Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2010 November 25

= November 25 =

Is a seperate account for Wikimedia Commons considered Sock puppetry?
Hello,

some time ago, after having created an account for Wikipedia I decided also to upload media to Wikimedia Commons. Thus I created a new account (seperate from my Wikipedia account) for Wikimedia Commons. (I have since then contributed to Commons as User:T_Yamaguchi). Now my question is: Is this considered a case of WP:SOCK? Should I cease to use that account and instead contribute to Commons under my Wikipedia identity? Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 02:25, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * No, you're fine. You may safely contribute to different Wikimedia projects, such as commons, wiktionary, Wikinews, etc. under differently named accounts.  You may, if you choose, use unified login to create one account for use at all projects, or you may, if you choose, indicate at the userpage of each account at each project the connections between projects.  This is all optional however, since sockpupetry is always narrowly defined as using multiple accounts for deception or disruption.  Even so, such policies are particular to each project, so running accounts under different usernames at each project probably wouldn't ever be considered sockpuppetry, unless you have found a way to use your differently named commons account to do disruptive or deceptive stuff.  As long as you are acting in good behavior in all of your accounts, you're fine. -- Jayron  32  04:17, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for the quick reply. You convinced me that running both accounts parellely is ok.Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 04:40, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Browser error that prevented me from reverting an accident
Hi, I recently posted a warning template on here and it messed up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Leoboudv

But I can't undo it because the browser supersized the buttons. What do I do? It worked before. It's still supersized. Moseyman (talk) 06:56, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I've removed the template from that talk page. Without a parameter it's not much use.
 * Which buttons do you mean? Is it still a problem if you restart your browser or reboot your machine? Please post here again with more detail if you are still having problems. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:53, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Mobile user experience feedback
Is there any facility to give feedback to those who develope the wikipedia mobile site? I am a heavy mobile user and am becoming quite familiar with glitches, styling errors and the like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.171.196.8 (talk) 13:14, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * If you are talking about Wapedia, try http://wapedia.mobi/en/Special:Feedback - David Biddulph (talk) 13:30, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * But if you just mean m.en.wikipedia.org, which is what Safari points me to when I try to browse WP on my iPhone, check out Help:Mobile access - there's a list of known bugs, a place to report new ones (if you register a Bugzilla account), and I'd bet on Help talk:Mobile access being watched by people who've been involved in developing the mobile version. Gonzonoir (talk) 13:38, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia fundraining . . ..
Never before in my life have I so hated going to a website. . . . because of the manner and degree of financial proselytizing ON EVERY PAGE!

I'm told that Jimmy Whalen was uncomfortable with the idea, and had to be talked into it. IT SHOWS!

Brain imagery research has demonstrated that human perception is refined to the point of being able to pick up subtle clues in the pictures of facial expressions to reveal a person's true inner feelings, regardless of image one is consciously attempting to project (see research on (see research on 'face reading').

Which, I suspect, explains why I now get such a nauseating 'gut' reaction to every – Whalen-adorned – Wikipedia page I open. I can only hope and pray that there are enough others out there with a similar response that this 'global emotional stressor' will soon be moved to 'cease and desist' – and never to reappear again. . ..

And finally: SCHOLARLY IT IS NOT. . ..

Lance DuRand, Founding Partner Partnership With Earth Foundation 174.145.139.177 (talk) 15:08, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Click on the x in the top right hand corner of the banner to close it, and if you register an account and log in you can set your preferences not to display such banners. David Biddulph (talk) 15:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Two things
 * You can make this go away by clicking the little "x" in the upper right corner of the picture.
 * Regardless of your visceral reaction, careful research has shown, and results have played out, to show that these current ad banners generate more donation revenue than the earlier, less invasive, text-only pleas. See Wikipedia Signpost/2010-11-08/Fundraiser and Wikipedia Signpost/2010-11-15/News and notes.  In summary, though it makes you mad, it causes more people to donate more money than any other method they have tried, so it isn't going away.  This is a case where a vocal, very pissed-off minority isn't actually correct; the majority of people are giving more money, so its actually an effective advertising campaign. -- Jayron  32  15:18, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Like every other cash-strapped purveyor of information and learning, Wikipedia has to raise money in order to keep operating, and it does so by appealing directly to those who use and benefit from it, rather than accepting commercial advertising. You're most welcome to visit as many pages as you like, and nobody's going to force you to pay a penny for the privilege.  Isn't that great?  What would be more annoying and less scholarly - a periodic fundraising drive such as this, or flashing ads for pizzas, insurance and escort services at the top of the page all the time?  By all means create an account and switch Mr Wales off if you like, but don't forget that the money he's raising will ensure that Wikipedia is here, sans pizza, the next time you need it.   Ka renjc 16:16, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Same reference used mulitple times in article is showing up multiple times in the reflist rather than once
Hi, I'm sure its easily solved, but my last edit at Adrian Adepitan (adding a single reference in different areas to support a number of assertions) has added the same reference a number of times in the reflist section at the end - I only intended that the reference be added once in the reflist, how can I fix this? Cheers all Darigan (talk) 15:48, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Have a look at WP:REFNAME. The example there should make it clear. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:51, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I have started the process for you. I have given your reference a name, as explained in John's link, and have then converted one of your duplicate citations so it refers to the named reference.  This diff shows what I did.  You can now alter the other duplicate citations in the same way to get the effect you want.  Ka renjc 15:58, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks John of Reading & Karenjc - I Looked at the WP:REFNAME link and Karenjc's diffand fixed the rest of them. Cheers again Darigan (talk) 16:02, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

what a disgusting ad - who cares if it can be removed by clicking something - it should not be so intrusive to begin with! duh!

