Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2016 May 22

= May 22 =

Re assistance William M Cooley
I finally received helpful assistance in the chatroom! They read my help question, and answered without any negative overtones, and in a very professional manner. My faith has been resorted in Wikipedia. They also mentioned that my original question was too verbose, and that might have confused some people. I'd like to state that I am starting a new article without anything fringe. The article will strictly focus on the Architect himself, and his work. It will not be written in any way that can be considered a memorial page either. Architect Cooley deserves a page about his work - despite what :JohnCD states. All of the information comes directly from his files at The American Institute of Architects, Chicago History Museum, published books, numerous magazine articles, and hundreds of newspaper articles. There are hundreds of churches around the US that this architect built before he died at the age of 40. That is a lot of work for someone so young.That in itself is notable.

Also, I would like to mention on a final note; even if what someone writes does not resonate with a particular person - there is no need for name calling. The amount of negative words :JohnCD used was over the top. All he had to do was write that it was fringe, and conspiracy, and leave it at that. Words such as paranoid, crackpot, crazy, really were not needed in order to delete the sandbox. Very unprofessional imho. It was just my sandbox where I was collecting information, and learning how to use Wikipedia.I never submitted the article as it was still a work in progress. I now fully understand what Wikioedia will and will not accept. Thanks to all; even to those who were somewhat caustic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blue shakti711 (talk • contribs) 03:29, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I am confused. The only edits that you have made under this user name are to this article.  I can't find the edits that you have made to a Cooley or a sandbox.  Did you use a different user name?  (I know that sandboxes cannot be used by unregistered editors.)  Robert McClenon (talk) 14:26, 22 May 2016 (UTC)


 * The file was User:Blue Shakti/Sandbox. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:11, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Then we have an editor who has been inactive for two years and who then decides to come back and resume being combative.  By the way, if you look at the talk page of the deleted sandbox, there is a two-year-old legal threat.  Robert McClenon (talk) 19:50, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * If you really want your sandbox restored, you can request its undeletion into user space at Requests for Undeletion, but that request might not be granted if it does contain crackpot material. .Robert McClenon (talk) 20:29, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Changing an image
Hello. I would like to change the box cover image on The Lord of the Rings Online to the current logo (There is no updated box art.) for the game. The game has dropped the "Shadows of Angmar" portion of the title in the years since its original release. Is there any way I can do this without violating guidelines on WP:VG or any other applicable Wikipedia guidelines? -- Super3588 (talk) 05:48, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Documentation at Infobox video game says: "The ideal image is an English-language cover or, in the case of an arcade game, a promotional flier. Secondarily, use a logo or foreign-language cover. When cover designs differ between regions, use the cover from the region associated with the game's first English language release, though do not change another English-language version that has been uploaded first." – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:44, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Not the response I was hoping for, but thank you. -- Super3588 (talk) 03:24, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Trouble with Twinkle and a CfD
I tried using Twinkle to make a CfD for Category:Lists of people by proposed medical condition and got the same error message 2 times that said it couldn't find the target page. I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, because Twinkle made a hat note for the article and posted twice on the category creator's user talkpage, but it's not listed under Categories for discussion/Log/2016 May 22. I never started a CfD before, with Twinkle or other ways. Thanks in advance! —PermStrump ( talk )  08:18, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Someone had edited the hidden comments at Categories for discussion/Log/2016 May 22. I think Twinkle looks for these comments to find its way round the page, so I've restored them. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:56, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! It worked that time. —PermStrump  ( talk )  11:01, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Duplicate found
Hey I found a duplicate: Disney_Sports_Football is a duplicate of: Disney_Sports_Soccer

