Help desk
< October 26	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 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.

October 27

How to provide proof of copyright holder's permission to display copyrighted images here?

I have some basic experience in talking to people professionally via email but I wonder how to provide proof of copyright holder's permission? I see plenty of pages where images are missing but the only possible source of them is from those who have copyright over images that may be relevant to the article. CommanderOzEvolved (talk) (contribs) 02:36, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@CommanderOzEvolved: Please see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. Note that the copyright holder must license under a license that lets anyone use the material, not just us, and this is likely to be a show-stopper. If the copyright holder wishes to do this, it is often technically easier for them to simply add such a license to the material on a web page they control rather than going through the process of sending permission to us. -Arch dude (talk) 03:04, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Shirley Aley Campbell, artist, recent death date

Greetings,

Might someone be so kind as to edit the Wikipedia page for the American artist Shirley Aley Campbell to record her recent death date of August 13, 2018? Thank you!

You are free to make this change yourself, but be sure to include a reference to reliable source, such as an obituary in a newspaper. If you are uncomfortable directly editing the article, just slap the information, with the source, in a new section on the article's talk page. -Arch dude (talk) 03:15, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Warning regarding falsification of statement made by source

Hi. Could someone tell me whether there's a single-issue user warning/notice template for handling the above issue? In this case, it's for a user who has regularly, over a period of years, misrepresented what sources say – so the idea of AGF has become somewhat redundant. I searched for previous discussions and came across thread 1.1 here. One of the replies suggests a relevance to Wikipedia:Vandalism with regard to that policy's statement on "any addition, removal, or change of content", yet from what I can see (writing seven years later), the policy focuses on removal and other, clearly disruptive behaviour. I suppose what I'm seeking to address is a concerted effort by an editor to undermine the encyclopaedia's integrity but done much more subtly, and amid genuinely productive contributions. Thank you, JG66 (talk) 03:45, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

JG66 Greetings. Pls provide at least 3 "diff" for examples, so we could understand the issue further. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 05:18, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CASSIOPEIA. Look, I'd rather not provide diffs here – obviously, they'll only "out" the editor in question. I'm more than confident my suspicions are right, at the expense of AGF, but all I'm looking for is the correct way to go about addressing the behaviour. To my way of thinking, it falls under WP:TENDENTIOUS: falsification of what a source clearly says, either completely or in part; synthesising authors' opinions; and, in general, perpetrating an insidious POV creep across music-related articles through a careful selection of sources. I appreciate that's vague. JG66 (talk) 08:01, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

JG66

If an edit made without source provided, one can tag "unsourced" warning tag; if the edit made with source but not info is added not what the source claim, you still would use "unsourced" template tag but add in additional description to made clear "info claimed not found as per source",
If an edit made with source but skew from the source, you would tag "NPOV" warning tag.
if the editor continues to make such edit, a "disruptive" warning message could be used, and if the edit is particular malicious especially on living biography page, you would tag "vandalism" warning tag (however, pls see Wikipedia:Vandalism to see the definition of what constitutes vandalism. Additional messages/communication would be help to specify the issues with the editors might serve well sometimes.
You could report the editor to WP:AIV if the same editor continues to made such edit after more than 4 times escalating warning (level 1, 2, 3, 4) had posted in their talk page on the same month.

Hope this helps. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 08:57, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks CASSIOPEIA, that is helpful. JG66 (talk) 12:24, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Creating an archive for my Talk Page

I noticed that many users archive the messages on their talk pages in order to "clean" it up. How to do that? How to archive my messages? I don`t want to erase them, just to archive it and make my talk page more navigable.--SirEdimon (talk) 06:25, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SirEdimon: See H:ARC ―Abelmoschus Esculentus 06:39, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @SirEdimon: You can manually archive your user talk page by creating new subpages and pasting the unwanted content there. Alternately, you can tell lowercase sigmabot III or Cluebot III to run the process automatically. Step-by-step instructions are available at the link Abelmoschus Esculentus kindly provided. Tera TIX 06:44, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the help.--SirEdimon (talk) 06:46, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

QUESTION

How to Make typo corrections without bot revision interference? Serpantssponge (talk) 07:57, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Serpantssponge, Greetings. You could just simple click "edit source" on the menu bar and make the typo correction Please place "typo correction" on edit summary before save the edit. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 08:59, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If a bot is reverting a legitimate edit of any kind, the creators/operators of the bot should be informed. There should be a means to report such an error on the bot's user pages. 331dot (talk) 09:03, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Purple Turtle Article

Hello We wanted to get published an article regarding our IP "Purple Turtle on Wikipedia. Kindly let us know how can we do it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pradeeepbatham (talk • contribs) 2018-10-27T10:27:02 (UTC)

Hello, Pradeepbatham. I'm afraid the answer is, you probably can't. Wikipedia may not be used for promotion of any kind. If several people who have no connection with you or your IP have chosen to write about it in some depth, and been published in reliable places (such as major newspapers, or books from reputable publishers) then there can be an article about it (the Wikipedia jargon for this is that it will then be "notable"). Such an article should be based almost entirely on what those independent people have said, not on what you say or want to say; and you will have no control whatever over the contents of the article. But a search for "Purple Turtle" does not give me any hits that seem to be you (I'm not sure even what you mean by your "IP" - "Internet provider", perhaps?) so I doubt very much that it meets the criteria for notability currently, and so no article on it would be accepted however written. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 10:02, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Colin. My guess would be Intellectual Property, but it's impossible to guess from a web search which of various "Purple Turtle"-branded entities the OP means.

