Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2016 February 18

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.

February 18

Opt-out of Visual Editor

Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Opt-out#The_official_opt-out says: "Access to VisualEditor is handled by Beta Features on the English Wikipedia. To remove your access to VisualEditor, go to the Beta Features section of Special:Preferences and uncheck the "VisualEditor" item." but VisualEditor is not listed on the Beta Features section of Special:Preferences.

There is an option labeled "Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta" but it is in the Editing section. It should be changed to "Disable VisualEditor" and the instructions on Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Opt-out#The_official_opt-out should be changed because they are outdated. Rong Qiqi (talk) 02:56, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Right, I have updated Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Opt-out#The official opt-out. Thanks. "Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta" hints that it may return at some time even if you disable it now. There is a history I will not go into here but I think it's best to keep that wording. It's the default in the MediaWiki software but it would be possible for the English Wikipedia to change it at MediaWiki:Visualeditor-preference-betatempdisable. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:45, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Rong Qiqi (talk) 04:56, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Help:Cite errors/Cite error references no key

Could somebody explain and fix what is causing the cite errors showing at the bottom of the page at Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting? Thanks.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:35, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Because the references are defined in the references section, they require names. I'll try to give them some, but this also probably means they are not used inline for specific statements. —PC-XT+ 07:30, 18 February 2016 (UTC) 08:59, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

I placed one inline reference in Special:Diff/705572323. There are still two more to place. (I used a comma in one name, but I think I'll remove it to avoid complicating things.) —PC-XT+ 07:40, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

 Fixed These were duplicate references that included archives, so they weren't flagged as duplicates of the ones that were only dead links. I replaced the dead links with the archived versions. —PC-XT+ 08:59, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Here's what happened: One bot removed the names while adding the archives. The next edit was another bot recovering the references it considered lost. —PC-XT+ 09:09, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks are due here. It was beyond me to figure out what had gone wrong or how to fix it.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 10:40, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

New article deleted

Dear Sir,

I create one article for my company organization , but there showing copyright information and they delete my article , please if any query contact my company mail.

my create page is - ICAD(Innovative Contractors for Advanced Dimensions)

My personal details is

Thanks Omar Faruk Marketing Coordinator ICAD <redacted contact details> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omarchatkhil (talk • contribs) 10:00, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

@Omarchatkhil: Welcome to Wikipedia. I'm afraid Wikipedia is not for promotion of your company - please take the time to read through these resources -- samtar ^whisper 10:02, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Image cannot be displayed, because it contains errors

In Observable_universe#Horizons there's a wide panoramic image, "A diagram of our location in the observable universe.".

If I click on it and then click the magnifying glass, it gives an error message;

The image "https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Earth%27s_Location_in_the_Universe_%28JPEG%29.jpg" cannot be displayed, because it contains errors

81.108.18.234 (talk) 10:16, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

It works for me in Firefox 44.0.2. What is your browser? The image is 23,624 × 2,953 pixels. This is extremely wide. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:28, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

As it says at File:Earth%27s_Location_in_the_Universe_(JPEG).jpg, "Warning     The original file has a large number of pixels and may either not load properly or cause your browser to freeze." Maproom (talk) 12:42, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm using the same, FF 44.0.2. 81.108.18.234 (talk) 12:50, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

The message is under "Summary" at File:Earth's Location in the Universe (JPEG).jpg. Maybe your computer has limitations like memory, operating system, browser add-ons. I don't think anything can be done at our end, except to not provide the image at all in such high resolution. If you right-click https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Earth%27s_Location_in_the_Universe_%28JPEG%29.jpg and save it then maybe you have other programs that can display it. If you right-click a file in a folder on your computer and select "Open with" then you may get a list of programs that work with the file type. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:03, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, so, I discovered that message eventually. And I'm able to right-clock and download the original image, and view it in other applications.

