Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2019 August 26

< Wikipedia:Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< August 25 << Jul | August | Sep >> August 27 >
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 26

edit

Is WP:ANI appropriate here?

edit

I've seen problematic edits from this IP ([1]) once by looking around pages randomly, then I reverted an edit to Louis Nix that said he was retired without a source. Now the IP got blocked for a month for disruptive editing, but in his contributions, he’s made changes, some correct, some not. I've seen a bizarre mix of good faith and not-so good faith edits. James-the-Charizard (talk) 02:32, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@James-the-Charizard: As there's currently a block in force, there's not much to be achieved by starting an ANI. Eagleash (talk) 04:58, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On the Border

edit

Hi, I have created a redirect for On the Border (South Korean TV series) to the article Those Who Cross the Line as On the border is an aka of Those Who Cross the Line.

I looked through the English Wikipedia and found several articles with the same name, e.g. On the Border, On the border (a redirect of On the Border), On the Border (film), On the Border Mexican Grill & Cantina and On the Border (Armenian TV series).

Is a Disambiguation required to be create for this? If yes, how should I proceed as I have never create a Disambiguation page before. I have read the WP:Disambiguation documentation and is very lengthy and confusing. Any experience editors, kindly advice if any. Thanks. Flipchip73 (talk) 04:15, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Flipchip73: Yes, this should have a disambiguation page. On the Border (Eagles album) is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC so it should stay at that title and replace its hatnote with {{Other uses}}. This will link On the Border (disambiguation) which should follow MOS:DAB. Would you like me to make it? PrimeHunter (talk) 08:54, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter: Please help to do it as I do not have any experience and would not want to create un-necessary mistakes. Thank you in advance. Flipchip73 (talk) 01:26, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:15, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter: Thank you and appreciate for the effort. Flipchip73 (talk) 09:21, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Account suspected of vandalism and starting an edit war

edit
The account is Ltyl (talk.
Is citing Chinese propaganda, from my perspective trying to sabotage the article about the dmeonstrations in Hong Kong.
I want to ask a moderator to get involved.
How do I do that?
--2019OutlaweD (talk) 11:39, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @2019OutlaweD: After a quick look at Special:Contributions/Ltyl, I do not see clear evidence of Ltyl violating Wikipedia policies by trying to push a pro-Beijing point of view. Only complain to administrators if a conduct policy has been violated; if you are sure it has, go to WP:ANI and cite WP:DIFFs of the problematic edits. (If it is about content disagreements, you must follow all steps of dispute resolution.) Finally, be aware that your own conduct will be examined - for instance, this is a strong accusation and not particularly civil in context.
Note that I do sympathize with Hong Kongers and I understand how hard it must be to keep calm under the circumstances, as the risks you take just by writing something unpleasant toward the executive on Wikipedia are significant. You must nonetheless assume good faith from other editors, unless you have extremely convincing evidence that they are the 50 Cent Party. TigraanClick here to contact me 12:16, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have to point out that the accusation 'Is citing Chinese propaganda' is factually wrong. I haven't cited one single unreliable source in the edits related to the protests. Ltyl (talk) 13:02, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As this section is not really about wiki articles; facts and good faith do not really seem to matter here, so I might just add a few comments: The account 2019OutlaweD seems to be a right-wing extremist. I suspect that he belongs to one of those violent groups such as Valiant Frontier. Ltyl (talk) 13:02, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ltyl: My above comment (about not assuming derogatory political allegiances of other editors) applies to you as well. TigraanClick here to contact me 08:25, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I believe my edits have shown more impartiality than this account 2019OutlaweD. Ltyl (talk) 13:02, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Except for the fact that unbiassed movies show that groups of whitely dressed people appeared out of nowhere started beating unarmed peaceful demonstrators and that the propaganda from Beijing is trying to make people believe that the whitely dressed people are normal travellers and that Beijing has a looooong history of paying triade members to do just this sort of thing by people dressed in white...
Source1
Source 2
Source 3
And last but not least, the police is actively walking away. The police is paid by Beijing. Why would they walk away?
So, who would voice a position like: "the people in white are peaceful travellers"?
Who would refuse to look at evidence, or look up evidence, when in doubt?
It is a short list.
--2019OutlaweD (talk) 14:43, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and guess who also told me that the people in white were just normal travellers, victims of the terrorists in Hong Kong?
-That's right, police in Beijing!
They carefully explained that this information is everywhere on state media.
--2019OutlaweD (talk) 14:47, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


