Help desk
< May 26	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 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.

May 27

change nickname

hi. i have had a wiki account for some years. i am wondering if it is possible to change my nickname, ie, the name that appears after i have made an edit. thanks. statson52 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jptweddell (talk • contribs) 00:30, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CUSTOMSIG or Wikipedia:Changing username may be of interest. Rwessel (talk) 00:36, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter photos

May a photo posted by a Twitter user to their Twitter account be used in a Wikipedia article? 73.222.229.165 (talk) 01:20, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Generally no. Photos used on Wikipedia that do not fall under our non-free use criteria must be explicitly released under a free license. What this means is that the photo must be able to be used or modified by any person, at any time, for any reason (including commercial use). Unless the photographer explicitly states this on the photo we must assume that the image is copyrighted and it cannot be used. --Majora (talk) 01:26, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for quick reply. Photo in question is of a famous person and has been published in mainstream media. Does that make any difference? 73.222.229.165 (talk) 01:31, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If it is a living person it excludes non-free use. So the photo must be freely released in order to be used. Publication in mainstream media does not equate to a license that we can accept. The media has different licensing requirements and they can use images must more readily than we can. Unfortunately, unless we have an explicit release from the photographer the image cannot be used. Sorry. --Majora (talk) 01:36, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But I'm told that sometimes public figures do agree to license their photos appropriately, if they are asked. The holder of the copyright (who is usually the photographer, but might be the subject, or their agent) would have to send an email according to the procedure in donating copyright materials. --ColinFine (talk) 08:27, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

unblock requests

I see here has a list of current unblock requests: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Requests_for_unblock I can't figure out how to see past unblock requests..Is this possible? I'm interested in looking into what percentage of unblock requests are granted. 68.48.241.158 (talk) 02:20, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you might be able to get something out of the block log. To actually see past unblock requests, you'd presumably have to search through a database dump for granted and non-granted unblock request templates in the history of user talk pages, although that would have false negatives (wouldn't detect unblock requests made without a template) and possibly false positives. Goldenshimmer (talk) 02:31, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

so likely virtually impossible to look into this? there's no log kept as far as anyone knows?68.48.241.158 (talk) 02:51, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, those two publicly available data sets I mentioned hold all the requisite data, just not in an entirely structured format. Goldenshimmer (talk) 03:58, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

idk that seems utterly difficult..I believe approx. 0% of requests are granted, which is concerning..but don't know how to establish this or have it be established that it's not the case...there is no log for accountability...perhaps I could propose that a log be created..68.48.241.158 (talk) 04:07, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have personally seen dozens of unblock requests granted and that is just in recent memory. One in the last 24 hours that I happened to stumble upon. So 0% is incorrect. As to the number, most people who are blocked fail to read the relevant guide and therefore only make matters worse for themselves. Unblock requests only work if the person actually understands what they did and gives admins a reason to believe that they are going to stop the actions that caused the block in the first place. There are plenty of avenues for appeal and plenty of accountability. --Majora (talk) 04:15, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I unblocked someone in the past 24 hours. So it's plainly false. --Jayron 32 04:47, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

okay, I'll try to take a look...or if I can be pointed to a couple of examples...where another admin overturned/reduced the block that another admin imposed...i'd like to see how it played out..68.48.241.158 (talk) 10:25, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You would basically have to watch the category and then check the block logs later. HighInBC 04:14, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if this sounds overly suspicious, OP, but I'm going to come out and ask: are you a blocked user? If you are, then posting here anonymously is block evasion: read the blocking notice for all the information you need about requesting an unblock. Generalised questions like this are often a prelude to Wikilawyering, and the fact that it is an IP who is asking about unblocking makes me suspicious. --ColinFine (talk) 10:36, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

no but I've been blocked before and have had my unblock requests improperly denied twice in a row by the same admin (which is against policy)..I believe the area of blocks and unblock requests is an area that may need more transparency and accountability to give Wikipedia increased credibility (it likely would have taken you less than a minute of research to realize your suspicions are baseless by the way)..68.48.241.158 (talk) 10:44, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First off, no, you haven't been improperly denied. Second, if you don't remain civil, you'll probably find yourself blocked a 5th time.142.105.159.60 (talk) 16:57, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

first off, yes I was. Second, I suppose you should clarify that you were referring to the above poster who A. didn't assume good-faith B. made a ridiculous accusation C. obviously took no time to look into anything before making the ridiculous accusation. good day..68.48.241.158 (talk) 17:53, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There was no need to clarify. I was addressing you and you alone. You were denied because you didn't address the reason you were blocked in your unblock requests, and his question was valid as many blocked Users have used IP's to get around their block and have asked questions similar to your own.142.105.159.60 (talk) 18:00, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question about WP:NLT

