Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2014 March 7

= March 7 =

Referencing errors on Abdominal aortic aneurysm
Reference help requested.

I think I fixed the unnamed parameter error. Can you help me tell if that is right? Thanks.Bakerstmd (talk) 01:03, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Bakerstmd (talk) 01:03, 7 March 2014 (UTC)


 * You fixed the original error by changing  to , but that introduced another problem. It placed the article in the hidden Category:CS1 errors: dates. If you don't have an actual year then don't use the year parameter. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:59, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

How to amend project assessment table
I want to amend Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Contract bridge articles by quality statistics to add a class for Redirect. There are at present 10 redirects in the NA-Class which I want to change to Redirect-Class. It has been some time since I worked on the assessment table stuff and I forget how to amend it. Newwhist (talk) 01:46, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm far from an expert on this subject. But it looks to me that since "redirect" class is missing from that table, you have to add it. I think you'll need assistance from this bot - User:WP 1.0 bot to add a new class. You'll find more help on that page. C T F 8 3 !  02:31, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

cain's quest
hi could not find any info on cain's quest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.162.150.118 (talk) 01:59, 7 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia has no info on Cain's Quest Snowmobile Endurance Race. Articles can be requested at Requested articles or submitted at Article wizard. If you only want info for yourself then you need another site, for example an external search engine like http://google.com. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:11, 7 March 2014 (UTC)


 * You can find information about the race at http://cainsquest.com/ As noted by PrimeHunter, using a search engine like Google will get you an answer pretty quickly. -- Jayron  32  02:12, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Can I alter an already placed inline citation so that it can be repeated?
I am new to editing and am beginning to insert citations for an entry which has hardly any, and I now want to reuse a citation number to avoid repetition in the reference section. Can I alter the original citation in the edit page to allow it to do this? I have tried to add ref name=etc / (properly coded), but after doing this, and then using this for the citation number to repeat, it has not done so. The original citation was done using the refToolbar.

Can citations be made that are repeatable, using the refToolbar?

Many thanks Jyddcc — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jyddcc (talk • contribs) 04:05, 7 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Are you sure you've added it correctly? The first instance is a regular reference with "name=", and the rest are of the form . (See the guide below. Don't worry about the quotation marks; if you don't have a fancy name, they're not necessary.) These can also be added from the RefToolbar: Click the icon next to "Named references".

Anon 126  (talk - contribs) 04:35, 7 March 2014 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict) See WP:REFNAME for the syntax. In [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Unarius_Academy_of_Science&diff=598493289&oldid=598490652] you had an extra '>' before name. If you create the ref with the toolbar then there is ref name field. If the ref has already been created then you can just add the name manually. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:39, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

VibraSens
The article VibraSens has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * See WP:ADVERT

Updated article and I'll try my best to save my article and still working on it's modification.

Request you to please highlight the content or guide how I can avoid deletion of my article VibraSens.

As I tried searching for reason but there are many reasons and I am unable to correlate with them.

Also, if it is OK now then please remove the warning, or it is required to be removed from our end.

Please help.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkt.hq (talk • contribs) 05:04, 7 March 2014
 * Here are some reasons;


 * WP:NOTADVERTISING
 * WP:NPOV
 * WP:COI
 * WP:FIRST 88.104.31.21 (talk) 05:27, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Müller Wiseman Dairies Title
Hi,

I am trying to change the name used on the Müller Wiseman Dairies main title on the Wikipedia page, it is the only part that it won't let me edit. The problem with the title is that there is dash between Müller and Wiseman which shouldn't be there is there anyway I can take this out?