We really need a mod here.
Anyway, here is the BBC. While in 2019, the police walked away and arrested no one, in 2014 the same thing happend: a group of men dressed in white attacked peaceful and unarmed demonstrators out of the blue. Police did make arrests at the time, showing 19 had known triade background. Really, to say that this is unproven, are the words of someone that has done no effort in finding out the truth and is simply (knowingly or not) repeating Chinese propaganda.
This user tried to get Chinese propaganda into this page and pretended to know it was all just made up, while a 10 second search on any search engine turns up 1000000 sources that say the exact opposite. With video evidence to prove it.


The user took it out of the article here and here, saying that there was no source in WESTERN media.
Who would call objective media out to be western media?
Who would re-add Chinese propaganda to this article, like here (after it had been rolled back after this edit!, and these edits), hashing out facts here,
I am going to stop going back this user's edits. It is a clear as anything.
How do I get a mod to take a good look at this user?
--2019OutlaweD (talk) 16:10, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Changed. I apologise for speaking my mind.
--2019OutlaweD (talk) 17:06, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The user you are mentioning has not done anything even remotely resembling vandalism. And the closest thing I can find to edit warring today is two reverts of an inclusion they initially inserted (three total edits) - which is dancing at the line of WP:3RR but as they're engaging at talk is going to be a hard sell. The first step is to warn an editor that you are concerned about their conduct. If that editor chooses to disregard your warning you would then (and only after they disregarded your warning) approach the appropriate noticeboard. In this case it would be WP:3RR/N. But again, I must reiterate, before that noticeboard would do anything for you you'd have to warn them and then they'd have to continue to edit war. Simonm223 (talk) 17:54, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I can't believe that you just said that. Above I already show 5 times the same edit, 2 more happened after I posted it. The user hashes out facts. And the worst of it: pretends to check facts while I have shown above that the usr hasn't.
You are not being objective Simonm223.
Will someone please tell me how to alert someone that can take action against this user, whose edits are 100% about making the peaceful demonstrators of Hong Kong that are asking for democracy and freedom, look like criminals?
--2019OutlaweD (talk) 18:41, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest instead you need to (Personal attack removed). Based on what I've seen of your conflict with Ltyl it's deeply unlikely any admin is going to kick them off the island for you. However you might catch a boomerang if you don't ease up and try to play nice. You have already (Personal attack removed). This behaviour here is verging on disruptive, as I have warned you, repeatedly. Simonm223 (talk) 18:45, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have been what Simon? (Personal attack removed)
And worse: this user has been shown by a live video feed that can be found everywhere on the internet by a 10 second search that what the user is saying is false. Yet, the user persists, being rolled back 7 times now, by a different user every time. All of the user's edits have been about putting the peaceful demonstrators asking for democracy and freedom in a bad light. (Personal attack removed) We need someone to take action.
--2019OutlaweD (talk) 18:52, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(Personal attack removed). I am certainly not lying to you. You came to helpdesk for advice. My advice in this case is to play nicely. I have counseled Ltyl to include refs in their infobox additions. I'm not trying to take sides here, and have tried really assertively to promote neutrality on the HK article set. So I'd suggest you'd be well advised to begin assuming good faith.Simonm223 (talk) 18:58, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
But also review WP:RGW - we are not here to write an article singing paeans to peaceful demonstrators asking for democracy and freedom nor are we here to write attack pages about annoying vandals and thugs trying to grind Hong Kong to a halt because they might have to face penalties for soliciting prostitutes while on business trips to Shenzhen. We are here to create neutral articles about notable topics. And while the current disharmony in Hong Kong is certainly very notable there seem to be altogether too many editors there who are more interested in righting great wrongs than creating neutral articles. Stop that. Wikipedia is not a platform for political advocacy. Not for the Black Shirts. Not for the CCP. Nor for any other faction. Simonm223 (talk) 19:02, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Simonm223, I certainly am not. However, the user that you are defending is not citing sources, and going against it, even with 7 individual users undoing the same untrue edit. I present sources, but you keep removing the sources. You also do not seem to look at the sources. So, from my perspective, given the fact that you already made person attacks about me, pretending that I said bad things about you, that I have some bad history on the Wikipedia and that you removed the sources I gave 2 times, undid edits on talk pages where I was trying to talk things over WITH SOURCES, but did allow the changes said user made, while a 10 second search on any search engine turns up 1000000 sources saying the opposite, I am beginning to think that you are not. Not here to write neutral articles, I mean. I could be wrong, but your behaviour certainly suggests it. So, I have tried a 3rd time on the talk page of the 2019 protests in Hong Kong. Let us discuss there, using the sources found by a 10 second search, that clearly show (LIVE CAMERA FEED!!!!) that triade members attacked peaceful unarmed demonstrators out of the blue, after forcing open a shutter. And that all sources compare the attacks with proven triade attacks from the past, paid for by being and that prove that the exact thing that keeps being placed back into the article is in fact Chinese propaganda. It shows that arguing in favour of a chance like that user is making is incredibly bias. Which is why I mentioned that word above. Sorry if that doesn't sit well in your emotions, but that is the fact.
Let's use the talk page first.
If you undo or remove my attempt yet again, or conclude to something that NO source is showing AGAIN, what should I say and do, in you opinion?
p.s. I noticed on your user page that your connection with socialism is very real. Do you think it is a good idea for you to be editing an article that is clearly showing socialism to be totalitarian (in the Chinese example), dishonest (Chinese example again), without moral compass (Tiananmen square), violently oppressive and trying to hide those facts from the world by using propaganda in the (social) media , such as 200000 fake accounts on twitter and facebook? I am just asking, because it might be that you would prefer to write something else about socialism. I do not mean to insult you here, it is just that your behaviour, in combination with this fact, worries me a lot.
--2019OutlaweD (talk) 06:35, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
p.s. I removed several personal attacks you made about me above, but I think some are left.
--2019OutlaweD (talk) 06:46, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect information on Wikipedia - how to fix Crib Point, Victoria page?

