Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2017 January 26

= January 26 =

Are "Thanks" public or private?
I had always thought that the "thank" link in the page history sent a private notification to the editor who made the edit. That is, the thank would show up in notifications so only that editor would see it. But, today when I clicked the "thank" link to thank an editor I got a prompt "Send public thanks for this edit? (yes / no)". So, are thanks sent this way private or public? Who is able to see the thanks notification? RudolfRed (talk) 02:01, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * They are public. Anybody is able to see them at Special:Log/thanks. Read more here: Notifications/Thanks – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 02:19, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Just a little precision... Though "public" in the sense that everyone can see who thanked whom when, only the thanked user receives a notification of some kind. I doubt the thank log receives much scrutiny. Tigraan Click here to contact me 12:19, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the replies. RudolfRed (talk) 15:16, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Editing search result subtitles
I want to edit the subtitle that comes up for an article when I type its name in the searchbar of the main www.wikipedia.org page. How do I do that? NPalgan2 (talk) 03:28, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, your query is not clear. What do you mean by subtitle? Or are you referring to search suggestions? Thanks. Lourdes  06:56, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I mean when I type in 'Oscar Lopez Rivera' on www.wikipedia.org, the subtitle is 'political prisoner' when 'Puerto Rican activist and FALN leader' would be NPOV. NPalgan2 (talk) 07:04, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The description "Puerto Rican political prisoner in the United States" comes from Wikidata, at d:Q7106111, and can be edited there. I found that link by finding the Oscar López Rivera article in Wikipedia and then clicking the "Wikidata item" link under the "Tools" menu in the left sidebar. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:35, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Article Creation
Hi! I've heard a very interesting Pakistani group, and I see that they have not a page on Wikipedia. I was looking for information and they have a few references, only within their country. Some examples: Daily Pakistan 1, Daily Pakistan 2, Ebuzz, and a reference that is not online - an interview in a Pakistani site about music, called Phaser Mag-.

It could be enough to upload an article? or I need more media covering their shows?

In other words: they are an important group in Pakistan, but they still have not international projection. Can they have a page on Wikipedia? Thanks!--Ane wiki (talk) 04:59, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, have you had a chance to go through Notability? You should follow the requirements provided in the said guidelines to assess what is required for qualifying the band on our notability guidelines. Come back if you need more help. Thanks. Lourdes  06:59, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks ,I think this group can meet the requirements of point 1, but I should investigate further.--Ane wiki (talk) 02:36, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Regaining use of vanished account after leave of absence
Hi,

I was wondering if I can regain the handle 'General Rommel' which I edited under a long time ago (4 years ago or so). As I requested and was granted courtesy vanishing, I am now unable to create a new account with the same name. Is there anything I can do to regain the name or will I be forced to choose another one? Cheers, 110.20.207.12 (talk) 11:51, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That is because your global account still exists under that name. Only your en.wp account was renamed. You can probably go to commons.wikimedia.org and log in there, or send yourself a password reset email from there. I'm not sure if it is possible to create an en.wp account under the english username atm. If you are logged in on commons and not on en.wp, i would turn to Steward_requests/Username_changes. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 12:23, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Contribs for IP range
Is there a relatively easy way to show contribs for an IP range, preferably in chron sequence? I'm trying to correct good-faith damage done by an IPv4 varying the last octet more often than daily. Rangeblock is not an option because it is not vandalism. I also can't communicate with the user because of the frequency of IP changes, so it would be nice to know which address they have used last. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  14:27, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Go to user contributions and change the last digit to a * and press search. eg change 123.456.789.321 to 123.456.789.*  Hope that helps. - X201 (talk) 14:35, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * User account "105.73.27.*" is not registered. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  14:50, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Here's a link - X201 (talk) 14:55, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Exactly. That shows the message I entered above. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  14:57, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That's weird, it shows me a list of all Ip addresses that start with 105.73.27. and lists all of the edits each one has made. - X201 (talk) 15:03, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Awesome. Please capture that and email it to me, four times daily. Thanks. &#8213; Mandruss   &#9742;  15:08, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Just tried it logged out and I get the same. Must be a permissions thing. Will have a search to see if I can find anything. - X201 (talk) 15:10, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Got it. Go to your Preferences page. Go to the Gadgets tab. Scroll down to Advanced and tick the option Allow /16, /24 and /27 – /32 CIDR ranges on Special:Contributions forms, as well as wildcard prefix searches Then save the settings - X201 (talk) 15:16, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Forgot to ping the above - X201 (talk) 15:17, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Not exactly what I wanted (merged in chron sequence), and it doesn't show time-of-day, but it's an improvement. No telling why that's opt-in. I'm going to assume it's not possible with IPv6. Thanks very much! &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  15:23, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Navigation Popups in Preferences > Gadgets > Browsing will allow you to hover over an IP address and see the time for all the edits. Just open a group and hover over one of the edits and it will show you the times for all edits in that group. - X201 (talk) 15:39, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thus saving me 2 clicks per address. Hmmmm. If I were a younger man I would learn what it takes to roll my own at Wikipedia, but I'm old and tired. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  15:44, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * if you don't like that interface, you can use the range contribs tool. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:32, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

