Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2024 September 28

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.

September 28

Question about user warnings

If a user or IP has a particularly egregious instance of vandalism, but is already warned with uw-vand1, is it fair to go to uw-vand4im? The context is a user blanking a majority of the page and adding typical hoax / obvious vandalistic text in its place. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 00:21, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello @GeorgeMemulous. Normally, users should warn the disruptive editor from Level 1 to 4 and then report them to the WP:AIV if they still continue. However, if their edits are very offensive or disruptive, the usage of the uw-vand4im is normally allowed, even if they haven't been warned all the way. If the IP address's edits seems that offensive, you can give them their "Only warning".

Per WP:UWLEVELS, it does say that "In cases of gross, extreme, or numerous vandalism it may be appropriate to use the Level 4im warning." 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 00:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

I understand that part. I was just wondering whether the "only warning" had to indeed be their only one, whether uw-vand1 or uw-vand2 could force them to go to uw-vand3 instead. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 14:25, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

I tend to think that people who issue an only warning, either multiple times or in addition to other warnings, look like they shouldn't be taken seriously. I really don't recommend it. And thank you for actually reading what the warnings say. As for your options, any increase will normally be sufficient. A v2 warning says that a user may be blocked, and I interpret that as a warning that the user may be blocked (of course no warning at all may sometimes be appropriate). -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:52, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

How to activate VisualEditor

It seems I can't use VisualEditor (VE) to edit articles despite having the option "Enable the visual editor" activated in my settings. Can someone help? Sabelöga (talk) 04:09, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

@Sabelöga We'll see if we can find the problem step-by-step. Go to an article – this one, say – and click "edit". Do you a little pencil in the top right of the editing box that allows you to switch to the visual editor? It should like the picture to the right.

Cremastra (talk) 16:15, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

@Cremastra Oh, I see now, the VisualEditor tool is only available with one of the options "Enable the editing toolbar" or "Use the wikitext mode inside the visual editor, instead of a different wikitext editor" activated. Otherwise, the "Visual editing" button isn't visible/available. Maybe I could have activated it somehow anyway, but I didn't get that far. Thanks! Sabelöga (talk) 20:04, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

It can be a bit of a pain to access, which is why I have "show me both editing tabs" enabled. Look at the second dropdown menu at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing under the "Editor" section. Cremastra (talk) 20:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I have also activated it now. Sabelöga (talk) 00:44, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Racial views of Donald Trump

This Wikipedia article is being used by Google when people search for Kamala Harris and her campaign. I never thought that Wikipedia would be used for politics. Lets see every quote some people did not approve of from President Biden or VP Harris. Please search your encyclopedia and rid it of anything being used by a political party and beware of items someone added for that purpose please. TooMuchTroble (talk) 04:20, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Just a quick answer: Wikipedia isn't WP:CENSORED and hasn't any control over how Google or other search engines display informations. Maresa63 ^Talk 07:13, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

@TooMuchTroble: I don't know which Google search you made but given Trump's statements about Kamala Harris, it's natural that she is mentioned in Racial views of Donald Trump. That means the article may be in some search results for Kamala Harris. She is also mentioned in 2875 other articles. We have six million articles and don't decide their content based on how it might be used by various other websites. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:11, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

@TooMuchTroble That ship probably sailed 20 years ago. Take a look at for example Wikipedia coverage of American politics and Wikipedia and the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:51, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

How do you re-enable Page Previews?

The "Page Previews" feature (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Page_Previews) is excellent. I was experimenting with its configuration (as a Logged-out user) and I turned it off via the cog-icon displayed at the bottom of each preview. I would like to turn it back on. The mediawiki page mentioned above says: '... Page Previews ... can be enabled via the "Edit preview settings" link available at the bottom of any wiki page'. I cannot find such a link anywhere. Does anybody know how to re-enables this feature?

