Help desk
< October 20	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 22 >

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 21

Alex Breingan

Hello there. I am wondering if any editors can help assist. I think I wrote this in the wrong forum before. I am very familiar with this story due to the coverage here in New Zealand. An editor who is closely linked to the subject has shared a fair statement on the emotional stress that this Alex Breingan has brought to the subject here [1].

Upon looking at the article itself, every single note about the financial issues and legal issues are cited from just one reporter. This is not giving it a neutral POV at all as per the rules with Wikipedia. The only other reporter out of the section talked about a website that was setup and questioned here [2] and about the recievership issues [3] but every single else source is from a single reporter under the Media Insider section of the NZ Herald. This needs to be adjusted and fixed so it's neutral. It's not fair on the subject with a single reporter writing these articles which the subject hasn't even talked back about them being true or not. It's a horrible way of writing without any balance.

The comment earlier claims that they aren't true, alot of the facts. Thank you. Can any experienced editors go and take a look at this? The friend of the subject has asked if the article can be deleted. If this is an option, can this happen? Thank you. It's just very unbalanced, the entire article and shouldn't be mostly cited from one single reporter. The New Zealand Investigation section should be cited from the source of the people doing the investigation, not from a reporter who is reporting everything about the subject. And the furniture purchases is completely a civil issue, not related to his company.

Another editor replied to where I posted this earlier [Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Alex Breingan] and said:

It's definitely a crappy article (which are legion on Wkipedia), with the financial/legal issues over-emphasized, overly-detailed (WP:VNOTSUFF) and written in pedantic Wikipedia:Proseline, as if every single news article warrants a new paragraph. The section should be consolidated into a couple paragraphs, to summarize without being so tedious, although some will probably scream "whitewashing!!!". --Animalparty!

Can any admins go through please and clean up this article? This is not good faith at all for the subject. Seems more of an attack page on the subject. Thank you.

MonkeyMonkeyHere (talk) 01:00, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi everyone. Looks like it's being resolved through a deletion nomination and the other help desk. Thank you! MonkeyMonkeyHere (talk) 04:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Citing a presentation

Would it be acceptable to cite a presentation to back up an extraordinary claim? The presentation can't be found in its original form online however was created by a reliable source, likely still exists on their servers, and the claim can be backed up by a Twitter post, which contains a still from the presentation. It's a lot of additional clauses, I know. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 01:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Reliable Wikipedia content must be published. The presentation can't be found in its original form online [so, nope] however was created by a reliable source [sez who?], likely still exists on their servers ["likely" doesn't count], and the claim can be backed up by a Twitter post, which contains a still from the presentation [a Twitter post is again not gonna cut it]. Nope, nope, nope, no way. --Orange Mike | Talk 03:36, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Queen Mary of Denmark

I have just added a "Commons" file - all wrong. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Domain_House_Hobart_20171119-013.jpg#%7B%7Bint%3Afiledesc%7D%7D

Sorry. Please add the caption: "Queen Mary graduated from the University of Tasmania in 1995"

Thanks 115.70.23.77 (talk) 02:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

@Srbernadette: Please read Help:Pictures. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:23, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

How do I delete an authorized amin and set mine

How do I delete an authorized amin and set mine 6mile722 (talk) 03:25, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

What is 'an unauthorised amin'? AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:28, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Which amin do you wish to delete and why? Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Page move headers

I started a Page Move discussion here. Another editor who strongly opposes my suggested title has now added his/her own preferred title to the move header as a second "alternative" suggestion. Tinkering with a move header like this seems WP:POINTY to me, but I can't find anything in WP policy that specifically addresses this. Muzilon (talk) 07:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Adding a direct link to the page move discussion for Larnoch Road murders for improved blind accessibility. Thisisnotatest (talk) 07:57, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Redirect deleted category?

Category:Pages with accessibility problems was recently deleted as overlapping Category:Accessibility issue tracking categories but no redirect was created. I was thinking to add such a redirect, since it might help anyone who might have bookmarked the deleted category get to the kept one. I'm guessing the fact that one wasn't created implies that might not be a good idea.

Is there a good reason not to create such a redirect for a deleted category? Thisisnotatest (talk) 07:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 13 § Category:Pages with accessibility problems.

Thisisnotatest, guidance is at WP:CATRED, with a user essay at Wikipedia:Category redirects that should be kept. Category redirects are Soft redirects, and watchlisting redirects doesn't show changes to the redirect target (also watchlisting a category doesn't show changes in membership).

