Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2014 August 25

= August 25 =

Wikify
What does it mean to "wikify" an article? I'm new to Wikipedia and I'm confused. Suggestbot has suggested some articles which I can "wikify". 1999sportsfan (talk) 00:30, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Wikify is defined as to format using Wiki markup (as opposed to plain text or HTML). It commonly refers to adding internal links to material (Wikilinks) but is not limited to just that. To wikify an article could refer to applying any form of wiki-markup, such as standard headings and layout, including the addition of infoboxes and other templates, or bolding/italicizing of text. Noun: wikification; gerund: wikifying; practitioner: wikifier. Ask if you have any questions. π♂101 (talk) 00:47, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Carlota of Mexico
There is a fraud painting of the Empress/ Princess of Austria. It says its from Winterhault. Obviously a fake, please remove it. It has negative connotations that are not true.

Carlota of Mexico
 * There are several so first you need to be more specific. Second, you need evidence they are fake. C T F 8 3 !  07:18, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

old wikimedia commons photos not accessible
Hello,

Some time ago, I changed my handle from grizdog to AlexFeldman. The changeover worked well for my Wikipedia edits, all the old ones now show up as AlexFeldman. But I recently uploaded another picture to the Wikimedia Commons, and none of my old pictures, uploaded as grizdog, still show up on my page of uploads. The pictures are still there, because they are used on some wikipedia pages and that is fine, but they don't show up as being uploaded by me. Is there a way to fix this?

Thanks. AlexFeldman (talk) 12:15, 25 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi, AlexFeldman. I don't believe there is any easy way to fix this. If you want to maintain credit for the images you uploaded under your old name, you could make a note on your Commons userpage.  Anon 126   (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 20:47, 25 August 2014 (UTC)


 * User:grizdog has not edited since 2006 and I see no sign there has been a commons:User:grizdog. The former name of your English Wikipedia account was User:Alexgriz. There is still a commons:User:Alexgriz. I guess this is the account you mean. Your username was changed at a time where it was only possible to be renamed at one project at a time. You can post a request at commons:Commons:Changing username. The account commons:User:AlexFeldman also exists now and would have to be renamed to free up the name (it's not possible to merge the two accounts or their edits). I'm not sure about the policy but you can log in as both users and sign with both accounts in the rename request to confirm you want this. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:01, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it was Alexgriz. Sorry about that. Thank you, this post was very helpful. AlexFeldman (talk) 21:10, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Create a new Wiki entry or not
Dear Kind Sir/Madame

The company for which I work, Umbra Cuscinetti, would like to post a Wikipedia page in English. I have been asked to begin this project; however, there is already a Wikipedia entry “Umbra Cuscinetti,” in Italian. Also, our Communications Director has tried to discover who the author of the Italian page is as no one from Umbra Cuscinetti was involved with the page. Even though we appreciate the efforts of an anonymous author, we intend to produce a more comprehensive and informative page.

it:Umbra Cuscinetti

We would like to ensure that we are following Wikipedia rules. We would like to know if can write a new page in English for Umbra Cuscinetti.

Thanks for your help in this matter.

Best regards, James Lupori Consultant/Umbra Cuscinetti Foligno, Italy James Lupori (talk)‎ 13:25, 25 August 2014‎ (UTC) Signed— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  21:30, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello James, and thanks for stopping by the help desk. One thing to keep in mind, is that Wikipedia discourages people from editing or creating articles about subjects that they have a close personal or financial interest with.  That means we avoid writing directly about ourselves, our relative, and our employers.  You can read about Wikipedia's policy regarding this at Conflict of interest.  The reason for this policy is because Wikipedia's main goal is to have a neutrally-written, factual encyclopedia, which can be in conflict if you have a vested interest in a subject, where you are likely to be overly promotional or laudatory about the subject.    If you would like help from someone else in writing the article, you can request that an article be created for you, by a volunteer editor who is unconnected to the subject.  See Requested articles for more info on how to do that.  When you request the article, you may want to indicate that the article exists at Italian Wikipedia, so someone could use that to help write the English one, especially if they also speak Italian.  Include as much information in your request as possible, including sources of information you can find about your company, to help the writer work on the article.  Does that help answer your questions?  -- Jayron  32  14:03, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Transclusion and watchlists
I have transcluded the lead of an article B into another article A using Transclusion. But changes to the lead of B do not show up as changes in the watchlist for article A. Is there any way to get around this, to alert people of the changes, short of keeping B in the watchlist as well? Kingsindian (talk) 14:01, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * No, it's the same for images, which are the most common transclusion. Changes to transclusions cannot be put in your watchlist without watching the source page.  You can, however, click on "related changes in the tools menu.  I think this is the result for the article in question. SpinningSpark 15:08, 25 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Do the changes show up if you WP:BYPASS your browser cached and/or force a server WP:PURGE?--ukexpat (talk) 15:09, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The user's problem is not a caching problem. SpinningSpark 16:06, 25 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I have three further questions related to your answer.
 * Is it possible to list only the transclusions in the "Recent Changes Linked" or "What links here" pages?
 * Is it possible to see which pages transclude a given page B?
 * I have an idea for reflecting transclusions. Each time the lead changes on article B, a bot adds a comment in article A mentioning the diff. Assuming there are not too many transclusions, this should not be too much of a problem. Any suggestions on whether this is a good idea, and if so, where can I pitch it? I would be interested in writing such a bot myself, though I don't have any experience in such things. Kingsindian (talk) 15:50, 25 August 2014 (UTC)