Thank you! Gvvannucci (talk) 05:23, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

@Gvvannucci: When logged out I see the link in the desktop version ("Desktop" at the bottom of mobile pages) but not in mobile. If I enable it in desktop then it's still disabled in mobile. I don't know how to enable it in mobile when logged out. It may work to delete browser cookies for wikipedia.org. Logged in users have "Enable page previews" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:27, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Making a Article

hello I am a ***** and is wondering how to make an article specifically about the other side (the greatest showman song) If anyone has answers pls help, thank you. 180.195.198.48 (talk) 07:48, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

(i) Get plenty of practice in making constructive edits, welcomed (not reverted) by other editors, to articles that already exist. (ii) Check that the subject of your proposed new article is notable (as defined by and for Wikipedia). (iii) Construct a draft that adheres to Wikipedia's principles. (iv) Submit the draft for review. (For more, click on "Learn to edit", a link you'll see on most if not all pages here.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:02, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

The Greatest Showman (soundtrack) has an article, but I'm not sure that the song "The Other Side" would be notable enough for a standalone article.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Charles Eamer Kempe

Ref number 14 and 17 are both in red. Please fix if you can. I am confused. Sorry, 175.38.37.197 (talk) 09:28, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

You have the date parameter in #14 as just "2024", I think it needs the entire date, which I don't know what it is. 331dot (talk) 09:30, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Number 17 is only red because no article exists about that media outlet. It doesn't necessarily need fixing. 331dot (talk) 09:31, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Recovering article

Good day how do i recover my article which i am busy working on and accidentally deleted it 41.1.135.6 (talk) 13:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

See the instructions at WP:REFUND. I'm assuming you deleted the article under G7 (user requests deletion)? Otherwise, if somebody else deleted it for some other reason, it's unlikely to be recovered. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 15:02, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Did you work on said article on a registered account? If so, you can log in and check your contributions (Alt+Y if you're on a Windows device) and see if you can find it there. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:49, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

It should also be noted that if the article wasn't published in any form, i.e. you had typed it in the editor but did not hit Publish, there is no way to recover it. That was stored entirely locally and (to my understanding) had no interaction with Wikimedia servers. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 20:45, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

corrections to imformation on the first special olympic games 1968

You have listed the founders where the Joseph P Kennedy foundation and the Chicago Park district, but you have left out the most IMPORTANT person who also made this happen. This person takes very little credit but deserves to be remember as someone who help get Special Olympic going in Chicago on July 20, 1968. The person is JUDGE ANNE BURKE, without her wisdom and fore site to get this going, there would have never been a Special Olympics. Ask Judge Anne Burke but please add her to the mix. She contacted the Park District not the Kennedy Family. 2601:243:1781:1970:858:55FF:DFCC:9AC2 (talk) 14:45, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

You would be better off posting this at Talk:1968 Special Olympics World Summer Games. Also, it would make everyone's lives much easier if you provided a reliable source, instead of making us "Ask Judge Anne Burke" which would be original research. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 14:57, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Also, it appears Anne Burke is already mentioned in the first sentence of the Planning section of the article. On Wikipedia, people are typically referred to by their name at the time of the event in question, but here it is noted in the article that Anne McGlone changed their surname to Burke later on. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 15:00, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

We have an article about her, Anne M. Burke. Cullen328 (talk) 19:50, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Bio article -- Infobox for multi-career person

For biographical articles, it seems Infoboxes generally utilize a simple one- or two-word designation relating to the individual's career, or their reason for being notable. Example for, say, "Franky Mozart": Infobox rock musician.

