Jump to content

Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2017 January 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< January 1 << Dec | January | Feb >> January 3 >
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.


January 2

[edit]

New draft article replacing old draft

[edit]

Hi, I want to rewrite Draft:Kristina_Pimenova from scratch, replacing some old draft that got rejected. How do I proceed? Can I just blank the page, thereby removing the template, should it be deleted first, or what? The declining admin doesn't answer me. Lyrda (talk) 01:07, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Lyrda hello. Yes you can blank the page; but don't remove the template as it would help you in resubmitting the article through the Resubmit button, and also allow the reviewing editor to assess the improvements from the previous version. I've created a small section heading for you in the draft, titled "Edit from here for any changes". Delete all the material below the same and write the stuff from scratch. Have a great new year. Lourdes 09:11, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting help

[edit]

Hi all. I've come across an editor who uses strange formatting (see: Black & White Records) I've tried to clean up The Music Trades (magazine) - but when it comes to the "Selected editors and publishers" section, I have no idea on how to format it. It looks wrong to me. I am on my way to correct over 70 articles due to their formatting, specifically the gratuitous use of refbegin and I am becoming a little frustrated, so if anybody can give me any pointers on this particular formatting. thanks --Jennica✿ / talk 03:44, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Lourdes: - I think you misunderstood me. I know about refbegin. This particular user is using it to make large non-referenced lists text smaller. For example, if someone had a 50+ list of albums for a discography section and threw refbegin on it to make it smaller. I don't know about the documentation on this but I can only assume it's incorrect since I've not seen it on any wikipedia article, ever. --Jennica✿ / talk 09:55, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Jennica you're right. It's a very innovative style of reducing the font size :) I've not seen this usage earlier and don't believe there might be any connected documentation on this. You can change this to the standard formatting styles. Lourdes 10:10, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PG&E Hinkley

[edit]

It is time for someone to update the current page on PG&E Hinkley plume for the most part I feel that it is fair and well written. An update would be great though currently the USGS is conducting a four year study that took two years to develop and get funded. Dr. Izbicki USGS is going to determine a final background number for remediation and cleanup purposes. This will have big implications for both the community and PG&E. The honest truth is the community no longer exists we are now a rural area we have lot our school, gas station, store and neighborhoods all bought out by PG&E. Thank you for the consideration of addition. Daron Banks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.21.209.67 (talk) 07:18, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This may be about Hinkley groundwater contamination. Maproom (talk) 09:35, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Beatport

[edit]

Dear editors: I came across an article (Bassjackers) which is mainly sourced to Beatport. Since this is described in its article as an online store, my thought was to remove these references. I checked the archive at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, and one other editor asked about it, but received no answer. Should the references all be deleted?—Anne Delong (talk) 07:26, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Anne, the source you mention is used to support the following statement: "A few months later they released together with Yves V the single "Bronx" on August 13, 2012 through Dimitri Vegas & Like Mike's label Smash the House". If you feel that this is a statement that is exceptional and needs to have exemplary sources, I would suggest putting up a note on the talk page of the article about the same and then waiting for a couple of days before removing the statement and the source. Thanks. Lourdes 09:06, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lourdes, I see that I have not made my concerns clear. I want to remove the multiple Beatport references not because I doubt that the "releases" exist, but because I believe that the references are there for promotional purposes, and to disguise the fact that the article has few sources to satisfy the WP:NOT guideline, which states "All article topics must be verifiable with independent, third-party sources". Thanks for the information about the Beatport rankings; although they don't seem to apply here, I will likely come across them at some point in another article. I will take your advice and start a discussion on the talk page. I wonder, though, if someone can point me to the relevant guideline or policy that specifies when it's okay to reference a commercial product listing on retailer's website and when it's not.—Anne Delong (talk) 15:23, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Anne Delong hi. It's a grey area here. Billboard is a media house. Beatport is not. Billboard rankings are globally renowned. Beatport's are not. Billboard makes money out of its charts.[5] Beatport makes money out of its songs. Something like iTunes rankings perhaps, where Apple might be making money from the songs download; while at the same time, the information about the songs debuting might be helpful. My suggestion would be to simply start a discussion on the talk page of the article with your query, and remove all the said beatport sources if consensus supports you or if nobody objects. Lourdes 15:35, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done.—Anne Delong (talk) 21:00, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

how to get latest update on this encyclopedia project and the wikimedia project as a whole?

