Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2018 May 11

< Wikipedia:Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< May 10 << Apr | May | Jun >> May 12 >
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.


May 11

edit

Shared IP address

edit

I'm sorry, but I have shared IP address and currently can make an account, it says I will be blocked, but please don't block this IP address, also it said I did vandalism on sandbox, but sandbox is for experimenting I said sorry even thought I didn't do it, please don't block this IP address, thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.94.52.14 (talk) 00:07, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So create an account and then you don't need to worry about what other users are doing. RudolfRed (talk) 00:12, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, creating an account will solve that problem, see the link for more details and instructions. Richard0612 13:22, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rosamund Lupton

edit

Could the "warning" at the top of this page be removed now - I have added three refs, so I have removed it. Also, I have tried to make the picture smaller on Christopher Hussey (died 1686) but failed. Are you able to make it smaller please? Sorry to trouble you. Thanks110.147.194.210 (talk) 01:36, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Policy on image sizing says “In general, do not define the size of an image unless there is a good reason to do so” and I’m not really seeing one here, the image looks fine to me. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:01, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on XYZ notifications

edit

Hi, I keep getting messages on my talk page asking to comment on XYZ talk page. I remember signing up for this years ago, but I don't want to get these notifications anymore. I have attempted to "unsubscribe" numerous times by following (what I think) are the directions, but it's confusing, and keeps happening. I think this is probably my fault...not doing something correctly...but can anyone offer assistance? Ditch ∝ 02:06, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are multiple lists and it looks like you signed up for quite a few of them. I think i got them all so you should stop getting those notifications. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:21, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You are a kind person and I appreciate your assistance very much. Have a great day! Ditch ∝ 02:15, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Convert once

edit

How to convert once from 2018-05-11 to May 11, 2018 as hundreds of similar date thing on a wiki page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wifik3r8bLk2Zr (talk • contribs) 02:36, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Along with the links that Arch dude provided you will want to read the info at MOS:DATETIES. Also the template that Eagleash mentioned is at the top of most articles it is can be at the bottom as that is where it was often placed back in 2005 through (roughly) 2007. MarnetteD|Talk 04:33, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I need to remove a conflict of interest

edit

I accidentally created a conflict of interest for the page William Forsche. It was merely an accident, I just want to get the conflict of interest removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ElmStreetsLastBrat (talk • contribs) 04:23, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I’m afraid I can’t quite figure out what it is you are talking about. Are you saying you have some connection to the subject of that article? Beeblebrox (talk) 05:58, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Page move resulting in break in archiving

edit

Lists of state leaders was moved to Lists of state leaders by age on January 25, 2016 with this edit. However the archive Talk:Lists of state leaders/Archive 1 was not moved. and nothing has been archived since the page move. I've updated the archive bot to now point to Talk:Lists of state leaders by age/Archive % but the older archive needs to be moved as well. Also for some reason the editor that made the page move also removed the redirect from the old page [1]. Can someone fix there issues? Cheers, DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 05:47, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Partly done. I moved the archive page, but it appears the original page was turned into a dab page so it should have its own talk page. Beeblebrox (talk) 06:04, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Access to scientific journals

edit

Is it possible to get access to scientific journals via Wikipedia? I'm writing regularly on Indian history & DNA-research, but I've lost the private access that I had to scientific journals. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:56, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I'll take a closer look there. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:07, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks from me too, this is an ongoing problem for me for one-off searches. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 01:15, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Hofstetter - German Page

edit

Hi,

I am writing, representing the conductor Michael Hofstetter in regards to the entry on his German page

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hofstetter

It recently under awards a new piece was added claiming something reported by the Giessener Allgemeine newspaper

This is not true and is currently being dealt with lawyers. Michael Hofstetter is within his legal right to ask for this to be removed. This is not added value information about himself and his work and simply gossips from small town newspapers and fake news.

