Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2024 October 9

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 9

create a new apple account

i bought a new phone but its says try in 8 hours DAGDJSR (talk) 00:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

creat a new apple account

i bought a 15 pro max but it says try in 8 hours DAGDJSR (talk) 00:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

@DAGDJSR this place is for asking Wikipedia-related questions only. For help with your phone, consider asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing or contacting Apple Support. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 00:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

CAN YOU HELP ME CREATE A NEW APPLE ACCOUNT? DAGDJSR (talk) 00:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

CAN YOOU HELP ME CREATE A NEW APPLE ACCOUNT? DAGDJSR (talk) 00:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

This is not a help forum for non-Wikipedia discussions. Try an Apple-related forum. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 01:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Steve Price (broadcaster)

Ref 15 is all wrong - please fix - I don't understand what was done wrong. Thanks 115.70.23.77 (talk) 01:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Never any mention of whodunnit, IP? It was wrong because you had just got it wrong. And you would have read {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help) (though in different colors), which unsurprisingly means that the values (or value) provided for "date" were (or was) unusable. The date provided: "29 March 20022". How could this be more understandable? -- Hoary (talk) 02:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Please check ref number. 3 in the article above - is it OK? Thanks 115.70.23.77 (talk) 02:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

@Srbernadette, this exact problem has been talked about multiple times on this help desk for many years. Another editor has fixed it for you, but I would ask you to ask yourself why the ref threw an error like the many other times you came to ask the same question with a different skin. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

​​ The above was explained to this user several months back at User talk:115.70.23.77#Help Desk questions, but it seems to have been going on for years. For awhile the questions stopped so I assumed they just figured things out; recently, though, they've started back up again essentially posting the same type of "Please fix this. I don't know what's wrong" questions as before. In most cases, these appear to be self-inflicted wounds that could easily be avoided if the user just slowed down and checked their edits before clicking "Publish changes". Errors in reference citation syntax are, I'm pretty sure, indicated at the top of the editing window after clicking "Show preview"; so, it doesn't seem to be too much to ask for this user check their work and then fix things themselves. Everyone makes mistakes and everyone needs help every now and then, but this has become too regular of an occurrence (at least in my opinion) and isn't inspiring confidence in this user's ability to avoid making similar mistakes moving forward.

Another issue is that they also seem to be constantly switching between editing while logged in and editing while logged out. While this isn't expressly prohibited per se, it too seems to have been going on for years, and there's no indication of it stopping anytime soon despite this user having already been blocked once for inappropriately using multiple accounts. At some point, people might start to question whether this user really has the competence to edit, and whether whatever positives they may be providing to the project outweigh their apparent inability to learn from their mistakes. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:23, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Awards listed in articles

Hi, this is a general question on which I'd be grateful for some input.

One piece of information that COI users (whether disclosed or undisclosed) often want to include into their articles are lists of awards. Sometimes these awards are clearly significant (such as those which already have Wikipedia articles of their own), sometimes they clearly are not (such as local awards, awards that were awarded to large numbers of individuals (or companies) every year, industry awards which are sometimes no more than paid-for accolades, etc.).

Distinguishing between the two categories above is often rather difficult and would require significant industry knowledge or academic awareness of the relevant field, which will often be beyond the ability of the average volunteer, even after conducting a Google search for the relevant award.

My question is whether there are any guidelines on what type of awards can and can't included in an article, beyond those contained in the draft proposal here [1] or (if not) any general principles that can be applied when dealing with COI edit requests to include such material. Also, what is the exact status of the draft proposal in terms of whether the contents can be implemented without objection?

To give an example, the proposal states The absolute minimum standard for inclusion of any award or accolade in an article or list is: The award or accolade must have been reported in a reliable source independent of the recipient or promoters of the award. In my experience, if that principle were to be universally applied it would result in the removal of the great majority of industry/academic awards currently detailed in Wikipedia articles.

Any assistance provided here would be very much appreciated. Axad12 (talk) 07:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

If I'm working on a biography, I'll mention or list any notable awards that they've won. I won't list anything else, partly out of respect for the subject. Learning that someone won the Mrs Joyful Prize for Raffia Work will not create a good impression in readers.

Even worse is listing not-notable awards that they were considered or shortlisted for but not awarded. The inclusion of these suggests that the creator of the article suspects that the subject isn.t really notable, and is "scraping the bottom of the barrel". Maproom (talk) 07:39, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Agreed 100%, but are there specific notability guidelines for awards contained (or linked) in WP:N? I didn't see them.

I suppose the grey area that I referred to above relates primarily to awards that fall below the level at which the award might have its own Wikipedia article, but where it still may feasibly be of a significant nature in a particular field.

Re: "scraping the bottom of the barrel" to bolster dodgy subject notability, I do agree but I feel that a lot of COI activity is essentially an extension of the subject's vanity. However, just because the subject is vain doesn't mean that some of the awards they've won might not be of significance in their field.