edit

Hello,

The Wikipedia page for the town Crib Point, Victoria in Australia is incorrect. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crib_Point,_Victoria

The "Gas Import Terminal" paragraph appears to be propaganda from the energy company AGL. The AGL Gas Import Terminal project is a proposal only - it is not a certainty. The paragraph does not detail correct information about the AGL gas project or the local communities who object to it on environmental and safety grounds.

How can this paragraph be removed please?

The town of Crib Point is more than just a proposed gas import terminal. This Wikipedia page is misleading and lacking in detail.

Any assistance to remove this paragraph is greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:5923:4900:1ED:ADA9:C4A3:8E85 (talk) 12:23, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I think your best bet is to engage other editors on the article's talk page and try to build consensus for changes. You can start a new section on the talk page to discuss the gas import terminal material, or to discuss the article and how to improve it more generally. Please keep Wikipedia policies in mind, including WP:AGF, WP:CIVIL, and WP:RS. --Tkynerd (talk) 12:47, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also see the neutral point of view policy, which requires that articles give due weight to significant viewpoints published by reliable sources. You could edit the paragraph to clarify that the project is a proposal and that that it has been opposed, including references to reliable sources for your edits. TSventon (talk) 13:03, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to upload photos, please assist

edit

Hi, I'm trying to insert photos into a draft Wiki page I've already submitted about my late father, Sherwood Ross.

When I try to upload the photos, I get a message saying that they can't be published because of questions about licensing.

The two photos I tried to upload have been in my family's possession for more than 50 years.

Please advise, tnx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kross305 (talk • contribs) 16:22, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kross305: Sadly, copyright law is a mess, but we must follow the law. The owner of the copyright, NOT the owner of the physical photograph, must license the copyright of the photo to us. The photographer is the copyright owner. This leads to the following ridiculous situation: If this was a commercial studio, you would need to get the studio to do this. If the photographer is still alive, the photographer could do this. If the photographer is deceased, then the copyright passed to the estate and you need to check the will. If you believe that you are the sole heir, then you own the copyright. -Arch dude (talk) 16:34, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)In order to upload photos, the photographer needs to agree to release the photo under an appropriate license. If you are not the photographer, you cannot do that. You say they have been in your family's possession for more than 50 years, but when were they taken and were they ever published? If they were first published prior to January 1, 1924, they might be public domain. If they are not public domain and you are unable to contact the photographer to get them released under an appropriate license, do you have any photos that you took yourself that you can use? ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:37, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you are sure that for example your father or grandfather owned the copyright then the Commons:Template:PD-heirs can be used on commmons, but you will need to provide information on the provenance. MilborneOne (talk) 16:41, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Kross305: The English Wikipedia, but not commons, has a limited set of "fair-use" exemptions. One is for a picture of a deceased person. To use this, upload to en.wikipedia, not commons, then select the appropriate "fair use" as the copyright status. -Arch dude (talk) 16:42, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Kross305. I'm sorry this is such a frustrating area, but unfortunately it is so, because of copyright law. What Arch dude says is correct, but such use must meet all the criteria in the non-free content criteria, one of which is that the image may be used only in main article space, and it must be used in at least one article. This implies that, if you rely on fair use, you should not upload the images while your draft is still a draft, but only after it has been moved into article space (usually by a reviewer who accepts the draft). --ColinFine (talk) 18:37, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Protected against edit requests?

