Help desk
< June 7	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 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.

June 8

Wikipedia considers a convicted terrorist a hero???

Hi there, I came across Eric Rudolph's wikipedia page and noted he is described as an American hero for his role in bombings which killed innocent people. I changed hero to terrorist but was informed this does not comply with Wikipedia's policy and has been reverted to the original. I won't change it again but will leave it up to you as to which word is most appropriate and least offensive. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.8.44.170 (talk) 02:08, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the history of the page shows that "hero" wasn't up for long (27 minutes), and your revision to terrorist is still live in the article. I think that the message placed on your talkpage might have been put there in error, and was meant for the user who originally changed "terrorist" to "hero". Perhaps @Drmies could clarify? Pi (Talk to me!) 02:15, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I clicked the wrong template. I did not, obviously, change it back to "hero"--in fact I blocked the person who inserted that. Drmies (talk)

The White House

The address listed is incorrect and should reflect the below address:

1600 Black Lives Matter Plaza NW, Washington DC 20005 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.202.152.162 (talk) 03:43, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Got a citation to a reliable source for that claim? (It appears to be from a tweet from a white house reporter trolling Trump.) --Guy Macon (talk) 03:55, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The street itself was not renamed, just the intersection of Pennsylvania Avenue and 14th Street NW. 331dot (talk) 09:52, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Naguib Sawiris

i need to edit the information in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naguib_Sawiris most of the information need to e changes and i don't know how and i need your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by NohaFanous (talk • contribs) 09:34, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The place to suggest changes to an article is on its talk page (in this case Talk:Naguib Sawiris), but you appear to be trying to add a malformatted and misplaced external link to the body of the text, and at least one of your edits removed existing sourced text. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:45, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unable to upload photo

Dear Mr or Ms,

we, Latvian National opera and ballet, are trying to upload a photo of the program of our first performance (15.10.1918.), but wikipedia doesn't allow us to do it. We are also unable to attach the picture and the explanation to this mail. Please assist us with this problem and your consultation.

Regards, Latvian National opera and ballet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Latvijas Nacionalā opera un balets (talk • contribs) 09:37, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Latvijas Nacionalā opera un balets. How were you trying to upload it? What happened to make you unable to? And (most important), what is the copyright status of the picture?

Also please note that (as mentioned in the message on your talk page) your account name is not acceptable, because it appears to represent an organisation (all accounts are for individuals, and may not be shared); and if you are planning to do anything to the existing article Latvian National Opera (including adding an image), please familiarise yourselves with our policies on conflict of interest and paid editing before you do so. --ColinFine (talk) 11:56, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand or misunderstand this, if either

(A) the photographer died in or before 1945 (regardless of the first publication of the photograph)

or

(B) both (i) the photographer died in or before 1949 and (ii) the photograph was first published in what is now Latvia in or before 1924,

then the photograph is in the public domain, and may be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons (thanks to which it may be used in the Wikipedia of any language).

I'm assuming that the photograph originated in what is now Latvia; if the first performance was instead in exile in, say, France, then I suppose that French (and not Latvian) copyright law would apply. Indeed, there are many possible complexities and points that I may have misunderstood, so you'd better ask at Wikimedia Commons for expert (Latvian?) opinion. -- Hoary (talk) 12:17, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is incomplete. If the photo was published in the US after 1924 and before 1964, and the copyright was properly renewed, or from 1964-1978 (when renewal was automatic) then it is still protected by US copyright, no matter when the photographer died. If it was first published anywhere before 1924, it is now in the public domain under US law, again no matter when the photographer died. There are some possible further complications if the photographer made the original photo as part of regular employment, such that it constituted a work-made-for-hire, which can make the employer the "author" of the photo under US law (although not under the law of various other countries) and again make the death date of the photographer not relevant. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:00, 8 June 2020 (UTC) @Latvijas Nacionalā opera un balets and Hoary: DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:01, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Latvijas Nacionalā opera un balets: I suggest you ask at Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions. TSventon (talk) 02:25, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Subsectioning

User A creates a section every time A needs to address a certain topic. Discussion starts, but user A replies by creating a new section. Discussion continues and the user is asked to stop creating sections. User A creates still another section to reply. And so on...

