Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2011 October 10

< Wikipedia:Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< October 9 << Sep | October | Nov >> October 11 >
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 10

edit

table sorting

edit

I'm wondering how to get a table to sort numerically. I asked at the sorting help page, but there was no response. (Most questions seem to go unanswered there.)

At List of natural satellites I placed a copy of all data in the Mean radius column in exponential form within {{Hs}}, as recommended on the sorting help page, yet it sorts alphanumerically. I tried {{sort}}, which we use in another article, and still no go. Others have reviewed the table, and thought it looked right. What are we doing wrong?

Thanks, — kwami (talk) 01:48, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Someone pointed out this on MetaWiki, but nothing there seems to help either. — kwami (talk) 06:16, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I extracted a sample of the table in question to Talk:List of natural satellites/table-test, just enough to demonstrate that indeed even with {{sort}} it's not working properly (still sorting alpha rather than numerically). Looking at an HTML dump of that page, the correct hidden sortkey is indeed present. Don't have an answer, but at least do have a simpler test case for experimenting. DMacks (talk) 06:28, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It works if you use {{ntsh}} to format the hidden sort key; see my edit to Talk:List of natural satellites/table-test. The browser/Javascript/magic(?) can then sort the hidden keys alphabetically. But your edits to the article, adding leading zeroes to the sort keys, have the same effect. Did the {{sort}} method work properly before the MediaWiki 1.18 upgrade? -- John of Reading (talk) 08:51, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possible wrong image

edit

Hi, could someone look into this image, please? I reckon it WAY wrong, especially since it's linked with the Dnepropetrovsk maniacs. In my opinion, it's just as easy as to put a 'Wanted' sign on someones forehead. I already notified wikiMedia, but in my opinion this should be dealt with ASAP, for someones privacy really is at stake here. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Igor_Sayenko.jpg 「Robster1983」☞ Life's short, talk fast ☜ 02:18, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, since no one cares; I don't care. I let it go, as it is not up to me. 「Robster1983」☞ Life's short, talk fast ☜ 17:32, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous directed me here. I went into the image of "Young Bekie" in Ballad#Classification. In the File links section it says No pages on the English Wikipedia link to this file. Shouldn't it say that Ballad links to it? SlightSmile 02:29, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We've just upgraded to a new version of the MediaWiki software and there has been quite a few bugs. There's a post about this problem at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#"File links" on media files not updating? Someone posted that they think it may be fixed but I will add a note that it does not appear to be, linking to here.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:37, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirecting to wrong country edition

edit

There must be a FAQ on this, but I can't figure out how to access it.

I'm in the U.S. and have always been able to access the U.S. edition. After recently visiting a UK blog that had some direct links to the en.wikipedia.org site, I can't access the U.S. edition -- only the UK. This is true on both Firefox and IE, even though I only accessed the site through Firefox. Direct typing of the wikipedia.org address into the address bar just redirects back to en.wikipedia.org.

I've tried clearing all of my cache, clearing my Google search history, and restarting my computer. What am I missing?

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.173.125 (talk) 06:15, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'ma fraid you are mistaken, there is no such thing as a US and UK "edition" of Wikipedia. There are only different language versions. Take a look at the url of this page - it begins with "en.wikipedia.org" - "en" is the language code for English. Roger (talk) 06:21, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See also WP:ENGVAR. Perhaps you happened to read more articles with US spelling earlier. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:37, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hallo Bruderrrrrr :*** :****

edit

hallo kurze frage ...sind bei der entwicklung dieser website auch Juden beteiligt sowie neuapostolen ? freue mich über eine schnelle antwort ..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ischderrowin (talk • contribs) 07:54, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dies ist die Englische Wikipedia. Bitte fragen Sie in de:Wikipedia:Fragen zur Wikipedia.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 08:39, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Dies ist der Help desk der Englischen Wikipedia and hier gestellte Fragen sollten generell in Englisch formuliert werden. Davon abgesehen, könnte die Kategorie Category:Jewish Wikipedians hilfreich sein. Grüße.
(Translation: This is the help desk of the English Wikipedia and questions posted here should generally be formulated in English. Apart from that, the category Category:Jewish Wikipedians might be helpful. Regards.)
Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 08:39, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Translation of the (IMO) somewhat bizarre original question: Hi, a quick question... are Jews as well as members of the New Apostolic Church involved in the development of this website? I'd appreciate a swift response
The answer, Ischderrowin, is "yes". The Wikimedia statement of values says explicitly Our board of trustees, staff members, and volunteers are involved without discrimination based on their religion, political beliefs, sexual preferences, nationalities, etc. Tonywalton Talk 22:48, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