[edit]

Hello there, I know I can edit this website and copyright issues are not to be asked on help desk. However, the subject content is what I want to ask. -- Ktsquare (talk) 08:54, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Firstly, welcome back. You would need to spend quite some time reading up on the following pages to get somewhat up to speed on what's going on.
  1. Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines: Read up not only the page I've linked but also the actual policies and guidelines linked within. It'll take you quite a while to understand all of them; but you're a sysop and it's important you read up on these. Take your time. Three other interesting pages are below.
  2. About Wikipedia and About Wikimedia: I don't know what these pages were when you last saw them, but these give a great consolidation of what the projects are right now.
  3. History of Wikipedia: 2010 to 2016

Once you've gone through these, come back here and we'll put you up to speed on some other pages you might find interesting. Thanks. Lourdes 09:31, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Ktsquare:. I am not sure just what sort of "latest update" you are looking for, but you might be interested to look at Special:Statistics which will give you current information on things like the number of articles, users, etc. If that's not what you are looking for, please ask more specifically - what exactly do you want to know? --Gronk Oz (talk) 11:45, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fleeting notice?

[edit]

A couple of days ago, I thought I saw an announcement of a new Wikipedia improvement drive, I suppose like the recent Africa destubathon. I was too busy to read it at the time. It hasn't shown up since. Was there one, or was I just hallucinating? Clarityfiend (talk) 10:08, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:29, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Section tagging with Twinkle

[edit]

I tried doing this using a custom "Unreferenced section" tag, but the tag showed up at top of article, not in the section I had opened for edting. Does Twinkle not have ability to tag a section? DonFB (talk) 12:17, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Transferring a Radio Station's Logo (I'll Try This Again)

[edit]

I often edit pages devoted to radio stations, but I'm having trouble transferring a station's logo to the info box. This is logo... WLOB Radio logo

1) It took me about an hour to figure out how to get a logo from a station's website to the info box, while editing WLOB. (There was a logo already there, but it was outdated, giving the wrong FM dial position.) When I got the current logo there, it was much bigger than it should be. I couldn't figure out how to make it the right size. I see some image lines include the word "thumb" but that made the logo too small. I fear I'm going to have to spend another hour figuring out how to size it right.

2) The logo I put into WLOB got deleted later that day. The reason was "(Copyright violation: external source, no license, no permission.)" Nearly every radio station Wikipedia page has the station's logo in the infobox. They're not getting rejected for copyright violations. I assume those editors transfer it from the station's webpage. Why did it happen to my edit? Whoever deleted it didn't explain how I could avoid the rejection. I'm not sure if it was a real person or a bot who deleted the logo. But there was no explanation for getting it right, just a deletion.

3) Why is this so hard? I'm not sure I remember all the steps to transfer a logo and clearly I still don't have it right, to size it correctly and to avoid copyright deletions. Yet others must know how to do this, since there are radio station logos in nearly all radio station info boxes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve1reg (talk • contribs) 12:36, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See: WP:Logos#Uploading_non-free_logos. The rationale there seems to be what other radio station articles are using. You could not upload to Commons (does not accept Non-free justification for anything), but logo should be uploadable to English Wikipedia with appropriate Fair Use explanation.
For additional guidance, take a look at WP:LOGOS#Copyright-free_logos and WP:PD#Non-creative_works and Commons:Threshold of originality. That third one might be most important. DonFB (talk) 13:11, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Saw logo at station website. It's rather wide, so I think it would be difficult to try to use all of it. My opinion: you could crop just the portion that says "News Talk WLOB" and use that; I believe those letters by themselves, even with the color usage, should be eligible for fair use, nor should the cropped image even be copyrightable, according to what I've read in the Threshold of originality page linked above. DonFB (talk) 13:24, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cher is broken

[edit]

