Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2017 February 9

< Wikipedia:Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< February 8 << Jan | February | Mar >> February 10 >
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.


February 9

edit

Referencing errors on The Magic Carpet Ride Tour

edit

Reference help requested. Please help me with an error on the page I created. I am new and do not understand what I did when citing references.. not sure how to correct it... Talia Jonet Thanks, Talia Jonet (talk) 01:24, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Although a submission for speedy deletion was administered, it does seem that this topic is notable for inclusion. However, in its present state: there are significant and numerous objections as to its state of adherence to WP quality for article standards. This requires editors assistance for major clean-up and reconstruction to remain plausible for inclusion. Maineartists (talk) 01:43, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please let me explain some of the history. The author created two copies of this draft. I tagged one of them for speedy deletion as A10, a copy of an existing article. I tagged the other for PROD because it was unreferenced. However, the first copy was deleted on the author's request, so that the A10 no longer applied. The author removed the PROD and is working on the article. More work is needed or the article may be nominated for Articles for Deletion. Have you now learned more than you wanted to know about deletion? Robert McClenon (talk) 06:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Is there something like a "what's trending on Wikipedia" page? I.e.: what pages are currently experiencing the greatest increase in page views; not necessarily the most page views. 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:542F:18A9:2EF1:9E7F (talk) 01:58, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. From that list, Wikitrends is promising, but the results seem to be dubious (e.g.: "Wikitrends - Most visited on English Wikipedia this week". tools.wmflabs.org.) 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:542F:18A9:2EF1:9E7F (talk) 04:01, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

requesting an article

edit

hi,

i tried to follow the guidelines for requesting a page, and i found myself looping without clarity. i would love it if someone could just make that request instead of me. i don't have any particular information about the topic, i just think it's important.

the article would be about "showing up for racial justice", and there is a website for this organization that you can find here: http://www.showingupforracialjustice.org/

i would imagine it would be in the same category as black lives matter or other organizations, and i can't figure out how to find out.

i hope this is enough. Mikinvc (talk) 03:47, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mikinvc, as you might know, articles have to meet certain standards to be included in Wikipedia. The organization you mentioned can be found in numerous listings in a google search, but those listings do not by themselves automatically demonstrate SURJ's "notability," which is the threshhold defined by Wikipedia for inclusion in this encyclopedia. Although the organization may be somewhat analogous to Black Lives Matter, it has not gained anywhere near the same amount of attention, which can explain why no WP article has been written yet. You could make a request that an article be written in the area designed for requests, but such a request might well languish without action among thousands of other requests. If the organization becomes truly notable due to greater coverage in a sufficient number of reliable independent sources, then it would become eligible for its own standalone article. At that point you might even want to try writing an initial version yourself, but only after you spend a little time reading wp:Your First Article. DonFB (talk) 06:26, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Corruption, embezzlement, plutocracy and kleptocracy in the Wikimedia Foundation

edit

I have information about severe corrupt practices within the WikiMedia Foundation. To whom may I whistleblow this information too? --CrustGapp (talk) 08:31, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Unless you have serious reasons to believe that the WMF has powerful allies in government that will cover up for them (in which case registering an account and posting on a site they control is not a bright idea), call the police. Otherwise, the press. Either will listen to you with the attention you deserve. TigraanClick here to contact me 11:43, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you aware that there is a highly inflamatory racial epithet that appears when google Barack Obama?

edit

Please check above the photo and fix this quickly. It appears to be a problem with google snippets. [1]

  1. ^ https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama
The vandalism was quickly reverted. We cannot control what Google does, but it usually catches up very quickly. Dbfirs 11:02, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Faulty BannerFetridge (talk) 10:38, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

edit

Hello - my name is Robin Lawrie, I am an illustrator/author who has a page on your site. A banner has appeared saying that the info on this page needs verification. The verification can be had via Google. If any doubt arises in your or the reader's mind as to whether the entries regarding my career are true they can be checked by all the entries there. Pretty well every book I have ever illustrated and/or written can be found this way and I will be credited as the illustrator and/or author. This banner may be affecting my income and my new venture which is to teach illustration. I have tried to remove this banner myself through your help pages but have found them far too complex and that they do not relate to any of the menus on the page. Could you please remove this banner and inform me when you do so. I appreciate all gthe good work you do and the tremendous facility you offer, but this is a problem for me.