Many academics, for example, are easily notable under WP:PROF despite never having won any type of award. But the awards that academics often do win seem to be of a particularly arcane nature, and sorting the wheat from the chaff in that regard seems almost impossible.

Industry awards, on the other hand, seem to usually be of a rather trivial nature (given that the sheer number of awarding bodies, often just industry magazines, is huge). If a company were to win (to take a probably made-up example) the UK Construction Magazine award for the most innovative modular housing solution of 2017, my assumption would be that that is not significant or encyclopaedic info. But how is one to tell? Axad12 (talk) 08:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Some general guidelines I use (which are not codified anywhere, but seem to work well enough): First, is there any verification at all that they even did win such an award? If not, unreferenced material can always be challenged and removed; often these sections are just sprawling "They won this and this and this" without any references at all and can just be removed as unreferenced material. If there is, did any reliable and independent source unaffiliated with both the article subject and the organization which gives the award comment on the significance of the win? If not, then mention of it is very likely undue weight. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

True, but in the case of companies, businesspeople and academics the final of those criteria would likely see the removal of the great majority of all awards mentioned in Wikipedia articles. So, do we just conclude that mention of most awards in those fields are simply undue and that awards given to celebrities and sportspeople (extensively covered in reliable sources) are always due? Surely things can't be so simple? Axad12 (talk) 08:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

My rule of thumb is that I include an award or similar if I a have decent independent source for it, or if the award or at least org behind it has a WP-article, I might include it with a primary source (not the awardee). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree with your general approach (and those detailed above by others) but the problem I will face is essentially as follows:

Suppose a COI edit request details a list of awards that the subject (usually a businessperson or academic) has won and which they would like included in the relevant Wikipedia article. If I go through the awards as you suggest and respond along the lines of "These ones are okay for inclusion, these ones aren't okay" then the COI editor would be perfectly entitled to say "can you point me towards the relevant policy/guidelines on that?" at which point I'd have to admit that there is no real basis for my response and no real grounds for some of the awards to be excluded (unless they are obviously trivial and undue).

Any thoughts on how to navigate that sort of conversation would be appreciated. Axad12 (talk) 08:57, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

WP:PROPORTION? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Fair point, but that would require an estimation to be made on whether the inclusion of the awards would be undue weight to minor aspects. Unfortunately whether the awards can reasonably be estimated to be minor or major is the fundamental problem.

I'm getting the impression that there are no real guidelines here and that editors use their own common sense when directly editing articles. Sadly I'm not sure that that will assist when dealing with COI editors who wish to include material using criteria other than common sense (typically their criteria will be dominated by "how impressive will this look?" and "how much can I get away with?"). Axad12 (talk) 09:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

As is detailed above there is normally no reason to include any award. So if you're asked to provide policy for the awards to include or not, you can probably provide policy that no award is possible and the COI editor has the choice to get some awards into the article or none at all. 176.0.162.62 (talk) 12:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

This comes up often. This isn't formalized into a guideline, but might be interesting to read through Wikipedia:Awards_and_accolades Graywalls (talk) 03:56, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

I have been donating for a long time, but can't find my login.

I know I used to have an account, but I can't remember the login name. The email address I used will still be the same. How do I regain access to my old account? Or will I need to cancel my donation. Create a new account and then start a new donation. 82.163.190.20 (talk) 08:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

The donation process is not connected to your account in any way. Doing so would, in fact, violate your privacy. You may donate if you have an account or if you do not have an account. The donation process is handled by the Wikimedia Foundation which actually collects the donations, we editors have nothing to do with it. Inquires about donations should be made to donate@wikimedia.org.

If you did not have an email address in your account preferences, there is no way to regain access to your account and you will need to create a new account. You may identify it as a successor to your old account("I am User5678, I was previously User1234 but lost access") 331dot (talk) 08:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks 82.163.190.20 (talk) 08:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

If you do have an account and you did store an email address (which is optional) and you can still receive mail at the address then you can use Special:PasswordReset to get the username and a temporary password. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Did you ever edit any Wikipedia articles? if not, then you can ignore your old lost account entirely. If you did ever edit articles, then you may still abandon that old account by doing nothing, or you can try to look at the edits on the page history of articles you edited to see if you recognize your old login name. If you can find your old login name (we call it your "user name") you can request a password reset to be sent to the associated email address. -Arch dude (talk) 15:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Creating an article for an upcoming artist