I tried a few times on December 26, and again today, but attempting to edit the Cher article results in a minute or so of waiting, then a "Secure Connection Failed" error message. I've never seen anything like it, on Wikipedia or elsewhere. Just me, or is something terribly wrong here? InedibleHulk (talk) 13:55, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The same thing happens at Dwayne Johnson, I've just discovered. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:24, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Lourdes and InedibleHulk: I was able to edit both pages without any problems on Google Chrome. —MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 16:00, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@MRD2014:If it's not too much trouble, could you make this edit to Cher? Getting an up-to-date browser would require an up-to-date OS for me. Seems a bit much. I won't ask you to note The Rock is also Canadian, but the Cher thing seems far less controversial. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:30, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Separate question, I'm sure -- but what does "Pending Edit", "Automatically Accepted" and "Accepted Revision" on the Cher History page mean? would this have anything to do with the delay? just curious Maineartists (talk) 16:04, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No. The page is under pending changes protection, which means edits by unregistered or registered non-autoconfirmed users have to be reviewed by a pending changes reviewer or administrator. —MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I need help

[edit]

Hi there. I need help. I have created a Wiki page for someone I know "Matt Nicholson (Composer)" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Nicholson_(composer)

It seems to be that everything I do on Wiki something goes wrong after creating the update and i have no idea what or why it does this.. For example a reliable source like IMDB is apparently an unreliable source when I have seen people references this type of thing before....

As well as: "This biography of a living person needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful. (December 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)"

"The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for biographies. Please help to establish notability by citing reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it beyond its mere trivial mention. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. Find sources: "Matt Nicholson" composer – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images (December 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)"

I have created the page and the relevant information, along with tags and references and cites

Just wondering if there is anything you can do or I need to know to make this page better? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GSmusic (talk • contribs) 14:30, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand why you are frustrated. In terms of IMDB and its reliability, see Wikipedia:Citing IMDb. In short while there are a few areas of IMDB which are completely reliable, there is also a lot where individual users of IMDB can contribute to it without adequate reliablity checks. The IMDB link about him *is* suitable as an external link, though.Naraht (talk) 14:46, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hey GSmusic. While IMDB may be reliable in the sense of, it's right more often than it's wrong, it's also user created, meaning it could be right today, and wrong tomorrow, with little oversight or professional fact checking like a newspaper or a magazine might have. Because of this, it's not considered reliable in the Wikipedia sense, which is a very specific one (see the full guidelines at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources). If you see it used in other articles, you are perfectly within your rights to remove it, and point out to the author, as someone has to you, that they need to find a better source.
In almost all cases, notability is established on Wikipedia by demonstrating (through references) that a subject has received sustained coverage in secondary sources that are independent of the topic. This is made somewhat more difficult for your subject, since the name appears to be fairly common, and is shared by the basketball coach of the Amarillo Bulls. But in your case, what you are probably looking for is industry or entertainment publications, things like reviews of his work or interviews that cover what he's done and who he is. You should be looking to show that he is not merely a person who does composing as a working man (for there are surly many thousands) but someone who is exceptional in their field and has thus attracted attention, and consequently coverage of his person for doing so.
Writing a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, so don't get discouraged. It may require a good bit of digging to beef up your article, but on the bright side, once done, will persist for a very long time, and hopefully receive attention and added work by others who are helping to build the encyclopedia. Hopefully this helps. TimothyJosephWood 14:49, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@GSmusic: First: Welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your full disclosure: "I have created a Wiki page for someone I know". As you know, this may be seen as a COI, so you may wish to tag yourself on the talk page. You are one of the few who actually admits it, so good for you! Second, see if your subject meets one (or more) of these requirements for notability here: WP Notability Music. If so, add it to the article. This will assuage any doubt for his inclusion. Also, as a rule of thumb (that the other editors have already mentioned), it's best to simply place IMDB in External Links. Try and stay away from personal websites, biographies, press releases, film credit listings, et al to establish notability; and focus on finding interviews, reviews, awards/nominations and articles that spotlight WP:NM for the subject. Good luck! Maineartists (talk) 15:34, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of compositions by César Franck

[edit]

Hi all, Happy New Year.
Some time ago I drafted a table, User:MinorProphet/César Franck - List of works to combine the contents of two previous articles dealing with the same subject from a different perspective:

I proposed a merge on the relevant talk pages and at César Franck, and since there has been no feedback I have moved the text in my draft to List of compositions by César Franck, which was previously a disambig for the two articles. I haven't changed anything else. However, I'm not entirely sure how to deal with the old articles:

  1. Should I blank them (with justifications, of course) and turn them into redirects?
  2. Furthermore, the talk page of List of compositions by César Franck now appears to redirect to List of compositions by César Franck by genre: I think it was moved to reflect the page content some time ago. If you open the talk page and then click 'Article', it takes you back to the old page, List of compositions by César Franck by genre.
  3. Do the talk pages need combining - or perhaps blanking - so I can post a message to show what has happened?
  4. I imagine that it wouldn't be possible/practical to combine the two previous articles' histories.

