Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2016 November 25

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< November 24 << Oct | November | Dec >> November 26 >
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 25[edit]

Issues with inbox & documentation pages[edit]

Hello,

2 issues here. Any time I insert an infobox, it aligns to the left, does not have borders, and various other formatting issues. I've verified the Navbar, Navbox, Infobox modules are installed properly in addition to the various templates. I can't figure out what could be causing this.

Additionally, all of my /doc pages are formatted incorrectly as well - no background colors/borders etc. Maybe these are related? Thank you for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stillhouse (talk • contribs) 00:14, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Stillhouse: This is a help page for the English Wikipedia. Are you referring to a wiki not run by the Wikimedia Foundation? It sounds like you need code in MediaWiki:Common.css and maybe elsewhere. It's hard to tell without a link to your wiki. Anyway, questions about the MediaWiki with no relation to Wikipedia or other Wikimedia wikis belong at mw:Project:Support desk. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:26, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Changes to the Biography of Robert Payne[edit]

I am Robert Payne's widow and proprietor of the literary rights to all his works. The biography that was there previously was disjointed, disconnected and quite frankly didn't make too much sense. A more detailed biography of his early life and his literary career is on the website www.robertpayneauthor.com. Reference Notes at the bottom of the biography on this website gives the sources for all the information. I would appreciate any help I can get from any of your editors in order to correct the Wikipedia biography. Thank you.

Sheila Lalwani Payne — Preceding unsigned comment added by Payneslp (talk • contribs) 05:27, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Payneslp: Welcome to Wikipedia, Ms Payne. I understand and appreciate your concern to improve this article. I see that your first attempted edit was automatically reverted, because it removed large portions of the article without explanation, and this we discourage as "blanking". I'll take a look at the article in the next day or so, but I'd have to point out that we prioritise independent sources over a website set up in the author's own name. Such a website can, of course, be used to locate such independent sources.
Should you have concerns over any other article, the first place to voice them would be the "talk page" for that same article: in the case you raise it would be Talk:Robert Payne (author): Noyster (talk), 11:18, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The article has now been revised and Ms Payne has been notified on her talk page: Noyster (talk), 01:05, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article about proposed event[edit]

I am thinking to create an article of TEDx Event that is proposed to be held in our city. I saw source codes of many TEDx events and didn't find any that is PROPOSED. Thus, I want to get the source code to create a proposed TEDx event article where I can include stuffs like "To be held on". Sorry for my bad language! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hell walker guy (talk • contribs) 05:55, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hell walker guy. Wikipeida only has articles about subjects that are notable, which means (in Wikipedia) that people who have no connection with them have thought it appropriate to publish substantial material about them. It is rare (not unknown, but rare) for an event in the future to meet that criterion. So, if you can find substantial published writing about this event, that does not come from the organisers, sponsors, or participants (and is not just based on interviews and press releases from them) then you could try writing an article, which summarises what these independent sources say bout it. Remember that Wikipedia has essentially no interest in what you know, or what I know, or what people associated with the event know or say: it is only interested in what independent people have published in reliable places about it.
If you decide it is worth going ahead with this article, please read Your first article, which will tell you how to make a draft in a safe place. --ColinFine (talk) 13:27, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't look like we have articles on each and every individual conference. (And rightly so, IMO.) So, this might not ever have the notability necessary. There is a list of TEDx events by city but these only gloss over the city's events as a whole and don't give details on each and every conference in that city. †dismas†|(talk) 15:01, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVG_Technologies - wrong info about the company being defunct[edit]

