Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2009 June 8

= June 8 =

Formatting
This isn't a big deal, however I can't seem to remember it nor can I find it, but isn't there some code that would fix the white space in the middle of the Robert Wadlow article? Jauerbackdude?/dude. 01:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * A little FixBunching has helped but to fix it completely the width of the table needs to be narrowed and I don't know how to do that. – ukexpat (talk) 01:14, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I made the table narrower (you can make it wider or narrower by changing the %). I also moved the image so the fixbunching is not needed and the page looks more pleasing to the eye.  hmwith  τ   03:54, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * That's much better - nice work. – ukexpat (talk) 03:59, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks all. The FixBunching was what I was looking for, but I probably would have been stuck with the table, too. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 11:26, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

New look?
Is it just my browser or does wikipedia have an entirley new look? I personally dont like it, the other was more user friendly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mus640 (talk • contribs) 01:37, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks the same to me. Did you inadvertently change the skin you are using in your preferences? – ukexpat (talk) 02:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Or maybe you downloaded an add-on for your browser that changes the way WP looks?  hmwith  τ   03:46, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Or possibly you changed the size text is displayed (which is easy to do). If so, just hit cntrl coupled with the plus or minus sign.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:48, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yet another possibility is that your browser cache somehow got bad content which can be fixed by clearing your entire cache. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:24, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * There is a place where "new looks" have been worked on. They can be found at the prototype wikimedia site.  Also, I've noticed that if I open multiple tabs, I can end up with a page or two looking oddly formated.  A refresh seems to resolve that.  My guess would be the "skin" issue that ukexpat mentions though. — Ched :  ?  18:03, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

yah, i found it was i accedentally changed my skin. Thanks!23:27, 8 June 2009 (UTC)Mus640 (talk)

Submission for reviewal?
Is there someplace (informal or formal) where you can submit your edit of an obscure article for reviewal by more advanced users? I just updated game replays, in this instance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GRHooked (talk • contribs) 05:04, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * WP:PR (peer review) might be what you're looking for. — Ched : ?  05:27, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. It's called a peer review. Check out that page for more information.  hmwith  τ   05:28, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Where to find the archive of a redirected page?
Hi, i am quite new here and i am looking for the archive of the following pages: [] [] [] Where can i find copy of the old articles, history and talk pages? Thanks for help. Iqinn (talk) 10:08, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I assume Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi is what you are looking for. As for the redirects: It seems some were created as pure redirects, and not as seperate articles. However, since i saw the DRV you requested: Please note the WP:CFORK and WP:G4 guidelines before simply recreating a deleted page (if that would be the intention) :) Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 10:27, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No that's not my intention. I just looking for more information that could help us to clear content issues like for example her age. No matter these information would go into Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi or the Mahmudiyah_killings. I respect the DRV outcome. There have been at least these two pages. [], []. And there has been something like a move. []. Is there an archive on Wikipedia where i can find these old information? Thanks Iqinn (talk) 11:33, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * When an article is moved correctly (meaning it's not a cut-and-paste move), the page history, talk page and talk page history are also moved to the new title. The only content remaining in the page history of your first 3 links is redirects. Only administrators can see the former content of deleted pages like your next 2 links: Talk:Abeer Qassim Hamza and Talk:Abeer Qassim Hamza murder. The only content was redirects to other talk pages which eventually lead to Talk:Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:19, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I can't see any picture
I can't see any picture on the pages? Sfarah77 (talk) 11:33, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Which browser do you have? Is the problem only on Wikipedia? Does Troubleshooting help? PrimeHunter (talk) 12:05, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Tables (episode list format)
Hello all,

Looking for some help, i am trying to improve a epsiode list so that it displays the infromation more nicer, i have worked otu how to do the col spanning, however there is a time when some episode number are the same so i would liek to span the row that thqat hap;pens to be one field instead of two. for example of wha ti mean please see here test--Andy Chat c 12:55, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * This is htge page of the original content List of Monster Buster Club episodes--Andy Chat c 12:56, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I should have meantion it is episode 40 + is where i need to make it one field an dmove the title to under the epsiode titel coloum--Andy Chat c 12:57, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Canonical Law
is the canonical laws is a parallel law for christians?is it has any conflict with the national laws where they are living? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.226.88 (talk) 13:55, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Have you tried the Humanities section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps.  TN X Man  13:56, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * And see Canon law. Might as well look at Sharia too. --Teratornis (talk) 18:07, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I can't find the move button
I created a page and misspelled the title. I am aware that I have to wait four days and 10 edits to change its name (or move it), but I was looking for the "move" button on eligible pages, and I can't find it there, either.

