Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2016 December 16

= December 16 =

Using Talk pages as a link dump
Is there any project page regarding the use of article Talk pages as a link dump, e.g. for potential sources? I recently came across a mess of some 50 completely disorganized URLs scattered through a Talk page, with no context or discussion or even user signatures. I formatted them all into a list, but that’s still a list of over 50 URLs. What’s the best practice for this, if there is one? —67.14.236.50 (talk) 03:53, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * That sort of research stuff should be in a user sandbox, not on talk Jimfbleak - talk to me?  07:08, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't know; I use talk pages for that quite often, especially if I'm collaborating with another user, or the page is at risk of deletion and I don't have time to actually work the sources in. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 15:43, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Pages full of nothing but URLs? A few or a dozen, I could understand. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 20:32, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Not quite nothing but URLs. Talk:Hammerton Killick is one where I plunked down a bunch of sources while I was working on the article; mostly ones I didn't have access to when I discovered them, but wanted to save for a trip to a library. There are about 26, along with notes about what I thought they could contribute. Talk:Browning Hill also has a list of potential sources for expanding the article, put there in a different situation. Talk:Legal history also has a (very short) list, from a time when I was considering substantially revising it but real life kept me occupied. Talk:Charles Augustus Rosenheimer Campbell also has a list from a time when I came across it working on a different article and thought it could be expanded.  Even Talk:Paleolithic diet has a source that I came across and thought would be useful to people working on that article, but didn't want to work in myself. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 20:57, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all the examples! Here’s the one I found: . Since organized into a single list and collapsed: . Still seems an unreasonable amount to me, especially if they aren’t removed or marked after use, and I find myself agreeing with User:Jimfbleak; but no one’s suggesting total removal, so I’ll leave that list be. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 21:58, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Change photo image
How can I change and update photo of Maria Elena Gonzalez Calderon. I have permission to change and have copyright — Preceding unsigned comment added by Megc70 (talk • contribs) 04:58, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, . It depends what you mean by "I have copyright". If you own the copyright of the picture you want to use (which probably means that you took the picture yourself, but there may be other cases) then you can explicitly licence it as you upload it. In any other case, you can upload it only if the copyright holder (not you) explicitly releases it under a licence such as CC-BY-SA (which will allow anybody to reuse the picture for any purpose, even commercially) - permission to use it on Wikipedia is not sufficient. If the copyright owner is willing to licence it, see Donating copyright materials for what they (not you) must do. If they are not, then you cannot use the picture on Wikipedia. To do the upload, if it is a new version of the same picture, go to commons:File:María Elena González Calderón 2014-04-27 17-46.jpg and pick "upload a new version of this file"; but if it is a different picture, use the upload wizard to upload it to commons. --ColinFine (talk) 17:51, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Referencing errors on List of museums in Devon
Reference help requested.

Could you please assist, as new to Wikipedia

Thanks, Torrington Lad (talk) 07:31, 16 December 2016 (UTC)


 * The error message said "Cite error: There are tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).", with the words "help page" in blue to indicate that it was a wikilink, in this case to Help:Cite errors/Cite error ref no input which gives a clear explanation of the problem. A bot has subsequently corrected the problem with . --David Biddulph (talk) 10:34, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Assistance to do edits in Wikipedia
HI, I want to create a page in Wikipedia, for that I need to be Auto confirmed which would require me to do some edits, I am a new user but a regular Wiki follower,can you please assist me as how can I make edits here in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SriB (talk • contribs) 12:46, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * if your objective is to improve Wikipedia, it is a mistake for you already to think of creating a new article. Article creation is one of the most difficult tasks in Wikipedia. Instead it would be much more fruitful to do some of the many easier things, such as correcting typos, improving grammar, and adding references. If however your objective is to publicise something, you should instead use some other site, such as Facebook. Wikipedia should not be used for publicity. Maproom (talk) 13:18, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, you don't need to be autoconfirmed to create a Wikipedia article, unless the article has been create protected that way. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:16, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, and welcome to the Help Desk.  In addition to 's always excellent advice, if you check your Talk page (User talk:SriB), I have left a selection of links that should contain what you need to get started. Start with "Introduction" and "Getting started".  I trust they will be helpful, and when you have specific questions please come back and ask. --Gronk Oz (talk) 17:23, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Paper tiger
Reference help requested.