 * For #1 you can get the transclusions only for "what links here" like this. It is done by clicking "hide links" and "hide redirects" leaving only transclusions showing.  I think that's the answer to #2 as well.  For #3 I think it is a bad idea.  The place to pitch it is at Village pump (proposals). SpinningSpark 16:06, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that works great. Could you elaborate on why you think it is a bad idea? I will try asking at the Village pump anyway. Kingsindian (talk) 18:47, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * For one thing, it will swamp users' watchlists with bot rubbish. For another, the edits have null value to the article.  Maintenance tasks like this should be invisible to operations on the article.  Possibly some other solution might be suggested at WP:VPT, but I doubt it considering how long the much more common image transclusion issue has been going on, and the repeated calls for unified watchlists, especially with Commons and absolutely zero happening about it. SpinningSpark 18:55, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the elaboration. The second issue you raise (maintainance edits should be invisible), can be addressed by just adding or removing whitespaces, while using the edit summary for the diff. The other issue can't be gotten away from. But, I anticipate trancluded sections to change rarely, so I hope the "bot rubbish" would not be too much. Anyway, I have made the suggestion at Village_pump_(proposals). Kingsindian (talk) 07:52, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Raymond Burr Filmography
I just saw "Station West" (1948 Western) on TCM and noticed Raymond Burr in the role of Mark Bristow. IMDb also has him listed in the Full Cast & Crew on their web site, but it is not on wikipedia. Can you get wikipedia updated? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.19.58.49 (talk • contribs)
 * Even better, YOU can get Wikipedia updated. Wikipedia only works because people who notice something is missing adds information.  You noticed something is missing, so you can go ahead and add it.  We say "The encyclopedia anyone can edit" and we mean it... -- Jayron  32  15:18, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * However, a reliable source will be needed, and IMDB is not considered a reliable source. Is the list of cast and characters in the movie itself considered a reliable primary source?  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:02, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Creating books
How can we create more then one book?

Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.249.179.124 (talk • contribs)


 * You need to save your books to do that. If you register an account you will be able to save books to your user workspace.  As an unregistered user you cannot do this, but you can download the book you are working on and then start a new one. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 17:13, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Editing a Semi Protected Page
I was asked to add a new item to the Personal Life section of the article Noam Chomsky. This was done on 8/22. Here is the direct link to it: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Noam_Chomsky&oldid=622342182#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_22_August_2014 I need to know if I filled out the information correctly or not. I have never added information to a semi-protected account before and am not sure I followed the instructions correctly or not. As you can see, this is an addition and not a correction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ptbates1 (talk • contribs)


 * Your request has already been serviced and rejected. Please see the replies to you on that page. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 16:55, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * When the original poster is auto-confirmed, they will be able to edit the page directly. However, the requirement for reliable sourcing will still apply, especially to biographies of living persons.  Although the OP will be able to edit semi-protected pages after auto-confirmation, any unsourced edits may be reverted, and any unsourced edits to BLPs almost certainly will be reverted.  A newspaper article referring to the marriage (in a regular newspaper, not a tabloid) would, for instance, be a reliable source.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:09, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