First African-American woman aviator
Willa Beatrice Brown (January 22, 1906 – July 18, 1992) was an American aviator, lobbyist, teacher, and civil rights activist.[1] She was the first African-American woman to earn her pilot's license in the United States,[

Bessie Coleman (January 26, 1892 – April 30, 1926) was an American civil aviator. She was the first African-American woman to hold a pilot license.[1][2][3]

they BOTH cant be the first — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.217.124.82 (talk) 14:27, 26 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Both statements are true. Bessie Coleman earn her pilot's license in France. Back then, US flying schools did not accept African-American women. Maproom (talk) 14:37, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Can you check my English in this article please! :(
My English is not good :(... And I'm also quite a newbie to Wikipedia, so can you guys check my English in Creep (TLC song)? Thank you so so so much Beyoncetan (talk) 16:38, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Responses here.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  20:47, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

'Personal life' section header policy
Is there a policy which dictates that the section of a biography focusing on the subject's personal life should be under the heading of "==Personal life==" instead of "==Personal=="? I couldn't find anything in the manual of style. Lepricavark (talk) 16:48, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't recall seeing "Personal" and it sounds odd to me. meta:Research:Investigate frequency of section titles in 5 large Wikipedias says there are 98892 "Personal life" while "Personal" is not listed in the top-100 with more than 13856. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:27, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * One example can be found at Brandon Inge. I've recently seen another editor changing headers from "Personal" to "Personal life", but I wanted to make sure that such a change is proper before I follow suit. Lepricavark (talk) 17:39, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The current content of that section is not really "personal life", it is more "trivia". Tigraan Click here to contact me 17:50, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * It's kind of a combination between personal life and trivia because it does mention his home and children, but it also mentions some trivial information as well. Lepricavark (talk) 18:05, 26 January 2017 (UTC)


 * No policy, or even a MOS recommendation that I could find, but "Personal" as a section heading is grammatically wierd. As an "isolated" adjective it sticks out like the proverbial sore thumb. Other headings commonly used in biographies are nouns or noun phrases; "Early life", "Education", "Career", etc. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:00, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * In that case, it seems like I would not cause any controversy by changing such a section heading when I find it. Thanks! Lepricavark (talk) 18:05, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * , I show 11,040 hits when I do a search for insource:/[^=]==Personal==/ limited to the mainspace. I added the [^=] to limit it to top level headers since the two entries I saw in my first search where it was not top level didn't seem appropriate to change. You may want to take a look at AutoWikiBrowser (I'm not sure a bot would be appropriate).Naraht (talk) 22:01, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I was planning to use AWB, but AVG is squawking at me about AWB being some kind of threat and I've been having difficulty with my computer as a result. Hopefully it will all sort itself out. Lepricavark (talk) 22:21, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Let's hope. Have fun...Naraht (talk) 22:53, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

when/how do substandard pages get deleted?
I've come across an article Syntelic which has only this text: "Syntelic attachment occurs when both sister chromosomes are attached to a single spindle pole." There is only one reference, which is to a page that no longer exists. Syntelic was created in Feb 2009 by an unregistered editor. It was tagged for several problems in March of 2009. What more needs to be done to get this article deleted? Thanks, DennisPietras (talk) 19:00, 26 January 2017 (UTC)