What are the specific "errors" and suggested fix? A ri gi bod (talk) 16:22, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, A ri gi bod (talk) 16:22, 16 December 2016 (UTC)


 * It says: "More than one of |author1= and |last1= specified." Remove the "author1" parameter to fix the referencing. — MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 16:30, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Dear A ri gi bod, you cannot have both "Last1=" and "Author1=". You have to remove one of the two. Taketa (talk) 17:07, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * When specifying the author in a cite, you have two options: either put their full name in "author", or split their "first" and "last" names. But you can't specifry both. --Gronk Oz (talk) 17:26, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The contrarian in me suggests that the correct 'fix' for this particular error is to delete both author parameters. The document itself does not identify an author so making the assumption that it is Henry Kissinger and the United States Government is, in my mind, inappropriate.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 17:33, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Lady-Gaga-Perfect-Illusion-sample.ogg
Hi all I just uploaded a file linked above in the Ogg format adhering to WP:SAMPLE, and somehow it is showing a big screen image in the file, which is being transcluded in the linked article also. Please help as usually that big image does not come in articles ala File:Madonna - Living for Love.ogg. Please help. — I B  [ Poke  ] 17:15, 16 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm no expert on this, but it is to do with how the OGG file has been produced. Your file is an "Ogg multiplexed audio/video file", and it's that (blank) video component that is trying to display.  Compare it to File:Accordion chords-01.ogg, which is an "Ogg Vorbis sound file" and does not have the problem.  Sorry this isn't the solution, but hopefully it might be a step towards it... --Gronk Oz (talk) 17:45, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Do I have to have consensus to remove a screenshot?
On the page Murders of Alison Parker and Adam Ward, there is a screenshot or image I wanted to remove. I started a section on the talk page of Murders of Alison Parker and Adam Ward titled "Would anyone object to me removing the screenshot?". I have wrote my opinion several times about wanting to remove the screenshot, but an editor named George Ho is just adamant that it stay. I don't know much about copyright, but I don't know if the screenshot is copyrighted or not since it was caputered from liveleak, which liveleak could have gotten the video from news station, which would own the footage, or who knows where. I personally just think the screenshot looks like it's there for shock value and makes Wikipedia look like a tabloid. The editor, George Ho wanted to know why I'm so interested in the image, and if I'm interested in the front page of Wikipedia? He then looked up my IP and wrote on the talk page that I'm from Tennessee. I don't understand what my being from Tennessee has to do with anything? If I remove the screenshot/image, the worse that will happen is that someone would revert me, correct? Can someone just read the talk page for Murders of Alison Parker and Adam West and tell me if I need consensus to remove the screenshot? Thank you. 2601:483:100:CB54:2921:709C:47A2:195E (talk) 23:22, 16 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Convenience link:
 * † dismas †|(talk) 23:26, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * † dismas †|(talk) 23:26, 16 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Wow. I just read the incredibly dominated talk page for this subject ... exhausting. Not to mention the ordeal you went through on your talk page: . I hope you were able to sort it all out. Re: consensus -- The discussion seems to be circling, but in your favor. IMHO the article is poorly written (grammatically incorrect in need of clean-up), reads like a tabloid, undue in weight, and teetering on NPOV in some sections; not very encyclopedic. Mostly, judging from the edit history, it is monitored too closely and edited too often by one largely invested editor who seems to include every little bit of information that can be found, regardless if it is relevant to the subject or not. Good luck! Best. Maineartists (talk) 00:33, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Maineartists, Thanks for your opinion. You used the perfect word, exhausting. That's how I felt trying to make the a single edit to remove the screenshot/image. I will probably not bother anymore with trying to remove the screenshot. It's too tiring, I also don't stay on Wikipedia all day long like some others do. I know if I remove it, it will be added back, and I don't want to edit war or be dragged to an even longer discussion board for just removing a screenshot. It's reasons like this simple edit I wanted to make, that make me not want to edit Wikipedia. 2601:483:100:CB54:2921:709C:47A2:195E (talk) 00:59, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
 * If you choose not to fight the battle, just walk away. I know it's a bit disheartening to do when you know you are abandoning a righteous fight to make a little piece of Wikipedia better, but you can hope that eventually some other editor will take up the fight. In the mean time, find something else amongst the more than 5 million articles that you will enjoy working on. We need you, and we don't want to lose you because of the actions of some other editor. Eventually some eidtor that actually enjoys that sort of thing will probably step in. -Arch dude (talk) 03:38, 17 December 2016 (UTC)