My phone somehow ate the second half of this reply, but a redirect is not needed. Per Special:WhatLinksHere/Category:Pages with accessibility problems, three projectspace pages associated with WikiProject Disability may need to be updated to link the surviving category, but that's the last step I think. Folly Mox (talk) 12:36, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Folly Mox, thank you. After checking those pages, it appears no further action is needed. Anyway, glad I asked. Thisisnotatest (talk) 03:38, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

geography

where was DIAL SQUARE IN THE UK? 2A02:C7C:36B2:8400:4CD3:B10D:FD13:5BEB (talk) 11:49, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

See Dial Square F.C.. PS: wrong venue; you want the Reference Desk. SerialNumber54129 12:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

But to complete the trail of breadcrumbs, the original Dial Square was an area of workshops within the Royal Arsenal. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.86.81 (talk) 12:47, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

I was trying to avoid foul language... SerialNumber54129 12:57, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

As a Leyton Orient supporter, I feel your pain. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.86.81 (talk) 15:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Merge archives?

Hi, is it possible to merge the archives of two articles? SerialNumber54129 12:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

WP:Histmerges are possible in any namespace, but the method I've seen in the past is leaving the merged articles' talkpage archives at separate subpage titles. In this case Talk:Cheese dream has no content, so can be redirected without histmerge. Folly Mox (talk) 12:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

@Folly Mox: Ah, right; although it has no content is because I already archived it? SerialNumber54129 12:28, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Oh, I see: Talk:Cheese dream/Archive 1 was not listed in an {{archives}} on Talk:Cheese dream, so I didn't see it. Also, I was wrong about the talkpage anyway: it transcludes {{DYK talk}}.

For my somewhat recent experience with this type of thing, you can see how it was handled at Help talk:Your first article/Archive 4. The upside to this is that talkpage threads referring to a specific article title are sequestered from one another; the downside is that users' contribs will appear to have been made directly to the archive (since it is a move target rather than copypasted by an archive bot).

I don't really feel like doing a thorough examination of Talk:Cheese dream/Archive 1 to see whether it would make sense to histmerge the talkpage archives, but I note after a brief naive search that as of eight years ago, the vibe seems to have been talkpages of merged articles usually don't get merged. Folly Mox (talk) 12:51, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Folly Mox, I'll leave it then. Gotta feeling I've messed something up somewhere, so probably best to leave well alone :) Cheers! SerialNumber54129 12:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Save Page Now on Wayback Machine

Twitter postings from Internet Archive state that Wayback Machine is now up and running. However, I still cannot Save Page Now. Is it still down after the cyberattack? Thanks. Tfhentz (talk) 14:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

@Tfhentz: It's in read-only mode. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

why are you letting everyone to edit?

wikipedia was about collecting moderate information but how is it legal to let anyone edit sources and history without knowing the intention of the edit? such as erasing a group's people history, culture and dehumanize them with biased or no-moderate information from extreme people. I have seen this happening since the BDS movement, when cancel colture has been spreading lies about israelis and jews. I've seen this been manipulated to try and brainwash the world that "palestine was created a million years ago" when you search in google for "when palestine was created" (you won't see it anymore but surely sen it in tiktok and such but if you were smart you would see there was a manipulation of an article saying that "there was a find of homosapian body in a 'palesinian territory'" to monopolize the google search) I've seen endless erasing and changes of jewish history just to try and erasing jew's connection to their home for YEARS and its happening with Oct 7th and Zionism as well. you can also see the difference when you change the language.

this manipulation is part of a destruction and the rise of antisemitism is the results. (no, if you think zionism is not part of jews and you "don't hate jews" for critisizing ONLY israel and not terrorist groups, then you are brainwashed already) seeing how many kids who don't have the ability for a critical mind use thise site for their "H.W.",perhaps you need to stop allowing everyone to monopolize the information like that? Grisimmm (talk) 14:57, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

We have two articles: History of Palestine (the geographical entity), and History of the State of Palestine (20th century partition plan) - X201 (talk) 15:43, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Grisimmm Please read the information I will post on your user talk page. You are not permitted to edit about this topic. 331dot (talk) 15:46, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

publish an article that is in my sandbox

Hello, I want to publish an article that is currently in my sandbox, how can I do it? Pauletta Sofia (talk) 17:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

This is the English-language Wikipedia. Articles are written in English. Your sandbox contains an article in Spanish, and thus will not be accepted. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

And now you have moved your Spanish article to mainspace in English Wikipedia, where it does not belong. There is no mechanism for moving pages between different Wikipedias, so you should create es:Roberto Garzón Jiménez and then (assuming that your draft satisfies Spanish Wikipedia's policies), copy the source from Roberto Garzón Jiménez into it.

I note that you have uploaded c:Notario Roberto Garzón Jímenez.jpg as "own work", without giving any copyright permission, so the image will get deleted in a few days unless you do so.

