Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2009 January 25

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.

January 25

adventure game

I do not know how I found this page but I hope it will lead me to what i am looking for

I am look for the original ADVENTURE game to play on line. I found it on line many years ago and now i can not find it It starts off: you are standing out side a building. then you go inside and pick up keys,lamp.(i forget what else) You then go outside (I WILL LIST THE REST) GRATE CAGE ROD DROP ROD GET BIRD FREE BIRD AND KILL SNAKE ECT IF YOU OR ANYONE CAN PROVIDE ME WITH THE WEB SITE TO PLAY THIS GAME OR DOWNLOAD IT ON A DISK PLEASE E-MAIL <redacted> THANK YOU PS. PLEASE EMAIL SO I KNOW YOU RECEIVE THIS THANK YOU —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.123.106 (talk) 00:41, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Our article Colossal Cave Adventure has links to many versions. Algebraist 00:46, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Date relative linking

Is it possible using parserfunctions or a template to link to an article using functions of the current date or week and year. What I'm trying to is to provide a link from a portal's main page to articles such as Premier League 2008–09 for the current season which generally ends on July 31 and begins on August 1 (week 31) -

If todays date is before August 1, link to Premier League 2008–09 (i.e. [[<name> <last year>-<last year+1>]])

If todays date is August 1 or after, link to Premier League 2009–10 (i.e. [[<name> <current year>-<current year +1>]])

I'm guessing this would be some function of {{CURRENTYEAR}}, {{CURRENTWEEK}}, {{CURRENTTIMESTAMP}} or {{#time:}} but this is making my head bleed. Nanonic (talk) 02:44, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

[[Premier League {{#expr:{{CURRENTYEAR}}-1}}-{{#time: y}}]] gives Premier League 2023-24

[[Premier League {{CURRENTYEAR}}-{{#expr:{{#time: y}}+1}}]] gives Premier League 2024-25

But this does not work for 2007-08, since if {{#time: y}} expands to i.e. 07 then {{#expr:{{#time: y}}+1}} expands to 8 missing the leading zero, I can not find a right function that gives only x right most characters from a string, if that function exists which I assume it does this can be fixed. --Stefan ^talk 06:40, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Found it, you need #sub: from mw:Extension:StringFunctions which is not running ... see #get_a_substring_in_a_template above, maybe there is a alternative? --Stefan ^talk 06:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, final fix to get a dynamic link to the current season this should work, but this does not work for previous season, it only works from 2009 and onwards.

{{#ifexpr: {{CURRENTMONTH}} < 08 | [[Premier League {{#expr:{{CURRENTYEAR}}-1}}-{{#time: y}}]]}}

{{#ifexpr: {{CURRENTMONTH}} > 07 | [[Premier League {{CURRENTYEAR}}-{{#expr:{{#time: y}}+1}}]]}}

Which renders like: Premier League 2024-25 --Stefan ^talk 07:16, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

You're a superstar! That works perfectly, thanks. Nanonic (talk) 15:42, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

How do I rename a page and redirect a page.

The word sephira[1] is a religious term and currently a band is using the page. They are not a noteworthy band and the page should be redirected to the sephirot page. I am not sure what to do with the band page but the word should definitely be a re-direct to the sehpirot article. Should I create a new page for the band (even though their noteworthiness is in contention) or should I just delete the page, create a new one and redirect? I am confused and there is too much crap to sort through to find an answer.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Luckynumbers (talk • contribs) 03:10, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

You can use {{Otheruses}} to direct people to the correct page. Chamal ^talk 03:14, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but you cannot just redirect articles willy nilly. I have reverted your redirect of Sephira and edited Sephira (disambiguation) to point to the band and the religious term with equal weight, and I will add appropriate hatnotes to each. – ukexpat (talk) 03:42, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

And Sephira (band) which you had created by copy and paste is now a redirect to Sephira.  – ukexpat (talk) 04:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Why can't I find a page in AllPages?

Resolved

Why does Piping (sewing) not appear in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AllPages&from=Piping+&namespace=4 ? — Sebastian 05:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

You are looking in the "Wikipedia" namespace (for guidelines etc), but Piping (sewing) is in the "article" namespace.--Commander Keane (talk) 05:46, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

But of course! I made that same mistake years ago already! — Sebastian 06:30, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

(Invalid) new messages alerts?

