Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2014 June 10

= June 10 =

Links to an external site with possible copyright violation
Recent edits to Owain Arwel Hughes and to Gwahoddiad have added a link to a video clip on Youtube that I suspect may be a copyright violation. See talk:Owain Arwel Hughes.

The clip is. The recent Wikipedia edits say the material is from a BBC television program, Songs of Praise, but it appears to have been posted to Youtube by an individual unconnected to the BBC.

Is it against Wikipedia policy to include links to external sites which we suspect may be copyright violations? We are only posting links to questionable material, but The Pirate Bay were sued for doing just that.

Should these edits be reverted? Verbcatcher (talk) 00:45, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * No, copyright material should not be linked, and yes it should be reverted per the WP:CV policy and the WP:ELNEVER guideline. Leaving it up is contributory copyright infringement.  Spinning Spark  01:30, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I've also removed the links from the talk page too but left enough clue as to what was being discussed should a source be found. CaptRik (talk) 12:55, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Photomontage
I'm trying to design a photomontage for a settlement, however I'm having a massive problem with black bars appearing at the bottom of some of the images, which must have something to do with the ratio of each image. Is there a way to bypass this problem and get rid of the bars? These are the images I'm working with (and the irritating black bars that come along with them)...

Help, please. Ashton 29 (talk) 07:23, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Not to cast dispersions on the Help Desk but you might find better help at Graphics Lab which is meant for this kind of thing. Dismas |(talk) 07:43, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * . Dismas is right. But now that I have this typed in here, I'll say it anyway:


 * Maybe I'm missing something here – but it seems inevitable that you will get these black bars if the images you pair up in the same row have different heights. Or rather, since you have used "size=300" to resize them all to the same width, that they have different aspect ratios.


 * Here is a tedious way to deal with the problem.
 * Download all seven images.
 * For the six paired images, note their aspect ratios, and sort them accordingly. Pair them in sort order, so that each is paired, as far as possible, with another image of similar aspect ratio.
 * For each pair, trim a little off the width of the relatively longer one, or off the height of the relatively taller one, or both, so as to give them the same aspect ratio.
 * Resize them all to the same width, that of the least wide; except the double-width one at the top, to twice this width.
 * Use a graphics program to assemble them into a montage.
 * Upload the montage to Commons.


 * Or you could just reduce the black bars by using the Photomontage tag as you have, but pairing the images as described above. Maproom (talk) 07:53, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

How to link a word in 1 article to an article already present in Wikipedia?
Hi, I have recently edited the page Google Hummingbird. There the name "Danny Sullivan" was linked to an article about a racer name "Danny Sullivan" (Danny Sullivan), while the article clearly meant to redirect to Danny Sullivan (technologist). I have removed the link but am not sure how to link to the correct Danny Sullivan. Please advise. BhaskarCopywriter (talk) 11:00, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * You do it with a pipe. I have fixed the article.  Spinning  Spark  11:13, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi sir how create reference links
Hi sir how create reference links — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.Lokeswara Rao (talk • contribs) 12:09, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Take a look at WP:Referencing for beginners, Dr.Lokeswara Rao. - Purplewowies (talk) 12:28, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Unreviewed Articles
I have several 'unreviewed articles', which are live on the internet but are yet to be 'reviewed'. I have been waiting for one of them to be reviewed for five months. How do I bring these articles to the attention of an 'appropriate' editor? Gomach (talk) 12:35, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Here is as good a place as any, and I have just reviewed William Taylor (ophthalmologist).--ukexpat (talk) 12:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Many thanks. The others are Croftinloan School (five months), Alan Watson Featherstone (two months) and Doug Mitchell (film producer) (one month).Gomach (talk) 12:52, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Doug Mitchell (film producer) ✅, will look at the others.--ukexpat (talk) 13:00, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * ✅ and ✅.--ukexpat (talk) 13:16, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you - very much appreciated. Gomach (talk) 13:33, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

politics in Nigeria
why was my article declined or rejected for publcationDrizu (talk) 13:54, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * For the reasons explained in the rejection box at the top of User:Drizu/sandbox.--ukexpat (talk) 14:04, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Also, Wikipedia already has a pretty decent article titled Politics of Nigeria. If you have references to new information (rather than opinions you have) you are free to improve that article instead of creating a new one.  -- Jayron  32  19:33, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Italicising sources
Just a quick question about style and appearance. Someone recently undid one of my edits on the argument that the source shouldn't be italicised because it's an online rather than a print reference. As I've not encountered this issue before, I wondered if it is actually a style guideline or just someone's personal preference. Thanks, This is Paul (talk) 14:17, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Here's what our Manual of Style has to say:
 * "Website titles may or may not be italicized depending on the type of site and what kind of content it features. Online magazines, newspapers, and news sites with original content should generally be italicized (Salon.com or The Huffington Post). Online encyclopedias and dictionaries should also be italicized (Scholarpedia or Merriam-Webster Online). Other types of websites should be decided on a case-by-case basis."


 * Personally, I think that your version of the ref was correct. The online magazine is called E! and is published by NBCUniversal; the site isn't named "E!. NBCUniversal". Deor (talk) 14:41, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I thought it probably was ok, but it's always best to check these things out. I think I've found a way to stop the italic text appearing by adding two apostrophes before and after the journal's title. I'll change it again and hope for the best. This is Paul (talk) 15:07, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Cite error - Johnny Test
Hey friends, I'm looking at the Reference section at List of Johnny Test episodes. There is a cite error on the page, which tells me that "Boomerange_note" was named, but never defined. It appears the date is being transcluded from Johnny Test (season 6) in the Explanatory Notes section. I'm not sure what I can do to fix this; was hoping someone could chime in. Thanks, you hard-working rascal you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:00, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * The problem is that only part of the Johnny Test (season 6) page is transcluded. The part transcluded is between the   tags.  For the references to be succesfully transcluded they must also be between these tags.  What is happening is that some references are being used more than once with named references, the full ref is outside the onlyinclude tags and inside the shortened   form is used.  The problem can be fixed by swapping over the full ref with one of the shortened refs inside the onlyinclude tags.  If none of that makes any sense to you, ask for someone here to help do it for you.  Spinning  Spark  16:20, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Ah, thank you! I was able to make the fix. (Although I accidentally thanked you as SpinningShark during my first run-through. Sorry 'bout dat.) I appreciate the assist. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:39, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. The name thing seems to be a common mistake.  Perhaps I'll change my username to that to avoid confusion.  Spinning  Spark  16:54, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Changing the title of an article (Canadian Association of Accredited Mortgage Professionals)
Hello,

I would like to modify the title of an article that I authored: Canadian Association of Accredited Mortgage Professionals

I would like to change it to: Canadian Association of Accredited Mortgage Professionals (CAAMP). This is so that it more easily found when searching, as many people know the association by its acronym.

Please let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stoox123 (talk • contribs) 17:02, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Although it didn't get attached with an underscore as part of your message, I presume that you want the (CAAMP) to be part of the name. Much better from the standpoint of how Wikipedia works (IMO) would be to have CAAMP be a redirect to Canadian Association of Accredited Mortgage Professionals. That way if someone searches on CAAMP, it would take them to the redirect page which would then go to the article which has the full name. This is like the way that USA redirects to the United States. Does that work for you?Naraht (talk) 17:12, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I've created the redirect. Someone with more knowledge of the subject organization should provide links from other articles to the article so that the orphan tag can be removed.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:46, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Links fixed for clarity.--ukexpat (talk) 18:48, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

More on the Reference Desk question
So I went ahead and reposted my reply on the Computer Reference Desk, only to have it deleted saying "banned users are not allowed to edit". Not only was I not banned here, but I did not even include any content written by the banned user, only my own text. Still the question got deleted. Is this behaviour supposed to happen? Will Wikipedia remove every question about the same subject, even if they are entirely unconnected to the banned user? J I P &#124; Talk 18:23, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * You were reverted by the troll himself.  Spinning Spark  19:26, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Just to clarify Spinningspark's response, you, JIP, did nothing wrong. Our currently active ref-desk troll is the one who reverted you.  They have been blocked in the mean time.  You should carry on and please be aware that what one repeatedly blocked troll does to entertain themselves does not count as what "Wikipedia" as a community does.  I hope you soon learn to tell the difference.  -- Jayron  32  19:31, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment
Hi there, I am on a dispute with another editor, and at this stage I am trying to post a claim on the request a comment resource but the layout turns out messy actually, I copied the template to my Sandbox and then posted back once filled to the space provided on the link added above after pressing the "create an RFC/U" button. It is not very helpful. Any hints will be much appreciated. Thanks Iñaki LL (talk) 21:46, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Why are you transcluding the template into sandbox? You have no idea what other functions that template carries out automatically (and neither do I).  The template is expecting to be substituted onto the newly created RFC page.  If it isn't, something is bound to go pear shaped.  Start again, this time following the instructions.  Spinning  Spark  22:29, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

List of smoking bans in the United States
north carolina overturned its bill sited Senate Bill 703.http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Sessions/2013/Bills/Senate/HTML/S703v2.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbotbyl (talk • contribs) 22:04, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Suggestions for changes to articles are generally put on the talk page for the relevant article. You can put your suggestion, if you don't feel bold enough to make the change yourself, on Talk:List of smoking bans in the United States.  Dismas |(talk) 02:06, 11 June 2014 (UTC)