Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2016 May 19

< Wikipedia:Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< May 18 << Apr | May | Jun >> May 20 >
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.


May 19

edit

Pending change review process question

edit

I reviewed a pending change today of Laverne Cox and did not accept it because it was unsourced info in a BLP. Shortly thereafter, another editor reverted my change but added a citation. Rather than just doing a new edit and adding the citation - this editor appears to have done a revert and edit in one step. I'm just wondering how this works and is this common? I haven't seen it before. Was this the right way to handle this. I'm a little concerned because my change was reverted (is there any reason have any concern about this?) (The editor actually reverted their own change a few minutes later.) MB (talk) 00:26, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This has nothing to do with pending changes. It has to do with the undo button. When you click undo, you also get the option to make additional changes besides just reverting. In this case, General Ization hit undo, and then went to the material and added a source in one action. -- The Voidwalker Discuss 19:32, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Home Page

edit

How do I make Wikipedia my home page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Romo909 (talk • contribs) 01:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This help desk is for questions about editing Wikipedia. Setting your home page is a function of your browser. The method will vary from one browser to another, but if you give details you can probably get help at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing. --David Biddulph (talk) 01:25, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Romo909: Here are instructions for many popular browsers: http://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch000577.htm. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:04, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
edit

I am working on writing a wikipedia article about a magazine, and am wondering about the logo image to put in the infobox. The logo of this magazine is a G with a superscript M, all in serif capitals. I'm pretty sure it is not trademarked. How should I go about uploading an image of this— should I copy the logo image from their website and upload that, or recreate it myself, knowing that I might not get the font and placement just right? How would wikipedia's image copyright restrictions apply in this scenario? Margalob (talk) 02:29, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Margalob: Please provide a link to the website or at least the title of the article so I can look it up myself. If it is just script, nothing else, it would not meet the threshold of originality and can be uploaded to commons with {{PD-textlogo}} as the license. However, just because it is not copyrighted (provided it does not meet the threshold) does not mean it is not trademarked. Please be careful not to confuse copyright with trademark. --Majora (talk) 02:35, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the magazine's website and the logo Margalob (talk) 02:48, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Margalob: Yep. That is not copyrightable. You can go ahead and upload that to Commons. See c:Special:UploadWizard. When it is all uploaded the two templates that need to be under the "licensing" section are {{PD-textlogo}} and {{trademarked}}. If you want me to check your work please let me know. --Majora (talk) 02:53, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!Margalob (talk) 02:56, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

personal biography entry

edit

I am interested in entering a personal biography entry, can you advise on the protocol and information required to do this? many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lisa black hochhauser (talk • contribs) 08:44, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you are asking about writing about yourself, please read Wikipedia:Autobiography. —teb728 t c 08:58, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

edit

I made a small edit on the above page - it now says "pending". Have I done something wrong? We are librarians in Australia. 203.45.162.33 (talk) 09:09, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No you did nothing wrong - that page is under Pending changes protection - so edits from IPs, such as you, and unconfirmed accounts, are not visible to the public until they have been approved by an editor with reviewer rights. - Arjayay (talk) 09:26, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Cite errors/Cite error included ref

edit

This is about world weather records.today it recorded all time high of 51℃.i updated the information. but there's an error showing there please hepl. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gauravjat (talk • contribs) 14:36, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are 3 errors in your edits to List of weather records. Firstly, template {{Dts}} needs a valid date format. Secondly, the reference needs to start with <ref> and finish with </ref>. Thirdly, the template {{cite web}} needs to have the correct values for the relevant parameters, and finish with }}. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:44, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Think it's fixed, but better double check me. There's an error in the table, I'll have a look at that now. Sam Sailor Talk! 14:46, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Cite errors/Cite error references no text

edit

Hi how are you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.51.240.61 (talk) 15:01, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Page flagged

edit

Hi there,

I recently helped create a page and I noticed that it has been flagged for promotional content. Just wanted to reach out to see how I can rectify this issue. The page is for Unanimous A.I.: Unanimous A.I.

Looking forward to a reply, Brittiny — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bgonzalez512 (talk • contribs) 18:38, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed your broken url link to a wikilink. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:44, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I'm still seeing a notification about promotional content - how can i fix? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bgonzalez512 (talk • contribs) 19:01, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bgonzalez512, I've just read over the lead section and history. Both of them sound like they came straight out of some promotional web site (possibly even the company's web site). They sound like advertising speak rather than a natural description of the company. Please see WP:NPOV and WP:PROMOTION. Once the article has been re-written to not sound like an advertisement, you (or anyone else) can take the notice off the article. Dismas|(talk) 19:06, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Brittiny. Please remember that Wikipedia is not interested in what the company, or its employees, associates or friends, say about it. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the company have published about it, in reliable places. An article on the company should be based almost 100% on what these unconnected people have published about it (though rewritten, so as not to infringe their copyright). If an independent reliable source has talked about "enabling groups to form 'human swarms'" in connection with the company (and note that that would not include any article based on a press release or an interview, but only a truly independent piece of writing), then the article can talk about it: otherwise nothing about this belongs in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ColinFine (talk • contribs)

a doubt regarding with further communication

edit

i like the data provided by the wikipedia very much and it is very usefull but it will be better and more convenient if you provide some way to clear moredoubts like by having mails or by having active chat,if any such things are present please tell me how to use them

