Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2013 July 28

= July 28 =

Brotherhood of St. Andrew references
How do I indicate my reference? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gooddal (talk • contribs) 03:01, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Start by reading Referencing for Beginnners. After that, if you have a more specific question, come back for help.  RudolfRed (talk) 03:12, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

New signature
Is my new signature kosher?--TonyTheTiger (T/C) Check out the WAWARD 03:29, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't like it per WP:SIG. " Check out the WAWARD " is long for a signature, it links to an award page and not a page to improve the encyclopedia, and you are the only listed awardee. That makes the signature look self-promotional. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:33, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * O.K. Now it is more like my old signature.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/FOUR]]/CHICAGO/WAWARD) 19:21, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, it was like this.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 19:26, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Urgent help needed
Please kindly help me out with the following problem.

On behalf or Dr Debapriya Bhattacharya, I am requesting urgent help. The wiki page of Debapriya Bhattacharya is Debapriya Bhattchariya. But the problem is the link got a wrong spelling. "Bhattachariya" spelling should be "Bhattacharya" i.e. there should not be the letter "i". Because of this mistake when we search for this page in wiki it appears with the wrong spelling of my colleague. How can I sort out this problem? If there is no way to solve this, then what is the procedure to close this page so that I can re-create a page for Debapriya Bhattacharya with correct spelling.

Looking forward to get a helpful response.

Regards, Sifat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sifat.sagufta (talk • contribs) 08:02, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * We can move the page to another spelling but the link isn't spelled "Bhattachariya", it's spelled "Bhattchariya" without "a" after "t", so it would appear there are two things to change and not one. Is that correct? PrimeHunter (talk) 09:04, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Moved, as the references given (at least the first three) all use the requested spelling Rojomoke (talk) 09:36, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Inaccurate information & Common misconception
I was reading a page and found some incorrect information. I'd love to contact the author of this page, but can't find a way to do so. Canada in the American Civil War is the page to which I am referring. It says that slavery was a key influence on the American Civil War. This is a common misconception, but I would like the error corrected. Slavery was not brought up as an issue until after the war started. Lincoln used it as a way to get support for the war. It also brought about the ability to have blacks to serve in the Union army. Slavery was in the North and the South. Only 6% of the Confederacy owned slaves at the time of the war. There were even black slave owners. Took one guy a year to prove he owned another black man. The war was started by the Morrill Tariff. The South was being unjustly taxed. The Confederacy was born to represent the South. Lee and Grant both had slaves. Lee set his free before he left to fight. Grant didn't give his up until the 13th amendment forced him to do so. The War didn't start until Lincoln sent the Union Army to make the Confederates "pay up." Lincoln was, quite frankly, a jackass. Sure, he freed the slaves. That's fine and dandy. However, he didn't give a shit about the slaves. Sure, we say slavery is gone. Is it really? Hell no. It just has a different name, and we've included all races now. The American Civil War wasn't about slavery. It was about people standing up against tyranny and injustice. I couldn't care less what color someone's skin is and I think slavery was bad, but think about it. Do you think a disagreement over slavery is a good reason to start such a bloody war? No one felt that strongly about it. At the time, slavery was just kinda there. Even if you didn't agree with it, you didn't really do anything about it. Besides, a war wouldn't be the answer to something like that. Would 300 THOUSAND people go off to their deaths for a bunch of black people (keep in mind, "coloreds" were still segregated from whites for a long, long time after that)? I think not. It took a long time before a substantial number of whites were ready to let "coloreds" have the same rights they had. In the mindset of those people back then, free or not, a negro was a negro. Slavery was bad, but it's not the thing we think it was. It's a common misconception that slaves were beaten by their owners. The point of having a slave was for them to serve you. If you were beating them and mistreating them all the time, they'd be incapable of serving you. Those who sold slaves DID beat them, but owners didn't beat their slaves.
 * SineBot didn't sign this post. It was by 50.21.146.63 (talk), 28 July 2013.


