Help desk
< January 26	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 28 >

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.

January 27[edit]

Image upload request[edit]

Where does a (non-registered) editor go to request an image to be uploaded for an article? The following from the Library of Congress should be copyright-free, and would make an ideal addition to the Rebecca (raccoon) article.

"Mrs. Calvin Coolidge, half-length portrait, standing, facing front, holding her pet raccoon Rebecca". Prints & Photographs Online Catalog. Library of Congress.

Thanks, ~107.15.152.93 (talk) 06:05, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The file already exists on Commons. You can find it here: File:Grace Coolidge and Rebecca.jpg. In the future you can make such requests at WP:Files for upload. --Majora (talk) 06:19, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

– Thanks for the prompt reply! ~107.15.152.93 (talk) 06:35, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Editing the article The Sparrows (band)[edit]

I have just worked on editing the article The Sparrows (band) and found the following: the inline citations were missing at all. And it was neccessary to add some sources to the content. I found that just as the structure of the article so the content before my editing were seemed to copy and paste from the following source KAY AND THE SPARROW RARE "COLLECTOR'S ITEM" ORIGINAL RELEASE FROM 1967. But may be i make a mistake and the content of the above source was copied from wikipedia. Please help me to resolve the dilemma. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lyupant (talk • contribs) 09:25, 27 January 27, 2018 (UTC)

Hi Lyupant, the EBay page contains a copy of the WP article, complete with links to other WP pages, so it's not a problem for our article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:49, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Thanks a lot for your assistance. Now I am informed about ebay.

Where to invite talk page participation[edit]

Where should I go to invite interested editors to participate in a current thread on this talk page of a math article? Loraof (talk) 16:53, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You could post something at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics. nagualdesign 16:56, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Loraof (talk) 17:06, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Where to ask for someone to redraw graph?[edit]

Where do I go to invite someone to redraw this graph, which has a flaw in it? Loraof (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a crack at it, if I can work out what specifically needs changing. nagualdesign 17:06, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

...Actually, I'm not convinced that the graph is wrong. You say, "cumulative distribution reaches 1 at about X = 3" – 'about' being the operative word here. I think it actually runs from [-4,0] to [4,1] but it's just difficult to tell. Take a look at the Matlab code. nagualdesign 17:18, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, from the matlab code the underlyng CDF is is a normal from -5 to +5, so the "tails" are very long and skinny, so skinny that they merge with the upper (for +) and lower (for -) sides of the display box and are not visible. The largest sample of the EDF (4) just happened t be drawn from that lon tail. -Arch dude (talk) 17:49, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The CDF doesn't reach a value of 1 until x = + infinity. It does get "close to" 1 with an x value of 3, but doesn't actually reach it. The probability of finding an experimental value at around 3.5 is small, but non-zero. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:01, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It might look better if the graph was remade at, say, 10× the resolution, then it could be scaled down to produce some smooth antialiasing. nagualdesign 18:05, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone who is just briefly looking at the graph is likely to form the impression that the smooth curve reaches the value 1 before the step function does. So yes, showing it at a better resolution might avoid that. Can someone do that? Thanks. Loraof (talk) 18:28, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've applied some antialiasing to the curve (and the text). nagualdesign 18:58, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Change the color to faded green instead of gray? -Arch dude (talk) 21:55, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done nagualdesign 22:08, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I’m confused. The graph still looks to me like it touches 1 too soon. Has the new version been given a different file name from the one that the article Empirical distribution function uses? Loraof (talk) 23:38, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, you're looking at the right graph. Bear in mind that, mathematically speaking, the line never 'touches' the top of the graph, but the line must be drawn with some thickness. If you look very closely the green line runs along the topmost row of pixels, fading as it moves to the right. That's as close as we're going to get to displaying 2 lines of infinitesimal thickness less than 1 pixel apart. nagualdesign 00:05, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Maybe you could change it so the blue step function goes straight up to 1 at X= about 2, eliminating the last two horizontal steps? This would also require moving the last two pmf hash marks to the left. Thanks for working on this! Loraof (talk) 00:16, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For the graph to go straight up vertical at that point would require a cluster of 3 samples at the x=2 mark, but what the graph is meant to show is that you get more clustering in the middle (x=0) and less towards the extremes. The actual samples (the grey bars at the bottom) were chosen at random by a precise mathematical model. To change that in the way that you're asking would be antithetical to the meaning of the graph. nagualdesign 00:23, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For anyone who's interested there's an ongoing discussion about this graph at User talk:Loraof#Empirical distribution function. nagualdesign 17:05, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Help plz[edit]

i rotated my picture before uploading and re rotated it and now I am trying too re-rotated it back where should be i found a command display: inline-block; transform: rotate(270deg); and i keep inserting it in all different places in the picture [[ ]] not working. I went to where says type it but its not showing an example of how to insert it... Example doesnt show me where to rotate the picture in doesnt show where put it in something like this — Preceding unsigned comment added by Googoo85 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Rotated and also cropped (4:3). nagualdesign 19:09, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you made 22 edits at Manhole cover. In future I suggest you use the Show preview button instead. nagualdesign 19:15, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Page not showing up on google[edit]

Hello, I am unsure if this is the right place for this question. I am an autoconfirmed user and I recently created Akil Thomas which shows up when searched inside of Wikipedia but not when searched on Google. I am unsure why this is. Thanks, HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 20:11, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@HickoryOughtShirt?4: Hello, new pages will not be indexed by search engines for 90 days or until they have been reviewed, whichever is the shorter period. Eagleash (talk) 20:17, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... Viewing the source I see that it contains <meta name="robots" content="noindex,nofollow"/>. Maybe there's something in the software to prevent new articles from being indexed until certain conditions are met? (edit conflict) Ahhh... nagualdesign 20:20, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Nagualdesign: I created a page Matthew Highmore that can be searched on google however an admin helped me put it in article space (if that matters). I checked the wiki index page and I thought it said autoconfirmed users do not have the meta robot code, maybe I just read it wrong. Thanks for informing me of that! HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 20:51, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Highmore has been patrolled by an administrator [1]. New page reviewers can also patrol pages so indexing becomes allowed but your own user groups cannot. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:53, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What they said. nagualdesign 20:55, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page archives[edit]

Resolved

Talk:St Edmund Hall, Oxford is automatically archived, but no link to the archives appears on the talk page. How should this be fixed? I could insert a direct link, but obviously this would not update itself when new archive are created. DuncanHill (talk) 22:50, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The standard {{talk header}} has an automatic archive list for pages that have "normal" archive schemes. I added one. --Majora (talk) 22:59, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant, many thanks. DuncanHill (talk) 23:00, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]