Where is the button to move pages? —Preceding unsigned comment added by NWCPAO (talk • contribs) 13:57, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It will appear at the top of pages, near the history tab. It looks like you need 5 or so more edits before the button will appear. TN X Man  13:58, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

How to stop a redirect and create a disabiguation in one foul swoop.
Currently there is a redirect on MALP to something in the Stargate universe, MALP also means Macrophage activating lipoprotein. I'm wondering how does one go about stopping the redirect straight to the stargate universe, and then creating a disambiguation page with the two on. MedicRoo (talk) 14:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Either use this link, or alternatively you can simply scroll to the top of the article you have been redirected to. There will be a small text link called "Redirected from ". Clicking that will get you to the page intended. Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 14:43, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If you need help on creating a disambiguation page at that link, see WP:Disambiguation.  hmwith  τ   15:20, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Efron's dice image
Hey folks. The image at Nontransitive_dice is wrong (the rightmost die should have something on the top face, and it doesn't). The talk page for the image said to request correction here. So here I am, request correction. Thanks. --Islomaniac 973 14:49, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I guess the selection of faces is intended to convey the probability of rolls. The first 3 dice have probabilities 2/6 = 1/3, or 4/6 = 2/3, or 6/6 = 3/3 of each possible roll, and this can be conveyed with 3 displayed faces of which 1, 2 or 3 shows that result. The last has 3/6 = 1/2 which doesn't work for 3 displayed faces, but it works for 2. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:15, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * your point is valid, but I agree with OP, it looks like someone made a mistake. A better solution would be to change the perspective on the fourth die to show only two faces. --Sphilbrick (talk) 16:14, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, especially if it's still recognazible as a die. If the simple style of the image is kept then it might require a perspective where the existence of a third face is barely visible but the content of it is not. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:50, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Author
Who is the author of this site?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edog480g (talk • contribs) 14:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Everyone, really. You should check out this page for more details. TN X Man  14:58, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) There are thousands of authors. If you want to cite an article here then see Citing Wikipedia. Otherwise see for example Who writes Wikipedia or About. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:00, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Manufacturer of recreational vehicles
Perhaps I don't have the right Category above -OR- there is no such category. I want to write up a new artile on Jayco, Inc., the second largest manufacturer of recreational vehicles. I don't see an article on this company. Would that Category above be the correct Category to put the company in after the article is written? Can someone THEN make such a Category? Other Categories that would be appropriate? Is there similar article companies that manufacture recreational vehicles? Can't find them. Apparently I am looking in the wrong Categories - help!--Doug Coldwell talk 16:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That would be Category:Recreational vehicle manufacturers (found by looking at the article about Winnebago Industries). -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * If you look at a similar article like Winnebago Industries, you will find Category:Recreational vehicle manufacturers. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 16:13, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Great! I had the right idea for the Category, however just had the words in another order. I thought maybe there should be other manufacturers of recreational vehicles. Now I can get some ideas on how to write up the article. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell talk 18:41, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Deleted article but not one I wrote ???
As a new user I am attempting to write an article on the musician, Dan Pinto. However, before even starting the article, I am getting messages that come up saying that back in 2005 an article about a person with the same name was deleted for whatever reason. That article has nothing to do with me or about the person I am trying to write about, yet it is creating an issue for me. How do I go about handling this situation?

