49, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I took it to the technical folks at the village pump. It appears to have been fixed now. Manxruler (talk) 06:32, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wanting to submit content[edit]

Hello, My name is Cora Brown and I am working with Billy Mann in New York at MannCom Creative. I am contacting you on behalf of one of our artist that goes by the name of Kstylis. We would like to know how to submit content, to be published. <redacted> Thank you for your time and I hope to hear from you soon.

Cora Brown Intern at MannCom Creative MannCom.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:E8A0:3400:A89D:3D8B:1DA6:26C9 (talk) 15:28, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What are you wanting to submit? You may need to clarify before an appropriate answer can be given. Dustin (talk) 15:32, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)WP:COI strongly discourages you from writing where you have a conflict of interest, which it's clear that you do. If you still want to submit content, be aware that it must be in neutral tone and supported by reliable sources to show why this person is notable per WP:GNG- if they were actually notable, it's likely someone without COI would have written about them. The way to create articles is to read Wikipedia:Your first article and then use Wikipedia:Article Wizard. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:33, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cora, you can submit photographs of artwork or prints at the Wikimedia Commons but they need to be donated and permission to reproduce, use or resell needs to be given. If the artist wishes to hold on to copyright, Wikimedia can not accept the donation. One solution that some contributors use is to upload low resolution photographs of small size so that there would be little commercial value. Editors at the Commons can help you with questions about the process and you can see examples there of other artwork that has been donated. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:10, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Window functions[edit]

Hi there,

As a part of a larger project I have to deal with Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) which is a variation of Discrete Fourier Transform (DFT). After some trials and errors I settled on Librow FFT. The source code there is in C but most of my software is in Gfortran and I had to convert Librow's source to Gfortran. I tested Librow's code before conversion using Wikipedia's Window functions. The test consisted of invoking Forward and Inverse FFT. Everything worked. The GFortran software derived from the C source code likewise worked perfectly well in a sense that by invoking the Inverse transform I could always get the original functions. Specifically I used Blackman-Harris window, Flat top window, Triangular window & Sine window. Everything worked except one thing: I could never get anything even remotely similar to the Fourier transform functions the website demonstrates. So, I began looking critically at the "Fourier Transforms" displayed on that page.

First we know that DFT gives us a set of complex numbers. The illustrations given on the web page did not mention how these seemingly real numbers had been obtained. Are they real or imaginary parts? How come the abscissas contain negative domain? In a way of reminding:

DFT of a signal $x$ is defined (Stanford) as:

$\mathrm {X} (\omega _{k})\triangleq \sum _{n=0}^{N-1}x(t_{n})e^{-j\omega _{k}t_{n}}~~~k=0,1,2...N-1$

where

$\omega _{k}~\triangleq ~{\frac {k2\pi }{NT}}~~~$ ; where N - number of samples; 1/T - sampling rate

I don't see how one can get negative numbers of anything for the abscissas.

This situation is very unsettling for me because I don't understand what is going on, how those functions were obtained, why my real and imaginary parts of FFT differ from the illustrations given in the Wikipedia article. Am I on the right track or what? Now I have to question a lot of things. I am wondering if there is anybody out there who can explain to me the discrepancy? Thanks --AboutFace 22 (talk) 15:36, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This Help Desk is for questions about how to use Wikipedia. If you want help on FFT, you are much more likely to find it by asking at Wikipedia's Mathematics reference desk. Maproom (talk) 15:48, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maproom, thank you but I disagree with you. It is about the quality of material posted there. People ask similar questions in this desk all the time. At the same time I want to say that my post should not be construed as a critique of the Wikipedia article. I cannot care less about it. I have my plate full as it is and I simply want to make sure the reference point I use has sufficient authority for me to try to adjust my codes. Thanks, - --AboutFace 22 (talk) 15:59, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why on earth do you think that you are going to get an answer to a complex mathematical question on a help desk clearly labelled as being "only for questions about using Wikipedia"? Who exactly are you expecting to respond? AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:06, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you have an issue with the content of an article, that should be discussed on the talk page of the article in question, for example: Talk:Window function. Rwessel (talk) 16:10, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"If you want help on FFT..." - I don't need any help with FFT. You guys do not understand. I have posted at Math Desk many times. I don't think I can get any help there. People over there are theoretically trained and nobody does any digital/numeric simulations. I think you are kicking me out for no reason. I doubt I can get any help at Math Desk. --AboutFace 22 (talk) 16:29, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you can't get help on a desk where people with mathematical knowledge normally respond, you are even less likely to get it here. That isn't what this desk is for. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:34, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rwessel, I think you gave me the route to go. I checked that link and lo and behold it has a lot of critique of the page and possibly even my questions have already been raised. I just have to read it more. Thanks you. --AboutFace 22 (talk) 16:39, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you think that you found a link. Good. However, if you say that the Math Reference Desk is not likely to be able to help you because they are theoreticians and do not do digital/numeric simulation, that might imply that the Computing Reference Desk would be a better resource. In any case, we were not kicking you out for no reason, but saying that the question appeared to be beyond our ability to answer. Good luck finding an answer. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:44, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I am getting the message. I don't think the Computer desk will be a good place for this material either. They are good at the codes but not necessarily at the Math, although you never know. I have experience with them also. Now I have a question: Would it be a problem if I copy this post to the Window Function:talk page? I know the Wikipedia abhors duplications. Thanks, - --AboutFace 22 (talk) 17:06, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any harm in copying your initial post to an article talk page. I don't see any purpose to copying our comments to another page. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:12, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I posted at the talk page and was surprised how quickly I got a response. On average people post there once a year. The individual who answered said that it was a wrong place for me to post, that posting there is done "to improve the article." Another blow :-) --AboutFace 22 (talk) 01:01, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unwanted italic title[edit]