Although I'm quite happy with editing pages, my brain can't quite cope with the logic needed to untangle these redirects. Any ideas, please? MinorProphet (talk) 16:04, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • MinorProphet hi. Redirect all other lists and their talk pages to your list and your new list's talk page respectively. Remove the current redirect at your new list's talk page and place a template that may be appropriate for rating the class of the list et al. If someone throws a fit at what all you've done, well, that's when the fun starts. But don't worry. Do this and see how it goes. Lourdes 17:35, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Lourdes, for your swift and helpful reply. I shall Boldly™ go where no man etc... MinorProphet (talk) 18:45, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Cite errors/Cite error included ref

[edit]

I am trying to add information to Patricia Elliott's page in Early Life. From personal knowledge, because I was in her class, Patricia Elliott went to the London Academy of Music and Dramatic Art (LAMDA) for a year, 1963-64.

I can't figure out all the gobbledegook about "referencing."

Dana Ivey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dariv (talk • contribs) 18:40, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, the last edit by an IP, presumably yourself whilst not logged in, left multiple 'stray' ref tags on the page (now removed) but added no content. To add the information, add your text, followed by a reference thus 'Elliott text etc.<ref>ref content</ref>. The reference must be to a reliable source...please see WP:RS and personal knowledge is not of any use as it is WP:OR. Please see WP:REFB for a guide to adding references. Eagleash (talk) 18:57, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Vaillancourt

[edit]

Steve Vaillancourt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

By coincidence, I pulled up an article about me. While I could quibble with certain points, there is one out and our error. I ran in both 2002 and 2004 and won both times, putting my service as from 1996-2014 and again starting with the past elecetion.

Rep. Steve Vaillancourt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.241.29 (talk) 18:50, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The easiest way is if you can point us to some reliable sources. We don't go on hearsay which as you are no doubt aware, is non admissible. Yet, if you know something is amiss, then you are one of us (an unpaid contributor) and will have to do what we do and find reliable references to correct it. Please read this: Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. --Aspro (talk) 19:45, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dueling notabilities

[edit]

What to do (if anything) about somebody who doesn't have an article but is arguably more notable than somebody having the same name and an article? Dab? Hatnote? ...or... Nothing? Frankly, its a sad state of affairs that this Martin Voráček has an article, but this one doesn't. --2606:A000:4C0C:E200:88A3:6217:E1F4:239C (talk) 23:52, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

P.s.: here's a mainstream secondary source: [9]

A dab or hatnote is only made if an article exists. Otherwise there is nothing to direct readers to so no reason to do anything. If you want to submit an article about the psychologist then you can use Wikipedia:Articles for creation and call the page "Martin Voracek (psychologist)". Just ignore the existing article about the footballer. If your submission is accepted then the reviewer will deal with it. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:02, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I redlinked PrimeHunter's suggested page for convenience. --2606:A000:4C0C:E200:88A3:6217:E1F4:239C (talk) 06:18, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Although, this Martin Voráček may need a serious looking at to see if it even merits inclusion. Maineartists (talk) 00:07, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
He appears to meet the Wikipedia:Notability (sports) Association Football criterion No. 2: "Players who have played, and managers who have managed in a fully professional league, will generally be regarded as notable", as he plays for a team in the topmost Czech league. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.95} 2.122.62.241 (talk) 01:08, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Do what you would do even if the athlete did not exist. Find sufficient reliable sources for the scientist establishing his notability--if they exist--and create an article. It may be unfortunate that a mere athlete has an article and a scholarly researcher does not, but, as I'm sure you know, Wikipedia doesn't care. We can only follow the policies that regulate article creation. DonFB (talk) 00:09, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2017_January_2&oldid=935344032"