Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2015 April 27

= April 27 =

History merge question
Dear editors. This draft: Draft:Hedda Gabler (2014 film) has an OTRS ticket, but its contents were copy-pasted by another editor over a redirect at "Heda Gabler (film)" which in turn had content in its history about another related topic. The result was then moved to Hedda Gabler (2014 film). For attribution reasons, it would be good to reunite the original with the copy. It would also be good to return the redirect to its original state, in case anyone wanted to expand the content. My question is: Is this doable within acceptable procedures? I don't see any technical difficulty in doing either, but there may be consequences of which I am unaware. I don't want to create an inappropriate merge. &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 01:27, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I could delete Hedda Gabler (2014 film), restore the pre-paste edits, move them to "Hedda Gabler (filmography)", and then restore the remaining edits at Hedda Gabler (2014 film).  Then a standard history merge of Draft:Hedda Gabler (2014 film) and Hedda Gabler (2014 film) would work. Is this ever done?
 * Another way would involve merging the post-paste edits of the mainspace article to the draft and then moving it to mainspace as a separate article. However, this is the opposite direction from a usual history merge.  Is this ever done?
 * If you want to get hyper technical, the redirect that was for some reason left in during the cut-paste move would be without attribution. Imo that isn't enough to by copyrightable, so we can probably just ignore it. As far as I can see, there is no other reason not to proceed as you propose, and that is done somewhat regularly to repair situations like this. If you want to be really sure, you could ask User:Anthony Appleyard, who is by far the definitive expert on history merging. Monty  845  01:40, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


 * ✅ I history-merged the already-deleted edits of Draft:Hedda Gabler (2014 film) to Hedda Gabler (2014 film). There was no WP:Parallel histories. The non-deleted edits of Draft:Hedda Gabler (2014 film) were merely one redirect, to Hedda Gabler (2014 film). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:00, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Anthony Appleyard, I thought I had already just done that merge a few minutes earlier, moving all of the non-deleted edits. Did I mess up? &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 05:08, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * It looks OK to me. But please log all performed history-merges in Requests for history merge. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:13, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, Anthony Appleyard, I will, but this one involved creating a new page for some hidden edits, combining two talk pages, and dealing with an OTRS tag which I didn't have permission to move, and I was just finishing up when I noticed your ping. The edits you undeleted and moved were deleted as a copyright violation - however, later the information was readded by the same editor and an OTRS filed, which I didn't consider.  In these circumstances, should they be deleted or undeleted? My guess is that it doesn't matter one way or the other, but this is the first time I've come across this situation.&mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 05:32, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Best leave them until the copyright query is settled. This sort of thing happens sometimes, e.g. what I call "selfcopyvio", i.e. where the same man or organization uploads the same text to Wikipedia and to an external web page. And "reversecopyvio", where an external web page copies Wikipedia. And where an external page contains text which is stated to be released for public re-use. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:24, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, Anthony, the OTRS ticket giving explicit permission was issued long ago (but after those few edits had been deleted as copyvio), and I asked to check it just to be sure. It just ended up on the wrong page because of the copy-paste, which I fixed.  I had to rewrite one sentence that it didn't cover. I think all is okay now.  Thank you, and also, for taking time to help, &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 12:50, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Ending a merger proposal
I proposed merging Vision therapy and Behavioral optometry. There was much healthy discussion, which continues, but no consensus. I want to withdraw my proposal, but I don't know how to proceed. Do I just remove the tags on the articles and mention it on the talk pages, or should an admin close the discussion, or ??? Lou Sander (talk) 02:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * You can state that there was no obvious consensus on the relevant talk page, and that you have withdrawn your suggestion. After that remove merge from and merge to where you inserted it. Everybody is free to add it again if they disagree and intend to continue or revive the discussion. –Be..anyone (talk) 19:07, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Editing of Jeff Roe webpage
Hi, The page for Jeff Roe has been almost entirely edited by a single user. And that user consistently remove edits by other users that mention the involvement of Jeff Roe in the campaign of Catherine Hanaway. This is a well-known fact and many links mention this involvement. Catherine Hanaway's campaign was described as bullyish and was seen as a potential cause for the suicide of her opponent in the GOP primaries. So I can understand that Mr. Roe or any supporter doesn't appreciate to be connected to that case. But it is all well-documented facts. This is now the third time that this other user undid all sections related to Mrs. Hanaway's campaign on Jeff Roe's page. I find that very disturbing. Could any one advise on that? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BKroust (talk • contribs) 02:18, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I don't see any evidence that you've tried to discuss this with the other editor on the talk page for the article (Talk:Jeff Roe). That would be the first step in coming to a consensus on the matter.  Dismas |(talk) 11:28, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I didn't know what the procedure was. Thanks for your guidance. BKroust (talk) 13:58, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