 * Wikipedia pages don't have specific authors. They are created by someone, but then can be edited by anyone who cares to, even you.  The place to discuss this particular issue is on its Talk Page, Talk:Canada in the American Civil War.  You will need to be able to refer to independent, reliable sources to back up any changes you wish to make.  Rojomoke (talk) 09:45, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, Wikipedia is based on consensus and neutral point of view. You have a strong pro-Southern point of view, and you will find that pushing it will encounter opposition.  Many twenty-first century historians write that twentieth-century historians minimized the importance of slavery as a reason for the American Civil War, and you will have difficulty imposing a non-consensus interpretation.  Any change to the interpretation of the causes of the American Civil War will be contentious.  You could try a content Request for Comments to see if other editors support your point of view.  In any case, attempting to change the point of view of the article by yourself will result in conflict.   Robert McClenon (talk) 14:18, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Editing chris tiu
I'm the mother of chris tiu. I tried to edit Chris Tiu's official blog but it was removed. Chris has two official blogs. The first one ( which is up to 2011) was in the wikipedia. The most recent one, which i tried to add, was removed when i tried editing it. It is ctiu.blogspot.com. Please try to check and verify it by reading through it. Thanks. Sincerely yours, Lianne tiu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liannetiu (talk • contribs) 10:28, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a blog. Please read the conflict of interest policy.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:18, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * @User:Robert McClenon - I believe the OP was trying to update Chris Tiu. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:34, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
 * @User:Liannetiu - I have done the change with an explanation in the edit summary. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:34, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

homepage
how do I make wiki my home page thx  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patriciagandolfini (talk • contribs) 11:07, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Patricia, Every browser has a setting for making a particular site your homepage. As an example, in Firefox, click on Firefox at the top of the page, go into Preferences from there, then go into the General tab, and in there you should see where to set your homepage. If you want instructions for a different browser, tell us what it is. By the way, this site is called Wikipedia, not wiki. A wiki is any website using wiki software; there are thousands of them.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:10, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Lost my edit toolbar,... again
I lost my edit toolbar on the Main Wikipedia pages a day or two ago... again. I checked the archives for similar incidents, and they claimed that the people involved should either use WP:PURGE or update their JavaScript. My PC insists that my JavaScript program is updated, and purging hasn't worked for me. As I mentioned in the title, this isn't the first time I've had this problem. ---User:DanTD (talk) 13:06, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * This happens to me occasionally as well. I believe this can happen if your internet connection is poor. It seems in that case the toolbar either loads in a messed up state (such that you see all the special characters and stuff uncollapsed above the edit window) or doesn't appear at all. At least that's what happens to me sometimes. It might sometimes also be caused if there is a lag in Wikipedias database servers (I think). --  Toshio   Yamaguchi  13:27, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Another step that sometimes works is to bypass your browser cache - that's Ctrl-F5 in many browsers. -- John of Reading (talk) 14:12, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * That didn't work for me either. ---User:DanTD (talk) 00:10, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Editing an Article/Error Message
Hello,

I recently worked on an Article for Submission that needed better references. I edited the article and references, and tried to submit a new version. Here is the error message I received:

''WARNING: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Schüttler Waske Tennis-University is 7,026 bytes. If it is not a redirect with only 1 edit in its edit history, this may be a "copy and paste" move. To avoid losing the edit history, administrators should consider merging the history of the AfC draft into this article. Non-administrators should consider placing at the top of this article before removing this AFC submission template.''

I think I need to change the title to the specified URL, but I do not know how or how to assure the article will be reviewed for publishing. Is there a way you could make the necessary changes and make sure it can be reviewed?

Here is the URL for the page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%BCttler_Waske_Tennis-University that I wanted to replace http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/The_Sh%C3%BCttler_Waske_Tennis_University&action=edit

Thanks! Amreisenauer39 (talk) 14:24, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I have cleaned up by deleting Schüttler Waske Tennis-University and moving its page history to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Shüttler Waske Tennis University. When you are ready to resubmit, use the "Resubmit" button in the box at the top. See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to make references. They should be placed where they are used. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:58, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Personal bias
I added new development in one of existing article but that is deleted by other contributor, we discussed on talk page but seem that contributor is biased. How can we resolve the dispute?--Ali aff (talk) 17:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Please read the policy on dispute resolution. I assume that the article is 2008 Mumbai attacks.  Please be careful to avoid edit warring, as you have already been warned.  If your dispute is with one editor, the next step could be third opinion.  If, as it appears, the dispute is with multiple editors, a possibility would be a Request for Comments.  Please be careful to avoid edit warring.   Robert McClenon (talk) 18:24, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