Is there a guideline that could suggest the user to stop this behavior? Is it disruptive?

Also, are we allowed to transform the consecutive sections in subsections of a bigger section? (without changing section titles nor moving discussions up or down).--ReyHahn (talk) 11:49, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ReyHahn and welcome to the Help desk. See Wikipedia:Refactoring talk pages and Editing others' comments. There is more advice here about creating sections and subsection than about joining them, however. See also WP:TALKNEW where it says: Don't create a new heading that duplicates an existing heading: If you are responding to a comment or adding to a discussion on a particular topic, respond after the comment or at the bottom of the existing section.

In general I would say that the practice you describe is at least mildly disruptive, and that combining A's comments by joining them into a single section, or by making the separate sections into subsections is justifiable, provided that the meaning and context of A's comments is not changed. It is also permitted to change headings if this adds to clari8ty and does not change the maning of any editor's comments. You can ask A not to comment in this way. If it becomes serio0usly disruptive you could take the matter to WP:ANI, but I would be quite reluctant to do that. I hope that is helpful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 12:43, 8 June 2020 (UTC) @ReyHahn: DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 12:45, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Depreciated source?

I recently tried to cite this news article, but I got a notice saying that it's a depreciated source. It wasn't a big deal since I was able to find another source with the same information, but I can't find ETToday listed at Wikipedia:Deprecated sources. Is the website actually depreciated? ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 11:55, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ganbaruby: Where did you get the notice? I suggest asking whoever posted the notice for clarification. RudolfRed (talk) 22:37, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ganbaruby, I added this because it was linked in a couple of articles as Epoch Times (and the content may have been syndicated). That said, it's a terrible source. Guy (help!) 07:56, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@JzG: Thanks for the reply. I totally understand why the Epoch Times is depreciated, but I find it strange that ETToday is blocked as well, considering that ETToday is a Taiwanese news outlet that has (to my knowledge) no affiliation with Falun Gong. The RfC also has no mention of ETToday as well. What exactly do you mean by "linked in a couple of articles as Epoch Times"? ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 09:28, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ganbaruby, it was listed as the url in citation templates identified as Epoch Times in some articles, presumably syndicated content. Guy (help!) 10:52, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@JzG: I see that this issue was previously brought up on your talk page by User:Newslinger. I do find it odd that ETtoday's articles were attributed to Epoch, but ETtoday's Chinese wiki page and some quick Google searches in both English and Chinese don't point to ETtoday ever coming under Epoch's ownership. This makes me think that the cite url template was just incorrectly filled out. Could you point me to the list of places ETtoday was identified as Epoch? With my Chinese ability, I can personally go through them and let you know what I find, and if anything, cut down on pages still sourcing Epoch. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 16:35, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ganbaruby, not without wading through a large number of diffs, no. But it doesn't really matter: I fixed the filter this morning. I would have done it when Newslinger mentioned it but I got distracted, sorry. Guy (help!) 17:05, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@JzG: Didn't realize you fixed it already. Cheers. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 17:58, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Using Wikipedia

I am creating an article for a celebrity. I tried editing. But I want to know how to publish it quickly on the Google search. Pleas help me out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pappu Sulthan (talk • contribs) 12:30, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I tried editing an article. But I want to publish it as soon as possible. How do I do that quickly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pappu Sulthan (talk • contribs) 12:33, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The first thing is to forget about doing things quickly; there is no deadline. You then need to ascertain whether the subject meets Wikipedia's definition of notability. If so, you can read the advice at WP:Your first article. If you are trying to write about yourself, please read the advice against autobiography. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:37, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pappu Sulthan: We are an encylopedia, not a means of promotion (seeWP:NOT), so we specifically delay indexing by Google and other search engines for new articles. Therefore, if your main goal is to get on Google search, you should try a different platform. We have a few suggestions at WP:OUT. If you wish to continue ere on Wikipedia and are being compensated for this in any way, please read and adhere to WP:PAID. -Arch dude (talk) 14:54, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I create a page for an organisation?

