Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2017 April 11

= April 11 =

Wrongfully created article
Hi, Im trying to edit the article in:

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardy_Hern%C3%A1n_Schmidt_Fuentes

I used another person as a template and saved changes. Now any change I make is flagged as piracy. Please Help.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walter Peet (talk • contribs) 02:34, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * This is the English Wikipedia help desk. Sorry, we can't assist with other language projects. Please try the Spanish help desk --Majora (talk) 02:36, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Systematic reversal of my edits
Under what circumstances can someone systematically reverse every edit I make? Sorry if I'm asking in the wrong place. Siuenti (씨유엔티) 03:43, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * When your edits are consistently disruptive, disregard our terms of service, or show that you are definitely not here to create and improve an encyclopedia. -- Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  06:56, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Following on from the above question, what if my edits are NOT disruptive, and were genuinely correcting out of date information? Edits reverting to the old version have been made from an IP address (189.101.118.145) without a user name, and there are no comments or details about the reversion (or potential issues with my edits) in the talk page. It seems the other contributor is the disruptive one. If they were a moderator then I'd expect that they'd at least be logged in. How do I get clarity of what the issue is/was, or get someone to adjudicate? I say this with specific reference to the Portuguese language version on pt:Corumbá. I see little point contributing if my contributions and time are for nothing. Bald white guy (talk) 09:12, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * First of all, this is the help desk for the English Wikipedia; procedures on the Portuguese Wikipedia may differ.
 * Now, on en-wp, there is no "moderator"; there are administrators, but they are not supposed to be a higher authority in any way. Instead, they are editors granted with technical abilities for moderation when conduct issues arise or the community at large agrees to do something that needs administrator tools. In particular, they are not judges of content disputes; using one's status as administrator to get one's way in a content dispute is one of the clearest abuse of the tools and grounds for removal from the admin corps.
 * Finally, I cannot read Portuguese, but apparently you left a message on the talk page and edit summaries, unlike the IP editor. On en-wp, the next step would be to reinstate "your" version since the IP editor did not justify theirs, and escalate up to WP:ANI if the IP editor edit-wars without justifying their version. The pt-wp procedure is probably similar. Tigraan Click here to contact me 09:31, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you . That helps. I was afraid that I might have made a mistake or accidentally violated a policy (as I'm only a very occasional user) but could find no information. I've left a comment on the Talk page asking for clarification if there was a real issue - and have reinstated my changes in the interim. My changes weren't too significant - I just swapped out an image that had a very large watermark, replacing it with a newer (unwatermarked) image, plus replaced older 10 year old images of locations in the tourism section, since those locations have changed or no longer exist. Sorry, I asked here because I'm a native English speaker who's passable in Portuguese but not great. Bald white guy (talk) 09:47, 14 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Hopefully you can find appropriate place to request help if you start at the pt:Wikipédia:Pedidos page (shortcut pt:WP:P). --CiaPan (talk) 09:54, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * You can also use template pt:Predefinição:Ajudem-me (corresponding to Template:Help me in en-wiki): put it in your talk page at pt-wiki with a description of the problem. Possibly somebody, fluent enough both in English and Portuguese, will help you. --CiaPan (talk) 10:01, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Help:Cite errors/Cite error ref no input
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Beyond Industry (talk • contribs) 06:05, 11 April 2017 (UTC)


 * The error message said "Cite error: There are tags on this page without content in them (see the help page)." The words "help page" were in blue, indicating that they were a wikilink, in this case to Help:Cite errors/Cite error ref no input. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:14, 11 April 2017 (UTC)


 * This appears to relate to Mc Jr where the page was created by the placing of just empty ref tags and a non-existent template. It has been deleted. Eagleash (talk) 11:57, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Sandbox to Article
Hi! I'm trying to move an article from my Sandbox and publish it. Do I need to just copy and paste into the article wizard, or is their a faster way to do it?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lyrical22/sandbox is the article I want to move. Thanks! Lyrical22 (talk) 07:04, 11 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I've added a userspace draft template, which gives you a "Submit" button to use when you want to submit the draft for review. One thing which you may want to do is to consolidate the references used more than once, see Help:Referencing for beginners, but that in itself oughtn't to be a reason for your draft to be declined on its review. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:15, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Lyrical22, I've fixed the refs and done some other clean-up Jimfbleak - talk to me?  14:33, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Can you check my first created Wikepedia page
Hi,

I was wondering if my page now is up to the Wikipedia standards about references.