virus on computer

edit

I got a virus on your site. someone is sending messages using my friends on tagged to get people to open it it says that tagged is giving away some type of note book. Computer has shut down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.6.147.162 (talk) 08:19, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia. Your mention of "messages" and "tagged" suggests you are trying to report a problem with some other site, perhaps Facebook, which you should report through that site's feedback/contact system. But just in case, could you post the URL of the page that you suspect contains a bad link? -- John of Reading (talk) 08:32, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)You have our sympathy, but this isn't Tagged, this is Wikipedia. If you want Tagged, it is at http://www.tagged.com/ . - David Biddulph (talk) 08:35, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shortcuts

edit

If I think that a shortcut currently directing to a page should better direct to another page, can I simply change it or must such a change be discussed beforehand (and if so, should this discussion take place at the current target page of the shortcut or where I want to direct it to)? After all there is no Wikipedia:Shortcuts for discussion. The specific shortcut in in question currently directs to an essay and I would like to direct it to a section in an editing guideline. Should I be bold and change it? Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 10:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Part of your problem may be that you're looking for the wrong name. See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. Dismas|(talk) 10:54, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. However WP:RFD#The guiding principles of RfD says
"RfD is not the place to resolve most editorial disputes. If you think a redirect should be targeted at a different article, discuss it on the talk pages of the current target article and/or the proposed target article. However, for more difficult cases, this page can be a centralized discussion place for resolving tough debates about where redirects point."
I am unsure what a "difficult" case is supposed to mean. Does "difficult" mean "controversial"? And it says it should be discussed at the talk page of the current target article and/or the proposed target article. Which of them is it? Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 11:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I boldly changed it (diff and diff). Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 11:17, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, really changed with this edit. :) Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 11:24, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would have thought that you were causing some confusion with WP:Navbox and WP:NAVBOX redirecting to different places. The target of the first includes a link to the latter. This is the sort of situation that is might be regarded as "difficult", and therefore worthy of discussion before moving. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:35, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And for extra confusion, at the target of WP:Navbox you've put a link saying that a shortcut for it is WP:NAVBOX, although WP:NAVBOX goes somewhere else. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:38, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Now both direct to the same place (see diff). Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 11:45, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The target uses {{shortcut|WP:NAVBOX}}, which creates an anchor named WP:NAVBOX. The redirect should then link to Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates#WP:NAVBOX. If someone changes the section title, the shortcut will still work. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 12:21, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Shortcut#Changing shortcuts. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:28, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The book History of Commonwealth Engineering by John Dunn

edit

While this book is quite informative Mr Dunn fails to mention the contribution made to the growth of the company by my father, H. R (Bert) Davidson who was the first employee brought over from Clyde Engineering in 1938 and was production manager then works manager during the war years and onwards till 1953 when he moved to Victoria and set up the manufacturing plant at Dandenong. {I knew personally many of the men quoted in this book)

I would like to be able to get in touch with the author to provide further backgroung as I was quite involved in assisting my father in the late 40's and worked for Comeng in the 60's on the Harris train projects.-----

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Russ Davidson (talk • contribs) 11:17, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but this is the help desk for the English Wikipedia. We have no connection with Mr Dunn and we cannot provide off-Wikipedia contact details for individuals. I fear you have to look for the contact details somewhere else. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 11:36, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TeenScreen merge request

