Help desk
< February 15	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 17 >

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.

February 16

Mysterious deletion of topic at RSN.

On the 10th Feb I started a topic on the RSN and five days later I find it has been deleted by an unknown other without explanation. It was becoming a useful discussion on a controversial issue. Who has the power to do that I am wondering and can I appeal?Jed Stuart (talk) 01:03, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion has been archived here, presumably because nobody had added to it after 10 February. (Sections are archived after 5 days). Eagleash (talk) 01:14, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Perhaps you can explain also how in my Watchlist, which I watch very carefully, sometimes changes are not registering. As a result I often go to the page itself to check. I went to the topic mentioned and found it deleted and then went to the history and found that there were two helpful comments that had not registered on my watchlist. The first two comments did.Jed Stuart (talk) 01:40, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jed Stuart. For technical questions about how the software operates, you're more likely to find knowledgeable people at WP:VPT. --ColinFine (talk) 10:29, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment did not come through to my Watchlist changes either. A comment on something unrelated to me did though. I will go to WP:VPT with it,thanks.Jed Stuart (talk) 01:40, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jed Stuart, if you are talking about emails received from your watchlist, only the first change since your last visit is sent until you visit the page, again. (I think this is to avoid spamming if a lot of edits happen.) —PC-XT+ 09:00, 17 February 2016 (UTC) 09:03, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not talking about emails from the watchlist. I gave up on using that a long time ago when I found that many were not arriving, including the first change. I only monitor the watchlist changes online. YOur comment did not appear in the changes there, yet another one on another topic in help desk did.Jed Stuart (talk) 23:49, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:VPT got it. I needed to have checked "Expand watchlist to show all changes, not just the most recent." in Preferences/Watchlist/Advanced options in order to get it doing what I thought it should be doing.Jed Stuart (talk) 00:27, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are stand-alone lists of U.S. Supreme Court law clerks notable?

Are articles that are simply stand-alone lists containing names of mostly non-notable people notable? There are nine articles which list the law clerks of the U.S. Supreme Court, past and present; there's one article for each of the nine seats on the court. Seat 1, Seat 2, Seat 3, Seat 4, Seat 6, Seat 8, Seat 9, Seat 10, and Chief Justice. (There's no seat 5 or 7.) There's also this main article which lists the court's clerks over the years. Hundreds of the names on each of the nine lists used fake wikilinks; they were actually direct links to the person's profile on the the websites of the law firms or universities they work(ed) for. I removed all the direct links. But should these articles even exist? Granted, numerous Supreme Court law clerks go on to become notable, which is why some of the names are true wikilinks, but the majority of people listed in these articles are not notable. Further, with only a few exceptions, there are absolutely no sources verifying that these people actually even clerked for the court. I'm sure most of the people listed were indeed clerks, but the way these articles are designed - with no sources required for inclusion - editors could simply add any names they wanted and no one would know if they're legitimate or not. But the bigger issue is my overall question. Should these articles even exist if the majority, or most, of the people are not even notable? If not, can someone pursue the proper process for dealing with it? Rowssusan (talk) 02:01, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update: A discussion is underway at WikiProject Lists for those who are interested in giving their input. Rowssusan (talk) 04:00, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Any admin willing to chat/email off-wiki?

I've come across a case of an IP editor who has admitted on a public off-wiki forum to repeatedly making certain edits (I learned of the issue there, not here). These edits would almost certainly be considered promotional in nature, and have been reverted a number of times already. The user has received a couple of warnings on their (IP) talk page. I do not wish to dox the editor (although they may have done it to themselves already), so I'd prefer to avoid discussing any specifics in a public forum. At this point, I'm not even sure I should revert any further edits should they occur (I have not interacted at all at this point), and the user appears to have stated that they have such intent. Rwessel (talk) 07:43, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Got a meg for Spaming, why??

I received a message about adding multiple links on several wikipedia pages.

The only edit I did was changing the word ARISE to ARISE Network (this is the actual business name) and added a link to point to that website for user convenience. Here is the page I was working on: Intervention (counseling)

What went wrong?

Asher — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.177.254.166 (talk) 07:54, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~I don't see your edit, but if your IP changes, you may have received a message meant for someone who had that IP in the past... —PC-XT+ 08:18, 16 February 2016 (UTC)~~[reply]

Nevermind, I now see that IP problems don't apply in this situation. —PC-XT+ 09:08, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Part of your problem was that you were trying to add an external link into the article text. WP:External links explains how and where external links should be used. If the link was relevant, it should have been added as a reference rather than an in-line external link. In your question I have taken the liberty of changing the url of the Wikipedia page to a wikilink, as these are more readable. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:41, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Change of profile photo

Hello My account is musclerjack Can you do me a favor I would want to change the profile photo of Gary Kubiak's page Gary Kubiak Since he has left the Texans for three years And he just has won Super Bowl 50 for the Broncos Here is the picture http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/nfl/super-bowl/nijqbs/picture59144638/ALTERNATES/FREE_640/kubiak

