Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2024 October 16

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.

October 16

Want to request move but process confusing and closer inactive

Hi. I want to request a move of PlanetRomeo but it is unclear how to do that. It makes sense that the article ought to be titled "ROMEO (social network)" — fyi, styling is in all-caps — but it has previously been moved as the site/app has changed names twice since its founding. The closer of the last move (in 2015) is @Jenks24, who is no longer active, and initiating a move review apparently requires posting on that user's talk page. That section on the article talk page suggests that posting there about subsequent moves is inappropriate. The name of the site/app was changed from PlanetRomeo in 2021, when the owner bought the romeo.com domain. Some of its users still informally use the previous names, so redirects both from "GayRomeo" and "PlanetRomeo" would seem to be in order. But after three years with the current name, most Wikipedia users searching for the article will be unable to find it, as it doesn't appear on the "Romeo" disambiguation page. The article itself requires significant editing I will be happy to do on my own, but moving it so that it's correctly titled seems like the top priority. I tried to do the move request myself but the specifics of the situation made it a challenge I don't seem to be up to. Any assistance is appreciated — Jamesmartinthompson (talk) 10:36, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Jamesmartinthompson, the move review process is only used for recent moves: something from nine years ago would just use another move request.

I'm not seeing anything at Talk:PlanetRomeo that indicates posting a move request there would be inappropriate. Can you let us know what is giving you that impression? I didn't see anything in the banner shell about not requesting another move, and the most recent talkpage activity apart from bot action and vandalism was eight years ago.

Please feel free to add {{rm}} to Talk:PlanetRomeo yourself (you can use Twinkle to make this easier, if you have it turned on in Special:Preferences). I don't know enough about MOS:DAB to provide an answer on the appropriateness of adding a link to the article at Romeo (disambiguation); perhaps others can weigh in, but I imagine you could also do this if you feel it's correct, and see if the addition is reverted (which is no big deal). Folly Mox (talk) 11:00, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Might be the {{rmtop}} boilerplate of Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. The current rmtop phrasing is slightly different but does still have that last sentence. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Non RS sources in COI edit requests

Hi, I've recently seen several COI edit requests where the sourcing was to websites which appeared to be news websites but where closer examination suggested that they are places where companies can install press releases as though they were independent news stories. Of course, the pseudo-promotional nature of the text usually gives them away, but at the bottom of such articles there can be founds links to pages saying, for example,

If you are interested in adding your story, press release or other news, email our team

or with reports from happy customers such as We had a fabulous experience working with [name of website]. They were collaborative, worked hard to align with our marketing plan and shape the article accordingly.

So, two questions: what is this practice called, and what kind of action can be taken if COI editors (sometimes from large wiki-editing firms) are trying to install such press release type material? Axad12 (talk) 10:47, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

The sources' practice or the COI editors' practice? The practice that the sources are doing is WP:LAUNDERING. The COI editors? Trying to use terrible sources, I guess. Not really much you can do other than telling them not to do it, and maybe dragging them to a noticeboard if they're doing it repeatedly. Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I meant from the standpoint of the COI editors. I was under the impression that it was a form of Astroturfing, but the article here doesn't fully support that idea.

I've recently been surprised to see long serving employees of two large wiki-editing companies using the tactic (whatever it is called), and another wiki-editing company even advertises the service on their website.

I'm sure that the companies/editors in question must be aware that the practice is contrary to Wikipedia policy. I assume that they're working on the basis that if the reviewing editor doesn't spot the problem with the sourcing in the edit request then no harm is done, but it seems to me to be an exceptionally bad faith activity. This is all the more the case when it's reasonable to assume that the requesting paid editor had previously installed the press release onto an apparently RS-looking website, with the intention of using it here as a source.

When I spot this is future, I wonder if there is a standard notice that can be placed on the users' talkpages. Not necessarily anything specific, but just something to formally request that they stop doing it. Axad12 (talk) 12:58, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

The closest template would probably be {{uw-unreliable}}, though you can always create your own template if you want to customise it, for example with a different icon like and phrasing or something. Call it uw-presswashing or uw-laundering or something like that. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:25, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Article not appearing on internet search

Hello. I created the article John Dillwyn-Venables-Llewelyn. Whether I search the exact article title or namesakes (e.g. Sir John Venables-Llewelyn) it does not appear on any search engines (google, safari etc). It is only accessible via the link in the Dillwyn-Venables-Llewelyn baronets article, or my watchlist. Anyone have any ideas why this may be? TIA Mac Edmunds (talk) 14:51, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia has no control over how search engines work. The article John Dillwyn-Venables-Llewelyn was created in June 2024, so maybe they haven't got round to crawling it yet.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:16, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I've created a few others and they have appeared immediately, so just confused me. Mac Edmunds (talk) 17:36, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

The article is the top result for me on DuckDuckGo. Confirming I also don't see it as a google result (having given up on page four or five). Folly Mox (talk) 22:36, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. Mac Edmunds (talk) 09:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

@Mac Edmunds Although the article was reviewed by the new pages patrol on 8 September, making it available to search engines, it has had no edits since then. In my experience, if you were to edit it now Google and others would notice and index it quickly. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I’ll give it a quick edit in a mo. Mac Edmunds (talk) 12:50, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Short description issue

When I look up Murder of Meredith Kercher on my mobile phone, the short description is "Template for Amanda Knox". How can this be fixed? Batrachoseps (talk) 14:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

@Batrachoseps: This should be fixed after this edit to the navbox at the foot of that article. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:21, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Batrachoseps (talk) 15:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Clarifcation on Options to hide an image

Can any of you guys clarify on what the following means? How do I block specific images in the search code using this code?

Disable images in search widget for certain skins

Search result images can be turned off by altering the respective common.css for the skin being used and adding a rule to not display background images for spans of the class .wvui-typeahead-suggestion__thumbnail. For example:

span.wvui-typeahead-suggestion__thumbnail {
  background-image:none !important;    
}

Kidgeorge (talk) 22:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Kidgeorge. This isn't about specific images. It's hiding all images that get put into a span with a class of "wvui-typeahead-suggestion__thumbnail", which I'm guessing will be images chosen by the software to appear when you are searching. ColinFine (talk) 22:32, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Is there any way to block specific images in the search bar. On the other hand, you can also disable specific images by filename or disable all images on an specfic page.

There are instances where it blocks all images within a specific page or blocks some images while allowing others to be displayed. Other times, it doesn't block the images at all, even after you bypassed your cache. Kidgeorge (talk) 21:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)