Coral — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.172.74.42 (talk) 10:41, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * You can't, because you're only an IP. You can make a request at Requested moves to have the page renamed. C T F 8 3 !  11:15, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and moved it for you, as the company's website has no dash. C T F 8 3 !  11:17, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Film Museum Society, Lahore, Pakistan.
I want to create a page:

Film Museum Society Lahore is a non-profit organization that conducts research on history and theory of Pakistani cinema and conducts related activities. The organization was established in 2007. The company is registered in Pakistan as well as USA with a proper registration/DUNS number. Please see https://www.facebook.com/pages/Film-Museum-Society-Lahore-Pakistan/411717272298676?notif_t=page_new_likes. You may also review the interview of the CEO in a recent issue of Blue Chip Magazine at http://bluechipmag.com/in-conversation-with-wajiha-rizvi/. Two more interviews were released by Express Urdu newspaper and Voice of America on Aaj TV http://www.express.pk/story/88459/#.UR30GDVICmY.facebook, and http://cdnbakmi.kaltura.com/p/1175831/sp/117583100/serveFlavor/entryId/1_wbbdhzvz/flavorId/1_yx2yrrsh/name/a.mp4. Please check these pages for details of some work conducted by the researchers especially the CEO at CRPkC/Film Museum Society in the past. The company has seven directors and limited funding to continue the work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wajiharaza (talk • contribs) 11:40, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * the first thing would be to show that the subject meets the requirements to have a stand alone article: that third party, reliably published sources have discussed the subject in a significant manner. Sources directly related to, coming from for initially founding the group are insufficient. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  11:46, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Images is too large
In the article Namsan Public Library the image from the infobox is huge, larger than the article itself. Could someone repair this? --Pustekuchen2014 (talk) 12:36, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * i moved the picture out of the template so it is a reasonable size now, but i cannot see why the template was making it huge, perhaps there was vandalism on the infobox template itself? we have had a lot of template related vandalism lately. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  12:51, 7 March 2014 (UTC)


 * The same in Kaesong Industrial Region and Myeong-dong. Looks like the infobox is not working as it should. --Pustekuchen2014 (talk) 12:50, 7 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Has this something to do with the last change done by Plastikspork here? --Pustekuchen2014 (talk) 12:52, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * yes, that appears to be the issue - it wasnt vandalism, but merely a side effect of someone trying to clean up the coding. i have let them know. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  12:58, 7 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Ok, well done, now the images are in a good size. Perhaps one should have a look at other changes of infobox templates done by this user in the case since settlement adds the px. --Pustekuchen2014 (talk) 12:57, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

How to handle a slash character in a page name
I'm currently reviewing an AfC draft that contains a "/" in the title. It is the actual name of the subject (a company) so changing the title is not an option. At present it appears as if the part of the name after the / is the page name and the part before is the name of the subdirectory where the page is. How do I move it so that the title is correctly displayed and linked/linkable? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:41, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * This might be useful: WP:NC-SLASH -- Glaisher  [talk]  12:47, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) The subpage feature is disabled in mainspace (see WP:NC-SLASH) so article names can contain "/" like any other character. Is there a problem moving it to a mainspace title with "/"? Or are you talking about a move to another namespace? PrimeHunter (talk) 12:49, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The draft is not ready for mainspace yet, so if possible I would like to move/format it in such a way that if/when a subsequent review does pass it into mainspace it will happen correctly. The move to mainspace is handled by a script which will actually drop the part of the name before the slash if it is presented as an actual slash character. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:00, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * If that is the case, moving manually might be the best option. (I haven't tried or known anything about the script). -- Glaisher  [talk]  13:04, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * It is not ready to be moved yet. I want to preempt/prevent an incorrect script-mediated move by a subsequent reviewer who may not be aware of the problem. Is there a way to format the draft page's title so that it will be correctly moved when someone uses the default script at AfC? BTW non-script moves are deprecated at AfC because the script does a number of other edits and cleanups to the page, it does not just simply move it. Manually doing the cleanups etc after a manual move from AfC is a complex onerous task that only the most experienced reviewers can competently perform.
 * Short version - Is there a way to format the slash in the title of a non-mainspace page so that it does not actually create a subdirectory but that forces it to accept the slash as an ordinary character in the title? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:41, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * No. What you can do now is use a page title without the slash and add a hatnote using correct title. I will make a proposal to disable subpages in the draft namespace. What is the draft in question? --  Gadget850talk 14:03, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * , please do not request that subpages be disabled for Draft: on BZ until there is clear community consensus for this. The reason for this is that the new article creation wizard I'm drafting up requires subpages for placing the editnotice and the submission templates.  Thanks. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 14:09, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Then there needs to be a clear process for handling page names with slashes. --  Gadget850talk 14:17, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree, and will add a note to mention what to do with possible "technical" restrictions in the "how to review" guide/tutorial so that new reviewers will know. Also, the script does not drop the part of the name, there is an input box there (screenshot) of where you want the draft moved to and it is up to the reviewer to make sure they type the title in correctly. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 14:32, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * FYI, the draft that prompted me to raise this issue is at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tsoi/Kobus & Associates, notice how the popup, if you have it activated, displays the title as "Kobus & Associates" and drops the "Tsoi/" part. Of course I know about the input box but I've seen many instances of reviewed articles being moved to wrong titles, usually by less experiences AfC reviewers, so the fact that the input box exists is not by itself sufficient to obviate the problem of drafts being accepted to incorrect titles.
 * @Technical 13, the example in the screencap you linked is not relevant as the "original" draft title did not contain such a slash. The script's automagically suggested title would actually simply have been "Pubsoft". You need to test the script on a draft title that does contain such a slash. A strong reminder to reviewers to check the title suggested by the script, and correct it when necessary, is indeed a good idea. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:19, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