I also note that if the photo (and the previous version) are indeed your own work, then you would appear to be associated with Jimenez, and as far as English Wikipedia is concerned you have a conflict of interest. (I don't know what Spanish Wikipedia's policies on this are). ColinFine (talk) 20:41, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

There actually is a mechanism for moving pages between wikis, see WP:IMPORT, but it requires advanced permisssions. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 20:56, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

New article on WordPress Vs WPEngine or editing the main WordPress page?

Hi, the recent controversy surrounding WordPress and WPEngine has strong impact on the entire ecosystem and has already started changing the way people use WordPress. This is why I am thinking of creating a separate article on the issue.

I want to know whether - as far as Wikipedia rules are concerned - creating a new page on this topic is legit or not.

Thanks. ParallelDimension (talk) 17:38, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

The dispute is covered by reliable sources. My suggestion is to create a neutral well-referenced section about it at WordPress. If that section grows too long, that would be the time to create a spin-off article. Frankly, since you are a new editor, it would be very difficult for you to successfully create a freestanding article about a dispute between two tech companies. Cullen328 (talk) 20:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

To add to Cullen's answer: My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 20:47, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Initial volunteer editor review not received

Courtesy link: Draft:Jeremiah Abraham Barondess

I submitted a draft article on "Jeremiah A. Barondess, MD" in late May 2024 and was told that it would be reviewed by one of your volunteer reviewers. I was not expecting a response before four months, but it is now five months later. Could someone check on this matter? Dr. Barondess turned age 100 on June 6th, 2024 and we would like for his article to appear sometime soon. Thanks so much. Gordon DeFriese GHDeFriese (talk) 17:51, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

It looks like you created it on your user page here User:GHDeFriese but you have not submitted it for review so nobody will have seen it. Theroadislong (talk) 17:58, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

I went ahead and moved it to draft space as this post makes it clear they do want it reviewed. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 18:12, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

It's submitted for review now, but while we're waiting I'd strongly suggest attaching reliable sources to the text or there is very little chance it will be approved. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 18:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

@GHDeFriese, please read BACKWARDS. ColinFine (talk) 20:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

About extended confirmed

What is the quickest way to obtain WP:XCON status without having to wait for 500 edits? 49.205.80.150 (talk) 20:05, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

There is no way for a new account to gain extended confirmed status without making 500 productive, useful edits over the course of a month or more. Why are you in a hurry? Cullen328 (talk) 20:09, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

There's also no way for an IP user to get it at all, so if this in reference to an account, please sign before continuing this discussion. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 20:54, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Because Im tryna post on somebody's talk page 37.21.150.38 (talk) 11:06, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

I assume you're asking because you want to edit a page that is extended-confirmed protected, so I'll take this moment to warn you that if it looks like you were making a lot of edits simply to get extended confirmed status, that status can and will be revoked. -- asilvering (talk) 20:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm asking because I want to talk to somebody about on their talk page but their talk page is extendedconfirmed protected 37.21.150.38 (talk) 11:07, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

In that case, 37.21.150.38, trying to circumvent their preference (assuming they themself created the restriction) would seem somewhat impolite.

Instead, if you want to talk to them, you could post a message on your own Talk page that includes a WP:Ping to them. They can then respond on your talk page if they choose to. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.86.81 (talk) 14:37, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

@Ohnoitsjamie: Does this seem like a discussion you deleted yesterday? Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:46, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for pinging me. This LTA is using proxies in an attempt to harass someone. I'm going to leave this here for reference; feel free to message me/ping me/report to AIV if they show up again. They have a finite amount of proxies; the more we block, the better. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:53, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Is there a way to merge versions of an article?

I've recently been dealing with an issue on the article List of string instruments. Basically, an IP user (45.186.112.244) made an edit to a section of the article that introduced a lot of problems, and involved deleting a lot of entries and breaking a lot of links (I'll spare you the details but suffice to say there were a lot of redlinks afterward). A few other users then gradually changed back parts of the section (each edit only fixed a few links at a time), and I cleaned up what remained.

But that still leaves the problem of the deleted entries. I'd love to just revert it, but a lot of those edits afterward also added information (mostly countries of origin) that would be lost if I reverted it back to the version right before the bad edit, and would be cumbersome to add back manually. I'm wondering if there is perhaps a way to merge that version with the current version of the article to fix all the problems that edit caused without sacrificing the info other people added afterwards. I know similar things are possible, like when two people edit an article at the same time, but I don't know if it's possible to do it manually and I don't know if it would even produce the right result. Any other information on how to potentially solve this problem is also welcome.

Best regards, TypoEater (talk) 22:22, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

I think what you are proposing would be possible by first doing a history split then doing a selective history merge but I might be wrong about that. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 03:52, 22 October 2024 (UTC)