My notifications are not working
I am not seeing all of my pings, mentions etcetera in my notifications. What is wrong?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:41, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Did you, by any chance, disable it at Special:Preferences ? --Glaisher (talk) 17:42, 25 August 2014 (UTC) PS. did the ping work in this edit?
 * Tony, it might help if you give a diff or two of examples you think you should have got a notification for. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 17:53, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * No. I am getting some pings like this one. I did not get one that was placed earlier here on a discussion I was watching and someone else is complaining about me ignoring a ping last month that is not showing in my notifications even when I scroll down today.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:58, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * You didn't get that one because the ping and the user signature were not placed in the same edit. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 18:04, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:19, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Indians Fire
I created an Indians Fire page ... trying to upload an image of the fire burn map and a photo of the fire origin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Campbell Heather (talk • contribs)


 * Your account is too new to upload images to Wikipedia. Try Commons: instead, images there can be used on all Wikimedia projects, including Wikipedia. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 18:42, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Book requested/needed template
Is there any "Book requested/needed" template in Wikipedia (the way we use (infobox) image needed, reference User:Titodutta/Books/Time, Time travel and more, a book I just created for personal use ). I feel, this article may make a fantastic book List of paradoxes. Of course, I may go and create one,. Or is there any template or something to request at talk page? -- Tito ☸ Dutta 18:35, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Numbering formulas
Hi there,

I just posted at Ref Desk/Mathematics under this heading: "Comparison of two integrals." I could not figure out how to number the integrals properly. Every time I pasted |$$ next to my formulas the numbers would be displayed very close to them not at the right margin of the page. In the end I had to place dots between the formulas and the numbers to make them more visible. Even now that symbol (EquationRef) would not appear as such. Thanks, --AboutFace 22 (talk) 21:08, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * @AboutFace 22:  Hey AboutFace. We Usually number at the front and not from the back, so,

$$$$\int\limits_{0}^{n}$$f(φ)cos(mφ) dφ $$$$\int\limits_{0}^{360}$$f(ω)cos(ω) d(ω)
 * There may be a math specific convention I am unfamiliar with but this is what I would expect to see and all of the examples of usage in the template's documentation are given for front numbering. D'oh, Weird blindness. Did you need some of the special functionality this template provides for your post? AFAICT you could have just numbered with hashes through wiki markup:

or manually:
 * 1) $$\int\limits_{0}^{n}$$f(φ)cos(mφ) dφ
 * 2) $$\int\limits_{0}^{360}$$f(ω)cos(ω) d(ω)

1) $$\int\limits_{0}^{n}$$f(φ)cos(mφ) dφ

2) $$\int\limits_{0}^{360}$$f(ω)cos(ω) d(ω)

Anyway. You could add a larger space at the back or the front using non-breaking spaces:

$$\int\limits_{0}^{n}$$f(φ)cos(mφ) dφ $$

$$\int\limits_{0}^{360}$$f(ω)cos(ω) d(ω) $$
 * Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:44, 25 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Equation numbering is pretty universally, at least outside Wikipedia, in books and scholarly papers, right justified on the page. Despite the comment above, the template documentation gives several examples of right justified numbering. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 22:59, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Fuhghettaboutit. I will try to make sense out of it. We are orthographically related :-) Just Kidding. --AboutFace 22 (talk) 23:43, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Error when I try to move a page
Hello, I am trying to move a page, but get the following error when I try to do so:

You do not have permission to move this page, for the following reason: The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. Please choose another name, or use Requested moves to ask an administrator to help you with the move. Do not manually move the article by copying and pasting it; the page history must be moved along with the article text.

What would be the next step for me to move this page and get it under the proper title? Thanks,


 * What is the page you are trying to move, and where are you trying to move it to? --ColinFine (talk) 22:19, 25 August 2014 (UTC)


 * See the thread at the editors talk page User talk:RobinMadison. They want to move the DirecTV article to all caps. IMO that is not a good idea per Article titles. At the very least there should be a discussion on the talk page first. Robin you only have 19 edits here at WikiP. That is why you cannot move pages yet. New editors, such as yourself, are always welcome but I would suggest that you take the time to read the pages that are linked in the "Welcome!" message that left on your page. There are lots of ins and outs about editing here and jumping right into page moves can be fraught with lots of problems. Best wishes on your future endeavors. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 22:29, 25 August 2014 (UTC)