I have occasionally (on various pages in the last 10 minutes) been seeing the "You have new messages" bar, yet when I click on my talk page, I find that there aren't any new messages nor have there been for over 12 hours (and I had previously seen the most recent ones from over 12 hours ago). Is anyone else having a similar experience? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 10:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Something seems to be wrong somewhere. I'm currently editing a new page, and when I save changes, it takes me to the page saying that "Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name". But when I purge it a few times, the page appears fine. Chamal ^talk 10:37, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

The system is randomly logging me out and back in:/–Capricorn42 (talk) 16:07, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

It's WP's time system. Sometimes it gets like a fraction of a second off, but that means that you get weird messages like the ones yall are talking about. flaminglawyer 21:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Solved: Correct use of double curly brackets/ aka braces : templates (and variable delimiters)

At the top of the methanol page, you can see some "See..." links, created with...

{{For|climate changing methane-water "ice" see|Methane clathrate}}
{{For|resolution of hydrate / clathrate confusion, see|hydrate}}

I was trying to look up the correct form and function of the double curly brackets, and (after 40 minutes of trying to RTFM!) have turned to this "Help" page for advice.

I did find...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Variable

... but nothing there quite covers what appears on the methanol page.

(BTW: Yes, tkbwik and tkbsimple are both me... I wasn't trying to be "clever", but I couldn't get into simple.wikipedia.com to edit something without a "new" id, and didn't realize that my "unsimple" wikipedia log-in had changed after I went into "simple")

Tkbwik (talk) 12:19, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello there! Double Curly Brackets are used to referred to a, much in the same was as double square brackets refer to links. In this specific case, the brackets were referring to Template:For, which produces the See... links at the top of the page. Help:Template is a good page for more information on templates and how to use them. Hope that helps, » \ / (⁂) 12:22, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Regarding your mention of variable delimiters, {{For}} has nothing to do with a for loop. This template just happens to be called "For". PrimeHunter (talk) 13:01, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

(Further from original poster:) Thank you, respondants. I was getting cross-eyed reading the template page, but when I got down to the chess board example, I perked up! Neat functionality!

For others reading this... the "answer" in a nutshell is that....

• "{{" will be the start of a template... a way to insert things into a page.
• Everything up to the first "|" is the name of the template.
• Things after the "|" are parameters passed to the template.
• For help with a template, e.g. the "for" template that I wondered about, search on, e.g., "template:for".

Templates are useful for achieving a consistent style for a common element. They're a bit like using CSS or macros or subroutines.

Certain words, enclosed in braces, work like variables, but in fact are essentially parameterless templates. See the Magic Words entry for the list of "certain words".

Tkbwik (talk) 14:40, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Searching

As a frequent user I'm frustrated with having to type in the main subject everytime I would like to refer to the drop-down listings. Is there a method I could use to get back to the drop-down list witout re-entering the subject?

Thanks, Wally in Iowa173.20.5.142 (talk) 13:45, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Are you talking about the list of previous searches you've done in the search box. Usually, it shows up after typing just a few letters after which I can use the arrow keys to select one. - Mgm|^(talk) 14:34, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
• Special:PrefixIndex may be of interest to you. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Far East people name order policy

I am quite puzzled concerning the order of names for Far Easterns. While most of Chinese and Koreans names appear in the traditional way (family name first), Japanese names are usually reversed and first name appears first (in Japanese, family name goes first). However I noticed that there are some Japanese that are listed in the traditional way, frequently historical personalities. Is there any official policy in wikipedia concerning this topic? --HIZUMI (talk) 15:15, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) (designated a guideline and not policy). PrimeHunter (talk) 15:25, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, thank you. That makes things clear. But I think it is quite strange to use double standards. To be honest I can not find any good reason to reverse the names of the Japanese... --HIZUMI (talk) 15:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I remember reading somewhere that it is bordering on conventional (in the real world) for Japanese names to be reversed when presented alongside western names - much more so than other similar countries, at least. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 16:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see. By the way I noticed that the Hungarian version keeps the traditional order (Family Name First) for all Japanese. To be honest, I think it would be better to be close to the original. Speaking about the Hungarian version, I also noticed that they are the only version along with Turkish, that do not refer to Asian Names with the official Latinized version, but they use their own Latinized version which I guess is easier to achieve correct pronunciation. E.g. "Teng Hsziao-ping" instead of "Deng Xiaoping" or "Koidzumi Dzsunicsiró" instead of "Koizumi Junichiro". I think this will make easier correct pronunciation, since I don't know how many English speaking people can read pinyin or other romanized names with a correct pronunciation. --HIZUMI (talk) 16:28, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Just diffs, not current version