title of the article on me is in an unhelpful form of my personal name
Current article name: "Kevin McFoy Dunn." This was supplied by the person who originally put the page together (and with whom, I'm sorry to say, I'm no longer in contact, he having, I hear, decamped to Venezuela), but it has dawned on me that, all of the works in my recorded oeuvre having been issued under the name "Kevin Dunn," the current name in principle makes it most extraordinarily difficult for anyone researching me for whatever reason to find me on Wikipedia. I don't suppose some helpful and expertise-laden mover-editor with a little time on her/his hands could take the 20 or so seconds required for someone who knows what s/he's doing to fix this up (adding in the process the triply- if not quadruply-necessary disambiguation note) for the utility of historians and other such idle folk? Thanks. / K.McF.D. 24.99.207.2 (talk) 18:19, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * But the article Kevin Dunn already exists. So, the only option is Kevin Dunn (musician). Ruslik_ Zero 18:45, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I have redirected Kevin Dunn (musician). Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:38, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

How to add a reference
Hello there,

I recently created a page on here and then I attempted to add a reference so as my page would not get removed. However, I had issues doing this. I am unclear on whether or not you can refer to another Wikipedia page, I had trouble setting it out and then citing it. Could you give me a few tips please? Thank you in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by APEfc123 (talk • contribs) 19:09, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * The mentioned page Fiona o'carroll has been deleted because you blanked it. See Notability (people) for requirements to get a Wikipedia biography. The reference said:
 * This had many problems.
 * This had many problems.


 * 1) It wasn't displayed because the code  wasn't at the end of the article. See Help:Referencing for beginners.
 * 2) http://https:// is an invalid start of a url. Say either http:// or https:// but not both.
 * 3) https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.imdb.com%2Fname%2Fnm0639983%2F&ei=2Gr1UcSrDKj17AbcooHQDg&usg=AFQjCNHv8TD6sN5IrmhRsxGqPBrdCyaLNA&bvm=bv.49784469,d.ZGU is a Google redirect to another page http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0639983/. We link the actual page and not some redirect at an unrelated website. In this case we wouldn't even have allowed the Google redirect to be saved as a clickable link.
 * 4) http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0639983/ is about the subjects father. The subjects own page is http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2681255/.
 * 5) http://www.imdb.com, the Internet Movie Database is not considered a reliable source by Wikipedia and should generally not be used as a reference per External links/Perennial websites.
 * 6) The reference was unformatted so it would have looked poor even if it worked. A minimum of formatting would be adding a title, for example with  which produces: Fiona O'Carroll at the Internet Movie Database. We also have a purpose template (intended for use in an external links section and not references).   produces:.
 * Other Wikipedia articles are not allowed as references.PrimeHunter (talk) 20:53, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Bad multi-image or bad browser?
Is it just my browser or is there something wrong with the multi image templates on British American. I am seeing three of the boxes (history section, American icons, ) with huge amounts of white space and one a couple words of text. Rmhermen (talk) 19:46, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * It looks fine to me in Firefox 22.0. What is your browser? Does it change anything to log out? PrimeHunter (talk) 20:18, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I am on IE10 and what I see looks like this:
 * History
 * [edit]
 * Early
 * British
 * emigration
 * [edit]
 * The British
 * diaspora
 * consists of the

with the box taking up the rest of the page width. Rmhermen (talk) 20:22, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The boxes look fine when using Chrome but the two headings have vanished (2 History

2.1 Early British emigration). Are the heading visible in Firefox? Rmhermen (talk) 20:29, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * In Firefox at default zoom the two mentioned headings are hidden behind a row with the 4 US maps. I didn't notice that before. If I zoom out with then the headings become visible but with 3 US maps in one row with some blank space to the right, and 1 US map in a below row. In IE9 everything looks right with default zoom, both multiple images and all headings. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:40, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * So is there any way to improve the performance of this template across various browsers? Rmhermen (talk) 15:47, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
 * That can be discussed at Template talk:Multiple image which already mentions some browser issues. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:52, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

