Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2015 June 13

= June 13 =

Hyperlinks No Longer Appearing Dark Blue
I'm not sure what has happened, but wikipedia hyperlinks I have visited have stopped appearing dark blue--they appear as though I have not visited them before.

My browser is firefox.

When I visit a site within Wikipedia right now, the link will turn dark blue and remain that color, but for some reason it will not do so for previously visited sites. This seems to be a wikipedia related issue--when I google the wikipedia websites I had visited in the past, they do appear dark blue in the google results. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorsey4Heisman (talk • contribs) 01:48, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * This is probably related to WP forcing HTTPS connections. WP has been changed to using HTTPS instead of HTTP recently. Your browser will most likely class this as a completely different website. See also Village pump (technical)/Archive 138. Nanonic (talk) 01:59, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Florynce Kennedy
Dear Wiki Editorial volunteers, My name is Scott Foster and I live in Honolulu Hawaii. I have worked in the communications field for over 40 years and my credentials may be verified at . I am writing regarding Florynce Kennedy, a Wiki page about my longtime friend Faye Kennedy Daly’s late sister, Florynce "Flo" Kennedy. Her name and work are known internationally in certain circles of the Women's movement.

Faye Kennedy Daly also resides in Honolulu. Faye Kennedy Daly is 84 (4/3/31) and her sister Joy Kennedy-Banks is 88 (12/26/26). Joy is in declining health and currently lives in her home in East Orange New Jersey 07017. However, Joy may soon be moved to Honolulu in order for Faye to care for her.

As I understand it, the Wiki page about their late sister, Florynce "Flo" Kennedy was authored by a Mr. Steve Kropper Steven Kropper. Mr. Kropper is known to Faye Kennedy who sent me the following statement: “Mr. Steve Kropper became known to me in May 2014, after I learned that he was contacting various people across the country, including Hawaii, seeking their participation in a centennial birthday 'celebration' for my late sister Florynce Kennedy. He did this without contacting either me or my sister. The date of his proposed ‘centennial celebration’ would be February 11, 2016. When Mr. Kropper and I were subsequently in contact (via a Baltimore friend), I learned that Mr. Kropper wanted to pursue numerous other events in Flo’s name, essentially making her into a cottage industry. Prior to Florynce’s death, none of her friends had ever heard of Mr. Kropper. He also planned to have a paid board of directors of his choosing and did not invite me to be on that board. I told him that my sister and I opposed all of his plans and asked him to cease and desist in anything involving Florynce." Two things of note have since occurred: 1) On April 7, 2015, Faye asked me to make the following edits to Florynce Kennedy which were immediately reverted to the original. Please note that the name of the two surviving sisters are not even mentioned. WIKI EDITS AS MADE AND REVERSED Photo Cover photo of Florynce “Flo" Kennedy’s 1976 autobiography, “Color Me Flo: My Hard Life and Good Times.” Photo credit Patrick Daly [Faye Kennedy Daly's husband]. Early life The New York media dubbed the sisters, “the Black Brontes” and “the Other Kennedys” when all had books published in 1976. Later life and death Florynce “Flo" Kennedy’s legacy lives on in her youngest sister, Faye Kennedy of Honolulu and Joy Kennedy-Banks of East Orange, New Jersey. Flo’s threatened national boycott of Hawaii during her visits after sister Faye retired there led to the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday’s belated adoption in the island state in 1989 — three years after the federal holiday became law (1986). Faye’s own rise to political prominence and national honors accelerated during this period. The Hawaii MLK parade continues to be one of the largest and most diverse in the nation. After Flo’s passing, her sister Joy, a former model, songwriter and civic leader was very involved in protecting Flo’s legacy. Faye Kennedy now administers Joy’s power of attorney because of her sister’s advanced age and frail health. The two financially secure sisters oppose any efforts to use Flo’s name without Faye’s written authorization. For more information, please contact: END OUR ATTEMPTED WIKI EDITS 2) Faye Kennedy Daly asked me to create a Web site where the sisters could have complete control and that is now on line at  and we have posted several family photos and other relevant content which we would like to see added to . We would also want to add the link to Harvard University’s Arthur and Elizabeth Schlesinger Library on the History of Women in America  where Florynce’s papers are archived. In addition to the above draft edits which were made and then reverted, we would also like to add more information such as the link to  and . We have no intention of getting into a "pissing match" with Mr. Kropper and I am writing you directly to ask for your guidance on how to proceed. We await your kind response and guidance. Sincerely, Scott Foster for Faye Kennedy Daly NOTE: If needed, Faye Kennedy Daly can be contacted at:

Fosters005 (talk) 02:57, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The Florynce Kennedy page was originated by User:Julia528, and as nearly as I can tell Steven Kropper (who appears to be User:Skropper) had no part in writing it. Your edit was reverted by User:Beyond My Ken; a good first step would be to discuss the changes you want with him/her at User talk:Beyond My Ken.
 * My reaction to your additions: One of your additions was sourced to a telephone interview, which is unacceptable; content must be sourced to published reliable sources. Your other additions were completely unsourced. Your claim about power of attorney has no place in an encyclopedia. Any photos you want to put on Wikipedia must be licensed under a free license, i.e. one that allow anyone to reuse the photo anywhere for anything.
 * Your contact information has been removed because we do not reply via mail, email, or telephone. —teb728 t c 07:13, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * An even better place to discuss reverted edits, rather than a user talk page, would be the article talk page, Talk: Florynce Kennedy. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:17, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Image Use
See Talk:Mychal Judge for full details. It comes down to fair use rules on a deceased person and the commercial opportunity "automatic fail" bit, as I'm totally confused with regards to that, so wanted to ask before I went through the process of uploading the image, but I've gotten no response on the talk page. This has apparently been ongoing for 3 years now. RegistryKey(RegEdit) 02:58, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I replied on the article talk page. —teb728 t c 08:44, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Jesse Hibbs
You have used actor Dan Duryea's photo as Jesse Hibbs. Hdid you make that mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.52.217.238 (talk) 04:10, 13 June 2015 (UTC)


 * There is no picture in our article Jesse Hibbs. Are you talking about the image that appears alongside a Google search?  That's put there by Google, and Wikipedia has no control over it.  You can click on the "Feedback" link to report the mistake to them.  Rojomoke (talk) 05:00, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

How Can I Capitolize someones Last name in the main title of the wikipedia article?
Hi there! I was creating a page and didn't realize that the last name of the person was not capitalized. Now I am having a hard time finding a way to change it. Can anyone help me? Or even change it for me? The title of the article is Matthew santoro. But i would like it to say Matthew Santoro. Thanks!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JadieSantoro (talk • contribs) 04:33, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Somebody has done this for you. Matthew Santoro.  Rojomoke (talk) 04:56, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Using an "a" might help as in "capitalize." Otherwise, you might end up with a building.  The Dissident Aggressor 14:06, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Please help
Hello wikipedia community members. I have just created my first account and I have no idea how to proceed. I have written a short biography of the chairman of the State Emergency Management Agency in Borno State, Nigeria whose sole responsibility is for the resettlement of the internally displaced people due to the insurgency of the boko haram. I seek the help of magnahimous and experienced editors/users in order to setup the page. I also have the subject's written permission to publish the article as well as his picture. Please help! Thank you. Ammeerah (talk) 05:56, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Please read Your first article. Important things to keep in mind include: The article must be written from a neutral point of view. And the notability of the subject must be demonstrated by references to significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject.
 * The article does not need the permission of the subject: it is not his article but Wikipedia’s article about him. Likewise the photo does not need the permission of the subject, but it does need the permission of the photographer for anyone to use the photo anywhere (not just Wikipedia) for anything.
 * You mention that this is your “first account”; you should not have more than one account. —teb728 t c 09:07, 13 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I have just replied to this same question at the Teahouse. Please do not post the same question in more than one pace, . --ColinFine (talk) 10:08, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * You might also want to check out Category:Boko Haram. As for first and more accounts, check Sock puppetry.24.36.54.238 (talk) 13:38, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think that his reference to creating his "first" account meant that he was planning to create another account, but directing him to the policy is still a good idea. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:14, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

sockpuppet
please block Mr Stephen, he is sockpuppet linked to Andy Burham  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.149.205.175 (talk) 09:10, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * There is no account User:Andy Burnham. —teb728 t c 09:23, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * 109 meant the article Andy Burnham, where 109 and Mr Stephen are involved in an edit war. Maproom (talk) 09:28, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * And 109 is clearly in the wrong in the edit war. 109 has repeatedly been adding a malformatted account of a very minor incident, citing a reader's comment on a newspaper's discussion page. Maproom (talk) 09:35, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

This is incorrect, the 109 user me, was at the meeting and the vote was seen by myself — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.149.205.175 (talk) 09:47, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * That's not a reliable source. We need published sources, neutral third parties, not some IP address making unsubstantiated claims. -- Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  12:36, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Correct use of "Translated page" template?
I'm not sure I've correctly applied translated page at Talk:Josef Karl Richter? This is the first article I have created by translating an article from another Wikipedia. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:31, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

General Question About Noticeboards
When people file complaints on noticeboards, is it common for those complaints to then backfire on the person who made them and for that person to end up becoming the focus with blocks/bans applied, etc? I've seen this a number of times. Each time the original issue is ignored entirely and it becomes all about the person who filed the complaint.

If this is as common as I believe, or even if it is relatively rare, isn't that a direct violation of our duty to focus on content and not people? Say this person was evading a block or something and that comes out and they get banned. Ok, sure. But their claims should not be dismissed. They should still be evaluated and if appropriate, action should be taken. To use an analogy, if a criminal reports a crime, the police arrest both of them. They don't let the person who was being reported go because they were reported by a criminal.

If you agree, then how can that be enforced or changed? Who 'watches the watchers' in this regard?