It's a pity the viewer doesn't give a more meaningful error, or more info. I would imagine that that's a reasonably common image for people to click on, because you can't tell much from the in-page small version. I don't like the new way that pictures are displayed. 81.108.18.234 (talk) 13:18, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

The error message is from Firefox and not the viewer. Users with an account can disable Media Viewer at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:27, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

I've also had problems viewing that exact image on Macbooks using Safari too. The image itself is huge when looked at full size, I guessed it was some kind of timeout downloading it. Shame as it's really one of the best images on wikipedia. CaptRik (talk) 14:05, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Replacing images on Wiki page

Hello - I need to replace two images on our office's Wiki page. I just set up an account today, but I think there is a four-day lag in order for me to do this? Please advise. Thanks!

Here is the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montgomery_County_Sheriff%27s_Office_(Pennsylvania)

Montcopasheriff (talk) 17:41, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

• Greetings, @Moncopasheriff:. You may want to change your username so that it doesn't sound like a shared or group account. Anyhow, which images do you want to add to that page?Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:26, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Incomplete MFD template

I asked yesterday about a draft for which I had requested review, and said that an unregistered editor had recommended that the draft be nominated for Miscellany for deletion as containing original research and being a conflict of interest draft. (To repeat what I said above, there is a long-standing dispute between two scientists who apparently dislike each other strongly, and, regarding a related article, the author made a legal threat and is blocked.) The advice that I got, which was consistent with what I had thought, was that those were almost certainly not reasons for MFD (and might or might not be reasons for AFD in article space), and that the so-called original research might not be that anyway, because it consisted of the original author's publications in peer-reviewed journals. The unregistered editor then attempted to nominate the draft for MFD anyway. This applied an MFD template to the draft, but the unregistered editor was unable to create the MFD discussion page. This has left a template on the draft that points to nowhere. My question is whether I may remove the MFD template. I am aware that the removal of deletion templates from articles is, under normal circumstances, forbidden, so my question has to do with the removal of an incomplete template. If I agreed with the MFD, I would complete the process of the MFD nomination, but I don't agree. By the way, the draft is Draft:Geopolymer concrete. May I remove the template? Does someone want to complete the nomination (in which case I will !vote Keep in draft space)? Is someone (preferably with knowledge) willing to review the draft? Robert McClenon (talk) 19:15, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

If they gave a rationale on a talk page somewhere, I can complete the nom for them on an AGF basis, on the theory that they would have completed the steps themselves if able. Do you have a link or a diff or something? (Most of what ends up at WP:BADAFD is IP editor noms and misapplied templates - this is similar. Easy to fix.) UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 19:47, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes.

Here is the rationale on the talk page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft_talk%3AGeopolymer_concrete&type=revision&diff=705621108&oldid=705497198

Here is the unsuccessful attempt to MFD:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft%3AGeopolymer_concrete&type=revision&diff=705465727&oldid=704833053

Thank you for being willing to complete the nomination. When you complete the nomination, I will !vote against it, but they were expressing a good-faith opinion with which I disagree. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:55, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

 Done and posted at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Geopolymer concrete. I don't make it over to MFD very often, so feel free to correct any formatting screwups I put into the debate. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 20:10, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Guido Guidi

The article Guido Guidi desperately needs splitting. It's clear that it's now about two different Guido Guidis simultaneously. The article is even linked from List of people with reduplicated names as "comics artist" rather than "photographer". I would translate the linked Italian article as Guido Guidi (comics artist) but the problem is, I don't understand nearly enough Italian. What should be done here?