First one should be deleted. Greetings, Christian Dreamian (talk) 09:59, 22 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you . Whilst either name is valid, Disney Sports Soccer was the (slightly) more encyclopedic article, so I've redirected Disney Sports Football to there. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:05, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Ok thanks Joseph. Shouldn't this be edited as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nintendo_GameCube_games The duplicate can be removed now. I'm new here and I don't wanna mess up the page so I just mention it here and leave you guys to it. Dreamian (talk) 10:37, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Instead of mentioning it here, go to the article's Talk page (for example, Talk:List of Nintendo GameCube games) and mention it there. Topics like this one are the reason we have Talk pages here. (Go to the article, click Talk in the upper-left, and then click Add Topic in the upper-right.) -- Super3588 (talk) 14:48, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Meaningless edit summaries
Now here's an interesting one. How to we deal with somebody who makes meaningless edit summaries. For some months now an anonymous ip has been adding information to articles relating to British television and adding edit summaries that make no sense. A couple of examples of what I mean can be found in the edit histories of and, but there are scores of them knocking about. I have on occasion queried the meaning of these edits with the user concerned, but never receive an answer. Recently I have even took to issuing a couple of user warnings, but the user continues unabashed. They are even happy to edit war whenever the edits have been undone, which a few people have done in recent days. The edits themselves seem like fairly reasonable edits, and if the person added an appropriate edit summary then there wouldn't be an issue. But the whole thing is just quite bizarre (almost like some kind of secret code), as well as being mildly irritating. What is the best way to approach this? This is Paul (talk) 17:18, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I have occasionally in the past seen complaints about weird or bizarre edit summaries by unregistered editors. My advice is to ignore meaningless or bizarre edit summaries.  If they are making constructive edits, let them make constructive edits.  If they are making non-constructive edits or reverting constructive edits, the best approach is to try to discuss on the article talk page, and, if that does not work, request semi-protection.  Meaningless or weird edit summaries are far less of a problem than insulting or hostile edit summaries, which are a form of personal attack.  Occasionally insulting or obscene edit summaries are redacted, but I see no reason to have stupid edit summaries redacted.  The use of edit summaries is only encouraged and not required anyway, so that the real question with stupid or weird edit summaries is the edits themselves.  If the edits are all right, let them be.  If you disagree with the edits, try to discuss.  If discussion with unregistered editors fails, semi-protection is often in order.  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:01, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, I think I'm just a bit perplexed by it all. This is Paul (talk) 20:12, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * What we have is a human behind the IP addresses who is trying to perplex us, so just ignore them unless their edits are problematical. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:23, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Why are these two charts acting differently? One results in bold text, while the other does not.
Please take a look at these two charts, located here: User talk:Joseph A. Spadaro/Sandbox/Page79. Why are these two charts acting differently? Specifically, I am referring to the final row at the bottom of each chart. In Chart Number 1, the entries in that final row are all bold text. In Chart Number 2, they are not. What exactly is causing this difference? Or, namely, why are the entries in Chart Number 1 bold text (in the last row at the bottom), when I did not include any commands to bold them? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:44, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * vs
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 19:52, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes. See more at Help:Table. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:26, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I read that page. Wikipedia "tutorials" are notoriously difficult to understand. What exactly does the "|" symbol do? And what exactly does the "!" symbol do? And how are they different exactly? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 23:45, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * this:

{| !header
 * +caption
 * data
 * }
 * becomes this
 * }
 * becomes this


 * the  is shorthand for the  html tag pair and   is shorthand for the  html tag pair.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 00:13, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:34, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Notifications, and ping-template when manually archiving a talk page
Hi. I use template:ping a lot on my talk page. If I manually archive my talk page, is there any danger of re-notifying a bunch of editors? Are /Archive pages prevented from sending notifications? I figure this is probably common enough that it's accounted for, but I couldn't find a answer. I know I could set up a bot for this, but I prefer manual archives for my own talk page. Thanks. Grayfell (talk) 20:45, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Notifications only trigger when a signature is added to accompany the ping template. So as long as you don't resign your archive as you are archiving them you do not run the risk of repinging anyone. --Majora (talk) 21:21, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, so that's how it works! That's clever. Thanks. Grayfell (talk) 00:34, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Where to report non-free images?
On my watchlist, a user added non-free images to Shawn Mendes. When I looked at the files, one photo was directly taken from a magazine website, which I am certain is not free for usage. Another one had no indication where it came from, but a user by the name of Love shawn uploaded it and claimed it as their own, which I am also certain it isn't. Can someone indicate me where I should report this or, even better, would help me with this? Thanks, Callmemirela  🍁  &#123;Talk&#125;   &#9809;  21:35, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The image (File:Shawn Mendes2016.jpg) has already been nominated for deletion on Wikimedia Commons where it was uploaded. Nominating copyvio images for deletion is the correct course of action, because simply removing them from the article still leaves the images hosted. Some uses of non-free images are acceptable, so calling these images copyright violations is more appropriate in this case. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:40, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help. I was trying to nominate it for deletion through Wikipedia, but I forgot there was Commons and so on. Even then, I wouldn't know how to do it anyways. Again, thank you. Callmemirela  🍁  &#123;Talk&#125;   &#9809;  21:45, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Hide one user's edits from watchlist
Is it possible to hide all edits by a specific user from your watchlist? I know it's possible to hide your own/bots/minor/etc, but I want something like a blacklist that I can type in users' names and no longer see their edits. There is one editor that has been making small edits to the category structure of many items on my watchlist for quite some time, and he is filling up my watchlist with what to me are trivial and unimportant edits. This makes it more likely for me to miss actual relevant edits among the mass of these trivial ones. He does mark all his edits a minor, but I would rather not have to hide all minor edits because some I find relevant.. just not the ones from him. Anyone know of such a tool? Thanks!--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 22:30, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Difficulty patrolling back-of-queue for NPP
When I try to click review, I can't get the software to recognize that I had visited the page. It did not allow me to mark the page as patrolled. Discuss-Dubious (t/c) 22:53, 22 May 2016 (UTC)