Thanks~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Musclerjack (talk • contribs) 09:12, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Musclerjack: Hi there. When it comes to images on Wikipedia, we aim to use freely licensed images whenever possible. For us to consider an image free, it needs to be licensed in a way that lets anyone modify and share the image (even commercially). We do use fully-copyrighted images in cases where no free equivalent is available, such as to illustrate the cover art of a movie, or to show what a video game character looks like. However, since Mr. Kubiak is a living person, and we already have a free image of him, I'm afraid we can't use the image you have linked unless it is freely licensed to Wikipedia's standards. See Wikipedia:Non-free content for more information. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 09:18, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Musclerjack, if you were to take a new picture of him, the copyright in that picture would be yours, and you could donate it to Wikipedia; but images found on the web are usually not acceptable, as SuperHamster explained. --ColinFine (talk) 10:32, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Japheth Callen Memorial Foundation

Hello kindly help me is Japheth Callen Memorial Foundation your member they are recruting and asking applicants to send Kshs.2027 to ^{[details removed]} kindly get back to me on ^{[details removed]} — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.237.192.204 (talk) 10:35, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 5 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:25, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Suvigya Sharma

Despite of several significant coverage from Indian media, Article Suvigya Sharma has been nominated for the deletion, while it strongly passes basic criteria of notability WP:GNG.

I humbly invite here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suvigya Sharma, to Wikipedia members to review the article and involve in discussion and voting process.

It is humble request, General Notability Guidelines should be highly considered while reviewing the article, your efforts would be appreciated. Thank you --103.195.248.92 (talk) 10:45, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Cite errors/Cite error ref no input - no help with combo refn and "tags on this page without content "

Hi. I'm not able to add refn|group=fn|... with opening and closing braces to master's degree. Adding the info with ref tags works, but when i change them to refn, i get "Cite error: There are ref tags on this page without content in them (see the help page)." The help page Help:Cite errors/Cite error ref no input doesn't even mention refn and both Help:Footnotes and Template:Refn don't even mention the "without content" error message. I've used refn before and it worked, so i'm very confused despite having experience, and the beginnings of those help pages need to be made much easier for beginners. --Espoo (talk) 10:57, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~Actually it is just about correct of English' stilistics Dawid2009~~(talk) 11:13, 16 February 2016 (UTC) I'm sorry I wanted include it in section Paper Soccer. My omission. Actually there isn't this section, because someone other has began topic apart in new different titled section. Dawid2009 (talk) 13:00, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you're saying. --Espoo (talk) 22:43, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think the comment by Dawid may have become detached from another discussion. (The one about Paper Soccer?) Eagleash (talk) 22:51, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As a test I added this master's degree:

{{refn|group=fn|some text}}

which works when I click Show preview. If I edit that to be

{{refn|group=fn}}

then when I click Show preview I get the error message you mentioned. So, are you using the template correctly? Can you show us an explicit example where it doesn't work?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:00, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably the OP is talking about this version? --David Biddulph (talk) 01:47, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Espoo: I think the problem is the = characters in the urls within the comment text. It should work if you change each = to {{=}}. - David Biddulph (talk) 02:05, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@David Biddulph: Thanks. Wow, i would have thought that would break the link. Would you like to explain why it doesn't?

We definitely need to explain the error message on Help:Cite errors/Cite error ref no input and Help:Footnotes and Template:Refn. --Espoo (talk) 11:13, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I want to correct wikipedia information about kashmiri National hero Maqbool butt who was a freedom fighter and was hanged by india.wikipedia has mentioned him as a terrorist i want to ask that all our the world kashmiri nation pay homage to his national hero if Maqbool butt was a terrorist then che guerra was also a terrorist...! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.47.47.203 (talk) 11:08, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well our article on Che Guevara does mention that he has been described as " the archetypal Fanatical Terrorist". The organisation that your hero founded is described as a "terrorist organisation" ((as in killing policemen and judges?)), but if you can find cites from reliable sources that say otherwise, please add them. Sometimes terrorists do become national heroes. Dbfirs 15:36, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think the "Narrative Therapy" article has been hacked?

In the sentence I have isolated below from the introductory paragraph there is a clear example of bias which I doubt is a part of Narrative Therapy; Kind Regds Ross

Narrative therapy is a form of psychotherapy that seeks to help people identify their values and the skills and knowledge they have to live these values, so they can effectively confront whatever problems they face. The therapist seeks to help the person co-author a new narrative about themselves by investigating the history of those qualities. Narrative therapy claims to be a social justice approach to therapeutic conversations, seeking to challenge dominant discourses that it claims shape people's lives in destructive ways.

'''Examples given of these subjugating narratives include capitalism; psychiatry/psychology; patriarchy; heterosexism; and Eurocentricity'''[citation needed].