Hi! I'm curious since this question idly occurred to me. Does Wikipedia's No Legal Threats policy disallow making all legal threats? For instance, hypothetically if a user were to say, "Hey User:Example, I'm gonna find you and beat you up cause you reverted me!", then if Example hypothetically replied, "If you track me down in real life and try to beat me up over that, then I'll drag your ass to court for assault", is that grounds for blocking? Legal consequences seem kind of, like, normal in response to a threat of real-life violence…. 😅 Goldenshimmer (talk) 02:26, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Goldenshimmer, I'd block the first editor anyway, for obvious reasons. The second editor is factually incorrect. In most jurisdictions, assault is a criminal offence and the prosecutor is the country or state legal authority, not an individual. Our policy concerns civil actions bought by individuals. I'd warn the second editor to avoid pouring petrol on the fire, but it's not, imho, a breach of policy Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:55, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks Jimfbleak :) Hopefully will never be an issue for me personally, but reading the policy made me curious. I wonder if that kind of situation should be discussed in it, since it seems like a grey area… Goldenshimmer (talk) 06:09, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

the second editor wouldn't be factually incorrect, however, at least in the USA...assault is certainly a cause for civil action..not that it really matters as far as your question though..68.48.241.158 (talk) 10:48, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Move an article to (its own) already redirected article name

Hello, I would like to rename the article Angular mil to Milliradian. Can somebody help me? Sauer202 (talk) 11:03, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Moving a page#Moving over a redirect – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 11:18, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I don't understand the manual. Could you please explain what is the correct procedure in this case?Sauer202 (talk) 11:46, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sauer202], first Milliradian is itself a redirect to Radian, which should be the target. You need an admin to delete the redirect. I can do that, but you don't appear to have proposed this move on the article talk page or at the project page, which you should do to see if there is consensus for the move Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:06, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've now added a discussion on WikiProject Measurement and on the talk page. I also used the command db-move|Angular mil|Milliradian is a more commonly used name as described in the article. Sauer202 (talk) 13:00, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jimfbleak, how long do you want to wait before you do the name change? I think it will be uncontroversial. I've never heard of the name angular mil, but milliradian is widespread. A Google search for "angular mil" returns 7000 results while "milliradian" returns almost 60 000 results. The name change can change be reverted later anyways if someone diagrees. Sauer202 (talk) 20:00, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sauer202, I imagine you are right, but I've been on Wikipedia long enough to be aware that the most innocuous of changes can upset someone. I'm inclined to give it 24 hours from your last message and do it then if no objections Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:43, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! :) Sauer202 (talk) 07:56, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's been moved, seems like the right decision to me. Clearly the common name, and the name used in the radian article about it as well. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:03, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

how many admins are there?

A. How many are there currently (having trouble finding this) B. Is there a way to know how many of these are active (ie certain amount of edits over past year) C. How does the number of current admins compare to the number at other times in Wikipedia's history? Thanks for any help.68.48.241.158 (talk) 15:04, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:List of administrators answers at least A and B

-- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 15:06, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

thanks don't know how missed this page...there are 546 active admins...!!!??? I would have been concerned if there were only 5460!68.48.241.158 (talk) 15:10, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

figured out how to look through history to see past counts too so all set, thanks!68.48.241.158 (talk) 15:41, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging a copyvio image

What are we supposed to do with an image file that is clearly a copyvio, such as when the uploader misrepresented or misunderstood the copyright status? The usual speedy deletion tag "db-copyvio" is not available in Twinkle when viewing a File page. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:13, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Manually) tag {{Db-filecopyvio|url=URL of source}} per WP:F9. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:19, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:43, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Roger (Dodger67), you should first read up on Wikipedia:Guide to image deletion#Copyright_concerns. That provides a comprehensive understanding of your query. Xender Lourdes (talk) 16:10, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I understand copyright issues quite well, I've been here long enough... All I needed was the correct tag to use, in this case F9 is it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:33, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See you around then... Xender Lourdes (talk) 01:40, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Italics for spacecraft names?

