Help desk
< February 27	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	March 1 >

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 28

Find me some vandalism, please?

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 04:25, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After reading Students' union, I observed that the {{pt}} in the final external link displayed as

(Portuguese

So cool)

This text isn't in {{pt}} or in {{Languageicon}}, upon which it's based, or in {{ISO 639 name}}, upon which Languageicon is based. It's also not in the coding of the article, so it's plainly in the template somewhere. Can someone find where this vandalism has occurred and revert it? Since someone has found a way to vandalise a fully-protected template, if you find the vandalism, please tell me and I'll protect the vandalised template. Nyttend (talk) 23:58, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind: I've found it. I failed to check {{ISO 639 name pt}} before posting this request. Nyttend (talk) 00:00, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading oggs

Hello. I have a video clip in Windows Media Player form (wav. I think). I tried to upload it, but Commons only accepts ogg. files. How do I convert it to ogg? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 00:59, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have a .wav file as those are strictly audio files. More likely you have a .wmv or .asf file. There are programs you can download to convert files to ogg (try Googling it) but I prefer using the website media-convert.com. If you can stand all the ads it does the job quickly and accepts most formats. Xenon54 / talk / 02:22, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Map of the Canton Railroad Baltimore Md

Hello. All I want to know is how can I get a copy of the map of the Canton Railroad Baltimore MD? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Banjo1 (talk • contribs) 01:30, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our roughly three million articles, and thought that we were directly affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is a help desk for asking questions related to using the encyclopedia. Thus, we have no inside track on the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the left hand side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. Xenon54 / talk / 02:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

youtube video content as a citation

I linked to a youtube video as a citation for an article and a bot removed the link. I wasn't sure if the references video would work so I used a direct link. Would the references feature have been proper?--69.248.225.198 (talk) 01:56, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Different Bots work differently but youtube is not a relieable source Mlpearc (talk) 02:01, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When possible it's a good idea to use the proper references format; try to use {{cite video}} or {{cite web}}, and if you still have issues, come back here and we'll try to help you.

Links to YouTube and other video sharing sites are not explicitly prohibited, and certainly videos are permissible as sources. However, most YouTube videos that are of interest to Wikipedians are copyright violations, and Wikipedia prohibits linking to copyright violations, so in effect this prevents most links to YouTube. Before linking you should pause to consider whether the video you want to link to is a copyright violation and whether you can substitute a text source. You might also want to consult those on the reliable sources noticeboard to determine whether the video would be considered an appropriate reliable source. Xenon54 / talk / 02:17, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trojan

Resolved

– Link has checked okay, issue is on the user's end. --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 04:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Entry "Torchwood", Footnote 8, is supposed to link to an article in the Hollywood Reporter. Instead it links to a trojan that pretends to be Windows Security telling you that you have a trojan, please download these .exe files. How can this be fixed?76.92.189.227 (talk) 04:33, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was not able to recreate this problem. Footnote 8 on Torchwood links to an article for me... --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 05:37, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Works just fine from here as well. Dismas|^(talk) 06:35, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. Sounds as if your browser has been compromised. --ColinFine (talk) 11:41, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet template question

What is the policy on sockpuppet templates for IP addresses? I see that, for the most part, IPs are only listed as "suspected" sockpuppets, not "confirmed" sockpuppets. Is that a rule? What about an IP address that has never been used by anyone except a specific user? In my opinion, it is a confirmed sockpuppet until someone other than that particular user happens to use the IP address. -- kainaw ™ 04:36, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Red Links/Archives

I have seen someone post website(s) about where to check to see if something existed at a certain time from web archives. Does anyone know a site where I can find archived websites? I have tried to google it and most sites deal with government, not public sites. Thanks Brinkley32 (talk) 06:22, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This help desk is for questions about how to edit Wikipedia. General knowledge questions should go on the reference desk. That being said, Google for the "way back machine" (I think it's waybackmachine.com but I'm not sure). That's one archive site I know of. Dismas|^(talk) 06:34, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finding the most active editors on an article

Resolved

– Multiple times! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:13, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a tool available to list all the editors (or the top xx editors) for an article sorted by number of edits?

Something like:

Editor-1 (15 edits)
Editor-2 (10 edits)
Editor-3 (3 edits)

I'm asking because when I propose an article for deletion or take one to AfD, if it's got a long history (especially a long recent history), then it would be useful to see which editors I should let know!