Resolved

 – ukexpat (talk) 17:31, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Is there an easy way to access just the differences between two versions and not the current version from the watchlist? Diff's good, but on long articles with only small edits it loads the rest of the page. Or does it have to do this anyway for the diff to work? - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 16:16, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

The "Misc" tab at Special:Preferences has the option "Do not show page content below diffs". This applies to all diffs. I don't know any other method to switch between showing and not showing page content. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:22, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

(ec)I was going to suggest the same thing. Also you can use WP:POPUPS; mouse over the "diff" link and it will quickly show you the changes that have been made. –Capricorn42 (talk) 16:25, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, wp:popups is ideal. Thanks! - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 17:20, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Mariana Bridi

Please do not delete the content on Mariana Bridi. Perhaps others will live because of what she went through. She died of a bacterial infection within 30 days!

Articles_for_deletion/Mariana_Bridi_da_Costa

Please keep. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.119.25.222 (talk) 16:50, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, this is the help desk for questions about using Wikipedia. Whether or not the article is to be kept will be decided at the AfD through consensus. You can read about notability requirements here. Canvassing is inappropriate if that was your intention. –Capricorn42 (talk) 17:21, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Your reasoning doesn't hold water 70.119. For the article to have effect on someone, they'd have to know where to find it first and although misdiagnoses do happen, and even if they do, it's still a bad idea to self-diagnose. That's why Wikipedia doesn't give medical advice. - Mgm|^(talk) 17:34, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Request for Netural Party

I would like to submit a request to have an administrator's privileges looked into being revoked. I'm not making this request lightly or superfluously, I'm making it as a result of a detailed examination of the administrator's editing practices as well as his lack of neutrality while resolving issues. But most importantly, I'm making this request due to his interaction with members of the community. The administrator is too quick to personally attack people and is too quick to block, often with no other explanation than "stop doing this". The sad part is that the administrator did a good job in the early days, but has now become drunk with power. How do I start the ball rolling?72.66.3.14 (talk) 17:53, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Third opinion is the first step in dispute resolution I think. –Capricorn42 (talk) 18:04, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

No, it's not. The first step - in any dispute - is to talk it out with the adminstrator on their talk page. Tell them that you think they are abusing their power. If they don't change or respond in a hostile manner, a good place discuss a broken admin is at WP:AN/I. Xenon54 (talk) 18:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Names

Can I Ask How Can U Apply To Change Your Wikipedia User Name? ChillaxNOW (talk) 19:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:CHU –Capricorn42 (talk) 19:03, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Details of WP:OR

If someone works for a film studio or production house of some sort, has copied various documents to verify employment, and then put various details (legal name, birth date, etc) onto a public web site, does this violate WP:OR or WP:RS? If you want to look more into it, see the last entry on my talk page. Dismas|^(talk) 19:41, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure, although a simple verification of employment isn't enough to confer notability (as I'm sure you know). This information isn't particularly verifiable, so I'd say it's not acceptable just based on that. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:59, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not looking to confirm the notability of the article subjects. They're already notable.

And it seems I wasn't quite right about the business of the source. It's a blog that does reviews. For some reason, they have copies of the IDs of the actors on file. Dismas|^(talk) 20:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• It depends on whether the documents can be reliably linked to the person in question. Personal data is exactly the sort of data that can be reliably confirmed by the subject without breaking rules. I'd still not recommend they'd do it because putting such material only makes you an easy target for identity theft. - Mgm|^(talk) 23:01, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Mgm, please reword that. Your last sentence is a mystery as far as what you're trying to communicate. Dismas|^(talk) 00:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

style question

Resolved

 – ukexpat (talk) 01:23, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I've searched both here and google, and can't find the type of info I want. I'm looking for options for {style coding. An example:

{|style="border:solid gray; background:lightblue; margin:0pt; width:100%;" |-valign=top |align=left width=40% rowspan=2 height=0%|__TOC__ | |- |align=center valign=center colspan=3| {| style="border:solid blue; margin:1pt; width:80%" |align="center" valign="top" bgcolor=lemonchiffon|some text here |} |}