T —Preceding unsigned comment added by Write2Wiki (talk • contribs) 16:47, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * How is this creating an issue for you? If you want to create an article about Dan Pinto, go ahead and do it. Algebraist 16:50, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * This should not be creating an issue. Go ahead and create your article in the text box below the red "You are attempting to re-create..." box. KuyaBriBri Talk 16:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The 2005 page was vandalism and you can just ignore it. Please ensure your article satisfies Notability (music) or it may be deleted. See also Your first article. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:59, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Genealogy for families 17:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Am working on my family history & would like to find some links for Genealogy to help put it together. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ploesti3 (talk • contribs) 17:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Take a look at the Genealogy Project and possibly ask at the Reference Desk. – ukexpat (talk) 17:13, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Multilingual Wiki links
My en.wikipedia article on Merchant Street Historic District in Honolulu makes reference to Yokohama Specie Bank, which has no entry in en.wikipedia, but does in ja.wikipedia and zh.wikipedia. What is the best way to link from wikipedia in one language to wikipedia in another? I ended up treating it like an external link, but that doesn't seem very satisfactory. 横浜正金銀行 Joel (talk) 19:40, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * H:ILL should help. – ukexpat (talk) 19:48, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Perfect! Thanks very much. Joel (talk) 20:22, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

How do I get my article removed from the orphan category?
I have created a new article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farmer_Research_Committees titled FARMER RESEARCH COMMITTEE

But it is characterized as an orphan and a dead end page???? I added numerous internal and external links but this doesn't seem to succeed in the article being adopted.

Can someone explain what I need to do to remove the article from the orphan category and the dead end?

Puzzled. Jacashby (talk) 20:03, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:ORPHAN; WP:DEP; If you have implyed internal links using, you can remove the DEAD END tag. Find relevant articles in which you can use Farmer Research Committee . Then you can remove the ORPHAN tag.  Zoo  Fari  20:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * But don't just scatter around links to the article wily-nily to avoid orphan status. They have to be relevant to the articles in which you place them. – ukexpat (talk) 20:12, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Jacashby, the tag was likely put there by an automated script (a bot) that adds the tag to all articles with no links to them. The bot does not remove the tag, so if you've added internal links to the article you can remove it yourself and the bot won't re-add it. TastyCakes (talk) 20:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems you haven't added links, as shown in the "What links here" page for the article you can see that only a redirect page links to it. TastyCakes (talk) 20:18, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You can search Wikipedia for articles that mention topics in the Farmer Research Committee article, and might possibly link to it. Note that fixing the "orphan" problem requires edits to other articles. Additionally, the Farmer Research Committee article has other problems which require edits to that article itself; see the other message templates at the top. In addition to those problems, the Farmer Research Committee article has no footnotes. See WP:FOOT, WP:CITE, and WP:CITET. Look at some featured articles to see examples of what our articles should look like. --Teratornis (talk) 21:59, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

question about "This article is an orphan, as few or no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from other articles related to it."
do you have suggestions for this? currently the wikipedia entry is the only one featuring the subject (cathy waterman). do i have to find relative articles & add my subject to their articles & then link those entries back? it seems tricky to do that without it being arbitrary or is there a better way to deal with that warning?

thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.81.234.84 (talk) 20:32, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Check out the section just above this one for some good answers. TN X Man  20:33, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

man. fast reply! thanks. i'll look into that & see if i can get it to work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.81.234.84 (talk) 20:37, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

My Addition to wikipedia
Hi i made a page about my friend moscow mark who is a rapper, and i got a message saying that it wasnt allowed? i dont know why that would be, i didnt lie about anything in the page. it wasnt offensive or innapropriate either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tmac4prez (talk • contribs) 20:46, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * In order for the article to be kept, it would need to demonstrate "notability" by Wikipedia's inclusion guidelines.  In this case, the subject probably hasn't received significant coverage in reliable independent sources, or doesn't meet WP:MUSICBIO.  -- Kraftlos  (Talk | Contrib) 20:48, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Upload
I want to know why I can't upload images. :|

I want to add one to NeoCube. XRDoDRX (talk) 21:40, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Your account looks new. See WP:AUTOCONFIRM. Unfortunately, I cannot see what Wikipedia looks like from the perspective of a newly registered user account, so I cannot tell whether the page(s) you saw explain why you cannot upload an image yet. --Teratornis (talk) 21:47, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, apparently I have to wait 4 days. D: XRDoDRX (talk) 21:51, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * And before you upload please take a look at our non-free use stuff. – ukexpat (talk) 21:56, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If you want to upload free content images, you can upload them immediately on Commons. (Commons also has its own autoconfirmation requirement, but new accounts can upload new images, they cannot update existing images until after 4 days.) Unify your login with Special:MergeAccount first, so you don't have to create a separate account on Commons. See Commons:COM:L for information about licensing, and Commons:COM:EIC for links to extensive documentation about what is and isn't free. Or tell us more about your images and we'll tell you whether and how to upload them. --Teratornis (talk) 22:07, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

A new kind of vandalism? Or no?
Lately I've seen edits that are normally unwanted but have no detrimental effect on the encyclopedia, such as the addition of a userbox reading "This user's page has just been vandalized". I've seen some editors accept the box, some remove it with a tongue-in-cheek message, and some remove the userbox and warn the vandal.