 * See Dispute resolution for all you wanted to know and more. :)  Dismas |(talk) 14:02, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I see that Dismas also welcomed the new editor to Wikipedia and provided a lot of useful links. This Help Desk is, in general, a good place to ask questions about editing Wikipedia and about Wikipedia policies.  In the particular case, as was noted, the first place to discuss article content is the article talk pages, either Talk: Jeff Roe or Talk: Catherine Hanaway. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:43, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Blocking VPNs
Does Wikimedia block VPNs in case vandals misuse them? Pickuptha&#39;Musket (talk) 10:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes. But depends how "private" it is, if it's publicly accessible then I imagine Open proxies would apply. Яehevkor ✉ 10:24, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Having Issues Uploading Recent Magazine Cover
Hello,

I'm having issue's uploading a recent magazine cover for the American way magazine page: American Way (magazine)

Can anyone assist with this? I'm having issue tackling the copyrights in Wikipedia Commons.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emugera (talk • contribs) 12:31, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * You definitely shouldn't be uploading it to Commons - that's for free files only, and I'm assuming a magazine cover will be under copyright. You could potentially upload it here on Wikipedia under a claim of Fair Use, but you would need to make a solid case for it being necessary under the FU criteria. Yunshui 雲 水 14:20, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * In fact, since American Way (magazine) already has an image, it wouldn't be possible to justify another under FU, so that won't work either. You should not upload the magazine cover at all, either here or at COmmons; doing so would be a copyright violation. Yunshui 雲 水 14:23, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm just trying to figure out how the initial image would have been uploaded and replicate that, because I credited it to the appropriate copyright holder but the image was removed for infringing copyrights. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emugera (talk • contribs) 14:07, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Reference priority
Hi. While improving an article on a Russian politician, I stumbled on a question of whether his blog or an external media sources would be more reliable when it comes to his proclamations. While the blog is a primary source (and is appropriate for the matter), and a newspaper is a secondary one, so the former would seem to be a better idea, it is written in Russian, unlike the newspaper, which is written in English, and this is English Wiki. So, what would be a better choice for quoting his proclamations? I tried to look at some other places but I have not found the answer. If I am in the wrong place (although it seems to me it's not the case), please, just point me to where I should go instead. Cheers--R8R (talk) 14:10, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * If the question has to do with sources for attributing positions to the politician, then that is one of the few cases where a blog would be considered a reliable source. In general, Wikipedia prefers secondary sources to primary sources, but, again, identifying the views of the politician would appear to be a case where the primary source is reliable.  If you read and write Russian, can you translate his statements into English?  If the politician's blog and the English-language newspaper agree on the politician's views, then they could both be sourced.  If what the politician says in Russian and what the English media say that he says are different, then we should report the inconsistency.  (That is not an uncommon problem, where a foreign official says one thing in his own language and something else in English.  I would generally believe that what he says in his own language is what he means, and what he says in English is what he thinks that the British and American public wants to hear.)  At least, that is my opinion.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:55, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * This is a reasonable place to ask questions about editing Wikipedia in general. A detailed discussion of what source to use could take place at the reliable sources noticeboard.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:55, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, R8R. There are two issues: (1) what did he say, and (2) is what he said notable enough to be in the encyclopedia.  While the blog may be an accurate source for his opinions, secondary sources should cover this information to show that it's notable.  After all, millions of people write all sorts of things in blogs, and most are not suitable for inclusion in an article.  So, for example, if secondary sources write about the importance of his blog, or demonstrate independent journalistic interest in and reporting of his proclamations, these should be used as references, and then, if the secondary sources are not specific enough (for example, if they comment on what he wrote but don't say what it was),  the blog could be used additionally to confirm exactly what he wrote.  However, if there are no secondary sources, likely the proclamations are not notable and shouldn't be in the article.&mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 16:12, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, Robert and Anna, thank you both very much, things are clear to me now :) --R8R (talk) 22:01, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Barnstars Question
Hello guys,

I am a graphic designer and I create various Barnstars for Wikipedia which are not yet made by any one else (some are here below)- But the problem is that these are 2.0 version thus they are not listed on Barnstars list. I mean I am not saying that mine is the best and should be listed, just asking if they should be added to the list or something other than the 2.0 version guidelines should be followed and then it could be added to the list?

Thank You! Komchi ✉☆ 17:07, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

By that I mean the message I do not know how to create this and should I or not?  Komchi ✉☆ 17:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Please see Barnstars. Very nice graphics work, and you're clearly talented in that area, but whether or not those barnstars would be suitable for inclusion is a separate question. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  17:57, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


 * alright sir and thanks for the compliment :) but the problem is that people are not very active there.  Komchi ✉☆ 18:01, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I see that. At WikiProject_Wikipedia_Awards there is a list of 35 project participants, and a link to the contribs for each. You could find some participants who have been recently active and contact them for help on their user talk pages. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  23:21, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot sir Komchi ✉☆ 05:38, 28 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I asked User:Piotrus and this is what he said to me,"I am not sure why are you asking me; I haven't been involved with Barnstars much for years. I'd suggest you as ask at the teahouse or over at the WP:VP. Cheers" now tell me what to do... :\  Komchi ✉☆ 08:21, 28 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Ask someone else from the list. You could start at the bottom of the list and work your way up, so you're contacting the users who have signed up most recently. Do two things different this time. (1) Explain why you're asking them, that they are listed as a participant on the project page. (2) Don't ask them your barnstar question directly, simply say that you need to submit some barnstars for consideration, explain that you're not getting any response at the project's talk page, and give them a link to that talk page so they can get there easily. With any luck, they will go there and answer your questions, or perhaps ping someone who can. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  11:46, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah that would be good, Thanks. Komchi ✉☆ 13:19, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * The person you have now contacted last edited on 7 March. That was only one edit, and the previous edit was in June 2014. They are probably not a good choice. Further, you failed to sign your post, you included your barnstar images which was unnecessary, and your link to the project talk page does not work. To form a wikilink to any page on the site, go to that page, copy the page title, paste it, and put double-brackets around it, as: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedia Awards. You can also "pipe" the link, as: project talk page. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  17:22, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