edit

Last week I proposed a merge between the articles TeenScreen and Columbia University TeenScreen Program, which are duplicative. And because neither are very good, I've written a replacement draft incorporating what is good about both, with additional research. All of this is explained in the TeenScreen merger proposal. I also posted requests at WikiProjects Medicine and Psychology, and while I haven't received any feedback on those Talk pages, one editor from Medicine has voiced support on the TeenScreen page. As I've mentioned in each of these places: I can't do the merge, because I'm not an administrator; because I'm engaging this page on behalf of TeenScreen, I have a potential conflict of interest with the subject matter. If you are an admin, I'd welcome your input and action if you feel it is appropriate. Looking forward to your response, and happy to answer any questions. Thanks, WWB Too (talk) 14:23, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Why do you feel you need to be an administrator? I reviewed the procedure in WP:MERGETEXT and I don't see any steps that require administrator rights (maybe I'm missing something). Everything you need to do seems to just involve copying and pasting. You do not, for example, need to move your replacement draft over the destination page (moving a page over an existing page does require admin rights). It seems you could just edit the content of your draft article into the destination article in step 5 under WP:FMERGE.
  • Note that Help:Merging#cite_note-1 says the debate should be open for at least two weeks before you merge.
  • You could solicit more comments by checking the histories of the two articles to identify the most recent dozen or so editors for each one, and put {{Please see}} on their user talk pages to make them aware of the merge, so they can join the debate. The people who edited the articles might be the most likely editors to have an interest in the merge; they might be unlikely to check the WikiProject pages within the two week debate period.
Good luck. --Teratornis (talk) 23:07, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I could add that the two articles look to me like clear duplicates and thus the merge should be uncontroversial (unless I'm missing something). Your conflict of interest would (in my opinion) not really apply to the merge itself, but rather might apply to whatever content edits you make to the resulting merged article. Where is your replacement draft? --Teratornis (talk) 23:15, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're completely right, I'd somehow confused deletion privileges with the procedure of merging, forgetting that the thing to do would be creating a hard redirect. And I'd linked my replacement draft elsewhere, but not here. Here it is: User:WWB_Too/TeenScreen. Let me know what you think, if you get a chance. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 13:59, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable Sources

edit

Hi..the page I'm trying to edit is Nader Guirat reliable resources I plan to include will be very similar to the ones on this page Lara Scandar a blog and the artist's website, which seem to be accepted and resources referenced are satisfactory since there is no alert for requesting additional citation and warning of deletion. My question is, if I use similar resources would this save Nader Guirat page from deletion? Thank You --Mona MG (talk) 14:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are reliable if they are independent, third-party coverage of the topic. You can read more on this page. TNXMan 15:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Notability (music). The first thing to find is reliable sources to show that the artist is notable. The requirements for the kind of sources to show a person is notable are stricter than the requirements to show a particular fact is verifiable. Jc3s5h (talk) 15:08, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Those above have already provided links to some of our policies on what constitutes reliable sources and applicable notability requirements. Regarding the article on Lara Scandar, you have fallen into a logical trap of assuming that because something else has not yet been tagged for cleanup or deletion, this means that it has been reviewed and is acceptable, so emulating its sources should be sufficient. This does not work on Wikipedia, which has no central authority systematically reviewing each article that is created, and in fact, which has vast numbers of articles existing which should be deleted or tagged for cleanup but no one has yet done so. Please see, by way of analogy, What about article x? The sources on that other page—a blog and the subject's own website—are not proper reliable sources and should not be emulated. Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published sources and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Avoid self-published sources.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:33, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is the talk page for Special:Upload?

edit

I'm trying to find where I can raise some attention from the editors who are able to change Special:Upload. I'd like to see some of the features on the Commons upload form migrated here, and the big image preview that was JUST added removed because it jerks the page around (and if I want to preview the image, I'll open it before I upload it to make sure its correct). However, there is very little information at Special:Upload on where to post suggestions/comments - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 16:18, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki talk:Uploadtext, assuming you really do mean Special:Upload and not Wikipedia:Upload. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:31, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Which you can actually see if you enable the new Preferences → Gadgets → Create a toolbox link to show the page with messages from the user interface substituted with their names. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 21:18, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My Removed Article

edit

Well i just wrote my first article(The cloud Roads) with taking permission from the author of the book herself for writing the same plot that is written at the back of the book, then someone removed it and said i added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. what should i do to bring it back? --Maged1995 (talk) 17:00, 10 October 2011 (UTC) (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:47, 10 October 2011 (UTC).[reply]