Thanks

Robin Lawrie Fetridge (talk) 10:38, 9 February 2017 (UTC)https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new#[reply]

"Google" is not a magic word that fixes everything, just as a lack of professionally published mainstream academic or journalistic sources to verify that you are notable. Wikipedia is not here for you to promote your career on. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:44, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

archiviing my page

edit

Is someone who can help me at archiving of my page? I have a system which depend on one bot archiving my talk page. But it happend after concrete time. Is this possible that bot archiving my page when my talk page is exceeding boundery of 75 K bytes? Dawid2009 (talk) 10:56, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dawid2009: You say algo = old(100d) in [1]. This means archiving after 100 days. It doesn't look like User:MiszaBot/config can archive automatically when the size exceeds a boundary but you can reduce 100d to archive faster. Another archiving bot has a maxkeepbytes parameter at User:ClueBot III#Optional parameters. I see you manually archived to User talk:Dawid2009/Archive3. I have moved it to User talk:Dawid2009/Archive 3 with a space so the archiving bot and the archive box at top of User talk:Dawid2009 can find the archive. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:12, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Profile

edit

how to create a Wikipedia profile — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abiud Mandere (talk • contribs) 12:37, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WRONG INFO / HATERED.

edit

HI I WAS READING PAKISTAN-INDIA 1971 WAR And It Looks Like Is So One Sided Can I ask Why Is that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.55.101.13 (talk) 13:35, 9 February 2017 (UTC) [reply]

I think you are talking about the article, Indo-Pakistani War of 1971. You will need to express exactly what your concerns are, because what you asked here is very vague. The best place to ask the questions is on the article talk page. If you are talking about the article I linked then the place to do it is on Talk:Indo-Pakistani War of 1971. Also, when you do it, you need to ask nicely and not accuse editors of hatred or anything else. - GB fan 13:51, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
edit

At [ https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/feb/08/wikipedia-bans-daily-mail-as-unreliable-source-for-website ] The Guardian links to [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Daily_Mail_RfC ].

Is there a way to make it so that the link in the Guardian will still go to the RfC after it bgets archived and the URL changes? --Guy Macon (talk) 13:38, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • A WP:PERMALINK such as this can be used, but that's up to The Guardian to change it.
If you are asking Wikipedia-side, probably not, or at least not easily - URLs in the form http(s)://foo.bar/page#anchor are HTML standard for "go to page page on domain foo.bar, and reach the HTML anchor anchor". TigraanClick here to contact me 13:59, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My answer implied "...so redirecting http(s)://foo.bar/page1#anchor to http(s)://foo.bar/page2 would be feasible from the server side but ugly", but actually I am not even sure that the server knows that the browser was ordered to reach the anchor. Maybe it all happens client-side, in which case there is absolutely no way at all. TigraanClick here to contact me 14:02, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • A shortcut is a great idea. That being said, I am very disappointed to find out that despite millions and millions of dollars spent on software development[2] we don't have a way to redirect a link from a major newspaper when we archive an RfC. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:21, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Guy Macon: If I am to believe [3], Wikipedia servers do not receive the #Daily_Mail_RfC part of the request. No amount of programmer time will change that, so the solutions are either (1) ask TG to change their link, (2) redirect the whole RS/N to the Daily Mail RfC, (3) use the HTTP referer to redirect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard to an archived version for requests coming from the Guardian page. Option (3) is unreliable (some clients don't send or fake the referer field), breaks core internet principles (it's called uniform resource locator for a reason), and essentially shifts onto Wikimedia the burden of updating the Guardian's links via convoluted redirection shenanigans.
I am sure you could get a much more detailed explanation at WP:RD/C or WP:VPT if you so ask, but computers are not mind-readers and the WMF does not set internet standards yet. TigraanClick here to contact me 09:00, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm. RFC 2396[4] does say:
"When a URI reference is used to perform a retrieval action on the identified resource, the optional fragment identifier, separated from the URI by a crosshatch ("#") character, consists of additional reference information to be interpreted by the user agent after the retrieval action has been successfully completed." (Section 4.1).
But http://www.w3.org/TR/cuap#uri says:
"4. URI handling
Resources are located on the Web using Uniform Resources Identifiers [ RFC2396 ]. This section discusses how user agents should handle URIs.
4.1 Handle the fragment identifier of a URI when the HTTP request is redirected.
When a resource (URI1) has moved, an HTTP redirect can indicate its new location (URI2).
If URI1 has a fragment identifier #frag, then the new target that the user agent should be trying to reach would be URI2#frag. If URI2 already has a fragment identifier, then #frag must not be appended and the new target is URI2.
Wrong: Most current user agents do implement HTTP redirects but do not append the fragment identifier to the new URI, which generally confuses the user because they end up with the wrong resource.
References:
HTTP redirects are described in section 10.3 of the HTTP/1.1 specification [ RFC2616 ].
The required behavior is described in detail in "Handling of fragment identifiers in redirected URLs" [ RURL ].
The term "Persistent Uniform Resource Locator (PURL)" designates a URL (a special case of a URI) that points to another one through an HTTP redirect. For more information, refer to "Persistent Uniform Resource Locators" [ PURL ].
Example:
Suppose that a user requests the resource at http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-ruby/#changes and the server redirects the user agent to http://www.w3.org/TR/ruby/. Before fetching that latter URI, the browser should append the fragment identifier #changes to it: http://www.w3.org/TR/ruby/#changes."
Looking into this further, I found the IEInternals blog post[5] and this set of tests.[6] Another, more extensive and updated set of tests is here:[7]
(Also see Fragment identifier, Persistent uniform resource locator, draft-bos-http-redirect-0[8] (a draft that expired in 2000, but it appears to be the de-facto standard behavior for modern web browsers), and this MSDN blog post.[9])
So you can redirect and still retain the fragment identifier, because that's what modern browsers do. Alas, this still leaves us with a huge problem; we don't just want to redirect. We want to redirect only if the fragment identifier is "...#Daily_Mail_RfC". Offhand, I don't see a way to do that. --Guy Macon (talk) 11:42, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