Do you have reliable sources indicating that the photographer and the comics artist are two different people? Also, is the photographer, to the best of our knowledge, living? If so, the article should not be split, but tagged for proposed deletion as an unsourced BLP. I will go ahead and do that. The article is grandfathered. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:59, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

"Grandfathered"? What does that mean? I take it that because you struck out your text about proposing the article for deletion, you are not going to do that. I've never heard of Guidi the photographer, and he doesn't have an Italian article. I've heard of Guidi the comics artist, and the linked Italian article is about him. But the article says Guidi the photographer was born in the early 1940s, and I know for a fact Guidi the comics artist has drawn Transformers comics just this decade. I would imagine a photographer in his 70s wouldn't have the energy to do that as a side job from his main job as a photographer. JIP | Talk 20:11, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Here is a TFWiki article about Guido Guidi the comics artist. It doesn't state his birth year, but the picture looks nothing like Guido Guidi the photographer. JIP | Talk 20:19, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

WP:BLPPROD only applies to articles created after 2010. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:51, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

See grandfather clause, an exemption from a rule for cases, objects, or things preceding the adoption of the rule. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:00, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The article dates from 2006. The WP:BLPPROD process only applies to articles created after a specific date in 2010. I assume that is what "grandfathered" means above. DES ^(talk) 20:59, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

It appears that the article had been about Guidi the comics artist since 2006, but in 2016 an anonymous user took the initiative to rewrite the article about Guidi the photographer, completely without asking about it or informing anyone about it, completely ignoring the incoming links. Surely this should be enough to make two different articles, one containing the text about Guidi the comics artist before the IP decided to blindly go ahead and rewrite the entire article, one containing the IP's new material? JIP | Talk 20:56, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Seems pretty obvious to me that the article should be reverted to the comics artist version and a new photographer article created.--ukexpat (talk) 21:26, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

I have moved the IP's contributions to a new article Guido Guidi (photographer) and reverted Guido Guidi to be about the comics artist. It appears that Guido Guidi (photographer) already existed but was speedily deleted as a direct copyvio. Hopefully the IP's new contributions aren't a copyvio. JIP | Talk 19:44, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Number of edits made by a user

I see various "counts" to indicate how many edits that I have made on Wikipedia. This obviously applies to other editors, also. My question: when one of my edits gets "reverted", does that decrease my edit count by one or no? Let's say, I have one hundred edits. The last edit gets reverted by another editor. Do I now have only 99 edits? Or do I still have (the original) one hundred edits accumulated? Also, when I revert someone else's edit, does that action itself count as an additional edit on my part? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:42, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

@Joseph A. Spadaro: The simplest version of "your edit count" is the one shown in your preferences and by tools such as navigation popups. That count goes up by one whenever you hit "Save page" and it never decreases. There's more at Wikipedia:Edit count. -- John of Reading (talk) 22:09, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 23:08, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Please create a disambiguation page.

Please create a disambiguation page. I do not know how to do so. Here is one article: Gustavo Julian Garcia. Here is another: Gustavo Garcia. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 22:48, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia disambiguation guidelines say that disambiguation pages are meant for 3 or more pages of same/similar names. For 2, hatnotes should be used instead. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:47, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

And both of those pages have hatnotes. RudolfRed (talk) 00:40, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Process when AfD subject later becomes notable?

What is the process for an article deleted at AfD, when the subject later becomes notable? I think I remember someone saying DRV, but unless I misunderstand, DRV is for determining whether the AfD was properly closed. This is not about a particular case. —teb728 t c 22:44, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

WP:DRV is the right place. As it says on that page, a DRV can be started "if significant new information has come to light since a deletion that would justify recreating the deleted page". You might first try contacting, as a matter of courtesy, the admin who closed the AfD, but he or she is likely to pass you on to DRV rather than unilaterally reverse a community consensus. Deor (talk) 00:06, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

How do I avoid outing when investigating possible COI editing?

I have read the section titled "How to handle conflicts of interest" found on Wikipedia's Conflict of Interest policy. The section mentions that Wikipedia's policy against harassment takes precedence and that no one should reveal the identity of editors against their wishes. That being said, there is an editor who edits in a way that leads me to believe they might have a COI. I would like to raise the issue in a civil manner on the editor's talk page. How do I do that and avoid outing at the same time? Hitcher vs. Candyman (talk) 22:54, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

James Martineau

Ref number 12 is wrong. Please fix. Thanks123.2.36.6 (talk) 23:41, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

 Done Eagleash (talk) 23:51, 18 February 2016 (UTC)