This may not be the right spot for this question, but I have a query about Wikipedia style as it applies to spacecraft. In the Voyager Golden Record article, the names of the probes (Pioneer, Voyager) are italicized. However, the names are not italicized on the Pioneer plaque page, nor are they italicized on the Voyager program and Pioneer program pages. On the individual spacecrafts' pages, the titles of some spacecraft--Pioneer 10, Pioneer 11, Voyager 1, Voyager 2--are in italics, while most of the others--Pioneer 4, Pioneer Venus Orbiter, most of the early Pioneer craft--are not. I noticed that Voyager 1 is a good article; is the preferred style to have italic titles/plain in-text names? 137.28.230.102 (talk) 17:34, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:ITALICS says to use italics for spacecraft but not for missions. That may cause some confusion. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:48, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ack! I looked at MOS:ITALICS but totally missed that part. So, based on the call to "...distinguish the craft from the mission: The Eagle was the Apollo 11 lunar lander)," I guess the question I have is if the articles are about the probes or the larger mission. For example, in the first sentence of Pioneer 10, it says "Pioneer 10 (originally designated Pioneer F) is an American space probe,...." Then, in the third sentence, it says "This space exploration project was conducted by...." It's harder to separate the spacecraft name from the mission when talking about these probes, but it seems like the policy would point to italicizing except in constructions like "the Voyager program." Does that seem right? 137.28.230.102 (talk) 18:10, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't work in the area but an archive search of italics at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spaceflight gives some old discussions. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:04, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Publish a page developed in the Wikipedia Sandbox

How do I publish on Wikipedia? I have developed an article in Sandbox. I have attentively followed the guidelines for topic, format, references, and external links. I have aggressively edited my drafts over at least six weeks. I have saved my edits in Sandbox. How do I submit the article??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cordell Affeldt (talk • contribs) 17:35, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Search for the article you want to create. You'll see the sentence: "You may create the page [foo], but consider checking the search results below to see whether the topic is already covered." Click on foo, then copy and paste the source article (including the markup) from your sandbox. Preview it first to make sure it looks and reads as you intend. For a summary, I suggest something like "Created article via sandbox" so that other editors will understand why the article suddenly appeared fully formed. Then save. Note that the article, like any other, is still subject to Wikipedia's notability standards. Barte (talk) 19:35, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this is not the normal method for getting an article in the mainspace from a draft - one would normally move the article to its intended location, although this leaves you at the mercy of the new page reviewers and AfD process. — crh ₂₃ (Talk) 20:15, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Cordell Affeldt: To avoid the potential pain of an AfD or CSD and to get feedback on the article as it currently exists, you will probably wish to use the articles for creation process. To submit your article to the process, simply add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page you wish to submit. — crh ₂₃ (Talk) 19:47, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea--especially if this is your first created article. Barte (talk) 19:56, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Cordell Affeldt:He's submitted Draft:Oliver LaGrone using the AFC, and I've commented on his talk page. The Draft is very good, there are a few places in it that aren't complete and a few where it isn't encyclopedic. In short, when those things are fixed, I'll be happy to move it to mainspace, and it will probably jump straight to being B-Class.Naraht (talk) 22:09, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Guideline about not appending "United States" to addresses in the US