, I think you are mistaken... Here is a screenshot(just updated the old image to use your example) of me reviewing Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tsoi/Kobus & Associates. The script correctly filled in "Tsoi/Kobus & Associates" in the box... However, I do agree that reviewers may need a strong reminder from time to time to check the title suggested by the script, and correct it when necessary. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 20:35, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll also note the code that populates that field can be found on line 5 of the submission.js script on github and you can test yourself by going to your developer console of your browser ( on Firefox) and typing in  to see what the script will give you for a value for suggested page name. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 20:38, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks everyone, I think we can put this matter (and myself) to bed, goodnight all. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:56, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Incorrect photo added
Not really sure if I'm on the right place but my friend's page has had a photo added that is not him. The page is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ransford_Addo I would like the photo removed. Thank you

216.151.31.23 (talk) 13:18, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Vandalism. Reverted. --13:20, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

The stupid thing that keeps saying you have messages
Since when did Wikipedia be a Real-time interaction chat service? I keep getting stuff at the top of my page saying you have one notification or two notifications or whatever for almost completely irreleveant things and I should like to turn it off. I come to Wikipedia to edit and improve articles and that requires thought and consideration, not these constant popups saying I have a message here or a message there. How do I turn them off? Si Trew (talk) 14:25, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm on Mozilla Firefox by the way. Si Trew (talk) 14:27, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Preferences. Notifications. (Top right, then far right) --Onorem (talk) 14:29, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. I try to make Wikipedia a little bit better each day, but I find these very distracting. Have done so, thanks for the pointer. Si Trew (talk) 15:12, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I argued against them. I lost. I've gotten used to the few I have checked. --Onorem (talk) 15:22, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Article references and sources
Hi, I'm working on improving the 1877 Wimbledon Championship article and have a few questions on article footers, specifically the combination of references and sources. 1.) In the help article on shortened footnotes a different terminology is used for these sections. The Notes header is the same but the help example uses Citations where the Wimbledon article uses References and it uses References where the article uses Sources. Is the current setup of the Wimbledon article (Notes, References, Sources) valid and would that specific aspect pass an FA review? 2.) How do you decide between adding another source versus another reference? If a source is cited only once does it need to be added to the sources list or should it just be a reference? In the current setup an additional source is added only if it is cited on multiple occasions in the article and in that case the reference section lists a shortened form (e.g. Gillmeister, p.103). 3.) The current setups uses tags in combination with whereas the help example uses  tags instead. Is there a preference for either method?--Wolbo (talk) 14:48, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * if the good people at FA want to deny status because the terminology used in the nominated article is, say Footnotes / References rather than their preferred Notes/Sources (or whatevah); then that is easy quick change to make if they identify it as an "issue" preventing FA status, so I wouldn't worry about that.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  15:26, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Not 'worried' about it and agree it would be easily fixed but it is still something I would like to know. Questions 2.) and 3.) are of more importance.--Wolbo (talk) 15:59, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * regarding 2) weigh the reliability and "academic stature" of the sources. if they are both of equal reliability and stature, then including both is preferable so that we are establishing that we are not WP:UNDUEly represent a single point of view. If the proposed second source has greater reliability and academic stature, the certainly add that. If the proposed has less stature, then there would not be any reason to include it rather than using the existing source for another point. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  16:55, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thx for the response but that's not really what I'm asking. Let me try to ask question 2.) in a different way. Suppose I want to add a single citation from a book. In that case do I add that citation to A) the References section ONLY (in the current setup of the article) e.g. "Sally Mitchell, ed. (2011). Victorian Britain An Encyclopedia. Abingdon: Routledge. p. 791. ISBN 978-0415668514." or B) do I add "Sally Mitchell, ed. (2011). Victorian Britain An Encyclopedia. Abingdon: Routledge. p. 791. ISBN 978-0415668514." to the Sources section AND additionally add "Mitchell 2011, p. 791" to the References section? Hope that clarifies my question.--Wolbo (talk) 20:51, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The answer is neither A nor B. You don't add your new reference to either the references section or the notes section.  You add your new reference after the text which you wish to be supported by the reference, and you put it between tags.  See WP:Referencing for beginners as to how it works.  The  tag works in a similar way to but provides explanatory notes instead of references.  You would add the ref to the sources section only if different pages were being used as references in different places through the article. --David Biddulph (talk) 23:17, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thx. That is actually what I do (should have phrased that better). Up to now I always used in the text, or if the same citation is used multiple times . The citation shows up in the References section (where  is placed) and a separate Sources section is not needed. The disadvantage of this method is that if several citations from the same source (e.g. a book) are used, each with a different page number, the  will show a lot of duplicate info (see e.g. this article). My understanding is that in these situations a Sources section should be used so that the full book details, e.g. "Tarran, Bruce (2013). George Hillyard: The Man Who Moved Wimbledon. Kibworth Beauchamp: Matador. ISBN 978-1780885490." show up only once in the Sources section and the shortened footnotes, e.g. "  " and  are placed in the text and show up in the Reference sections as Tarran 2013, pp. 77–107. and Tarran 2013, pp. 82. 1.) Is this understanding correct? 2.) Is there a preference between using the  tag in the text or placing a tag to create the shortened footnotes for the References section?--Wolbo (talk) 01:15, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Where did my questions go
Approximately on Mar 3, 2014 I posted some questions on the (Help Desk) page, now I can't find or see them any longer? What happened to the questions and what is the policy regards this issue? Polkateer (talk) 16:47, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Looks like it went to the archive.--Wolbo (talk) 17:03, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * All discussions on this page are archived - usually after there have been no additions/alterations for 3 full days. There are several ways to find them, but I suggest you:-
 * Find the exact title of your request - do this by clicking "contributions" at the top RH side of your screen, and select the edit you raised it in by clicking on the date and time
 * Copy the title, return to this page and paste it into the "Search the help desk archives" box near the top of the page, click "Search the archives" and it will come up at, or near, the top of the list, click that and it will appear.
 * Almost nothing legitimate in Wikipedia is ever lost - you just have to know how to find it - Arjayay (talk) 17:20, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * A correction to Arjayay's response: only in The Teahouse does the length of time after an addition/alteration affect the archiving. Here, all the questions asked on a particular day are archived at once, and how long that takes varies.— Vchimpanzee  ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 19:18, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

How do I tag a page for merge to a DUPLICATE article?
Other than talk, which might languish, what is the process for reporting duplicate pages? Notably http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Miller_%28wide_receiver%29 is an inferior duplicate of the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Miller_%28athlete%29 but has information which should be merged to it. Dfoofnik (talk) 17:32, 7 March 2014 (UTC)


