Help desk
< August 28	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 30 >

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.

August 29

List of articles

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T71951

What's going on with the list of all articles? I can't get to the next page; all it says is "Previous page". The Simple English Wikipedia is also messed up! Please fix it!67.242.43.187 (talk) 00:48, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, someone else has noticed this and it has been reported to the developers. For now, the messy workaround is to copy the last entry into the "Display pages starting at" field at the top. -- John of Reading (talk) 03:38, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Banner at the top of the page

Hello.

How can I remove the banner that reads "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page"

Thanks, Ellie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alicialivia (talk • contribs) 01:33, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Short answer, which may sound sarcastic but is accurate: Discuss further on the talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:55, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Short but wrong answer: Just remove it by editing. This may start an edit war. So please don't do the easy wrong thing. Thank you for asking rather than doing. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:55, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Do you have a close connection with the subject of the article? This banner is typically used if the article is a biography of a person and a relative of the person is a major contributor, or the article is about a company and an employee or partner is a major contributor. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:55, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question: What article is it? Robert McClenon (talk) 01:55, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Longer answer: A substantial amount of rewrite may be needed to remove overly promotional material. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:55, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is the article Lester Ellis, Jr.? Why did you remove the category of Living People? Robert McClenon (talk) 02:10, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The banner can be removed by any neutral editor once the required cleanup has been done, but it should not be removed by anyone who has a "close connection" with the subject of the article. SpinningSpark 08:51, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not so slick with tables...

Hi, I'm not so slick with tables and the formatting of tables. May I please ask for some help from my colleagues to shrink the width of the series overviews at List of The Amazing World of Gumball episodes and at List of Breadwinners episodes? I'll take a look at what you've done so that hopefully I can someday get over this crippling deficiency. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you want to do that? I would suggest discussing this with page editors first, or more generally at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television. There is a consensus for the style of these tables over numerous articles. The wikiproject has a "Television Episodes Task Force" but there does not seem to be a lot of activity there at the moment so I suggest posting on the page I linked. I am not going to post the css code for changing the table widths right now, but feel free to come back here once agreement to do it has been reached. SpinningSpark 09:25, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Spinningspark As it would turn out, I'm a regular editor at Wikipedia, and an active member of WikiProject Television. The reason why I am asking for the tables to be narrowed, is that they are not typically presented in an across-the-entire-page format, especially for a scant 4 or 5 columns: List of Soul Train episodes, List of Fanboy and Chum Chum episodes, The Tom and Jerry Show (2014 TV series), List of Shaun the Sheep episodes, etc. Though an across-the-entire-page format might be appropriate for SpongeBob SquarePants, they are dealing with seven columns of data. (The table still looks a little stretched out, to me.) When 4 or 5 columns of data are stretched across the screen like they are at List of Uncle Grandpa episodes or the articles bove, it looks a little funky. I also don't think there is a consensus for the style of these tables, as there is no content about them at MOS:TV, and the last time we talked about Series Overview boxes, was to decide whether or not they should contain seasons that haven't aired yet. But if you think I need to go elsewhere... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:22, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the top line of the table in edit view. You will see the css code style="width:100%;". You can change that to whatever percentage of the screen width you would like the table to occupy. You might want to consider specifying the width in ems rather than % (eg style="width:50em;"). A 50% width will display radically differently for users with low-resolution screens to those with high-resolution screens. Specifying the width in ems puts the same amount of text on each line regardless of the resolution of the user's display or the size of font their browser is using. Your first example has the additional complication that the tables are transcluded in from other pages. You must go to the transcluded page to edit the tables. SpinningSpark 19:16, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus--for some reason I recall looking at the tables and not seeing the width values. Thank you for the slap across the back of my head. :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:18, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How to make this article reliable

Hi to all, I want to know how to make this article reliable. Ninoslav Marina Please help me. Thanks, Jovan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jovanuist (talk • contribs) 07:09, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! The immediate problem is that one of the references cites another Wikipedia article. Strange as it may seem, Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source for referencing so it should be removed. Moving on, while the subject of the article has a presumption of notability as a university professor, you need to back this up with further references that show significant coverage in independent reliable sources to avoid the article being tagged for deletion. Philg88 ^♦talk 09:37, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Healthy Planet

Hi,

I work for the charity Healthy Planet and the information about us on this page is incorrect.

this is the link) Healthy Planet

As the marketing executive for the charity it is my job to ensure that things like this get changed to accurately reflect us.

I made changes to the page, however you have deleted them. The text that should appear on the page is as follows, please can this be changed. I am happy to email you from my healthy planet email account to verify myself.

Thanks

This is not the place for a draft

Healthy Planet Foundation is an environmental charity in the United Kingdom formed with the belief that small actions can make big changes. The charity urges people to pursue sustainable, healthy living options on a daily basis by revitalising spaces, encouraging the repurposing of facilities that already exist and creating an internationally connected grass-root conservation community.

By being solution focused, pro-active and collaborative Healthy Planet works in an innovated and positive way to practice and promote all aspects of sustainable, healthy living.

Healthy Planet are a registered charity under the Charity Commission number 1122475 and are a registered Company Limited by Guarantee in England at Companies House under 06406524.

History

Healthy Planet was formed in January 2008 by founder Shaylesh Patel on the ethos that small changes together would build sustainable, healthy communities leaving a positive legacy for our future generations.