thank you Pudheer (talk) 18:56, 19 May 2016 (UTC) Pudheer (talk) 18:56, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pudheer, I've left a welcome message on your talk page with some links to get you started using Wikipedia. To respond to your question though, you can leave messages about article content on the talk page of the article you're reading. These are meant to discuss the article itself though and are not meant as a forum to discuss the subject, their latest projects, new advances on the subject, etc. You can also ask for answers to general knowledge questions at the Reference Desks. And questions about how to edit Wikipedia go here, at the Help Desk. If you have a feature that you'd like to suggest, the best place to go is the Village Pump. Dismas|(talk) 19:01, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Have you tried the #wikipedia-en-help IRC chat room? You can ask live help questions about using Wikipedia there, however it is not for general chat. uhhlive (talk) 19:02, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

sourcing question

edit

is it possible for a person/thing/event/phenomenon to be properly notable to have a Wikipedia article but none of it's sourcing is available online...and if so how is the notability judged if the sources can only be listed but not seen?68.48.241.158 (talk) 19:45, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:reliable sources and WP:offline sources. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:54, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
okay, thanks..is there a way/process for a person to send in pdf files of these offline sources for people to be able to see in order to determine notability?68.48.241.158 (talk) 19:59, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In general, no. If the sources have previously been published elsewhere, it may well be a copyright violation to copy them; if they haven't been previously published elsewhere, they are not reliable sources. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:07, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
interesting, thanks..68.48.241.158 (talk) 20:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Remember that in this era of Photoshop, purported scans/copies of picture and articles from print sources are even less reliable than ever. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:18, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help With Article

edit

hey, i work at a major record label and just signed up 2-3 days ago to get our artists on Wikipedia. i really need help with my first article. seems like whatever i do is wrong. the page is Dre Rich Kidd . please dont delete it. im trying my best to fix everything. CEOBryantR (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:38, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dre Rich Kidd. Please read about conflict of interest and paid editing. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:47, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, CEOBryantR. I'm afraid that what you are doing wrong is trying to use Wikipedia for promotion: this is forbidden. Wikipedia has no interest in what a person says about themself, or what their friends, relatives, employers, or associates, say about them: none. It is only interested in what people who have no connection to them have published about them in reliabale places (and it needs to be independent: not anything based on press releases or interviews with them). If such sources exist, then there can be an article about them, based entirely on what these independent people have published. If there are not such sources, then no Wikipedia article about them is possible, however it is written. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 22:17, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

edit

Please help me - there are the words "pending changes" up the top of this page. It has been there for nearly a day. Shall I try to fix it up by removing the words 'pending changes' myself??22:37, 19 May 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srbernadette (talk • contribs)

No no, that's supposed to be there @Srbernadette:. Pending changes is a type of page protection where edits by non-autoconfirmed users and IP editors need to be reviewed before they can be accepted and displayed to readers. -- The Voidwalker Discuss 23:14, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked and the most recent edits on the above page were "accepted" by the editor Gilo1969 - why is the "pending changes" still up the top of ther page. Has it's removal been overlooked? Thanks for any information you can provideSrbernadette (talk) 23:17, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It says "Accepted" for me. Dismas|(talk) 23:28, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am still confused. The last "accepted" on the above page was NOT by the editor called "Dismas". The most recent "accepted" was: [accepted by Gilo1969]. Why, then, is the phrase "pending..." still placed at the top of the page near "History' etc? Please help with any explanations. Thanks so much Srbernadette (talk) 23:35, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say I made an edit. I was just explaining what I saw on the article. If you're still seeing "Pending" then you should probably clear your browser's cache to get it to display correctly. Or you can just put it out of your mind and eventually the cache will be cleared anyway and the article will display correctly at a later date. Dismas|(talk) 23:40, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

edit

Hey Guys,

What is the procedure for sourcing a plaque? It is to take a picture? How would you use a picture as a source?

Cheers,

JoshMuirWikipedia (talk) 23:27, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read Help:File_page? RegistryKey(RegEdit) 05:12, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think JoshMuirWikipedia's question is about how to provide a reference for a plaque's existence, RegistryKey. I think the answer is that, while you can probably upload a picture of the plaque for illustration (though I am a bit hazy about the copyright implication), a reference must have been published. If a picture of the plaque has been published by a reliable publisher, then it could be used (as a Primary source only) - it doesn't then need to be uploaded, since the reference should give the information that a reader needs in principle to find it. But if it hasn't been published (as would probably be the case for a picture you took yourself) it cannot ever be used as a reference. --ColinFine (talk) 10:01, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking that as well, just wanted validation of my thought process, thanks. Although it does touch on the concept of referencing the information mentioned on the plaque, although that information is likely contained elsewhere as well (military records, news articles, etc.) RegistryKey(RegEdit) 10:07, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think I should have been more specific. There are a variety of information boards and plaques down at the Bicton Baths, and since I started the article yesterday, I went down there to get some information. I took pictures of the location, the boards and the plaques. My question was whether I could use the pictures as references for the information provided on them. I have checked online, and a lot of the information provided is not provided online. Note the information was published by an official source, which I am planning on including in the picture description. Thanks heaps, JoshMuirWikipedia (talk) 11:53, 20 May 2016 (UTC).[reply]
Hi, JoshMuirWikipedia. I'm not sure that erecting a plaque would count as "publishing" in Wikipedia's sense: you possibly need to ask at the Reliable sources noticeboard. But uploading your photo of a plaque, though it can be useful as illustration, cannot contribute to a reference, because in these days of Photoshop, a picture is simply not a reliable source unless it (the picture) was published by a reliable publisher. --ColinFine (talk) 20:59, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thankyou very much
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2016_May_19&oldid=733440776"