Hi, I am writing on behalf of AVG company. There is a misleading information on the wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVG_Technologies) in the knowledge box on the right side of the page. The company is not defunct. The company is consolidated with AVAST company and it continues to function under this company. Please can you remove the information from the knowledge box? thank you! VK — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kotlantka (talk • contribs) 06:31, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello VK, and thanks for the notice. But I'm not sure I follow what the problem is: the Infobox does not say the that AVG is defunct. It says "Acquired by Avast Software", which is consistent with the references (which were provided by the company itself). Do you think it should say something different?--Gronk Oz (talk) 06:50, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The infobox says 'defunct September 30, 2016' but I'm not sure it needs changing given the references; it is clear that it is part of Avast Software. Eagleash (talk) 06:52, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? Under the logo, the Infobox text starts with:
Former type	Public
Industry	Computer software
Fate		Acquired by Avast Software
There is no mention of it being "defunct" - where are you seeing that?--Gronk Oz (talk) 07:01, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Look a little further down. General Ization Talk 07:03, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hey guys, thanks very much for reply, There is a DEFUNCT in the box - under the logo there is former type, industry, founded, founder, and then DEFUNCT - can you remove this please? VK
I agree that "defunct" does not accurately describe the software, but this article is about the company. I tried changing the infobox to "takeover" but this seems not to be a valid entry. What would be a more appropriate and valid word? Dbfirs 07:48, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Add it to the "fate" parameter as explained at Template:Infobox company - Arjayay (talk) 11:27, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I added it to the "fate" parameter. (The reason a "takeover" parameter does not work is that that parameter name is not implemented for this template.) —teb728 t c 12:25, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oho! So that explains why AVG, heretofore an excellent free product, has now become an exceedingly annoying piece of nagware. --ColinFine (talk) 13:35, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking a tool to browse Wikipedia as of a particular date[edit]

As an example, suppose I'm up to season 5 of Mad Men and I want to look at articles like Don Draper in their version as of April 13, 2012. I know I can click on the history tab, use the menus to choose a month and year, then carefully go down to choose the particular date and time of the revision that I want to see, but this has three drawbacks:

  • it's cumbersome (especially since I want to be able to click on wikilinks like Peggy Olson and go straight to the 2012 version of that page in one click)
  • there's the possibility of inadvertently seeing spoilers on the 2016 version of the page
  • when viewing a prior revision, all templates are manifested as the 2016 version of the template, not the version on the appropriate date in the past

In some cases the Internet Archive Wayback Machine will do what I am asking for, but it can be slow to load and of course does not have every revision. Since Wikipedia stores every past version of every page, is there any convenient tool that will let me navigate Wikipedia as of a particular date? Mathew5000 (talk) 09:33, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You could try Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/TimeTraveller. It shows the current version of templates and images. Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/TimeTraveller.js hasn't been edited since 2009 so I don't know whether it still works. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:28, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
How do you even know these things? Lourdes 16:03, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be asking for phab:T2851 to be implemented, which, considering it has been around for 12 years, does not seem likely. Pppery 16:09, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In spite of popular belief, I'm not omniscient and have to research some questions. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:41, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(side note: what you said above is not true; many revisions from 2001 have been lost, and other lost revisions occur occasionally as recently as 2004). Pppery 17:06, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of a company that's not "mainstream"?[edit]

Per WP:ORGCRITE there should be some independent coverage. Well... I was looking for an article about Hakko (a Japanese company) which makes soldering and rework equipment that very well known in the electronics and hardware community, and I couldn't find one in any of the major Wikipedias. The problem is that it's not known outside of the community (because it's a metal and soldering company). There's an article on Apex Tool Group (American) which also makes the well-known Weller soldering stations. That article is facing similar issues (i.e. not enough sources). However, at least being a US company got it coverage from Bloomberg.

I can't find anything on Hakko other than what's covered on its site. Citing the site only would definitely award the article a deletion nomination. What to do here? —Hexafluoride Ping me if you need help, or post on my talk 12:06, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've posted in WikiProject Japan, and Electronics. Hopefully good source will come up. —Hexafluoride Ping me if you need help, or post on my talk 16:52, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Towns and villages of London -UK[edit]