 * There is a choice of 3 methods for proposing deletion, see WP:Deletion process. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:04, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I appear to have properly tagged it for proposed deletion! Emojione 263A.svg   DennisPietras (talk) 20:02, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * You ought to use the "|concern" parameter to give a rationale for deletion. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:16, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, having commented that the ref was a dead link, you ought to have either tagged it as a dead link or preferably have added an archive url, which I've done in ; see WP:Link rot. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:24, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I added a "concern" and see that the tag should be on the article, not the talk page. I am perplexed by how you found an "archive URL". Can you please explain that or direct me to a page that does? DennisPietras (talk) 21:52, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I gave you a link to WP:Link rot. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:02, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * THANK YOU for the link rot page, both for the link rot info and for a reason you might not realize. The supersrcipted "note 1" on that page does exactly what I've been interested in doing and couldn't figure out how! Knowledge is power! Emojione 263A.svg DennisPietras (talk) 02:51, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * A couple of things about prod deletion(s).
 * It should only be used for cases when you are almost positive that the deletion of the article would be uncontroversial if discussed at WP:AfD. Sometimes when an article such as Syntelic ends up at AfD, other editors step in and actually improve the article per WP:PRESERVE and WP:BEFORE. So, if you think that the article could possibly be improved by somebody (even if you can't or don't want to do it yourself), then maybe it's best to take to AfD or ask about it at a relevant WikiProject.
 * You should check to see if an article has been previously prodded before. Anyone can de-prod an article (even if they are acting in bad faith) by simply removing the tag. They do not even have to give a reason for doing so. Once an article has been de-prodded, it is no longer eligible for another prod. There may be certain exceptions to this such as WP:BLPPROD, but for the most part there's no re-prodding in Wikipedia.
 * It's a good idea to notify the creator of the article and any primary contributors of the prod by posting Template:PRODNote or Template:Polite-prod on their user talk page(s). This is optional, but it is in the spirit of being WP:HERE and WP:AGF to give those who might have been involved in editing the article a chance to contest the prod if they want. Many WikiProjects have pages where deletion notices, etc. added to article's tagged with their WikiProject's banner automatically show up, but not all projects have created such pages so it can be a good idea to post a short note on the project's talk page about the prod as well. Some people just assume that prod will be noticed by the edit showing up on watchlists, but I seen such an approach lead to serious problems between editors. I've also seen articles being refunded because someone contests the prod even after the article had been deleted.
 * Basically, if you're ever in doubt, you probably shouldn't prod. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:39, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tips. I saw the suggestion for contacting the originator, but since they never registered and appeared to have abandoned the page for about a decade, I figured it would be a waste of effort. In the future, I'll be more careful. DennisPietras (talk) 20:18, 27 January 2017 (UTC)


 * While the article is a grossly inadequate stub, it is not clear that the subject is non-notable. I'm not an expert in genetic chemistry, but there are more that 6000 Google hits for "Syntelic attachment", and hits from three Wikipedia articles to "syntelic". Someone with the proper time and expertise could salvage this. -Arch dude (talk) 19:26, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

2017 NCAA Division I FBS season
Why did you delete the the template I was ready to draft. 2600:8803:7A00:19:C02F:500D:AA19:5851 (talk) 20:19, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Please clarify what you think was deleted. There has been no page called 2017 NCAA Division I FBS season, Template:2017 NCAA Division I FBS season or Draft:Template:2017 NCAA Division I FBS season. The closest I can find is Draft:2017 NCAA Division I FBS football seaosn which hasn't been deleted. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:33, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