Can you help us through the process of getting this removed. As you can imagine this ordeal has caused get stress and anxiety to Prof Hofstetter and his family

With best wishes Mauro — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:CB:C3CF:849:B957:7DB3:71E6:4BCB (talk) 08:08, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This help desk is for the English Wikipedia. Questions regarding the German Wikipedia need to be dealt with there, rather than here. Each Wikipedia will have processes for dealing with points raised by editors who have a conflict of interest; you may find the advice at de:Wikipedia:Interessenkonflikt useful. I don't know about the rules regarding legal threats on the German Wikipedia, but here on the English Wikipedia you would not be permitted to edit after a legal threat has been made and not withdrawn. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:24, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a little box

edit

Virginia statistical areas has a huge table (standard for this class of articles) listing each of the state's cities and counties, providing its 2010 census population, and noting which statistical area under which it falls, if any. One of the jurisdictions in the table, the city of Bedford, ceased to exist in 2013; obviously I mustn't remove it, since it existed in 2010, but I don't want to leave it there as if it still exists (makes us look outdated), so I was planning to add a footnote. However, if I place a simple piece of text at the bottom, it's going to be really hard to see, given the size of the table; I'd therefore like to put it in some sort of little box, but I can't find a template to do this. Do we have some way to create a little text-containing box, maybe the size of a userbox? {{Box}} redirects to {{Divbox}}, which doesn't work in mainspace. I previewed the implementation of {{Divbox}} code, and the code of a parent template, but nothing appeared. Nyttend (talk) 11:23, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If WP:REFGROUP makes a footnote link at Bedford then I don't think the footnote needs to be so visible. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:38, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How do I make my own userboxes?

edit

How to make my own userboxes?Kpgjhpjm (talk) 13:31, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest taking a look here for some guidance on the process and content, and then at this section on the same page for technical details regarding how to actually create the templates. Richard0612 14:03, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am the subject of a wikipedia article

edit

I have a fan who adds to my page, but now there is a warning that the point of view is not neutral. How can I fix this please? Thank you so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Talamasca67 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Correction needed

edit

I wanted to remind the writer of this article that the current General Khalif is not Serigne Akhmadou Bamba's son but His grandson. Thank you for editing the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.235.221.87 (talk) 19:05, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Which article would this refer to? DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:15, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Lua error in Module:Authority_control at line 397: Tried to read nil global createRow."

edit

For some reason I see the text "Lua error in Module:Authority_control at line 397: Tried to read nil global createRow." in the end of some articles, like John Savage, 2nd Earl Rivers and Joshua Oldfield. I might think something went wrong with the coding. Best regards,Jeff5102 (talk) 19:45, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Already fixed; see User talk:Reedy. You might need to refresh the page if it's still showing up for you. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:04, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Wikiversity user wants to put a link to his Wikiversity project in a new Wikipedia page and introduce the project in that page

edit

A Wikiversity user wants to put a link to his Wikiversity project in a new Wikipedia page and introduce the project in that page

Must this user take a Wikipedia username? He already has a Wikiversity username. Must he apply a Wikipedia sandbox or can he just use the Wikiversity sandbox? He creates the page by using the name of the Wikiversity project in a Wikipedia search box. Can he then store the content that was prepared in the sandbox into the new page? Will a reference to an existing Wikiversity project be accepted by the Wikipedia mentors? The Project is [1] Sincerely Yours, Hans van Leunen --HansVanLeunen (talk) 21:38, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@HansVanLeunen: I think this falls under WP:NOT and WP:OR and is not suitable for a Wikipedia article. RudolfRed (talk) 21:57, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@RudolfRed: This would imply that Wikipedia does not recognize Wikiversity as a trusted publication resource for original research. See: [2]

--HansVanLeunen (talk) 22:47, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