I want to create an article about a person who had several personal roles, a variegated career. Should I choose one common, pre-existing designation (such as author)? Or can I use several designation words — or even devise a single-world designation that might encompass several of this person's career roles? Thanks. Joel Russ (talk) 19:57, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

@Joel Russ: {{Infobox person}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:46, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Qian Xuesen on the cover of Aviation Week & Space Technology

The biographical article on Qian Xuesen is somewhat controversial. In short: he did pioneering rocketry work first in the United States and later in China. One fundamental aspect of that is his return to China in 1955 under strained circumstances. Related to that is how, long after the fact, the importance of his work was acknowledged by rocketry experts in the United States. That acknowledgement is now widespread and undisputed, and is wonderfully exemplified by his being selected as the 2007 Aviation Week & Space Technology person of the year. It would greatly improve the article if we could include a thumbnail of the cover art for the January 07, 2008 edition of AW&ST. It appears here: https://aviationweek.com/cover-245 and it seems like at that size it meets all the criteria for fair use in the context of the biographical article. The award is mentioned in the text of the article, and there are no available alternate images of him at the time in his life depicted by this image. Would someone with more experience in fair use of sketches that are historically important please shepherd me through the steps required to do this without adding fair-use controversy to an already somewhat controversial article? (— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 20:52, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Sdsds, policy and precedent are pretty clear on this per WP:NFCI. We cannot use non-free images of a person when a freely licensed or public domain image is available, as is the case here. Countless notable people have appeared on magazine covers but we can use those images only if the copyright has expired. In most cases in the United States, this appplies to images published before 1929. There are exceptions, though. Copyright renewal used to be required although it no longer is. Time magazine failed to renew their copyrights on a timely basis, and as a result, most of their covers before 1936 are in the public domain. Barring dramatic changes in copyright law, that image will remain under copyright until the year 2103. Cullen328 (talk) 23:28, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Although you cannot use the image itself, you could include an external link to the image at the end of the article for curious readers. Cullen328 (talk) 23:43, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Ah good idea, thanks! I also sent email to the artist credited with the portrait, asking for explicit permission to use it, i.e. put the small-size version into the public domain. (— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 01:17, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, and yet we do not have (nor can we plausibly obtain) an image of him during this important phase of his life, i.e. when he was in PLA uniform. This ties the image to the controversy discussed in the article. (— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 01:33, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Sdsds, the credit for the illustration says Scott Marshall of the AW&ST Art Dept. That means that the illustration is almost certainly a Work for hire. If so, then Aviation Week and Space Technology is almost certainly the copyright holder instead of Marshall, according to U.S. copyright law. Cullen328 (talk) 06:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Can use this source?

I was going through articles on the Singapore Infopedia (example: this and this) for research and I noticed that at the bottom of the page, there's a statement that says "The information on this page and any images that appear here may be used for private research and study purposes only. They may not be copied, altered or amended in any way without first gaining the permission of the copyright holder". I'm assuming it means that I'm not allowed to use it because it would violate copyright laws unless if I get permission from the NLB? Most articles on Singapore that I've seen cite the Infopedia. Imbluey2. Please ping me so that I get notified of your response 23:05, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Imbluey2, citing a reliable source, and then summarizing it your own words is not a copyright violation. Avoid close paraphrasing. I do not know whether or not Infopedia is a reliable source. That is another matter. Cullen328 (talk) 23:38, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

I suppose you are right (and yes, the Infopedia is a reliable source, it cites information from other sources in its article and it was made for educational purposes). Imbluey2. Please ping me so that I get notified of your response 23:51, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Imbluey2, "Singapore Infopedia" is perhaps a reliable source. I don't know; I haven't investigated. But neither citing info from other sources nor being made for educational purposes nor the combination of these two makes it a reliable source. (Consider "Conservapedia". This cites info from other sources and claims to be made for educational purposes; but, to put it mildly, it's not a reliable source.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:20, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

@Imbluey2 I looked at the two examples you linked and both have extensive sets of references at the foot of their pages. I'd do the same as I would if I saw something in a Wikipedia article, bearing in mind that Wikipedia is not a reliable source: I would evaluate the sources used for myself and use them rather than Infopedia as citations. As Cullen328 said, recasting information from sources into your own words doesn't violate copyright. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:01, 29 September 2024 (UTC)