So my question: Should these kinds of edits be treated as vandalism? 69.250.171.249 (talk) 22:03, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd say treat them as meta-vandalism, the same as we treat other not obviously harmful experimental edits (i.e., start with a non-confrontational uw-test1 template on the user's talk page, and escalate as necessary if they persist). Just my opinion. If you'd rather throw the book at them, I suppose that's another option. --Teratornis (talk) 22:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * All right, thank you. I'll go with the meta-vandalism approach along with a message. Thanks, 69.250.171.249 (talk) 22:14, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * When you see something that looks like vandalism:
 * Check the page history to identify the user who added the vandalism or other unconstructive edit.
 * Check the user's talk page to see if anyone else already warned the user.
 * If the user has received other warnings previously about other vandalism, you can consider using a stronger warning template.
 * Check the user's talk page history to see if the user has blanked any previous warnings.
 * Check the user's contributions to see if the user has vandalized any other pages that nobody has fixed yet. Sometimes vandals work in bursts.
 * If the vandal is doing a lot of harm, and ignoring many warnings, it may be time to escalate to a block.
 * If we all pull together, we may restrain the hordes of disaffected male adolescents who discover Wikipedia and behave much as we might expect disaffected male adolescents to behave when given free reign. On the bright side, at least we don't give them automatic weapons. --Teratornis (talk) 22:23, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

References Section
Can websites be added to the References section of this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurosawa --Stepusual (talk) 23:05, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Certainly if a website is being used as a reliable source, it should generally be linked to as a reference. Some templates like cite web aim to provide a uniform standard for doing so, but ultimately content is more important than formatting -- someone else can always come along and clean up formatting, but only you know what content you have in mind. Citing sources can be quite a long read, but if you want to know more, it should have what you need. – Luna Santin  (talk) 23:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks!--Stepusual (talk) 23:13, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Do we need an independent secondary source for a statement of opinion from the Anti-Defamation League?
In our article on 9/11 Conspiracy Theories, there is a reference to an article published by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). My understanding is that for statements of opinion, you can cite significant viewpoints provided that they are attributed as such (which it is) per Reliable_sources. Another editor says that we need independent reliable sources to establish the notability of the ADL's viewpoint citing that they are an involved party and not really experts on anti-Semitism. The paragraph in question is here. The discussion is here. So, my question is do we need an independent secondary source for a statement of opinion from the Anti-Defamation League? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 23:18, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * It wouldn't hurt. The ADL is a significant organization and their opinions are generally notable; however the requirement that opinions are verified as significant by independent sources is important; otherwise every crackpot blogger's opinion could be cited in any article simply by qualifying it as "John Doe thinks that..." even if John Doe's opinion isn't all that important.  I think in this case, it is not unreasonable to ask that someone outside of the ADL thought that the ADL's opinion was worth noting before WE say that it is worth noting... --Jayron32. talk . contribs  04:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The sentence is this:"According to the Anti-Defamation League, anti-Semitic conspiracy theories blaming Jews and Israel for the terrorist attacks of September 11 continue to gain ground around the world, and are contributing to a new form of global anti-Semitism.". I'm not sure why it needs an independent source, but there is this which even talks about our article. Dougweller (talk) 11:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I can find WP:RS to support this, if needed. But at this point, I'm more curious about the general policy because I can see similar situations for other topics.  Do we really need an independent secondary source for a statement of opinion from PETA on an article about animal rights?  Do we really need an independent secondary source for a statement of opinion from the ACLU on civil liberties?  Do we really need an independent secondary source for a statement of opinion from the NRA about gun rights?  Etc. (BTW, I take no position on any of those topics.  Those just happen to be the advocacy groups and topics that jumped into my head as similar examples.) A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 13:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)