Full disclosure: I was recently involved in something like this but this is not about that at all. I would really appreciate if nobody discusses that and we focus on what I've said rather than focusing on me personally (...). Handpolk (talk) 11:08, 13 June 2015 (UTC)


 * See WP:BOOMERANG. AndyTheGrump (talk) 11:45, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have seen that essay (not a policy or guideline, just the opinion of some editor or editors). And I disagree strongly with much of it (I agree with the part about immunity, though I already explained that above). If you like, you can interpret what I've written as a critique of the essay and a request for how to fix the problems with it. Handpolk (talk) 12:52, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The notice boards are for dealing with disruption to our goal of writing an encyclopedia. Context is always important in that respect and so the full context of the incident is taken into account and the discussions and decisions are rightfully allowed to determine in the context of writing an encyclopedia where the actual issues of disruption are and what actions are most likely to lead to a furthering of our goal of writing an encyclopedia. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  13:42, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * There's an example of a boomerang, just two questions above this one. 109 accused Mr Stephen (who has been an active editor for nine years) of being a sockpuppet. The outcome is that the article in question is now protected, to prevent further edits by 109. 109 has not been blocked, warned, or reprimanded. Maproom (talk) 14:20, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The most common reason for a complaint at the noticeboards, especially WP:ANI, boomeranging is that a combative editor decides that they aren't getting their way and they demand, at a noticeboard, that they get their way. They then bring their conduct to the attention of administrators, and can get blocked for their own previous combative editing.  I agree that if the person being reported by a combative editor is also a combative editor, they should both be blocked.  I agree with the essay and do not know what User:Handpolk's criticism of it is.  What exactly is his or her criticism of the essay?  As I said, the essay is really aimed primarily at combative editors who use the noticeboards as a club.  I have also seen a case where a POV-pushing editor requested arbitration, and the ArbCom accepted the case, and multiple editors, including the filing party, were topic-banned.  The ArbCom does a very good job, in my opinion, of scrutinizing everyone's conduct.  WP:ANI is less thorough and less predictable.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:11, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * My criticism is that it effectively grants immunity to the person who was originally reported if a BOOMERANG ends up happening. You said that should not happen, but that is often what does happen. Handpolk (talk) 15:19, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The essay doesn't say that there is immunity to the person reported if a boomerang occurs. It says that there is no immunity to the person doing the reporting.  The reason why the person reported sometimes doesn't get blocked is that sometimes the person being reported wasn't doing anything wrong.  I don't see an issue with the essay, but would suggest that, if you don't like it, you discuss it on the essay's own talk page.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:25, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * By the way, I disagree with the OP's claim that the essay effectively grants immunity to the person who was originally reported if a boomerang results. The usual reason for the person being reported not being sanctioned is that the person being reported didn't do anything wrong.  It appears that the OP is complaining, not so much about the essay itself, as what he or she sees as the way the essay is interpreted.  I disagree with the claim that the essay, as applied, effectively grants immunity to the subject.  It is the sometimes worthlessness of the complaint that grants immunity.  Many of the parties who report at WP:ANI are problematic editors themselves.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:49, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * wikipedia is not a judicial nor quasi judicial body. The only "immunities" granted anywhere in the project are to most removals of copyright materials and almost all removals of WP:BLP offensive materials. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  16:57, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I think that TRPOD is making a distinction without a difference. The OP is complaining that, when a filing party is found to be guilty of conduct issues, the reported party escapes sanction.  I am saying that that is often but not always true, because sometimes the reported party was not doing anything wrong.  For instance, the reported party might (as mentioned above) have been removing copyright violations or BLP violations, and the reporting party might have called that removal "vandalism".  My experience is that the reported party gets off if the reported party wasn't wrong.  The OP appears to take a different view.  I don't think that the fact that we are not judicial or quasi-judicial is important.  It is that sometimes the report itself was wrong.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:11, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I only mentioned the essay because somebody else did. My issue is with what actually happens on Wikipedia. Your view is that when the reported editor gets off it is because they did nothing wrong and when they did something wrong they do not get off -- you are entitled to that view, my experience has been very different. Your view is how it should be...but I think that is not how it often works in reality. Handpolk (talk) 18:00, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Do you have any examples where you think the both the filing party and the other editor should have both been blocked and one wasn't? -- GB fan 18:16, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I do but even several examples would still be anecdotal and not prove anything. That part of this you'd just have to accept or agree with me on. If you disagree then the discussion couldn't really go forward. Which is fine. Handpolk (talk) 19:31, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Will someone uninvolved please close this, since the OP says that there is nothing to go forward? Robert McClenon (talk) 20:46, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

How can I avoid being redirected to the HTTPS ("secure") site?
Since a few days, Wikipedia has seemingly decided to redirect all access to HTTPS only (until recently, it used to be the case that Wikipedia was accessible over HTTP or HTTPS transports, but with no obligation to use the one or the other). Now I would very much like to avoid HTTPS: is there some way to do this? There used to be a setting to that effect in the per-user preferences, but it appears to be gone (or I can't find it). Is there still a way? --Gro-Tsen (talk) 18:21, 13 June 2015 (UTC)


 * It seems to partly depend on which browser and software you are using - please see Village pump (technical)/Archive 138 and Village pump (technical)/Archive 137 for the detailed ongoing discussions - Arjayay (talk) 18:28, 13 June 2015 (UTC)