This is the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arjan_Rietvink

If there is still something wrong with it please let me know what element specifically is causeing the problem.

Best Regards,

Paul — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pauldewit7 (talk • contribs) 08:23, 11 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, . I'm afraid not. The first two sources in Draft:Arjan Rietvink are not independent of Rietvink, and the other two are mere mentions. A Wikipedia article should be almost entirely based on what people unconnected with the subject have published about the subject in reliable places. It follows that, in order to write an article, you have to find at least one, and preferably more than one reliable published source (such as a major newspaper or a book from a reputable publisher) unconnected with the subject (and not based on an interview or press release from them) which discusses the subject at some length: the Wikipedia jargon for this criterion is that the subject is WP:notable. Please read Referencing for beginners, and (if you have not already read it) your first article. By the way, moved the article to Draft space, so that you can continue working on it without risking it getting summarily deleted) --ColinFine (talk) 10:09, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Visual snow is not a medical disorder, it is merely a symptom. The article is scaring the public with very little facts.
This article is scaring many of my anxiety patients, they believe they have this "syndrome": Visual snow Some of the worlds leading experts on our visual system say that this visual noise is normal. I want the article to reflect this. Patients with visual “snow” have normal equivalent input noise levels https://psych.nyu.edu/pelli/pubs/raghavan2010arvo-snow.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_Pelli - professor behind the view that: The visual-snow symptom is luminance-dependent, but is not a result of increased levels of intrinsic visual noise. Visual-snow patients have normal equivalent input noise, normal contrast sensitivity, and normal high-noise efficiency. Their only abnormality appears to be an increased perceptual gain, i.e., an intensified experience. This article from Harvard explains that this noise with in our visual system is normal: "The intrinsic dark noise of primate cones is equivalent to �4000 absorbed photons per second [17]; at mean light levels below this the cone signals are dominated by intrinsic noise." http://wilson.med.harvard.edu/nb204/DunnRieke2006b.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrishsv1 (talk • contribs) 09:35, 11 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. The best place to discuss such concerns is the article's talkpage Talk:Visual snow, where you already posted a similar message (in general, please do not post the same message in several forums at once). Another good place to ask for additional opinions from interested editors would be Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine, where I left a short notice to draw more attention to your message. Hope that helps a bit. GermanJoe (talk) 10:31, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Marciano
I can't be forced or told to jump to life after boxing. I can't be forced or told jump to life after boxing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1002:B009:A0C7:E299:5D07:50B3:5271 (talk) 13:06, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello. Your statement above contains no context and question, so it's not possible to understand why you posted it. Are you saying you think this should be added to our article on Rocky Marciano for some reason? Is it a quote from him? If so, why is it relevant to include this in the article? What reliable source is it from? You need be much more direct. All articles have talk pages (here, Talk:Rocky Marciano), which would probably be a more targeted place to post a suggestion/correction etc. than here.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:18, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Westminster School, Connecticut (USA) photos
Hi. I work at Westminster School and it has been brought to our attention that three photos on the Wikipedia entry need to be removed. We want to add more generic photos of buildings and remove the two sports and one dance photos with people. I am unsure how to do this. Can you help? My email is I am relatively new here and did not have a log in for Wikipedia until this morning. I am unsure of the process to gain access to delete these photos. As far as I can tell this page was created several year ago but these photos were added with the last few. The person who added them no longer works here. Thanks in advance for your help.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westminster_School_(Connecticut) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steph Riefe (talk • contribs) 13:13, 11 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Steph Riefe, you do not own the page, and since you have a conflict of interest You should discuss the removal of the existing images on the article talk page, with an explanation of why they need  to be removed. You can, of course, add other images as long as they meet our requirements of being free to use, modify or distribute for any purpose, including commercial, and not published elsewhere other than under the same licence or as explicitly public domain Jimfbleak - talk to me?  14:00, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Steph Riefe, while i was cleaning up this page (see its history), I noticed that you had removed the images without waiting for a reply here. Please explain why you have done so, or I will restore the images. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  14:22, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jim. Thanks for getting back to me. I was getting some pushback from people at the school so I removed the photos. The reason this came up is that one of the photos was used on another site and I was asked to remove the photos from the source so that would not happen again. In addition, the person who posted the three photos no longer works here and he was credited with taking the photos and he did not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steph Riefe (talk • contribs) 18:44, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello . I am going to assume this is about File:Westminster_Boys_Soccer_team.jpg (among others). I tend to think generic photographs of people do not belong to an article about a school and that the removal from the article could be justified, but you still have to discuss it at the talk page, and "we request you do so" is not going to cut it because you do not control the article about you. (One of Wikipedia's founders tried that and failed.)
 * However, in any case, this would only remove the photo from the article, but it would still be available on Wikimedia servers (see the link I gave), so to "remove the photos from the source" you would need to have that file deleted as well. To do so, you need to provide a valid rationale; I can see two such rationales, but what you wrote so far does not seem to support either.
 * The first one would be that, since this is an image of people, it infringes on their privacy. However, since apparently the photograph was taken at a public event, US law would probably not consider this an infringement; see also the Wikimedia Foundation's policy.
 * The other would be if, the user who uploaded the photographs and released them irrevocably under a free license, was not allowed to do so. I must stress that "the photographs were posted without our consent" is not sufficient justification. Even if the uploader now regrets having posted them, if they had the right to, it is too late to pull them back. There are some possible good justifications why the uploader might not have had the required copyrights:


 * 1) The uploader did not take the photographs.
 * 2) The uploader did take the photographs, but did so under an employment contract that transferred the copyrights to someone else.
 * Tigraan Click here to contact me 17:17, 12 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Message text. Steph Riefe (talk) 18:14, 12 April 2017 (UTC) Hi Tigraan. Thank you for getting in touch. The person who uploaded the three photos, PJ_Dakota, did not take at least two of them. I know that for sure. The other one I am not as sure but I think he did not. I would like to remove all three of them from Creative Commons. The girls' hockey one and boys' soccer are the photos I know PJ_Dakota did not take. PJ_Dakota no longer works here and the two photos (girls' hockey/boys' soccer) the actual photographer did not give permission for the photos to be used in this way. I am not sure about the other one but as it contains images of people we are hoping we can have it removed since we cannot sort out with certainty the correct process was followed. If we add more photos they will be of buildings. What should I do next? Steph Riefe (talk) 17:57, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Infobox problem
Hello, on Ober Ost, there is a superfluous blank line before the infobox. Yet, I could not figure out where it comes from. I also tried to find a help desk for templates but could not find one. Is there such a portal for specific template issues or am I right here?--Hubon (talk) 14:26, 11 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Hey Hubon. I believe it was the placement of prior to the infobox.  Timothy Joseph Wood  14:27, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! In fact, I didn't know that you have to place the DISPLAYTITLE function below the infobox. I always thought it was just the other way around...--Hubon (talk) 14:37, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * DISPLAYTITLE can be placed anywhere in the page. It was the newline after the DISPLAYTITLE which mattered. One newline at the start usually doesn't move down the following content but the article uses Infobox former country which currently starts with a blank line on transclusion due to a tag on the template page. The two consecutive newlines caused the blank line in rendering. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:58, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * It was affecting other articles so I have removed the transcluded newline from the infobox.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Infobox_former_country&diff=774976514&oldid=772298903] PrimeHunter (talk) 21:05, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much!--Hubon (talk) 14:00, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Weirton Area Port Authority - Speedy deletion WHY? - Need explanation, cannot find a way to determine what caused this
I started a Page called the Weirton Area Port Authority - and am reading that is was a Speedy Deletion Candidate - need to know why, as I am part of the ownership of the Copyright/Trademark — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjdefelice (talk • contribs) 14:37, 11 April 2017 (UTC)