finding a subject which could relate to more than one field
i find it very difficult to search for subjects that can be related to different fields. for instance: balloons. i was searching for balloons in software and couldn't find it. Do you have any pointers for me: how to narrow down a search when looking for an item which doesn't relate to the obvious field (like balloons)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.218.139.3 (talk) 17:23, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I think if an article existed on balloons in software, if you had searched for you would have found the right article quickly (you can also use Google and restrict your search to this site with a limiter such as ). Since it does not appear that there is an article on this topic, your lack of results are not surprising. Besides using the search feature, if you navigate to Balloon, the primary topic article, about gas filled membranes, you will see at the top "For other uses, see Balloon (disambiguation)." That page attempts to provide a navigation portal to all pages people have identified as being likely to be intended when someone search for "balloon", though such lists are not always complete. Knowing about such disambiguation pages is useful when looking for a topic. Note that when there is no primary topic (one topic much more likely to be searched for than any other), the title itself may be the disambiguation page. (see e.g. Mary). By doing this sort of winnowing, you sometimes identify missing topics and can act on that, by writing the article yourself, asking for its creation directly, or more subtly be creating a few red links in existing articles to invite other users to do so. I am not personally familiar with balloon software, however, so I don't know if it is notable topic for which there are sufficient third party reliable sources existing to sustain an article.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:47, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * The search for finds Balloon help, which is my best guess for "balloons in software". But, of course, the question is about a general difficulty, not just this example. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:57, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * And... I've just added Balloon help to the DAB page.--20:29, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Mr Wales appeal for donations
I tried several times to make a donation using my credit card. I checked my typing three times for accuracy. I used this card before and after your site refused the discover card.

Don —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.172.175.239 (talk) 19:04, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Please email donate@undefinedwikimedia.org with your concern. ǝɥʇ M0N0 farewell 01:16, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

MITFORD
Hello and bonjour, Firstly, many thanks for this most excellent website - to Jimmy Wales and all the volunteers that go to make it work. I raise a glass to you. Getting lost with all this techno stuff is perhaps appreciated. However...the issue being is that, when referencing for example Bertram Mitford, we get the same old story. The Bertram Mitford others should know about does not link up. What should appear is Bertram Mitford, the novelist who wrote over 20 novels about life and history of South Africa...my great uncle. Plus, I have noticed that those posting details about the Mitford family are unaware that I am the last living on the direct mainline of the original family of Mitford, Northumberland, since the 12th century and 1066. Kind regards Hugh Mitford Raymond —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hughmitford (talk • contribs) 20:48, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia. If there is already an article on a different Bertram Mitford, then you can solve this by adding a hatnote to the top of that article linking to the article on the Bertram Mitford you are talking about. Click the link for more information on hatnotes.
 * Since you're related to Bertram Mitford, it's not a good idea to write about him. It would be a conflict of interest, which is frowned upon. But you can see if you can get another editor to research him, see if he's notable, and write an article if he is. Hope this helps! --- cymru lass (hit me up)⁄(background check) 20:58, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I think he is notable and have begun it. Please add photo. Kittybrewster  &#9742;  23:06, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Different image, duplicate name on Wikipedia and Commons
I'm trying to link to an image on commons, but it directs to a different image with the same exact name on Wikipedia. I've followed the instructions to list the Wiki image for deletion (Orphan). How can I link to the commons image while waiting for the other to be deleted?Lvi56 (talk) 21:44, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * An image at commons cannot be displayed when there is an image with the same name at Wikipedia. It can be wikilinked but not displayed with commons:File:Lowe's Motor Speedway.jpg. I see you have nominated File:Lowe's Motor Speedway.jpg at Files for deletion/2010 November 25. Discussions there are usually open for 7 days. In naming conflicts like this it's more common to rename one of the files. Do you want to retract the nomination for deletion so the Wikipedia file can be renamed right away? This requires an administrator like me. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:25, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, Renaming one of them would be a lot better. Lvi56 (talk) 22:30, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I have renamed the Wikipedia version to File:Lowe's Motor Speedway, outside.jpg. You can now display the commons version. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:54, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks!Lvi56 (talk) 23:19, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Laid down your life for us
I wanted to thank all Military Officer's for laying their life down for Me and my Son.If i can ever help through a situation please let me know.As i know you all need your time alone just as we do so i am not going to make this a long Column i really do not know were to place this at so i hope this is alright.Sincerely Eddie Billings Jr —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.130.185.156 (talk) 21:52, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 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 upper right 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. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:57, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

I think you've got the wrong place for this. This is a place for questions about using Wikipedia. I'm going to post a few suggestions on your talkpage about things you can do to help and support military officers. --- cymru lass (hit me up)⁄(background check) 22:03, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Kyphoplasty
The article on the Spinal procedure, Kyphoplasty is not fully defined, and the clinical work by Wardlaw published in the Lancet proves its effectiveness, unlike vertebroplasty, not mentioned. This should be amended as I suggest, to avoid Wikipedia having a biased view which undermines its credibility. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.86.121.138 (talk) 22:35, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing this out. If you have reliable sources for this, go ahead and edit it! Wikipedia welcomes all helpful edits to the encyclopaedia. --- cymru lass (hit me up)⁄(background check) 22:46, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

translation
I want to translate pages about computer to Turkish, how can i do ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BrscnTnl (talk • contribs) 23:00, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * If you mean translating from the English Wikipedia to the Turkish Wikipedia then see Translation and tr:Vikipedi:Çeviri grubu. If you only want to read an article in Turkish then look for a link under Languages at the left saying Türkçe. It may not be a direct translation but an independently written article. If there is no Türkçe link then no corrsponding article in Turkish has been registered. You can try an online translation service at Machine translation. I use Google Translate. Enter the url here: http://translate.google.com/?sl=en&tl=tr#en|tr|. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:10, 26 November 2010 (UTC)