Thanks -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 08:25, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This? (Just type in the article name.) AlexiusHoratius 08:29, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS- Check "group by user". AlexiusHoratius 08:33, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) here. (That's for Wii Sports). I stumbled across it the other day, it's awesome- English a bit broken, but it does the job. :) SS✞^(Kay) 08:31, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can also just go to the page's history and click on the Revision history statistics located at the top of the page. Calmer Waters 08:42, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, all - I knew it was available, but for the life of me I couldn't think of it! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:13, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do I re-direct

How do I create or change a re-direct? For example, currently Kiddushin (bethrothal) re-directs to the Talmudic volume of that name. Since, however, there is now a topic for Jewish Bethrothal, I would like to redirect to it, and put a note as to the other link. P.S. I did not create the topic.

Also, how do you change an article title? It would seem non-controversial that a topic about Jewish Bethrothal should be called that. I would put a note on the talk page, but no-one answers my notes there.Mzk1 (talk) 11:28, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You edit a redirection just the same as another page, but it's a bit harder to get to it: pick it, and then on the destination page, pick the "Redirected from" link. That takes you to the redirection itself, and you can edit it like any other page. If there are now two articles to which it might point, you should probably change it to a disambiguation page; or if you think that one topic is much more likely to be looked for than the other, direct it to there, and put a hatnote at the top of each article.

You change an article title simply by moving the article (which will leave an automatic redirect behind). Note that "Jewish Betrothal" is not a suitable name for a page: it should be "Jewish betrothal" according to WP:MOS (but neither of these seem to exist at present). --ColinFine (talk) 11:52, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, my mistake, it's called erusin. So do I write Erusin (Jewish betrothal), or Erusin (jewish betrothal)?Mzk1 (talk) 20:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish should always be capitalised, like English, American etc so IMHO Erusin (Jewish betrothal) would be correct. – ukexpat (talk) 21:17, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will think on this more, perhaps.Mzk1 (talk) 21:53, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eukarya yet again

Resolved

– This isn't the correct forum. TN X Man 17:02, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the IP who has been adding "Eukarya" to taxoboxes has resurfaced as a registered user. He is called The Mysterious El Willstro (talk · contribs) or something like that. Can you please block him? It is really annoying. 78.150.145.206 (talk) 11:43, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why should he be blocked? This is a content dispute (which seems to have petered out without resolution at Talk:Reptile, but may have continued somewhere else)· Some editors argue that the domain is as much part of the classification as the kingdom; others don't. --ColinFine (talk) 11:56, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Domains are not required in infoboxes. 78.150.145.206 (talk) 11:59, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, a content dispute. I happen to disagree with you. --ColinFine (talk) 12:06, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Read the taxobox guidelines. 78.150.145.206 (talk) 12:12, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And many of the editors do not feel that an overly strict adherence to the taxobox guidelines is appropriate justification for systematically turning Eukarya into an orphan article.--Mr Fink (talk) 15:22, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not making it orphaned. The taxobox guidelines do not include Eukarya. And the Nomelacature Codes do not mention Eukarya. LOLWUT 86.172.62.88 (talk) 16:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again, this isn't the correct forum for this discussion. Please follow the guidelines set out at WP:DR. TN X Man 17:02, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't do that. Anyway, there's also other users as well. 86.172.62.88 (talk) 17:04, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfDs and Speedy Deletions

Resolved

– --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 04:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've been trying to get involved with some AfDs recently, and have come across a couple where I believe the article should be speedily deleted, (eg: ~~Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jaff Decker~~). How am I supposed to deal with this? Do I simply !vote delete, tag it for a speedy, or !vote Speedy Delete and then notify an admin using one of the noticeboards? -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 12:42, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I mean eg: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fantasy 98.6 FM -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 12:45, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You would ivote the speedy deletion, e.g., *'''Speedy delete''' under A7. Article does not indicate any significance or importance of the subject.--~~~~ and then tag the page using {{db-corp}}. That being said, a decision at AfD if made on the merits has precedential value for G4 purposes, meaning if it is reposted with the same content it can be speedy deleted as a repost. If speedy deleted, G4 does not apply, so there's some value in not marking for speedy deletion. Copyright violations (G12) and attack page (G10) should be marked immediately though.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Thanks! -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 23:28, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wish list of images?

Is there a wish list of images that are suitable for use in Wikipedia? For example, the Polydrive page could do with a picture - if anyone has this in their garage, they could take a photograph and upload it. There must be hundreds of other examples. Norman21 (talk) 14:02, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Requested pictures. You can also add to the article's talk page {{reqphoto}}, which adds the article to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:57, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Warning templates

How do you add vandal warning templates for various levels? I know you can, I just forget how. 2J Bäkkvire Maestro ^{communications} _{accomplishments} 14:39, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Various warning templates are at WP:WARN. Be sure to substitute the template.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But I'm confused how you do the text where you say "this edit to article x". The ones you've given me are generic. 2J Bäkkvire Maestro ^{communications} _{accomplishments} 15:14, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All you need to do is add the article name as the first parameter of the template. So for example:

{{uw-test1}}

gives:

Welcome and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. Thank you.

and:

{{uw-test1|Main Page}}

gives:

Welcome and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page Main Page worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. Thank you.