List of Mr. Men displays its title as List of Mr. Men, which doesn't make sense; it should probably be List of Mr. Men, or failing that, List of Mr. Men. How does one resolve this? I followed the documentation for {{infobox book}}, adding | italic title = no to every appearance of that infobox, and {{Infobox character}} doesn't appear to add {{italic title}}, but something else is producing it. Nyttend (talk) 17:21, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not certain what's causing the title to remain italicised, but Template:DISPLAYTITLE should resolve the issue. Sam Walton (talk) 17:25, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I tried using {{DISPLAYTITLE:List of ''Mr. Men''}} but couldn't get it to work. Hopefully someone will find the answer for you. MarnetteD|Talk 17:29, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The version with a DISPLAYTITLE displayed an error message down at Mr Worry's infobox, so I've added another "italic title = no" there. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:38, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is it sorted now? I re-added the DISPLAYTITLE to the top of the article and it works for me; I think maybe when John changed the last "italic title = no" it made it work. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:49, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Should be no italics at all. There's a series called Mr. Men, but it's about people called Mr. Men. Those people are what this article's about, not the books and shows they're in. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:51, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Men is a fictional cartoon and book series. The characters have no existence outside of the fictional works, and they certainly are not people. The article title should be "List of Mr. Men characters" to make it clear that it is not a list of arbitrary "people" with the surname "Men". Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:41, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Cite errors/Internal Links[edit]

How many citations do I need within my post to make the notice go away that I don't have enough citations? Also, I have internal links but a notice is saying I don't have any? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophieguetzko (talk • contribs) 19:25, 16 June 2015‎

The tags won't ever go away on their own. Someone will have to manually remove them from the article. The article still does need more citations as the final three paragraphs have no citations in them at all. I have removed the deadend tag as there are now links to other articles. -- GB fan 19:41, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ref in ref[edit]

I am using <ref group="note">blah</ref> to format notes. I also want to cite the information in the note. But using a normal ref tag nestled in another causes an error. How to go about this? --Fauzan ^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 19:42, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Footnotes#Footnotes:_embedding_references. Ruslik_Zero 20:07, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Negative image[edit]

The portrait of Sally Jewell appears as a negative image on my screen. So does the corresponding file File:Sally Jewell official portrait.jpg of that photo. Is this just a problem with my settings, or do other people see it as a negative as well? (I'm asking because my removal got reverted, in good faith). ---Sluzzelin talk 20:05, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see a normal looking photo in the article. With my slow Internet, I never saw anything with the corresponding file.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:23, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The image (both in the article and at the Commons) is a normal, positive image. This would seem to be something related to how your browser processes image files. General Ization ^Talk 21:26, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see normal color in the article and in the file. There probably is something wrong with the OP's settings. If the problem appears in other articles, the OP might want to ask for help at Village pump (technical). Robert McClenon (talk) 21:28, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The file history indicates you are not the first to see a problem but it looks OK to me in all five tested browsers Firefox, IE, Chrome, Safari and Opera on Windows Vista. They render it differently but not as a negative. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:32, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all, for checking and replying! I'm using Safari, fwiw, and hadn't even bothered checking other browsers. Now I've checked my Firefox, and the image shows positive. I won't pursue this any further, as it's normally not a problem: this is the only image I've ever seen in its negative (and I just checked over 20 random pages with photos). Performing a google-image search ("Sarah Jewell" + site:wikimedia.org, e.g.) shows the photo-positive, but when I click on the image and arrive at the Commons page, the photo is grinning at me in the negative again. ---Sluzzelin talk 22:21, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, but when I click on the image the upload-page, shows a positive again. (Anyway, don't waste your time figuring this one out, unless it's the kind of puzzle you delight in. It's really no biggy. :-)

Sluzzelin, a similar question to yours was asked on this external forum page. The problem may be a CMYK vs. RGB one. These replies may help: "You posted CMYK images -- convert them to RGB and they should be fine", and "As mentioned above, the ipad is misinterpreting a CMYK color scheme. That means the images were saved for print, not for the web. Webkit uses the sRGB color space, so the images need to be re-saved with sRGB embedded... Thread closed." NB I used to delight in these sort of problems. HTH. >MinorProphet (talk) 14:00, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, MP. I'm actually using OS X (version 10.6.8) on an oldish MacBook. Anyway, should this become a more frequent problem, I now know where to look. Thanks again! ---Sluzzelin talk 17:05, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Anon closure[edit]

Can an anon close an XfD? I have Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Electronic cigarette in mind. —teb728 t c 20:11, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly sure this has been discussed before - with the conclusion being reached that it isn't appropriate, since the closer needs to be personally identifiable should there be any queries regarding the closure. An IP number isn't a personal identifier. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:17, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Checking further, Wikipedia:Deletion process#Non-administrators closing discussions explicitly states that "Registered editors who are not administrators may close deletion discussions". Registered editors... AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:25, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see the same anon has closed Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#We need a CSD criterion for blatantly unencyclopedic drafts. —teb728 t c 20:28, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've unclosed these. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:29, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]