Good Day,

I would like to know how do I create a Wikipedia page fro an organization after it got removed by the admin? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thewcbs (talk • contribs) 12:36, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you read the deletion log for the article, it will explain the method of the deletion, and the reason for it. Any attempt to retrieve the article will depend on the method of deletion. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:40, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Thewcbs: WP:COI and WP:PAID might be relevant too. Brianjd (talk) 15:20, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What's the name of the organisation? --Orange Mike | Talk 17:53, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can’t edit myself because don’t know English good enough

Hello there is this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_amendments_to_the_Constitution_of_Russia?wprov=sfti1 article which doesn’t contain amendments like mentioning god in constitution and defining marriage as union of a man and woman, which is important because it discriminates LGBTQ community, but I don’t think there is a source in English somewhere about it. Could you draw someone’s (experienced Wikipedia ru-en translator, for example) attention to this problem? DonGuess (talk) 14:23, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a source in russian https://www.rbc.ru/politics/14/03/2020/5e689b689a7947e1824b2770. DonGuess (talk) 14:25, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The place to discuss an article is on its talk page, in this case Talk:2020 amendments to the Constitution of Russia. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:59, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I know, but I don’t think anyone would see it soon there, its importance is not even rated yet. By the way, who has a right to rate it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DonGuess (talk • contribs) 15:41, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DonGuess: Anyone can assign a WikiProject rating, as long as they follow the assessment criteria. For this talk page, the criteria is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Assessment. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) GoingBatty (talk) 16:11, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bots for predatory journals or unreliable sources

If anyone can point me to where to find bots that flag possibly unreliable sources, especially for medicine / psychiatry or sociology that would be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amousey (talk • contribs) 18:10, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Amousey: I'm not aware of any bots that can identify unreliable sources, but if a source is unreliable, it will often be blocked from being added. If the source was added before the blocking was implemented, bad sources may still exist. You might have more luck getting better info at Wikipedia:WikiProject Reliability. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 00:30, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Timtempleton: thanks Amousey (they/then pronouns) (talk) 01:08, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Amousey: Take a look at WP:CITEWATCH or WP:UPSD. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:07, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

John Farrow

In the Maureen O’Sullivan article, John Farrow dies twice. Once in an airplane crash, and once of a heart issue I believe. The question is...... which was it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.240.121.66 (talk) 22:38, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, the article says O'Sullivan's son, Michael, died in a plane crash. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:45, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Remove page history?

Hello, I just moved a new article from draft to mainspace: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Gottlieb_(amateur_astronomer) Is it now possible to remove the page history for the article, to delete references to my draft tinkerings? Think I read that an Administrator can do that. Thanks! Assambrew (talk) 23:04, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Assambrew, WP:Revision deletion is generally not used in such situations. There is no problem with keeping that in the history. Hillelfrei ^talk 23:40, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible but in this case you can effectively do it yourself. Since you are the only contributor you are allowed to copy-paste the content per Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. You can move it back and then copy-paste to mainspace instead of moving. See Wikipedia:Redirect#How to edit a redirect or convert it into an article. If there are other contributors then the page has to be moved to preserve the page history for attribution. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:46, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks. Well there is another contributor now, thanks to my mentioning the article here. Guess I will leave the history alone.. Assambrew (talk) 00:31, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Assambrew, just to check - is there anything sensitive in the page history that you're worried about? I haven't looked through it, but it (for example) you copied some material from a source which would have been in violation of copyright, but have now rewritten in your own words, I'd be happy to do a CV revdel on it. If it's just tinkering around with prose, I wouldn't worry about removing it (anyone dredging through the early versions of any of my articles will surely find the same sort of thing). GirthSummit _(blether) 13:27, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, nothing sensitive. I just thought it was messy to keep edit history around from when I was composing the article in draft. Thanks for replying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Assambrew (talk • contribs) 18:56, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]