Hope this helps. Set Sail For The Seven Seas 236° 25' 30" NET 15:45, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) If you click on the templates you will see that there is documentation on the template page, giving parameters you can add to tailor the template. For example, {{uw-vandalism2}} allows you to add the name of the article that was vandalized, in the form {{subst:uw-vandalism2|name of article}}. Most of these templates do not provide a parameter for the URL of the diff of the vandalism that is provided sometimes by bots when they revert, and I think Twinkle vandalism warnings also provide this. It's not really necessary.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:47, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect help

Resolved

– Withdrawn by user. --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 04:48, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I built the page La journée de la jupe and only just discovered that there was already a (better) article under the English title Skirt Day. I deleted my article but want to easily redirect all the links I had already created. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yinzland (talk • contribs) 19:01, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yinzland (talk • contribs) 19:04, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Displaying notes as footnotes when a Wikipedia article is put into a .pdf file?

Does any helpful and brainy individual know how to do this? Is it possible to download a .pdf file of a Wikipedia page (or even to have the Wikipedia page displayed on screen) so that references in the text appear at the bottom of each page, rather than collected as endnotes? Word can do it, so there must be a way for Wikipedia to do it, right? Wik idea 19:03, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Italics problem

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 15:02, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I just edited the format of Billy Chapin#The Night of the Hunter, but I can't get rid of the italics in sentence 3. Any ideas? Thanks. Piscator47 (talk) 20:11, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Redrose64 (talk) 20:16, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

redirect is wrong

The Desert Valley Star is redirected to The American Free Journal. It should not be redirected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.198.114.170 (talk) 21:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably best mentioned at Talk:American Free Journal since it seems that an article merge is in progress. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:00, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ALT

In a recent peer review it was recommended on English words first attested in Chaucer: The image also needs alt text for the visually impaired - see WP:ALT. Is there any way possible that reference #1 from WikiSource of the text wording (old and modern side-by-side) of the Balade to Rosemounde manuscript can be put in the white space above the English words first attested in Chaucer#Etymology and the lead of English words first attested in Chaucer? Otherwise can the image itself be made a "HOTLINK" to the Wikisource? Or is there still another better method for the visually impaired? IF any of the above works, can someone help me as I am technically not that good on things like this. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:16, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since image and TOC are being moved by other editors, I think bottom line is: is there still another better method for the visually impaired I can use? --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:43, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alt text is primarily to feed screen-reading software. Secondarily, if a user's browser cannot handle images (or has images turned off), the alt text appears in place of the image concerned, and the page layout will be vastly different. Either way, it doesn't get used to fill whitespace. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:54, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Making Templates

Resolved

– Redrose64 (talk) 18:38, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am not familiar on how to make templates. I recently wrote Chaucer coming in contact with Petrarch or Boccaccio. In the article you can see I have several sources for each statement. The reason I did this is because I believe the statements will be challanged and I have 3 - 12 sources for each statement. However I would like to combine these multiple references to just one reference per sentence as in a template, as recommended I do. Could someone develop such a template for me that will handle up to 12 references with the associated text I would like to include (as is already done in the article). IF the first line Geoffrey Chaucer coming in contact with Petrarch or Boccaccio has been a school of thought by scholars for centuries was done fo me with such a template I probably could figure it out from there, as long as there is available up to 12 parameter reference slots I can put in the template. Thanks again for the technicial help.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:26, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, because it should be a separate ref for each citation; but several refs per sentence are permitted. That said, there are rather a lot. If it's felt that there are too many, remove the more dubious ones to leave those that are most WP:RELIABLE. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:37, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can suggest a few things, but this page isn't really the place. Let's take it to the article's talk page. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:40, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

On February 26, I asked for this article to be peer reviewed, but since then nothing has happened, and I am wondering if I can accelerate the process. Regards.Immunize (talk) 22:42, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. As with anything else on Wikipedia, the project only moves as fast as the people who work on it can edit. The oldest unedited peer reviews are listed in a special box, but other than that there is no way to draw attention to the article, or otherwise speed up the process. Xenon54 / talk / 22:58, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my review: sort the list items. Write a user subpage that lists every way you can think of to improve the list. You might examine some of the featured lists to get ideas. On Wikipedia, many if not most of the productive editors already have a long list of things they want to edit. It's often easier to identify all the things you can do yourself, and then do them, rather than think of things for other people to do. Wikipedia, like most groups of people, probably has more thinkers than it needs, and not enough doers. --Teratornis (talk) 00:32, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]