Noticed that in a few recent years, some editors have started changing the location of villages and town in the north west of Greater London to simply west. Editors that live in London (and as they know were they live) just keep reverting them but the changes keep coming. Is there any way to stop this? --Aspro (talk) 15:46, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Aspro hi. Is it an editorial dispute about the location or pure vandalism? Lourdes 15:51, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly not vandalism, otherwise I would have brought it up before. Many editors ( err... going on memory here) aren’t even residents of the UK. Greater London is a very large conurbation and the cardinal points of the compass is too imprecise (to blind you with science we where taught ordinal points at school but that was so many decades ago I cant even remember what they referred to but at the time it made perfect sense). Think this is just no more than just ignorance and naïveté. Most certainly, I don't wish to restrict their efforts, because we accept and honour, WP as an Encyclopedia that anyone can edit but some edits, when they occur and repeat time and time again, become a pain. There should also be no dispute about the location. London & Greater London is well mapped. This is what is so frustrating.--Aspro (talk) 16:41, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't postal areas be a good unambiguous means of distinguishing West from Northwest London? AlexTiefling (talk) 16:47, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, NW postcode area seems to make for a clear-cut definition. If the slow-paced edit war continues without discussion, this becomes disruptive editing - but even if it comes from the right side. I suppose you have tried to discuss it on the talk page? TigraanClick here to contact me 16:51, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Back in and on the 27 June 2010. P.g.champion created a Wikimedia Commons category so that up-loaders of images had a good geographical location. So yes, postal areas does gives the towns and villages a geographical placement and is pertinent and evident here: London region postal towns but some editors keep corrupting this long accepted nomenclature of where people live.--Aspro (talk) 17:38, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's not so straightforward for Ruislip, HA7. I'd also recommend using talk pages, as well as gathering references. It might also be preferable to change the wording to avoid the issue entirely, as per Queensbury, HA7 and Belmont, HA7. -- zzuuzz (talk) 17:04, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Err.. why is it not straightforward for HA7. It is not in west london but north west London. It encompases Stanmore for heven's sake!--Aspro (talk) 17:53, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Using the NW postcode (or the N or W postcode for that matter) is not so straightforward for HA7. -- zzuuzz (talk) 19:04, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Stanmore is a Greater North Western London Postal Town not an inner London Postal District area, so I don't see what your point is.--Aspro (talk) 19:29, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Then I recommend you don't use the NW postcode area suggestion above which I was highlighting problems with. I do suggest you read my other comments. -- zzuuzz (talk) 19:46, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You're not making sense, so how can I comment?--Aspro (talk) 19:52, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Use the talk pages. Add references. Consider whether the wording can be improved in order to prevent incorrect edits. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:00, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Anyway, coming back to my point. How can we stop the geographically challenged editors from continuously switching North-West to West ?--Aspro (talk) 19:39, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    If it's an issue where a significant number of editors subscribe to what you're saying here, an alternative I would suggest is that you may request for comment on a standard that will be applied to all such pages, and a banner that may be placed on all talk pages of relevant articles, notifying future editors of the Rfc and guideline accepted. Once the Rfc is closed, paste the banner on all relevant articles, and just keep them on your watchlist (all this is assuming the Rfc goes your way). That's about it. Lourdes 02:07, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you or another editors guide me as how to do this RfC ? Think, I now know why, a few editors (many of which are not even residents of the UK) are getting the Greater London locations confused. But for us, that keep reverting these edits, is like not being able to see the wood for the trees and we would benefit from an uninvolved NPOV input to cut through it. Which is why I have bought the issue here for your help.--Aspro (talk) 18:25, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi again. You should follow the procedure listed down at requests for comment. My suggestion would be that you could use WT:WikiProject United Kingdom to start a new section with a neutrally worded question, place the Rfc tag on top of the section, and await responses. See any of the current Rfcs in action for guidance on how they proceed. I've started a handful of Rfcs in the past; here's a link to one of them: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#cite_note-A1 Rfc-6. If you have any trouble at any point, don't hesitate to come back. Lourdes 01:15, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to change the user name after about 5-7 years of using it?[edit]

I wonder if I can change my user name but with one condition. I want my new name appear in all my previous posts even a few years back. Is it possible? Thanks, - --AboutFace 22 (talk) 18:16, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@AboutFace 22: See Wikipedia:Changing username. Your old signatures would not change but page histories and so on would. You can redirect your old user and talk page to the new name so signature links still work. Such redirects are automatically made during the rename. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:38, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think I understand what you mean, @PrimeHunter. Thanks, --AboutFace 22 (talk) 21:44, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One more question. I have a SandBox associated with my name, actually two. What will happen to them? Thank you, - --AboutFace 22 (talk) 21:55, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@AboutFace 22: Actually three: Special:PrefixIndex/User:AboutFace 22/. Sandboxes and all other pages in your userspace are automatically moved to the new name. See Wikipedia:Changing username#Must read. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:28, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter, thank you, - --AboutFace 22 (talk) 01:37, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

speedy deletion[edit]

hi, I nominated this[1] for speedy deletion, how long does the process usually take? thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 21:50, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not too long, depending on what's in CAT:CSD it can typically take up to a few hours if it's not important. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:56, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 22:32, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
checkY It's gone now. --Gronk Oz (talk) 00:54, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2016_November_25&oldid=1138541051"