In passing, I'm sure there's been a recent upsurge in naming businesses, etc. "Purple [Whatever]". {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.196} 2.218.14.42 (talk) 23:02, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Locking an article

I just happened to notice while I was doing a paper that the White Nationalism page is locked for editing but the Black Nationalism page is not. I was wondering how pages get locked because users have clearly been writing inaccurate information on the latter.68.134.58.247 (talk) 14:20, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Each individual page is locked for one reason or the other; but they're not locked just because similar or related page is locked. If you believe there's enough disruption for a page to be locked you can request so at WP:RPP. –Ammarpad (talk) 14:49, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Locking an article is normally used to stop edit warring or halt vandalism. Inaccurate information isn't a sufficient reason unless it's become a battleground. I see no recent edit warring or vandalism, and it seems to have attracted little admin interest. If you wish to improve the article, you are welcome to do so, using independent third-party sources Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:58, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Wheelchair Epidemic/Article Deletion Squadron

Hi, can someone please close this mfd as ive withdrawn the nomination and there are no delete votes, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 18:33, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 23:42, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Actor

Dear Wiki team,

I'm Actor that is notable and know celebrity. Have have and imbd page, facebook page, twitter, and youtube. The the films that I've acting in have knowledge Pannel's crediting the production company I work for as a cast member. I have resources I can give you guys to show that I'm notable. Please let me know if you need the media sources that's affiliated with the production company.

Therealnicolaasmigliore (talk) 19:59, 27 October 2018 (UTC)Signed:Nicolaas MiglioreTherealnicolaasmigliore (talk) 19:59, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Therealnicolaasmigliore; unfortunately, IMDb, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube don't typically count towards notability. IMDb is not a reliable source, and the others are primary/non-independent. Almost all people require significant coverage in multiple high-quality independent secondary sources, in order to be considered notable, with a few very occasional exceptions, such as some academics. Autobiographies are rarely notable, and even if they were, it's very difficult to write from a neutral point of view. I'd suggest that you read and follow WP:YOURSELF. If you'd like more people to know about you, social media platforms or your own website would be a good place for that, but because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, it's really not the best place. Let me know if you have any questions and good luck with Wikipedia-editing!--SkyGazer 512 ^{Oh no, what did I do this time?} 20:11, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Changes reversed

I receny made changes to the https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Eugene_Melnyk to give a better discription on who he is I wanted to bring to light him being a entrepreneur and philanthropist" "Eugene Melnyk is the owner of the Ottawa Senators hocky team and Noted entrepreneur and philanthropist"

Hello, Vpnny. First off, I've removed the superfluous spaces at the start of your text above, which were making it render incorrectly. The way to indent is to start with one or more colons (i.e. ":") as I've done with this answer. There's no need to indent the first post in a thread, and the convention is to indent one colon's worth more than the post you're replying to (so if you reply to me next you would start with "::"): this makes it easier to see who is replying to whom.

Secondly, please sign all your posts on talk and help pages with four tildes (i.e. "~~~~" so that the system will automatically add your account name and the time & date. This also helps everyone to know who's saying what – I had to deduce from the article in question's View history page who you actually are.

Now, as to the substance of your query: @Materialscientist: rightly reverted your edits for several reasons.

One was that the information merely repeated what was already said in other places in the article, one of them only a couple of lines later.
Another was that you did not cite a Reference to a reliable source for what you added: who says that he is "noted"? Words like "noted" are what we call "Peacock" terms and must not be said as if they are Wikipedia's judgement, they could only be included as part of a direct quote by some relevant authority on the subject. Wikipedia itself must always display a neutral point of view. What we do instead is to say what philanthropical things he's done – and the article has a whole section on this – and allow readers to decide for themselves if these make him a "noted" philanthropist, etc.
A third reason is that you needlessly changed the article's first paragraph into larger type, contrary to Wikipedia's accepted style. Perhaps you nead to read Wikipedia:Manual of Style before you try to make any more edits to articles.

I hope that these observations will help you to learn how to edit acceptably. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.218.14.42 (talk) 23:38, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2019 NCAA Division I baseball article

What No Article 68.103.78.155 (talk) 23:12, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You mean NCAA Division I Baseball Championship? We do not appear to give each season its own article. You are welcome to add a 2019 section to that article provided that you can cite everything you say to a published reliable sources, but it may be too early for sufficient to have been published as yet. I imagine @Baseball Bugs: would know more about that. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.218.14.42 (talk) 23:47, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:NCAA Division I Baseball Championship shows an article for each season. The article for next year just hasn't been created yet. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:02, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]