HansVanLeunen: Wikipedia does not publish original research. What is the subject of the proposed Wikipedia article? Maproom (talk) 22:55, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Even if Wikipedia recognized Wikiversity as a reliable source, this would still be unacceptable to two reasons. First, the research is not notable: it has not been the subject of multiple articles in reliable sources (WP:NOTABLE), so no article should exist for it. Second, even if an article were warranted, the researcher should not write it, due to conflict of interest (WP:COI). -Arch dude (talk) 23:05, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, the page Wikiversity:Original_research cited says that such research could be considered reliable after it has gone through peer review. I see no indication that this particular theory has done so as yet. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:14, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@DESiegel: Do examples exist of Wikiversity projects that went through peer review? How was that achieved? Does a service exist that does it? I apply a ResearchGate project to invite critics. See: [3] The Wikiversity Hilbert Book Model Project is quite large and covers several chapters and quite new science. My retirement budget cannot afford a significant revision fee and the review process cannot cope with regular revisions of the project. The Hilbert Book Model Project is an ongoing project that started in 2011. The best way that I found to have this dynamic material checked regularly is via the ResearchGate project.
--HansVanLeunen (talk) 06:17, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't know, HansVanLeunen. I have never been involved in any Wikiversity project. I would tend to doubt that ResearchGate is providing true peer review by qualified and credentialed experts in the subject. But I could be mistaken about that. You might want to look at https://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Research_guidelines/En#Review_process where both internal and external reviews are described. This is rather out of scope for the Wikipedia help desk. All that I can say is that without independent published reliable sources, this is not suitable for a Wikipedia article. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 12:37, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again: even if this were the most rigorous research ever published, and even if it were peer-reviewed by the most respected memebers fo the most relevant research community, all rigorously atteaded in some way, it still will not be suitable for a Wikipedia article until the research becomes the subject of articles in multiple reliable sources, and the researcher should not write the Wikipedia article. -Arch dude (talk) 14:22, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@DESiegel: I understand that I must not myself write a Wikipedia page on a Wikiversity project that I initiated myself. I hope to have made my point clear that the peer review process is in conflict with Wikiversity projects, which provide dynamic original research content that is regularly revised and extended. The peer review process is too slow, too expensive and probably too biased to cope with these dynamic conditions. The best alternative to the sticky peer review process is an ongoing discussion of the project by critical followers. The discuss service of wiki media does not offer this service. I think it is not meant for that purpose. I found a ResearchGate process the best alternative that exists today. If Wikiversity will keep supporting dynamic projects that offer original research, then they must enable a replacement for the sticky peer review process or they must accept the solution that is offered by a ResearchGate project. Maybe a better-organized follower group can solve the situation.--HansVanLeunen (talk) 16:24, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Hilbert_Book_Model_Project
  2. ^ https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Original_research
  3. ^ https://www.researchgate.net/project/The-Hilbert-Book-Model-Project

A potential issue with wikitable headers/footers?

edit

I've recently noticed an issue crop up in articles that I've been editing or reading, in which unsortable column headers and footers (even those that have been "colspanned") have their text shifted to the left to leave some space, as if for a pair of sorting arrows, as in sortable column headers. For example:

class="wikitable sortable"
header 1 header 2
header 3 header 4 header 5 header 6
content 1 content 2 content 3 content 4
content 5 content 6 content 7 content 8
footer 1 footer 2 footer 3
footer 4

The text for headers 1, 2, 4 and 5 and for footers 1, 2, 3 and 4 seem to be shifted leftwards, which then unduly enlarges the table. This problem does not seem to persist for non-sortable tables as a whole, resulting in a slimmer table. Compare:

class="wikitable"
header 1 header 2
header 3 header 4 header 5 header 6
content 1 content 2 content 3 content 4
content 5 content 6 content 7 content 8
footer 1 footer 2 footer 3
footer 4

This problem seems to be rather new. Is this part of a new feature to be implemented across MediaWiki or is this simply something that has to be fixed? Thanks. RAVENPVFF | talk ~ 23:43, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Something's wrong with 'unsortable' column headers. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:55, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter: Thanks. RAVENPVFF | talk ~ 06:39, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

drugbox template "half-life"

edit

This is a bit technical & specialized, I'm afraid. I hope an editor experienced in this area can help.

I need help using or expanding the drugbox template.

On the page I want to edit, "Methocarbamol", the drugbox displays "Biological half-life". However, in editing mode, the parameter is called "elimination_half-life". This is confusing as the elimination and biological half-life may be construed differently (see below). The figure given for the half-life and referenced is indeed the elimination half-life, or more explicitly the serum half-life, as opposed to the protein-bound or effective half-life. For this article, I need to know how to change the text displayed to "elimination half-life" or something more explicit.

I am further concerned about the confusion of terms affecting all WP drug articles. WP itself is consistent: The definition of Biological half-life in the eponymous article is clear and is the same as the serum or elimination half-life. This also agrees with a Johns Hopkins presentation on Toxicology: Elimination (http://ocw.jhsph.edu/courses/publichealthtoxicology/PDFs/Lecture1_Trush.pdf) But "biological half-life" may also be construed as "effective half-life" (which for some drugs can be very different); e.g. Dictionary.com says "...biological half-life. Pharmacology. the time required for the activity of a substance taken into the body to lose one half its initial effectiveness". This could result in confusion, particularly for the lay person (I myself was confused). The best overall solution IMO would be to revert to the more explicit term "elimination half-life", and add the effective half-life where data is available. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 23:59, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked for assistance at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine#Help desk question may need help from someone with medical expertise. --Guy Macon (talk) 00:49, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2018_May_11&oldid=842642078"