Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2014 June 23

= June 23 =

Change user name
When I created my account I was not aware that my user name was going to be too close to the page I'm trying to create. I'm trying to create a pge for myself. Back in 2006 I created a User Name of dandipaola. The page I want to create is "Dan DiPaola" which is my name. Can you share with me how I may change my user name from "dandipaola"  to Dan DiPaola with the correct capitals and spaces. The system won't let me create a page with that name because it is too close to that user name

Dan DiPaola — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dandipaola (talk • contribs) 00:14, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Basically don't create a page about yourself. If you're anyone important, one will be created by someone else. See WP:COI C T F 8 3 !  01:32, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * To answer the question, go to Changing username C T F 8 3 !  01:36, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately Dan, CTF83! is correct. If you were to create an article about yourself, it would be seen as a conflict of interest and likely deleted (as has been done . However, you can draft a potential article by following the instructions laid out at articles for creation and submit it for review. If you are deemed noteworthy enough, the article might well be moved to the mainspace. However, before you even begin, I'd recommend looking over Notability &mdash; this subpage in particular &mdash; and re-evaluating whether your activities satisfy the threshold for inclusion listed at those pages. The vast majority of people do not fulfill those sets of criteria. As for your question, the username "Dan DiPaola" is actually not even registered yet. You could follow CTF83!'s link above and go through the instructions outlined there, but since you only have one live edit to your name (which was to post here), I'd recommend just starting a new account under your username of choice. Kurtis (talk) 03:53, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Log entries "resolve"
What does "resolve" mean in the logs? I clicked Special:Log/Rodhullandemu by mistake, and to my surprise I found a whole list of "resolve" items, e.g."contribs"Note that no page name is given, so I can't check any specific page's history. The user was indef-blocked in 2011, not even retaining email access, so this entry obviously reflects something that isn't exactly editing. Nyttend (talk) 05:04, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * The html source says  so it's a leftover from Article Feedback Tool/Version 5 which has since been removed. I don't think the feedback pages are visible now but it appears blocked users could post to them. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:10, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * For more info, the word refers to what the piece of feedback was marked as. Other leftovers include "helpful", "unhelpful", and "noaction", as well as "hide", which I think was only available to oversighters and/or rollbackers (I think the last might be from new user feedback or whatever as I can't remember anything marking an article feedback piece as non-actionable.) - Purplewowies (talk) 16:20, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

A cleanup template on the top of a page might not be enough...
What can one do after adding a cleanup template to a totally butchered article to only find this template's addition just is not enough of a step in the right direction to take? Where can one go? What choices are available? I would like to consider myself a fairly experienced user but never sought the answer to these questions. Typically, templates are enough of an addition to an article to satisfy me. Now I finally have stumbled across what is a total of three disasters that are burned in my brain. I don't have the time to rewrite freaking entire Wikipedia articles although I wouldn't mind if I did. These pages rely on sources that build their world view according to the Old Testament. For example, I was shocked to read an Adam in the Garden of Eden-esque story on a feline communication article. Wikipedia should instead contain sources of scientific nature which do in fact exist. Long story short, I'll end it here, is I'm wondering where or if there is a place where I can say, "Hey! This needs fixing. Somebody get on it!" and somebody gets on it and fixes it. I did notice a Help Out section in the Community Portal, which is pretty much exactly what I am looking for, but it seems as if I can not add my problem articles that I find in need of work... major work... to this. Marc Bago (talk) 07:51, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * @Marc Bago:  You can ruthlessly pare it down, possibly to a stub, and though doing so not at all limited only to unsourced content, it's often more straightforward where it is unsourced (note WP:BURDEN); you can look in the page history for a prior, better version to revert to; you can ask for help with a rewrite at an applicable and active WikiProject (you can sometimes locate applicable ones by looking to the talk page to see if they've identified the article topic as in their bailiwick); you can nominate it for speedy deletion, for proposed deletion or take it to articles for deletion, if it qualifies for one of them. It's very hard to give targeted advice without knowing what page you are talking about. Can you specify?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:45, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * @Fuhghettaboutit:  Hi. Re: Example of an article I consider to be in need of serious help. Here: dog-cat relationship. I don't know how to link to the state it was in when I stumbled across it, but look at the version in history before I made a snip of text. Also notice how long this article has been in this subpar and downright incorrect state. At the time I first came across it, I felt as if I was reading a Christian fundamentalist's heavily distorted take on the relationship between dogs and cats based solely on their observations of two pets they have at home and that only. The whole article just reads as trashy. What's disappointing is I came across plenty of scholarly studies without any difficulty on this type of communication and whatnot that could actually fit very well in the article. Plus it's a darn interesting topic to read about. Yeah. That's about the size of it. Marc Bago (talk) 13:35, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I see that the article has been heavily edited down today. Since the two experienced editors who edited it did not tag it for any of the three types of deletion, neither will I.  However, in general, if an article is really bad, any of the three types of deletion action is a reasonable response.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:19, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Tata Power Solar Wikipedia Page
I received an email from --ELEKHHT stating that our content has been removed for copyright violations. I am the authorized representative of the company Tata Power Solar, for posting the information & as per our knowledge, we did not post anything which does not belong to us. Could you please help us understand your actions.