 * (e/c) It appears to be an attempt to move DirecTV to DIRECTV. Hi RobinMadison. The reason you cannot move the page is because DIRECTV already exists as a redirect to DirecTV. You can move pages "over redirects" without higher permissions, but only when they only have a single edit in their page history and are pointing back to the page you are seeking to move from. But this would be a controversial move, and would need to be discussed, through requested moves, if it was going to go forward. I see you already know about that page, as you attempted to make a request to move it at the technical section of that process page geared toward uncontroversial moves (even though your request there is malformed, as you did not supply the names of the two pages). But I don't think that request will or should be acted upon as performing this move would seem to be against our naming conventions, and thus would be controversial without discussion first. Please see, for example, Manual of Style/Trademarks. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:34, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for investigating this further . Your efforts have shown an error in my post above. I have struck through the sentence. Your work is much appreciated. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 22:45, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Thanks . I'm going to delete the move request for now (unless you got there first :). And thanks to for the ping.  Philg88 ♦talk 22:55, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Glad to help!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:16, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * You are welcome P. and  - sorry to ping you again so soon but I just noticed that RM moved the article for SKECHERS to all caps on the 13th. Probably using the same reasoning as this time. Do you think it should be moved back? If not no worries but I thought I would ask while this is fresh in everyone's mind. Cheers. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 23:22, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I moved it back. Good looking out Marnette.  @RobinMadison:   Robin, this move was obviously done with the best if intentions, but article titling can be a thorny area and this particular issue is fairly well trodden: outside of acronyms, we don't normally title articles like this. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:32, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I saw your edits. It looks (to my anyway) like it was a somewhat involved process. I sure am glad you were here to do all the work. Cheers again. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 23:35, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * @MarnetteD:  :-) Just a few double redirects fixed. Wait until you have to do a history swap with the redirect because it has merged content, after you splice the history from a cut and paste move, and it's a DAB page move that severs the connections with links so fixing the double redirects is not enough but there's a few hundred hand dabs involved:-) More seriously, there's a write up at WP:RM/CI I've worked on that I hope might provide a not too daunting summary of move cleanup procedures (if you're interested; scintillating reading huh?)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:49, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Reading through everything gave me this feeling :-) To be serious though congrats on all your (and everyone elses) work on the RM/CI. It will be most helpful to those who work with page moves. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 00:20, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * If all of the above is the case, then why does this page Epcor have all caps? I dont think 'EPCOR' is an acronym, but the all caps makes sense, as the logo shows all caps. In fact, this page is redirected from a page titled 'Epcor'.  I don't understand why other pages cant be changed or redirected like this one.  Honestly if I see an article that cant even get the name of the subject correct, personally I'm not going to trust any additional information on that page. I understand that its a title guideline issue,  but why is this particular point part of the guidelines? Who decides these guidelines? The community as a whole? Administrators?  If the goal is to provide the reader with the most accurate information, then doesn't a 'guideline' that prevents that seem kind of silly?RobinMadison (talk) 18:48, 26 August 2014 (UTC)RobinMadison

@RobinMadison:  The community decides through consensus. Hundreds of hours have been spent on the article titling policy and related guidelines. There are also hundreds of requested move discussions involving this and similar requests where the community has affirmed the underlying principles through debate. You say the title is "incorrect". Others might argue it is not even an issue of correct versus incorrect but only of text styling and/or emphasis, and that conventions of English writing are more important, unless there is some overriding concern. One such overriding concern might be that for a particular title, reliable sources consistently adopt the trademark's styling. That might be convincing enough for consensus to depart from the guideline. But by the same token, what reliable sources actually do in most cases is to ignore all caps for the same reasons we do – such as that it is a gimmick, smacks of unconventional English, and we are not bound by company predilections. So, for example, the vast majority of newspapers and books when mentioning Skechers/SKECHERS use Skechers. Do you think we should lose confidence in The New York Times because they have mentioned Skechers in 292 articles and use "Skechers" consistently? Regarding Epcor, because of the way Wikipedia works, the fact that you can locate another or even a multitude of article with something similar is usually completely irrelevant (has no precedential value), because there are always examples of other articles suffering from the same problem as any particular one at issue. See by way of analogy, What about article x? In this case, not only should Epcor be moved from that title to de-cap it (unless it is an acronym, which would need to be looked at), but "Incorporated" should be removed from its name, per Naming conventions (companies), unless it's needed for natural disambiguation.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:32, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * P.S. EPCOR is an abbreviation of Edmonton Power Corporation.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:55, 27 August 2014 (UTC)