logotypes

edit
 
The picture used in for instance the Norwegian wikipedia (no:Natur & Kultur) is rather untelling—and nothing I would use.

As I mended a red link and created the stub Natur & Kultur, I pondered if the (Swedish) publisher's logotype ought to be used as illustration. I'm sure this is a FAQ, but searching for the answer, I found only references to the use of Wikipedia's trademark.
/Johan M. Olofsson (talk) 14:29, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Johan M. Olofsson: see WP:LOGO – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:49, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Johan M. Olofsson I will let another editor address the multiple issues regarding the article itself and simply focus on your question. When you say: "illustration" -- do you mean as an image? If so, it makes for a better article to place the image in an infobox with the essential information relative to the organization. Example: NFL Here is the template for publishers: Infobox Publisher Best. Maineartists (talk) 14:57, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I mean the logotype.
/Johan M. Olofsson (talk) 15:20, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Well, you can model your page after another well known publisher: Simon & Schuster and note that their "logo" is in the infobox; while their place of business is pictured below under History and Corporate Ownership. Best. Maineartists (talk) 16:04, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

how to centre a photo in a template

edit

Hello

I am editing this page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helensburgh

I have put a new photo in the template at the start of the article, but the photo (with its caption) appear at the side of the teplate rather than in the middle. How can it be centred? Thank you!Stewartnbl (talk) 15:33, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it is a good idea to replace the former static image, which is meant for a skyline or defining local landmark. Personally, I prefer the picture of Lady Helen Colquhoun (née Sutherland) after whom the town of Helensburgh is named not in the infobox but next to the text in the article. Lotje (talk) 16:01, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Stewartnbl. Assuming I understand what it was you were trying to do, I think I fixed it. If not, feel free to ping me and we can give it another go. TimothyJosephWood 16:07, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Putting English article into Dutch Wikipedia

edit

Hello friends. I've had a suggestion to put a page I published, Leo Passage onto the Dutch-language Wikipedia (nl.wikipedia.org). I have no idea how to go about this—do I submit it, translated, to the Dutch site? Is there a shortcut? Thanks in advance. Chicagoese (talk) 15:58, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Chicagoese. The various language Wikipedias operate more-or-less as separate entities, with some exceptions. But in a nutshell, you would need to go to nl.wiki and create an article in Dutch, just like you came to en.wiki and did the same in English. Multiple language versions of articles are ideally linked together in the side bar, but that is for the most part, the extent of their official connection. TimothyJosephWood 15:56, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thank you! Chicagoese (talk) 15:58, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant advice is at WP:Translate us. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:10, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

LINDA REGAN

edit

Linda Regan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I am Linda Regan and I wish you to remove my birthdate from my page please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frebbins (talk • contribs) 16:41, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've converted it to year only as per the guide in WP:DOB - X201 (talk) 17:12, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A New Company Profile

edit

I am very new with this. Where do I start to create a company's Wikipedia page? Is there a template I can fill out and then submit. To be candid, I'm in over my head in doing this.