 * The quickest solution is probably to just take whatever is not in one article and add it to the other, including sources. Then make a redirect out of the article that is now lacking.  If it were me, I'd add everything to the "athlete" article.  See WP:MERGE.  Dismas |(talk) 17:39, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Kazys Morkunas
Hello

Please allow me to fill in information. Kazys_Morkunas

It is not true that all copied description about Kazys Morkunas. And to coincide with craftatlas information that proves that the information is true and unimaginative. This artist must be a wikipedia page in english language. Information will be neatly boils within a few days. Than you — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregSproles (talk • contribs) 17:42, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The article Kazys Morkunas has been deleted three times in the last 24 hours, as unsourced, as a copyright infringement, and at an author's request. Maproom (talk) 18:24, 7 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Maybe a good approach is to work on the article in your Sandbox so that you can get it up to speed. Or, you could go through Articles for Creation. But if the article content is problematic, it doesn't make sense for us to let it go live on the promise that you'll fix it in a few days. What makes more sense is that you fix it now, and submit it in a few days. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:36, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Re: Thomas Parker/ The Wanted
Good Afternoon,

In the information written about The Wanted, in particular Thomas Parker, it has no mention that prior to failing to get though the first round of X Factor he was discovered,developed and managed by Tiger Entertainment.

Please can you include this in the information.

Best wishes, Karen Walters (Aka Omani) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.254.183.89 (talk) 17:48, 7 March 2014 (UTC)


 * What does that add to the article other than being thinly-veiled advertising for the agency?--ukexpat (talk) 19:42, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Enough support for proposal?
Is the support for this proposal enough to implement it? Would it be considered disruptive if I boldly (re)implemented the functionality myself per that discussion? --  Toshio   Yamaguchi  19:11, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Infobox Station
The header of the infobox Station on Zuidplein_(Rotterdam_Metro) (and many others like this one) has an issue. The white title on a white background makes it invisible. Originally the infobox should work. I do not see what the issue is here. And neither know who created the infobox. Any help appreciated. Kind regards, Timelezz (talk) 21:52, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Simple misuse of parameters and trying to make the template do something it's not designed for... I've to get the basics back in order... Not sure about the rest of the details but I'm sure you can fill them in from there. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 22:17, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The problem was in the Style template, which I have now fixed so that it does not read from the Color template. All stations should now read without having to edit every one. Yes, I know, the problem could have been anywhere. Sw2nd (talk) 23:31, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Kind regards, Timelezz (talk) 00:05, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Sw2nd, it solved the issue for some articles. But I still come across some that have an issue. For example, Leuvehaven (Rotterdam Metro), Rijnhaven (Rotterdam Metro), Wilhelminaplein (Rotterdam Metro), Slinge (Rotterdam Metro), Maashaven (Rotterdam Metro). Can you take another look at it? Thank you so much! Kind regards, Timelezz (talk) 00:08, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Oops! Fixed now. Sw2nd (talk) 00:16, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Perfect! I consider this one solved. With your graceful help! Timelezz (talk) 00:36, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

No original content (external links)
Wcrosbie removed http://www.nwlean.net/leandefs.htm from external links (article Lean manufacturing allegating "no original content". Would someone mind explaining how a glossary of very often used terms is original content? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lbertolotti (talk • contribs) 22:27, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi, have you tried contacting and asking 'em? Sort of hard for other editors to get inside someone else's head. Talk page is here. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:31, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * rarely is the correct question "Why was this external link removed?" - you are almost always better off asking "Why would this link be appropriate?" WP:EL -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  05:12, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

I've already opened this discussion on the lean manufacturing talk page (therefore not a bilateral discussion, but an open discussion). Perhaps I didn't make myself clear: my question is not why did he think it was original content, but how does wikipedia standards apply to such an issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lbertolotti (talk • contribs) 05:10, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * as i told you and linked to the guideline: WP:EL. there must be very good reason to include a link. wikipedia is not a link farm. Every external link must meet the criteria and be individually justified for inclusion in that article. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  06:58, 8 March 2014 (UTC)