I'm looking for what colors can be used, and perhaps even the hex equivalent. Hopefully one of you kind folks can point me where I want to go. (as opposed to where most people tell me I should go.) .. thanks Ched (talk) 20:29, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I believe you want Web colors. Algebraist 20:59, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes - that's extremely helpful for the colors. I also found that if I just added the html, to my search for "style" - it showed me MUCH more of the relevant pages. Sometimes this brain of mine just doesn't work like it used to. Thanks for the link Algebraist, even with coffee and rest, I wouldn't have thought of that. Ched (talk) 00:40, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia page on "Samar Chatterjee"

The page has been edited. References [9] and [10] have not been inserted in the right manner. Please help to correct it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sushila69 (talk • contribs) 21:28, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll take care of it - and some other problems with the article.... --Cameron Scott (talk) 21:30, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

EDITING ("Fascism/Etymology of the word "fasces"") & TALK PAGES

Okay, in all modesty, I have a Ph.D. in art history from Brown, and I wrote a fully annotated, 300-page dissertation. But your Help pages and especially the instructions and templates for adding references when I edit an entry, are the most intimidating thing I have ever seen in my entire life.

I had wanted to start editing, as well as (politely) talking through some suggestions I have for the entry on the "Etymology" of "fascism" -- especially the word "fasces." But I'm getting nowhere. Partly because, as much as I admire what you're doing, all webpages are visually, something of a mad screaming mess; partly because I am a MAC person & your templates look to me like PC nightmares:

{{cite book |last1= |first1= |authorlink1= |last2= |first2= |editor1-first= |editor1-last= |editor1-link= |others= |title= |url= |format= |accessdate= |edition= |series= |volume= |date= |year= |month= |origyear= |publisher= |location= |language= |isbn= |oclc= |doi= |id= |page= |pages= |chapter= |chapterurl= |quote= |ref= |bibcode= |laysummary= |laydate= |separator= |postscript= |lastauthoramp=}}

SAY WHAT????!!!!!!!!!!!!

Also, with all respect, I couldn't make head or tails of the "Talk Pages", (which I wanted to use to discuss my changes -- or maybe that's what THIS is?), which are mysterious to me in terms of where it is I write my messages or "talk." There doesn't seem to be any box for typing, and when I click on hyperlinks I get more and more pages and instructions, etc...

Can you suggest anything before I simply throw in the towel? Many thanks

Gianni101 (talk) 22:38, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Talk pages are the pages labelled "discussion". When you are at an article, it is one of the tabs at the top of your screen. You can click it to get to the talk page, and click the "edit this page" tab to start editing the page. It's customary for comments on talk pages to be added on the bottom. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:57, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
• For template: You wanted to use {{cite book}} to get to the documentation that tells you what to fill in in what spot of the code you copied here, you write Template:Cite book. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:57, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I've put a "welcome box" on your talk page, which may help. Personally I would agree that most of our Help pages are very difficult to use, and that templates and infoboxes are extremely counter-intuitive to use. As to "talk pages" - the easiect way to start a new section on a talk page is to click the "add bew section" tab at the top of the page. I do hope you saty with us and persevere - and if you have more questions please do ask them! DuncanHill (talk) 22:58, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia can be hard to start with, depending on what you try to do first. Referencing in particular is often a nightmare for the new user. Which is why many articles on Wikipedia lack references, or have ad hoc referencing styles. Plenty of users with months or even years of editing experience have not yet slogged through and mastered the instructions in WP:FOOT, WP:CITE, and WP:CITET. Wikipedia's instructions are certainly complex, but Wikipedia is allegedly the number five Web property in the world now. The four sites ahead of us: Google, Microsoft, Yahoo!, and AOL. As a thought exercise, imagine what you would have to do if you wanted to edit a site owned by one of those four companies - how many hours of effort would it take to get yourself into position to put your stamp on any one of those properties? You would have to interview for a position, get hired, probably relocate, go through some training program, get absorbed into the company's culture, and make a major life commitment. Would that be simpler than figuring out Wikipedia's instructions? I doubt it. Is there any possible way to make a top five Web property substantially simpler than any of the current top five? I doubt that too - if it were possible, someone would probably have done it. However, one of the biggest problems with learning Wikipedia is that it's not obvious where to start. If you start with something difficult (such as citation templates), the instructions assume you have previously absorbed a massive amount of background by doing simpler edits. A saner way to get started is to buy a book such as Wikipedia - The Missing Manual, which presents the introductory material in a logical order. --Teratornis (talk) 09:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC)