Help desk
< November 10	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 12 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

November 11

[edit] at same size as title?

For new pages (ones I apparently don't have cached), suddenly the [edit] to edit the top section is at the same size as the title rather than being much smaller. Anyone have any idea why? If I can't figure out a way to shrink it again, I'll turn off the option to have the edit for the top section.Naraht (talk) 01:02, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please give an example of such a page (after verifying that it still happens on that page). ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 01:13, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It would help if you said what operating system and browser you are using. (If the answers are "Android", and "Chrome", the problem may be due to the "font boosting" that Google does, messing up many things.) Maproom (talk) 01:30, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It has stopped. If something similar occurs, I'll include the information (which was Windows 7 and Chrome).Naraht (talk) 20:07, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for a writer

I would like to find someone to write my article so I can be linked to various books/tv shows/etc. ive appeared on. It's been years and several shows, I need to do this finally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.20.17.243 (talk) 01:27, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Gather a list of source material that people can read about your life, and provide those source materials at this page for requesting articles. The chance that someone takes on your request is based mostly on the depth, quality, and independence of the source material. --Jayron32 02:05, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Beta mobile version of Wiki

I'm wondering what happened to the Beta Mobile version of Wikipedia in the last couple of weeks! Suddenly, I could not click on a section title in an article to expand it. What kind of function did they put in there, that will not work on my BlackBerry OS 6.0? It worked before! --Skol fir (talk) 02:33, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think I answered my own question by looking at the HTML code for an example article. The first heading One_World_Trade_Center#Original_building that is collapsible in this article has the following HTML code:

DESKTOP VERSION of the collapsible heading

<h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Original_building_.281970.E2.80.932001.29">
<span id="Original_building"></span>Original building (1970–2001)</span><a href="#/
editor/1" title="Edit section: Original building (1970–2001)" data-section="1"
 class="icon icon-edit-enabled edit-page icon-32px">Edit</a></h2>

MOBILE VERSION below

...<h2 class="section-heading collapsible-heading icon icon-text icon-15px
 icon-arrow-down" tabindex="0" aria-haspopup="true" aria-controls="collapsible-block-0">
<span class="mw-headline" id="Original_building_.281970.E2.80.932001.29">
<span id="Original_building"></span>Original building (1970–2001)</span>
<a href="#/editor/1" title="Edit section: Original building (1970–2001)" 
data-section="1" class="icon icon-edit-enabled edit-page icon-32px">Edit</a></h2>

For some reason this "icon" is not working due to Blackberry OS 6.0 not recognizing the HTML code for the mobile version. Skol fir (talk) 22:34, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just tested the same functions (collapsible headers, 2nd order) on my Blackberry. I don't know if someone—who is knowledgeable about coding for the HTML behind all the Wiki pages—saw my earlier calls for help, but something has changed. I am now able to click on the "icon" for a collapsed header (arrow down) and open the contents, thus making the arrow on the left go up, revealing all the contents under that header. I am pleased! So, I can still use my 3 yr old Blackberry! That's a relief, as I was not in the position of purchasing a new one at this time. Skol fir (talk) 23:15, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nominate for deletion or not?

I know about nomination for deletion, I nominated an article once before. I learned that it's an arduous and inconvenient process that I really do not want to do unless I feel that I will be vindicated. In any case, High modernism reads like an argument for climate change deniers and it has been referenced in certain places to support that point of view. The article needs to be rewritten somehow, and should not stand in its current form, but I think its concept may be widespread enough that there should still be a page on it. I don't know. What is the right course of action? — Preceding unsigned comment added by StainlessSteelScorpion (talk • contribs) 03:43, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have an opinion on the article but will say that if you turn on Twinkle in your preferences, nominating an article is a very easy and painless process. Dismas|^(talk) 03:50, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say those using it that way show their complete and utter lack of comprehension of the article. Combat the abuse, don't attack the article they misuse. --Orange Mike | Talk 03:53, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On the flip side of that coin, Climate change denial seems extremely POV to me starting with the title. It doesn't attempt to present both sides of the issue fairly, that's in Global warming controversy. I objected strongly on those grounds but was summarily ignored. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 04:03, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with StainlessSteelScorpion. "High modernism" is not a concept, or a school of thought; it is a term of abuse. Maproom (talk) 08:50, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The term has widespread currency and there would be little chance of the article being deleted. The right course of action, as I see it, is to open a discussion on the article's talk page, setting out specific objections and suggested improvements. (I'm a bit puzzled by the question, as there is no mention of climate in the article): Noyster (talk), 16:08, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Noah Pawlowski

I created a page about a Living Person of note, within the article were several hot links providing direct credible evidence of the claim being made, ie plays for TEAM X (team x is a clickable link taking you to team x webpage, where the individual is shown to be on the roster). I was then warned that without references the page would be slated for deletion. Am I missing something? These links clearly verify the truth of the claims made, is it simply that they need to be in a different format?

Thanks for your time

YCCC--YouCallThisClean? (talk) 05:46, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. the page in question --- Noah Pawlowski

@YouCallThisClean?: I've cleaned up the references for you. We don't reference statements in articles by linking various words and phrases to the external source. We put them at the end of the statements that they act as references for in "ref" tags. If you edit the article and go through the article's history, you can see how I made those changes. Also, see References for beginners.

That said, I don't know if the subject of the article is notable enough for an article. The notability requirements for athletes is at WP:ATHLETE. Dismas|^(talk) 06:19, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noah Pawlowski - fails the WP:NFOOTY guidelines.--ukexpat (talk) 14:41, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Most of article is unreferenced and reads like a pamphlet

Random Page took me to Malaysia Hindudharma Mamandram. I started fixing non-native English errors, like missing articles (a and the), but noticed that most of the sections have no references and read like a promotional (or at least descriptive) pamphlet from the organization itself. I've added {{Unreferenced section}} to most of the §§, but how do I address the other issue, apparent self-promotion? --Thnidu (talk) 07:34, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thnidu, The best step is to do a search and find references. If you are unable to find references, you may tag, or, being bold remove all unreferenced information. All promotional language should be removed. You may also notify the author on the talk page. --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 13:33, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fauzan: OK, thanks. --Thnidu (talk) 17:42, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Velu.naikker has apparently done nothing on WP since June 2008, when they created that article (search results). I've left a note on their talk page, which I had to create.

Fauzan: I've deleted the unsourced, pamphlety material and replaced it with a few basic facts from the top of the organization's own website. That left very little, so I've tagged it as a stub for Hinduism and Malaysia. --Thnidu (talk) 08:05, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Moving embryonic article back to user space

I came across Gwen Parry-Jones an "article" which is so embryonic that it should be in User-space or Draft, not article-space. I'm not sure of the best way to deal with this. Do I:-

Just speedy the article? - which will frustrate the author
Move the article to User-space? - AFAIK this will leave a redirect, which I cannot remove - so do I then speedy the redirect?
Apply at requested moves
Hope that a passing Admin will just do it (please)

- Arjayay (talk) 08:47, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OrangeMike has moved it to Draft:Gwen Parry-Jones.--ukexpat (talk) 14:43, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - Arjayay (talk) 14:47, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

how

hi how i add a subject — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.168.189.29 (talk) 13:39, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Your first article.--ukexpat (talk) 14:44, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Work In PR - Want to Submit Article on Client

Hi - I understand there has been much discussion around PR people submitting/editing articles on behalf of clients and want to abide by best practices, without breaching conflict of interest rules. My client does want to submit a factual article on the company for submission on Wikipedia - what's the best way to go about this? Also, there is an existing article on one of the client's brands that isn't up-to-date with current information. How can this be rectified? Is there a way for me to work directly with an editor to edit/submit properly? Thanks. Lisasimone.richards (talk) 15:41, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The advice in general is set out here. The basic rule is to disclose that you have a conflict of interest, and use Talk pages. The normal method for an existing article would be to post the corrections you'd want on the Talk page, explaining that you have a conflict of interest, and use the {{request edit}} tag to ask someone involved to take a look at your requested edits. That way, they're being made by someone uninvolved, so there's less of a potential bias issue. With respect to new articles, it's normally best to use the articles for creation process; it can take a while for the reviewers to get around to reviewing any particular page, because we're a bit snowed under with creation requests at the moment, but it's the best way to make sure that everything is being done properly and above-board. --ais523 18:15, 11 November 2014 (U T C)

@Lisasimone.richards: for the existing article the same advice about going to the talk page is probably best. You would want to provide independent relaible sources that show the information currently in the article is outdated. You could edit it yourself if the information is not controversial.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:30, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help with posting

Hello,

I have a client that hired me to create their Wikipedia page. I got a note saying that it contained copywritten material. Is there a way to use the info with the company's permission? If not, how do we go about creating a page?

Thanks,

Kristin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kristinhege (talk • contribs) 17:07, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you have been 'hired by a client', editing Wikipedia articles would contravene the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest guidelines. As for using material from a company website, this is an encyclopaedia, not a platform for free advertising - it is highly unlikely that such material would ever be suitable for inclusion in an article. Any material, if it were acceptable, included from elsewhere would have to be released per the process described at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission - and note that this means that it could be reused with attribution under a Creative Commons license anywhere. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:18, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the fact that editing on behalf of your client violates conflict of interest guidelines, you ask about using copyrighted material with the company's permission. That is likely to be not feasible, because releasing the copyrighted material has the possibly unintended consequence (as noted in passing by AndyTheGrump) that it releases the material for reuse by anyone anywhere in the world under the Creative Commons copyleft. That is, the company can't approve the use of their material only for Wikipedia. They have to release it for use anywhere in the world, or leave it under full copyright, and in the latter case, we can't use it. To answer your second question: "If not, how do we go about creating a page?" You probably can't, because of conflict of interest. You could try requesting an article at WP:Requested Articles, but that is very backlogged. You could create an article in draft space and submit it for review, using wording that is rewritten from the copyrighted wording so as not to be a copy-and-paste and not a close paraphrase. In that case, it might be accepted if it isn't overly promotional and if you establish notability, but you have to remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a directory, and not every company is entitled to an article. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:29, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And remember that when you asked about copyright at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2014 October 22#18:55:25, 22 October 2014 review of submission by Kristinhege you were given a link to WP:COPYRIGHT. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:22, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also: whatever you do here, you must learn anew to write clean, balanced English prose, not PR-speak. Your deleted draft advertisement (never an article) contained all the classic mistakes, from a products list to misuse of the word "solutions" to peacock words. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:55, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

information incorrect

Jackie Bouvier Kennedy is listed in the famous Georgetown alum pages as having attended George Washington University; I noted this on several sites in looking up other info--Mrs. Kennedy was a GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY graduate, not Georgetown you idiots! She left money and they named a dormitory after her at GWU. Other Kennedys attended at Georgetown but not her! You do know these are two different universities, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.161.195.132 (talk) 19:26, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are more likely to get inaccuracies corrected by being polite than by insulting the collective editors of Wikipedia. Discuss this at the talk page, Talk: Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis , without being hostile. (Some District of Columbia residents do not realize that they are two different universities.) Robert McClenon (talk) 20:50, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

According to the source used in her article, she attended GWU 1950-51 and Georgetown 1954. If that is incorrect, feel free to find a better source that says she never attended Georgetown. I don't know what "famous Georgetown alum pages" you refer to, as you didn't provide any link and I'm not feeling inclined to go hunt them down. But you don't have to have received a degree to be considered an alumnus of a school. Thank you. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 23:18, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How do I get my personal bio read by the general public?

I am totally blind and I need help to get my personal biography to be read on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drrandallnozawa (talk • contribs) 19:58, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming this User:Drrandallnozawa/sandbox is your 'personal biography', you don't. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and only contains articles on subjects shown to meet our notability guidelines, as demonstrated through significant coverage in third-party published reliable sources. We aren't a free web-hosting service. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:06, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Drrandallnozawa: See also Wikipedia:Autobiography. Note that the text in User:Drrandallnozawa/sandbox starts with a leading space. That prevents line wrapping and makes it hard to read for seeing people. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:53, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

how do I put one of those boxes on my page?

How do I make a box on my userpage? I'm talking about those boxes that show "this user likes Nintendo 3DS". — Preceding unsigned comment added by FamilycomputerFTW (talk • contribs) 20:09, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:Userboxes , that even has a search for looking for themNaraht (talk) 20:42, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is a similar userbox at Template:User Nintendo ds. Check that out as well! Cheers! Eurodyne (talk) 01:36, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

question,,,,tables

how would one go about creating a collapsible table that opens horizontally (not vertically), im not very good at table and chart creation.thank you--65.8.187.212 (talk) 22:03, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]