Regards Prashant Tandon Deputy Manager - Marketing & Communications [Contact details redacted] Tps 25 (talk) 12:11, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * see Donating copyrighted materials for the process. you would need to fully release your content for use by anyone anywhere. But even if you did release it under such terms, it is highly unlikely that content from your website would be appropriate for an encyclopedia article. see WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:NOTADVERT. Does your company meet the criteria for a stand alone article? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  12:18, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * And also look at WP:COI - X201 (talk) 13:01, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

How to change photo file name
Hello,

Is there any way that I can change the file name of a photo that I uploaded? I looked at the page that has the photo but I can't find a way to change the file name.

Please let me know as soon as possible.

Thanks! --M.Renae (talk) 13:30, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I wonder if this is about "Photo of Carol Kicinski in kitchen, 2013.jpg"? That photo has been uploaded to en:Wikipedia, where its page says it is "a candidate to be copied to Wikimedia Commons". So you could bypass the copying, by uploading it directly to Wikimedia Commons but with your preferred name. Maproom (talk) 15:08, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Alternatively, I have file-mover rights on en Wikipedia so I can move it for you if you let me know the desired new name.--ukexpat (talk) 15:14, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * If you could move it for me that would be great, just to make sure I don't screw anything up in the process! I'd like the photo to be called "Gluten free Carol Kicinski" instead of "Photo of Carol Kicinski in kitchen, 2013" Thank you so much for your guidance! --M.Renae (talk) 17:21, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Not sure that I see the point of that move. Why not just move it to "Carol Kicinski.jpg"?--ukexpat (talk) 19:37, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I would like it to have gluten free in the name for SEO purposes. --M.Renae (talk) 19:51, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Sorry but we don't do anything for "SEO purposes" - this is an encyclopedia, and we don't care about search engine hits or optimisation.--ukexpat (talk) 20:02, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Draft:Susan Lee MacDonald
Reference help requested.

Hello, I'm having some difficulty trying to fix problems with the missing references list for the Draft: Susan Lee MacDonald. I see the two columns of text but seem unable to edit and remove this from the sandbox and into the userspace. Please help.

Thanks, QueenofKOREA — Preceding unsigned comment added by QueenofKorea (talk • contribs) 13:31, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * The link you have given in the header of your question is to a page showing the difference between two versions of the draft: that is why it is in two columns, and why you can't edit it. Here is a link to the draft itself: Draft:Susan_Lee_MacDonald. Maproom (talk) 15:12, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

About: editing language links
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stevioside has no link to http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stevioside

while https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steviol_glycoside has a language link to http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stevioside

the page http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steviolglycoside has no language link at all

I wanted to edit the language links, but that is not possible ("...already has...")

Tnx for your time Berthgmn (talk) 14:13, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Fixed, I believe. The problem, as you indicated, was that the Wikidata entry wikidata:Q415043, which was linked to nl:Stevioside and similar terms in other languages, was linked to the English article Steviol glycoside, and Wikidata entries cannot be linked to more than one article in the same Wikipedia. I have fixed it by changing it to link to Stevioside, and separately, linked Steviol glycoside to nl:Steviolglycoside, which has created a separate Wikidata entry wikidata:Q2805600. It is unfortunate that when you hit this problem, it doesn't give you any links to anything useful, not even to the Wikidata entry.
 * (Incidentally, the way I found it was by going to http://www.wikidata.org and searching for Stevioside. It used to be that the "languages" section in the sidebar gave you a link to that, but it doesn't seem to any more).
 * ✅. --ColinFine (talk) 15:51, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Ellipses
The Wiki Help on ellipses seems to hover between recommending "(...)" and plain " ... ", as far as I can make out. Are both permitted? And what about "[...]", which I have sometimes seen? --P123ct1 (talk) 16:50, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:ELLIPSES does not call for "(...)" at all. I think you are mistaking the parenthetical use of brackets for a prescription to apply brackets.  I believe that some style guides call for square brackets if the material removed spans more than one passage (e.g. whole paragraphs, or even chapters have been spanned).  However, our guidelines say use square brackets only when the quoted text itself already contains three consecutive periods.  Spinning  Spark  18:38, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was taking the round brackets too literally. I take what you say about square brackets is a translation of: "Square brackets, however, may optionally be used for precision, to make it clear that the ellipsis is not itself quoted; this is usually only necessary if the quoted passage also uses three periods in it to indicate a pause or suspension." !!!! --P123ct1 (talk) 19:07, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Cite error: There are tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).
I cannot figure out where the error is in the reference.

Gary Denbo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brentdenbo (talk • contribs) 21:11, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi Brentdenbo - the error was exactly that. There were ref tags on the page with nothing in them. I have fixed the issue in this edit. ~ Super  Hamster  Talk Contribs 21:19, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

ToC in timeline articles
We have articles, such as Timeline of the 2014 pro-Russian conflict in Ukraine, with exorbitantly long ToCs. I know there are special kinds of ToCs, but I don't know what kind would be appropriate for such an article as this, or how to implement it if there was one. Could anyone help out? It just looks rather ridiculous at the moment. I haven't been editing Timeline of the 2014 Crimean crisis, but that article also has a similarly long ToC. RGloucester — ☎ 23:31, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * TOC limit can be useful, but in this case it won't help. Perhaps the article doesn't really need a ToC, or maybe a horizontal ToC would work better than TOC right - Horizontal TOC. In any event it should be discussed on the talk page.--ukexpat (talk) 00:39, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * One can limit the depth of the ToC. For instance  limits it to level two headings, which in this case will just be the months.  There are many ways of manipulating the ToC, the question is what do you want the ToC to look like?  If you can state that we may be able to advise you better.  Maybe a better solution is to structure the headings on some other basis than date. Just because it's a timeline doesn't mean that the headings cannot be something more meaningful than just a plain date.  Spinning  Spark  00:44, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't really "want" it to look like anything, as long as it is rendered in a less clunky and obtuse manner then it is now (and also in a way more helpful to the reader). That is, if it is possible to do so. A horizontal ToC might be worth trying, but I'm sure how that will be rendered. I personally would not be in favour of restructuring the headings, as that would be quite difficult and time consuming. The "limited to level two heading" ToC seems like it might be appropriate. RGloucester  — ☎ 03:07, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I've adopted the "horizontal" option. It seems to do the job fairly well, though perhaps not it the best way possible. Thanks for your assistance. RGloucester  — ☎ 05:22, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * We can probably get you any ToC you want, but if you are not able to express what that ToC would be we can't really help. The basic problem is that the headings are a list of consecutive dates.  The list can be shortened by missing some out (most simply by just listing the months) or by listing a range of dates which point to the top date in the range or any number of other schemes.  But first there needs to be a specification of what is actually wanted before the technical details of how to achieve it can be worked out.  Spinning  Spark  12:16, 24 June 2014 (UTC)