The approach was developed during the 1970s and 1980s, largely by Australian social worker Michael White and David Epston of New Zealand.[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.19.170.255 (talk) 11:19, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That passage was added by Hantsheroes last October. You could ask him to justify it by providing a reference. Maproom (talk) 15:15, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since it has been questioned and there is no source, I have removed the sentence. -- GB fan 15:23, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

no content on Wikipedia sites ...just an opportunity to edit

How do I get content on Wikipedia sites instead of just headers that allow me to edit? Did I hit the wrong button somewhere? --2001:558:6004:1:356B:570C:ADB3:2424 (talk) 15:04, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Which Wikipedia sites? This one is full of content. Dbfirs 09:01, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Dawid2009 needs assistance with his sandbox

User:Dawid2009 has recently contacted me regarding some troubles with a sandbox he's working on. He's a non-native English speaker and having a hard time getting the English right. Also, he's having a hard time getting the references to work. Can anyone help him out? The article looks interesting but I'm not sure I understand it well enough to help with the needed corrections. Abyssal (talk) 18:05, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The page was most probably trnslated from Polish Wikipedia article pl:Piłkarzyki na kartce --CiaPan (talk) 19:04, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In which case anyone with a good enough command of English should be improving Paper soccer, or suggesting changes at Talk:Paper soccer, rather than working on a new version from square one. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:20, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't started talk in Paper soccer because I want redirect ineffictient section about variant popular in USSR to separate article. Dawid2009 (talk) 19:33, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Despiration of Paper soccer as game on small dimensions in Paper soccer is stub. Dawid2009 (talk) 20:13, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In the case of version I in Paper soccer, article one link is notfound. Its name is also the same as author's user page name. This user isn't also active in Wikipedia. Based on google.com we can know that this link was share of any application with despiration of rules any game. In this case this is OR because it isn't despired generally/broadly. This is described with complitations of any standards. About this variant there are a book so can correct it. But we can also accept this information and later redirect it into a separate article and wait until there is another source. Dawid2009 (talk) 07:13, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I quite signfincate corected this page, but I still don't know which date I have to include. Ref's access date into PLwiki or into ENwiki ? If into ENwiki it all probably is 2016-02-17. Dawid2009 (talk) 18:53, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Transfer

How do I transfer draft to main page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boggie20 (talk • contribs) 19:54, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If your Wikipedia account has been autoconfirmed, then you should be able to move pages yourself. If you are not yet autoconfirmed, you can request that a page be moved for you. Wikipedia:Moving a page and Wikipedia:Requested moves might have the information you are looking for. SarrCat ∑;3 20:06, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The only page you have been working on is User:Boggie20, which is not technically a draft, it it your user page. If you transfer it to main space now, it will get deleted, as it is entirely without references. I recommend you to read Your first article before you think of transferring it. Maproom (talk) 20:33, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Attribution when copying material under CC-BY-SA

Hello. I was working on getting a draft for Wikipedia:WikiProject Furry, specifically, WikiFur, an article which had previously been deleted and redirected to Furry fandom. My intention was to write it in my userspace, and then request the move to mainspace if/when I could get the article up to Wikipedia's standards. Anyways, I intend for my starting point for this draft to be the material already published by WikiFur itself, in it's article on itself. This, and other content published on WikiFur is placed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 license, as stated here. Now, I don't know too much about the legal stuff involved here, but I understand that this license requires attribution, as well as distribution under the same license. If I remember correctly, Wikipedia is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0, so the latter of those two issues is taken care of. But what about the attribution part? Is there a standard of practice for attributing content on Wikipedia that was largely derived from somewhere else? Do I need to worry about this, or can I just go ahead and copy the material into my userspace and commence wikify-ing it? Thanks! SarrCat ∑;3 20:01, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You can use {{CC-notice}} template. Please, also note that CC-BY-SA-4.0 license is not compatible with Wikipedia. See WP:COMPLIC. Ruslik_Zero 20:27, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you say the license is not compatible with the licenses that Wikipedia uses? Does that mean I should not copy the text over and work on it from that, but rather, just use the sources they have to write the article from scratch? SarrCat ∑;3 21:32, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually wait, on their page on licensing/copyright (the one I linked above), it says:

"All written work submitted to WikiFur is placed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 license (CC-BY-SA) and, unless otherwise specified, the GNU Free Documentation License"

So since it says it's also under GNU Free Documentation License unless otherwise specified (and it was not specified as far as I can tell), does that mean it can be copied over? According to the table on this page, GFDL is a compatible license. SarrCat ∑;3 21:47, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Or does it mean that it has to have GFDL AND one of the compatible CC liscences? Sorry for being confused about this.SarrCat ∑;3 21:49, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

According to the table it will be fine if licensed under both GDFL and CC-BY-SA-4.0. Ruslik_Zero 20:09, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirected category

The announcement "Redirects now work!!" made me think that after this change, Mexicano 777 (Puerto Rican rapper) should now be displayed in category:People from Manatí, Puerto Rico. Why is that not the case? I did a null edit to the latter category, but to no avail. — Sebastian 21:43, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SebastianHelm (talk · contribs) It is there when I look at it.Naraht (talk) 14:20, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Naraht, because the assigned category was changed in this edit. That was of course the right thing to do, but I had left it in the old category to show the problem here. I could recreate the categories as sandbox pages, but I hope the problem is clear without that. — Sebastian 00:22, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]