So basically im writing a wiki page for an Indian growing Artist, I had previously written and got the webpage removed entirely in terms of promotional.. Kindly give me the guidelines on how to not get this issue and to keep the webpage same without removal. Thanks in advance Timeless Scholar (talk) 12:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Your use of the phrases "upcoming artist" and "growing artist" indicates that it is far too soon for an article about this artist(musician? Your account has no orher edits so I don't know who you wrote about). Wikipedia is the last place to write about a topic, not the first. Once this person "arrives" and is noticed by independent reliable sources that then give them significant coverage, they may then meet the notability criteria to merit an article. 331dot (talk) 12:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

I dont know why it doesnt show but he is not far too soon, Upcoming as in he is an artist and has done works but i meant upcoming for the phrase of becoming a top artist Timeless Scholar (talk) 12:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

• OP blocked for sockpuppetry. 331dot (talk) 13:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Interface question - missing vertical scroll bar in preview

When I am not logged out in, there's an edit summary box at the bottom and when I click preview, it works fine. When I'm logged in, I will get a pop-up after I push publish, then have the "preview" and "publish" button within the popup. The problem is that when I push "preview", the vertical scroll bar is missing. There is a container/rail, but the tab in it is missing, so I can't grab it and scroll and I have to use the scroll wheel on the mouse or arrow keys on the keyboard to scroll. What settings is causing this? Graywalls (talk) 21:23, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

@Graywalls: I'm trying to understand your scenario. "not logged out" is the same as logged in. Did you mean "not logged in"? You only mention "push publish" in one of the situations. Did you mean "push preview"? What does the mentioned pop-up look like? Does it work if you select "Always enable safe mode" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering? It's just for testing and not a suggested solution. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:45, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Ooops. Graywalls (talk) 04:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Tried it. Made no difference. Graywalls (talk) 23:01, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

@Graywalls: I'm still trying to understand what you describe. Are you saying you "push publish" but it doesn't save, and then you want to preview and scroll instead? I'm confused. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:07, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

The scroll thing on the side disappears in the preview screen. Graywalls (talk) 01:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I tested this and experienced the same issue. Zooming in or out doesn't help, and it looks like the window itself is stretched too much; the Publish changes button is slightly cut off. Maybe the folks over at WP:VPT know more? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:43, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Please post clear steps to reproduce. Does it start with push publish as Graywalls said? Is the scroll bar missing from the whole window or the edit box? PrimeHunter (talk) 10:54, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

1. Edit an article in source mode.
2. Make an edit.
3. Click Publish changes.
4. Click Show preview in the dialogue box that appears.
5. Observe missing scroll bar element on the right-hand side.

This might just be an issue with Vector 2022; anyone with other skins should test this on their end. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:54, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Makes no difference between Vector classic / 2010 and default. I also experience the clipped button as Tenryuu detailed previously. The blue "Publish changes..." become partially lost into the frame and clipping off about halfway into the last "s". Graywalls (talk) 16:47, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

When I click "Publish changes", the edit is saved and the saved page is displayed. I guess you enabled something in preferences. Is it normal you have more steps after clicking "Publish changes"? What does the dialogue box say? Does it only happen in articles? PrimeHunter (talk) 18:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Looking at my preferences I've got the 2017 wikitext editor toggled on. It's happening in the talk and Wikipedia spaces as well.

@Graywalls: Try this if you're on a Windows device: press Alt+⇧ Shift+P. I tried this key combination while in source editor and the preview that shows up has a scroll bar. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:01, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I have now enabled the 2017 wikitext editor and get the dialogue box. I still didn't see the problem in my standard browser Firefox but I tried Google Chriome and see it there. There are two vertical bars to the right. In Firefox they are side by side and scrolling works normally in the left bar. In Chrome a bar without scrolling is on top of a shorter bar with scrolling which cannot be accessed. The bar on top can be removed with this in your CSS:

html.oo-ui-windowManager-modal-active:not(.oo-ui-windowManager-modal-active-fullscreen) {
  scrollbar-gutter: auto !important;
}

However, I don't know whether it removes a useful bar in other circumstances. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:46, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

@Tenryuu:, I tried that key combo and it doesn't seem to do anything. @PrimeHunter:, since Chrome holds 2/3 marketshare in desktop browsers globally, I believe this does should get fixed. Graywalls (talk) 00:28, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

@Graywalls: I have reported it at phab:T377073. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:37, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Uncertain if it would be considered a copyright violation.

There is a draft in AFC that the copyvio checker is showing a 92.4% similarity to a website that the article lists as one of its sources. Not sure if it still counts as a copyright violation since it is listed in the citations. Shadow311 (talk) 22:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Shadow311, yes, it counts as a copyright violation. --Ratekreel (talk) 22:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

See quick fail criteria and instructions to deal with copyvio problems. --Ratekreel (talk) 22:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

I believe the only way something like this is allowed at all is if the text is under a PD or compatible Creative Commons license and the text itself is attributed with a template. Even then, it's preferable to rewrite everything to be original to Wikipedia. I'm assuming, though, that isn't what here. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 16:55, 11 October 2024 (UTC)