You posted at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wikipedia_Awards. Let us know if nobody replies there in a week or so. Personally, I think your images are good and you can add them to the list. If you do not know how to add them to the list, ask here about this and we will guide you through. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:33, 29 April 2015 (UTC)


 * A project member has added the barnstars without discussion. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  14:28, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

render server error
I'm trying to download the book I created from our wiki site and I keep getting a render error.

An error occurred on the render server: RuntimeError: RuntimeError: command failed with returncode 256: ['mw-zip', '-o', '/home/pp/cache/84/84f91ab7993a0cb2/collection.zip', '-m', '/home/pp/cache/84/84f91ab7993a0cb2/metabook.json', '--status', 'qserve://localhost:14311/84f91ab7993a0cb2:makezip', '--username', 'vnarula', '--password', '{OMITTED}', '--domain', 'thehackettgroup'] Last Output: 1% creating nuwiki in u'/home/pp/cache/84/84f91ab7993a0cb2/tmp2GFpJp/nuwiki' removing tmpdir u'/home/pp/cache/84/84f91ab7993a0cb2/tmp2GFpJp' memory used: res=16.4 virt=92.1 1% error Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/pp/local/bin/mw-zip", line 37, in sys.exit(mwlib.apps.buildzip.main) File "/home/pp/.buildout/cache/eggs/mwlib-0.15.14-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg/mwlib/apps/buildzip.py", line 155, in main make_zip(output, options, env.metabook, podclient=podclient, status=status) File "/home/pp/.buildout/cache/eggs/mwlib-0.15.14-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg/mwlib/apps/buildzip.py", line 50, in make_zip make_nuwiki(fsdir, metabook=metabook, options=options, podclient=podclient, status=status) File "/home/pp/.buildout/cache/eggs/mwlib-0.15.14-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg/mwlib/apps/make_nuwiki.py", line 151, in make_nuwiki assert x.wikiident in id2wiki, "no wikiconf for %r (%s)" % (x.wikiident, x) AssertionError: no wikiconf for None (, 'title': u'CCure', 'url': u'https://wiki.thehackettgroup.com/index.php/CCure', 'timestamp': u'1336625181', 'currentVersion': 1, 'content_type': u'text/x-wiki', 'revision': u'10021', 'type': 'article', 'latest': u'10021'}>) in function system, file /home/pp/.buildout/cache/eggs/mwlib-0.15.14-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg/mwlib/nslave.py, line 64 in function qaddw, file /home/pp/.buildout/cache/eggs/qserve-0.2.8-py2.7.egg/qs/slave.py, line 66

Lil help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.185.69.246 (talk) 17:48, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Someone at this Help Desk is likely to be able to tell you how to report the error to a developer, but Village pump (technical) also might be a good place to ask how to report the error to a developer. However, have you tried creating a registered account?  You might be running into a privilege restriction.  I can't try to reproduce the problem because this is your only edit from your current IP address.  Any previous edits that you made were from other IP addresses.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:49, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Turkish Airlines Flight 1878
Would someone please nominate for WP:AFD the article Turkish Airlines Flight 1878 with the text :
 * Wikipedia is not a news summary service; this is without doubt a news story; no lasting significance to this event has been demonstrated as required by WP:EVENT, further with no deaths, injuries, or total hull loss and no reliable source predicting changes to procedures or regulations as a result of the accident it fails WP:AIRCRASH the projects own guidelines for an article.

thanks 1.136.96.194 (talk) 22:27, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Why don't you create a registered account and nominate the article for deletion? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:04, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * It has enough references that it might survive an AFD. WP:AIRCRASH is interesting but isn't policy and has a note that it probably shouldn't be cited at AFD as a reason by itself.  RJFJR (talk) 15:17, 28 April 2015 (UTC)


 * While not policy, this incident clearly does meet the guidelines at WP:AIRCRASH as there is serious damage to the aircraft. Rwessel (talk) 20:41, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

1.152.96.110 (talk) 22:44, 28 April 2015 (UTC).
 * 1) I do not wish to crate an account.
 * 2) WP:NOT IS policy and WP:EVENT explains that newsworthy events have to demonstrate lasting significance, this does not.
 * 3) the number of news references it may or may not have is not relevant to the lasting significance issue.


 * I initiated the AFD for you. (I'd describe the easy way to do it but it requires an account.)  RJFJR (talk) 14:13, 29 April 2015 (UTC)