edit

The article Brianna Wu AND its talk page are protected while the talk page archive is editable but says to only edit the current talk page which can not be edited because of the protection.That the article fails to mention that the person now known as a woman named Brianna Wu was a man named (Redacted) until 2005 is a truly major omission that makes it highly inaccurate...the high level protection appears engineered to keep this fact suppressed.So where does one go for redress?--12.144.5.2 (talk) 18:24, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing any reliable sources that substantiate your claim. Nonetheless, you're better off discussing on that article's talk page once you get extended confirmed rights, and a registered user name. The help desk is for general editing help. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 18:37, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've edited off and on for 16 of the 19 years that I have had sole control of this IP address,my opposition to registering accounts has not budged.On this issue,there is too much smoke for there to be no fire...for the article not even to address the claims made in https://medium.com/@infiltrator7n/in-which-i-take-apart-the-post-where-brianna-wu-denies-being-transgender-e4218b3b093f and (Redacted) is quite inappropriate.12.144.5.2 (talk) 19:39, 26 August 2019 (UTC)/L.E.[reply]
Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for edits to a protected page. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:38, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the pointer to RfPP.12.144.5.2 (talk) 19:39, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, and in general, Wikipedia doesn't deadname a person who has undergone a gender transition unless they were notable under their previous name. Notwithstanding the [citation needed] required for this specific claim. Simonm223 (talk) 18:42, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I would regard failure to give someone's birth name in a biographical article as always a mistake,no matter why they changed it.12.144.5.2 (talk) 19:39, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relevant policy: Presumption in favor of privacy. 107.15.157.44 (talk) 15:33, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If Wu's birthdate isn't recorded by any reliable sources it's fully possible for Wikipedia to be mute on the topic for entirely benign reasons. Simonm223 (talk) 15:34, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, neither Medium nor LolCow are reliable sources. Medium is a blogging platform ad LolCow is a wiki for heck's sake. Simonm223 (talk) 15:35, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Both articles appear well researched.Again,there appears an active effort to suppress facts about this person's past that should not be accommodated.12.144.5.2 (talk) 18:32, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I mean not to disparage the reliability of an anonymous Mass Effect fan. Simonm223 (talk) 15:36, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Lonnie Burr to add early films. Indicates page for film A Yank in Korea does not exist. But it does! How correct in Lonnie Burr?

edit 
Indicates page for film A Yank in Korea does not exist. But it does! How correct in Lonnie Burr?

≈≈≈≈ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Floomerfelt (talk • contribs) 20:01, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Floomerfelt: The wikilink needs to be [[A_Yank_in_Korea]], not [[A Yank in Korea (film)|A Yank in Korea]]. RudolfRed (talk) 20:17, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I've fixed it thus. Thanks for pointing out the problem. Deor (talk) 20:19, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Page Disappeared

edit

Hello...

Reaching out for a friend who used to have an active page, it seems as if the page has disappeared, why would that happen?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.71.249.233 (talk) 21:08, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It will be much easier to say if you remember the exact title of the page. A number of deletion reasons could apply. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:19, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
About 200 articles are deleted every day. The most frequent reason is lack of notability. -Arch dude (talk) 21:21, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Based on the same IP's request at WP:REFUND, the page in question is Jaime Jara, which was deleted at AfD in 2013. --Finngall talk 21:44, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Direct link to deletion history for convenience Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jaime Jara TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 22:49, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2019_August_26&oldid=1166603046"