Spencer Maus - — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpencerConnect (talk • contribs) 17:01, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please, read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Ruslik_Zero 18:04, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Spencer. Creating a Wikipedia page is not only time consuming but requires a great deal of adherence to the requirements and guidelines set forth here on WP. If you are new to WP and unfamiliar with how things work, it may be best that you check out this page: Request an Article and see if the article you wish to have created is: 1) Not already on Wikipedia - and - 2) notable enough for inclusion on WP: [WP:N]. Hope this helps a little. Good luck! Maineartists (talk) 18:02, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Spencer. I'm afraid that the simple answer is that you don't, because Wikipedia does not contain "profiles", or anything else that you might find in a business directory or advertising medium, because promotion of any kind is forbidden in Wikipedia.
It is possible that Wikipedia could have an article about the company. But you should understand that Wikipedia has essentially no interest in what the company says about itself, and especially no interest in what the company wants to say about itself: it is only interested in what people have no connection with the company have published about it, in reliable places. If there is enough such independent material, then the company is what we call notable, and there could be an article. As Ruslik0 has indicated, you are discouraged from writing such an article, because your conflict of interest may make it hard for you to write sufficiently neutrally; and once the article is written, you would have no control over the contents. --ColinFine (talk) 18:46, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Empty Citation

edit

I included the Congressional Record used by Loewen in his book that is citation #1. It is in the Talk section on Libonati's testimony. Don't know how to make it real under "empty citation" It is my first time

Jim H jhonnpeople — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhonnpeople (talk • contribs) 17:06, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jhonnpeople. I've studied the references and I'm trying to figure out exactly what it is that you are trying to do with your second citing. The template is an incorrect usage since it is for a book reference; however, since there are no specifics for within the template, it is showing up as "empty". Could you perhaps explain what you are trying to accomplish with this second reference? I do see fragments of book details such as page numbers 6-7, but not much more. Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 18:27, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
edit

IM LOOKING FOR AN OLD MOVIE THE STORY LINE WAS ONE WOMEN SEES AN OLD FRIEND IN A LINE UP ON THE STREET AND BECOMES FRIENDS WITH HER ONLY TO TRAP HER INTO KILLING THEIR HUSBANDS. SIMILAR PLOT AS DOUBLE CROSSED ONLY MADE MUCH BEFORE THIS MOVIE. MOVIE PLOT ONE HUSBAND IS RICH THE OTHER IS ABUSED BY HER HUSBAND. THE WOMEN ABUSED BY HUSBAND LIVED NEAR A CONSTRUCTION SITE. DO YOU KNOW THE NAME OF THIS MOVIE? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.210.47.14 (talk) 18:22, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please try your question here: Reference Desk Entertainment as this is the Help Desk. Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 18:33, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's an old trope so you can also try if it's listed at http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StrangersOnATrainPlotMurder. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:36, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Struggling to add a picture?

edit

Hi,

I am struggling to add a picture?

Can someone insert below picture for me.

 
Commandant Hans Lotter in Graaff-Reinet prison. Blood Spatter can be seen on his shirt.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivanlotter (talk • contribs) 18:47, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ivanlotter. I'm guessing you want to add it to the infobox in Johannes Lötter? If you look at the documentation for {{infobox military person}}, you'll see that (like many infoboxes, but unfortunately not all of them) the image must be given as a bare filename, not a Wikilink. So image= 1875-1901 Johannes Cornelius Lötter.jpg should do it. --ColinFine (talk) 19:16, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

forgot to list the death of herb oscar anderson

edit

forgot to list the death of herb oscar anderson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.246.200.50 (talk) 23:16, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We don't have an article on Herb Oscar Anderson or even a Herb Anderson. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:21, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2017_February_9&oldid=1065763426"