New page patrol for user talk pages?
I was looking at User_talk:APEfc123, and there's a link at the bottom to mark the page as patrolled. Is this link supposed to appear in user space and on talk pages? I looked at New_pages_patrol and it only discusses patrolling in Article, Image, and WP namespaces. RudolfRed (talk) 20:48, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I wonder if this may be related to something that's happeed to my sandboxes? In the last day or so I have received a few notifications (via the RDOD) that some of my sandboxes have been "reviewed". When I looked at the page histories there was no trace of any activity other than my own. Who does these "stealth" reviews and why? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:46, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
 * From the page history, click "View logs for this page" and then "Show patrol log" to see who did it. Even sandboxes might have to be deleted as advertising, attack pages or copyright violations, so all this effort by is to be commended. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:34, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

video
When trying to play a video under the lightning entry, the window where the video is to be seen has a note at the top, "For a better video playback experience we recommend a [ HTML5 video browser]." Then nothing happens. I look up HTML5 video but don't see a link that will install it in the browser. What is going on?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.84.152.14 (talk) 21:05, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6 million articles and thought we were 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 for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about 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. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:24, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I disagree. I think the user is asking about  WIkipedia video that says it won't play unless you have an HTML 5 browser.  I asked a similar question awhile ago.  It turns out that HTML 5 is not the requirement but rather support for some specific video format.  Here's my question and the reply.  RudolfRed (talk) 21:35, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I presume you are referring to the video at the beginning of the Lightning article. The note refers to your browser being out of date in that it does not support our latest video format. See HTML5 video. Bottom line: update your browser. --  Gadget850talk 21:39, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

How can I avoid the dreaded "CONFLICT OF INTEREST" tag by Wikipedia editors - which I understand?
I would like to see Herbert J. Mols with his own Wikipedia "Bio" page as do thousands of other people. He should be recognized for his contributions to Amateur Athletics: a founder of the NY Empire State Games, Executive with US AAU basketball (25 + years), Executive with the US Olympic Basketball Committee, Manager of several US State Dept Goodwill tours in the 1960's and 70's, Resident Manager of the 1970 Eastern European tour to the Soviet Union, Finland, Estonia (where he is mentioned several times in the recently written book by the Estonian Sports Museum), President of the Niagara AAU for several years (Track, Swimming, etc.), Manager of the 1971 US Men's Pam Games basketball team, 1972 Manager of the US Men's Olympic basketball team, & Manager of the 1974 US Men's World Basketball Championship team. He also will be inducted into the Greater Buffalo Sports Hall of Fame in late October, 2013 (http://buffalosportshallfame.com/13-greater-buffalo-sports-hall-of-fame-inductees-unveiled/), etc.

Regards,

Gary Mols Shawnigan Lake, BC (Redacted)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by GaryMols (talk • contribs) 21:08, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * You should use WP:RA to request an article if you have a conflict of interest. RudolfRed (talk) 21:55, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * You should look at Wikipedia's criteria for articles about people. The question is very simple: are there newspaper and magazine articles about Herbert Mols? Is his life discussed at any length within a book? If yes - and keep in mind that "mentioned several times" does NOT count - then yes, he probably qualifies to have a Wikipedia article. But if his name is just mentioned in articles and books - dozens or hundreds or tens of thousands of times - without someone say "This guy is important enough for us to write at length about him", then - sorry - he doesn't qualify.


 * The most persuasive case you can make for a Wikipedia article is to prepare a list of newspaper and magazine articles, and books, that do meet the WP:BIO criteria. If you can do that, you can probably find someone here to write a Wikipedia article. If, on the other hand, all you can provide is a resume (as you have, above), then the chances are much less that an experienced editor is going to volunteer to research what has been written about Herbert Mols. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 04:40, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

page curation, temporary page move
I'm working on cleanup of the New Pages Feed by page curation. There are two pages that cannot be curated due to a bug in the software; pages whose name starts with a period don't show the page curation toolbar. The pages are .44 Remington Centerfire and .223 Wylde. The bug is Bug 50023 - Unable to mark certain articles as patrolled, and it has not been fixed. I'm wondering if it's possible to move the pages to a temporary name, mark them reviewed, then move them back. I'm concerned about possibly messing up redirects or talk pages. JanetteDoe (talk) 22:39, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I would say to just ignore those pages for now. Don't move them just so you can mark them as patrolled.  When the bug is fixed, you can mark them.  RudolfRed (talk) 23:05, 28 July 2013 (UTC)