A contact for help with creating a page
I am wrestling with creating a new page for the "Schuylkill Permanent Bridge" a covered bridge that once spanned the Schuylkill River in Philadelphia, and I don't want to make errors that will result in its removal if I make unwitting mistakes. The bridge is mentioned in the Wikipedia page on William Rush. Is there anyway I could develop a specific contact within the Wikipedia world of editors so I could have consistent communication when needed. The trouble I most dread is uploading images that are privately held in the Athenaeum of Philadelphia, but they have assured me that they will grant permission for their use. Please give me help in replying to any response you may offer as I have not yet mastered how to use TALK pages, etc. It is still very confusing to me. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bypassed (talk • contribs) 21:19, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * There is quite a bit of information about the Schuylkill Permanent Bridge at Market Street Bridge (Philadelphia). My suggestion is to expand that section to the point where it will make sense to split the first bridge off onto its own page (and will help give you experience with wikipedia). Given that the Bridge burned in 1850 (and that by the time that Copyright issues become a problem (made after 1923) they were on the fourth bridge at that location, I don't think you'll have any issues with copyright. As for responding here, use two colons at the beginning of your comment in editing this session and it will indent appropriately. I'll be happy to add that page to my watchlist if you'd like to specifically comment on the talk page for that article. You may want to stop by the Teahouse and take the Wikipedia Adventure to learn.Naraht (talk) 22:34, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Your comments and suggestions are extremely helpful. They will help me organize my thoughts for how to approach this.  When I have formulated them, I would gladly reach out to you again.  Thank you!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bypassed (talk • contribs) 00:17, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Naraht's point about copyright is valid: you can copy just about any pre-1923 work without violating copyright law. However, you must still attribute any direct copy or close paraphrase in order to meet our WP:Plagiarism guidelines. Don't let this scare you, as it's really fairly easy to change a valid reference ("I used this") to a valid attribution ("I copied this"), and for a picture, this is all handled in the metadata you provide when you upload the picture, so separate attribution is not needed in the article itself -Arch dude (talk) 19:13, 28 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Not relevant in this case because of 's points, I think, ; but the general answer to your first point is that if you create a draft in Draft (or user) space - for example, by using the Article wizard - nobody will interfere with it unless you do something really bad on it like copyright infringement or personal attacks. Any other shortcomings will be left for you to correct them in peace, and submit it for review when you think it's ready. --ColinFine (talk) 00:59, 27 January 2017 (UTC)


 * This too is helpful. I will try to decide how to approach this.  The 1806 publication, that is cited on the Market Street bridge Wikipedia article, has two images (drawings actually) of the covered bridge and also it has the information that is relevant on how it was painted, which is very important historically.  I hope that the two images in the publication can be reproduced in a Wikipedia article.  I think that this is my most fundamental question--i.e. reproduction of an image that is in an old book, this one being from 1806.  Do you have any insight into this?  Thank you.--Bypassed (talk) 01:31, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * As I understand it (not my specialty, I've uploaded less than 5 images), pretty much everything produced prior to 1923 in the US is out of copyright and thus can be loaded without a problem. Just make sure that when you upload that, you mark it as produced prior to 1923 in the image load. BTW, if you can find any more information on the second and third bridges, that would be cool too. :)Naraht (talk) 01:42, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * It might take me a while now to gather what I need from the sources, etc. and then to review, study and take notes from all of the Wikipedia pages for instructions for creating an article and for using images, etc. But the comments and suggestions offered so far are very encouraging and very helpful.  Thank you.--Bypassed (talk) 14:45, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem. Creating a new page can be one of the most difficult thing to do for a new user. You definitely seem to be on the right track, feel free to reach out to me or other experienced users with questions. We'd much rather answer questions than deal with created pages by those who ignore or don't know the guidelines/rules.Naraht (talk) 15:57, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Page not displaying
Greetings,

I recently created a new page for my company Cage Fighter. Though, when I search "Cage Fighter" on Wikipedia or on google Mixed Martial Arts comes up. Why won't the page "Cage Fighter" that I created come up? And how do I get my page to display when Cage Fighter is typed in?

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tm853511 (talk • contribs) 21:59, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Your page has to be reviewed by a WP:New page reviewer first before it is fully released into the main space. Also, please read WP:COI, WP:PROMO, and WP:DIRECTORY
 * This was what your article looked when you created it. I was on the verge of nominating it for WP:G11. I've gotten rid of much of the promotional material since, but please refrain from editing the article directly. Instead, make suggestions at the article talk page. Stikkyy (talk) 22:33, 26 January 2017 (UTC)