The charity’s impact has grown rapidly over the last few years due to its partnerships with commercial landlords in 2010. Sponsoring Healthy Planet’s charitable efforts, landlords provide vacant spaces for the charity to occupy, with beneficial community projects and partners that share the same aim of sustainability. Through a government run scheme, landlords are able to qualify for 80% mandatory relief on their property rates and in agreement contribute 50% of the costs saved to Healthy Planet.

Continual growth has shown the charity develop its relationship with important organisations and key partners. On May 2012, Healthy Planet commemorated the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee by providing core funding for the new Jubilee Pound in Richmond Park. Sir David Attenborough, patron of Friends of Richmond Park dug the first spadeful of earth from the freshwater habitat, saying; "This new habitat will sustain a vast array of wildlife and help combat climate change by retaining more water within the Park."^{[citation needed]} The pound has created a new freshwater habitat to support water-loving plant and tree species, providing a refuge for the native wildlife.

Initiatives

Books for Free

The Books for Free initiative is the redistribution of unwanted books intended for landfill or pulping to volunteer run Books for Free centres nationwide, free to the public.

Stuff for Free

Healthy Planet partner with councils and local waste authorities to deliver large- scale community re-use events Stuff for Free. This redistribution initiative allows people to drop of their unwanted items saving them from landfill, to be reused promoting up cycling, recycling and waste minimisation.

Healthy Spaces

Healthy Spaces provides grass root, social enterprises and other charitable organisations which share the same ethos as Healthy Planet space to operate. The charity creates a partnership with commercial landlords allowing their empty spaces within their property such as retail units, warehouses and office’s to be used for free by these organisations, giving them a physical presence in the community.

Conservation Community

The Conservation Community is designed to raise awareness of grass root conservation projects worldwide. Healthy Planet supports projects in national, regional or community designated protected areas, in public spaces that include realistic, tangible actions and projects that have specific educational or scientific impact.

Get on the map

Get on the map is the core key fundraising tool used to support the conservation community. This innovative, crowd- funding platform uses Google maps technology to highlight Healthy Planets conservation partners, allowing their supporters to chose the project they want to donate to. Each donation is termed as a ‘pin’.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sineadlynchhealthyplanet (talk • contribs) 10:02, 29 August 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

This isn't the place for a draft. You need to read about WP:conflict of interest, and then suggest any changes (with references to independent reliable sources) at the article talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:11, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the draft above omits Healthy Planet's main claim to notability – the way it allows the owners of unused commercial properties to avoid paying business rates. But as David Biddulph said, the right place to discuss this is on the article's article talk page. Maproom (talk) 10:48, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help with a difficult editor

I'm not going to name names here (although I'm sure you could discover the source of my consternation by looking through my edit history), but I'm having trouble with a particular editor who refuses to engage in a dialogue about a couple of pages that we both have on our watchlists. It's not that this editor has outright said "I'm not going to talk about this with you", it's just that he's never taken the time to open up my talk page and send me a message despite me having sent him several in the past. He doesn't even discuss the issues via edit summaries, which would be the bare minimum I would expect from any editor, especially when their edits are being met with obvious opposition. I think language issues might be at play here, but the other party has shown a reasonable level of competence with English in the past (I mean, he must have some skill if he's contributing to the English language Wikipedia). Obviously we can't just go around reverting and re-reverting each other, but if the other party refuses to discuss, what am I supposed to do? I really need some help, as I've been blocked for edit warring in the past and I really don't want to go down that road again. – Pee Jay 12:42, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to judge what specific action would be best without looking at the particular case. Is the dispute resolution page any help to you? SpinningSpark 12:56, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the speedy reply, Spinningspark. I've had a look at the dispute resolution noticeboard, but it says there that the dispute "must have been discussed extensively on a talk page" before help can be requested. I don't think a one-sided discussion would count as extensive. – Pee Jay 13:59, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the page a little more carefully. Yes, in the first instance you should make good faith attempts to resolve the problem by discussion with the other editor. However, the sections on requesting community input, reporting to noticeboards, and subject-specific help are all open to you without the necessity of the participation of the other party. There may possibly also be a problem with editor behaviour that needs resolving here, but that can only be determined by looking at the specific case. SpinningSpark 14:16, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First, I disagree with the comment that we can discover who is the difficult editor from the history. The OP has mostly edited in the areas of association football and American football, but in multiple articles. (The OP is not an SPA.) So I don't know who the difficult editor is. Have you tried discussing on article talk pages? If the editor won't discuss on article talk pages, then WP:DRN is one possibility, although it isn't always the best. If there are only two editors involved, then third opinion may help. If another editor is reverting your edits, you can go to the edit warring noticeboard, but be careful not to be over WP:3RR yourself, because a common result at that board is that both editors may get blocked. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:58, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why have I received edit warnings?

I have never ever, ever, edited the Auburn Tiger football page. And why would I edit Jordan-Hare stadium to Jon Vogel-Hare stadium anyway? That is not correct. So, why am I receiving warnings? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.91.1.196 (talk) 15:33, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Probably because someone else, who uses the same IP address as you, has made those edits. You could avoid this happening again by registering an account with Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 15:38, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The warnings are dated 2009, and at the foot of the IP's user talk page it says: "This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Some IP addresses change periodically, and may be shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address. " --David Biddulph (talk) 15:41, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a template at the top of the user talk page that should set your mind at rest, Cheers, Philg88 ^♦talk 16:12, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creating an account has several advantages, including not seeing those warnings for previous editors using your IP address. That isn't the only advantage. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:23, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]