The author can donate the text, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. However, such text won't be must use here as it's usually written in such a way as to promote the book, which violates our policy on maintaining a neutral point of view. Яehevkor ✉ 17:00, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, remember that back-cover blurbs are not written by the book's author, but rather by some anonymous marketing intern or other harmless drudge. Thus, their copyrights belong not to the books' authors, but to the publishers; and are, as Rehevkor points out, NPOV-violating efforts to sell the book. --Orangemike (talk) 20:13, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
One more point: if the only thing there is to say about a book is a plot summary, the book is almost certainly not notable, and shouldn't have an article in Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 22:07, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

on what ellipsoid are the coordinates of Wikipedia?

edit

Wikipedia gives the coordinates of locations, top right, but it is not specified what kind of coordinates are them? for example, the paris observatory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Observatory are those coordinates expressed in WGS84 or? And is it possible to have a reference?

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.163.48.72 (talk) 17:51, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They are latitude and longitude coordinates. Is that what you mean? TNXMan 17:53, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) The question is a bit more subtle than that. The original poster is well aware that the coordinates are latitude and longitude values, but there are a number of possible ways to convert given latitude and longitude values into a physical location on the surface of the Earth. WGS 84 is one standard for doing so. (See also reference ellipsoid.)
As far as I know, there's no 'official' process for verifying or reporting coordinates on Wikipedia, though I'd be glad to be corrected on that; mayhaps there's a Wikiproject? What you see in articles is most likely whatever that article's editors have entered, or whatever values were pulled from an assortment of public databases. In practice, I would expect most to be WGS 84, just because it's widely used. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:21, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The documentation for the template that displays the coordinates is at Template:Coord/doc. The best place to ask your question is Template talk:Coord. I am curious about this too, so I will ask my own interpretation of your question there. Jc3s5h (talk) 18:12, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) The coordinates at Paris Observatory#Constitution are identical to those at [1] and those comply with WGS84 according to the note at the top of the page. That's all I can say given the fact that I am not familiar with this matter. If you need more information, you can discuss this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 18:25, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WGS84 is the standard datum for the global positioning system, and would therefore be what map providers reference. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 18:31, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
GPS may use WGS84, but that is not the only datum a user may set a GPS receiver to display. Also, latitude and longitude may be taken from paper maps, which may use a different datum. So it is likely that most, but not all, coordinates supplied by editors are in WGS84. In many cases the feature is large enough that the differences among systems is insignificant. Jc3s5h (talk) 18:48, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. The difference is negligible so long as you aren't building something. It would depend where the coordinates came from. If they were taken from Google Maps, its WGS84. If, however, they were taken from a book or somewhere where the coordinates were written, it may be the 1920s datum. Unless there are seconds and points of a second in the lat/long, there would be no difference between the different datum. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 19:01, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just for reference, "the 1920s datum" may refer to the North American Datum of 1927, i.e. NAD27. --Teratornis (talk) 23:24, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:GEO but bear in mind some of our Wikcoords are in error, not by mere seconds of arc but by minutes (miles, km) as here. Jim.henderson (talk) 19:35, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On the {{coord}} page there is a box headed "Quick how to"; in the third section of that box it states:

--Redrose64 (talk) 19:37, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote code

edit

What is the html or code for adding a footnote? This is a source I want to use as reference. How do I code it, so it becomes a footnote? http://cultureshark.blogspot.com/2011/06/rtv-responds-to-competition-by-making.html Thank you.

Defgirl666 (talk) 20:36, 10 October 2011 (UTC) Phyllis[reply]

See Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:38, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Winsor Biography

edit

In the Richard Winsor biography it states that he played "Toby" in the movie StreetDance 3D. In fact, he played "Tomas." Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.238.10.85 (talk) 21:53, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Taken care of.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:33, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How to make a list of contents?

edit

How do you make a list of contents and the top of the page because I am writing an article, and I don't know how. Please help. Iluvselenagomez1234 (talk) 22:29, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For each page with more than three headings, a table of contents (TOC) is automatically generated from the section headings. See WP:TOC. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:31, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2011_October_10&oldid=1085534553"