 * There are many useful links on your user talk page, including the process for donating copyrighted materials (if that material is suitable for Wikipedia), and guidance regarding conflict of interest. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:45, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Before you post any further material about the Weirton Area Port Authority, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your financial stake in it. Doing so is not difficult and I will post a message about this to your talk page providing instructions.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:11, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Charles Conger Ervin
I wrote an article on Charles Conger in 2011 and it was sent back for editing. I did not edit it at that time. Is it still available for editing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cececre (talk • contribs) 17:20, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * the above question is your only surviving contribution to Wikipedia. So, unless you used a different account, or didn't log in, when creating the Conger article, the answer is "no". Maproom (talk) 17:26, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * On 's user talk page you will find links to the deletion log for Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Charles Conger Ervin. The messages on the user's talk page tell him how to request undeletion. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:31, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * You're right. I thought I'd looked there, I don't know how I missed it. Maproom (talk) 18:42, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Italicise full article title
As per MOS:ITALICS, the titles of works of art are written in italics. However, in some article titles such as Damnation (Ride the Madness) and My Life II... The Journey Continues (Act 1), the parentheses aren't used as disambiguation. Is there a way to make the whole article title italics, as they are part of the album? Thanks, TheKaphox   T  18:14, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * If using Template:Italic title, add the parameter "|all = yes" to the template. Most of the time parenthesis are disambiguators, so the template defaults to not italicizing them.  If they are a proper part of the title, use the all = yes parameter.  -- Jayron 32 18:17, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Italics are often added by infoboxes and then it gets a little complicated because you also have to disable the unwanted italics made by the infobox, and the way to do this can vary between infoboxes. Both examples use Infobox album and I have fixed them.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Damnation_(Ride_the_Madness)&diff=774973454&oldid=585520923][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=My_Life_II..._The_Journey_Continues_(Act_1)&diff=774973786&oldid=766097547] PrimeHunter (talk) 20:47, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

You have new messages
When someone leaves me a message, I get an orange banner saying "You have new messages." The link takes me to my talk page, but when I go there, I still have the orange banner until I go to another page. Is it supposed to disappear when I go to the talk page? 208.95.51.38 (talk) 18:36, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * No, it only disappears for pages you open after you have visited and left the talk page. Herostratus (talk) 19:14, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Byzantine Papacy and Byzantine-period popes are poorly represented using only a single flawed source
The Wikipedia page on the 'Byzantine Papacy' and many of its pages on specific popes mainly only cites the source: Byzantine Rome and the Greek Popes by Andrew J Ekonomou 2007.

If you read reviews on this book by other Early Medieval historians such as Thomas F.X. Noble - avalable on JSTOR (It's very short, so go ahead) - you will see that he poorly represents the 'Eastern-ness' of these popes and their levels of loyalty to the Byzantine Empire during the 6th-8th centuries.

These pages should not be allowed to exist if they are going to city only a single secondary historical source written by a very questionable historian. - He is not even solely an historian by trade.

Whoever writes these pages should read Peter Llewellyn, Costambeys, T.F.X Noble, Rovelli, and J. Osborne if they are going to present the 'Byzantine' popes more fairly.

I do not have the time to do this myself but I would like whoever reads this to know that these pages on the 'Byzantine' popes are not constructed according to proper historical academic standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.82.8.6 (talk) 19:45, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. Yeah, there sure is a lot of dependence on just Ekonomou in the References. And if as you say that is flawed source, it's a problem. I have the time but not the interest, expertise, or access to sources. You have those, but not the time. If only some modern-day Doctor Frankenstein could make make one person of us! But OK, noted. I'll put it on my list, but realistically I'll probably never get to it. But perhaps your crie de couer will reach better ears. The article is tagged with One source, which is about all we can do now. Herostratus (talk) 19:22, 12 April 2017 (UTC)