I'm currently engaging with an editor who is (overpedantically imho) insisting on specifying "United States" after a statement about a subject's location: "<subject> is located in Dallas, Texas, United States". I know there is a specific guideline that tells us not to add "United States/US" after specifying a location/address that mentions the state. It's probably somewhere in the MOS but I can't find it. (BTW my "respondent" justifies reverting my removal of "United States" by citing systemic bias - which I find a bit bizarre. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:55, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dodger67, I think WP:PLACE is what you want. Dismas|^(talk) 19:30, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Dismas. That is actually about the titles of articles about places as such. The situation I'm dealing with is an article about a company "ACME Inc. is a widget manufacturer in Dallas, Texas, United States that makes..." I want to remove the "United States", my interlocutor insists on keeping it per "systemic bias" which I find to be an absurd rationale. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:59, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd generally support including "United States" unless the article mentions that ACME Inc. is an American company elsewhere, because some USA state names are ambiguous (e.g. "a widget manufacturer in Georgia" would usually be understood to mean in the country, not the US state) Goldenshimmer (talk) 20:37, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(That's less of an issue if it says it's "a widget manufacturer in Tbilisi, Georgia" or "a widget manufacturer in Atlanta, Georgia", since those are commonly known names associated with the relevant locations, but if it's "a widget manufacturer in Vale, Georgia" vs. "a widget manufacturer in Ila, Georgia", where frankly IMO Vale "sounds" more like a US city than "Ila".) Pinging Roger (Dodger67) Goldenshimmer (talk) 20:42, 27 May 2016 (UTC) Wikilinks added Goldenshimmer (talk) 20:43, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree: it is generally good to include the country at least once in the article because not all English speakers are from the United States. In fact, most English speakers aren't from the United States. This is a global website, despite being hosted in the Untied States, so we have to make sure content is clear for everyone using it. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:33, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise, I agree; it's always important to specify the country in some way or another, for the sake of the ignorant, even if a large number of readers already understand. This can be done in plenty of different ways, e.g. "an American company based in Atlanta, Georgia". It's similar to how lots of users would benefit by the addition of a country name to an article that discusses how Acme, Inc. is a company based in Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala. Nyttend (talk) 03:52, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Citing a legal complaint

I'm trying to cite a legal complaint, this one, in Shiva Ayyadurai. I've used Template:Cite court, but on further reading, I think that's for citing case law, as opposed to the initial filing. Have otherwise looked high and low but can't find any guidance. Thanks. Barte (talk) 19:21, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Legal complaints are biased and are not expected to have a neutral point of view, instead taking a single side in an argument; and thus are pretty much inevitably not suitable sources for our articles. --Orange Mike | Talk 03:34, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's a primary source, and as you note, not neutral by definition, but is used in combination with a secondary neutral source. I'll add additional filings, as well as other neutral sources, as they become available. From what I can see elsewhere Template:Cite web seems to be the answer I'm looking for.Barte (talk) 03:48, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: the basic <ref></ref>, "Basic form" on WP:VE, gets closest to the format for a standard-issue legal filing cite. Barte (talk) 20:38, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Posting a .png file

Hi there. I need to write a post for the Mathematics Desk. I've done it many times before but never with illustrations. How can I post a drawing which is a .png file?

Thanks, AboutFace 22 (talk) 19:27, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You could upload it to Wikipedia using WP:UPLOAD and then place it in your section as you would another image from Wikipedia. Or you could upload it to file sharing site such as Photobucket or Imgur (two that I've used in the past, I'm not making recommendations) and just post a link to the image without having it appear with your question. Dismas|^(talk) 19:33, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend, instead of Imgur or Photobucket or similar Web sites, using the Internet Archive, because they're a not-for-profit, and as such seem to be more in line with Wikipedia' s goals. Also, they don't habitually delete files, so broken links are much less likely to result. (disclaimer, I am a fan and user of IA, but without any formal relationship) Goldenshimmer (talk) 20:35, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much both @Dismas and @Goldenshimmer. Your suggestions are very helpful.AboutFace 22 (talk) 22:23, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New Article

The city of Courtenay, BC in Canada has just celebrated its centennial. During the year citizens nominated people who had made outstanding volunteer contributions to the city from 1915 to 2015. A comprehensive vetting of nominees resulted in 331 Citizens of the Century. For many of these we have good information edited and composed into approximately 100 word write-ups. For others we have insufficient information. Is it appropriate to create a Wikipedia article with an introduction and the list of 331 names along with the write-ups we have and encourage people with additional data to add to our write-ups?Plewis121 (talk) 19:48, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not in my opinion. "Citizens of the Century" is something purely of local interest and hasn't gotten any real notice even within the province. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:29, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]