Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2017 November 29

= November 29 =

Recent Edit to Oran Wendle Eagleson's Page
Hello, my name is Natalie. I recently made a lot of changes to black psychologist, Oran Wendle Eagleson's page, however, upon checking the page a few hours later, I found that it had been reverted back to a previous version by user Majora. I am not sure why exactly why this occurred, as all my additions were cited or else wording edits, and I am wondering if there is a way that any (if not all) of my additions could be salvaged, as I truly believe that they enhance Eagleson's page and give a fuller picture of his life and contributions. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.173.92.4 (talk) 00:02, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * explained in their edit summary that your edits were reverted because they had a bad case of "promotional language issues" and language so closely paraphrased from https://honorsandawards.iu.edu as to constitute plagiarism. -- Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  00:20, 29 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, Natalie. This is a normal part of Wikipedia operation: if somebody reverts your edit, your principal choices are to let it go, or to attempt to engage the other party in a discussion on the article's talk page. 's opinion is that the edits you made were not in neutral language, and that they may have been a copyright violation. If you think your additions were worth including (as you clearly do), it is up to you to get wording that Majora, and anybody else who joins the discussion, agree with.(Of course, you may feel that Majora's judgments were wrong, and try to convince them or others of that. But I observe that calling somebody a "pioneer" is not a neutral term, and should never be done in Wikipedia's voice. Please read about the Bold, revert, discuss cycle, and about neutral point of view. --ColinFine (talk) 23:10, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Question about Cristina Vee
Why shouldn't there be a category for her being of Mexican descent? Salma Hayek as a category being of Mexican descent. 2001:569:7671:F100:6806:57DC:A814:F459 (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You have to get the category's name right. In this case, that would be Category:American actresses of Mexican descent. -- Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  00:31, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I have added the Category for you. SA 13 Bro (talk) 00:37, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You need to take account of WP:CATDEF, as mentioned in the related thread above . --David Biddulph (talk) 00:40, 29 November 2017 (UTC) Archived.—  Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  20:51, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, thanks for your head up, I didn't noticed that is a related thread issue at above. S<b style="color:orange">A</b><b style="color:gold"> 1</b><b style="color:green">3</b><b style="color:blue"> B</b><b style="color:indigo">r</b><b style="color:violet">o</b> (talk) 00:50, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Christina's ethnicity in the categories not listed and its not fair. Why should that happen for other latino actors and her? 2001:569:7671:F100:6806:57DC:A814:F459 (talk) 01:44, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Have you read WP:CATDEF? If you have questions regarding a specific article the place for discussion is the article's talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 01:56, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * This is one of those cases where her ethnicity isn't prominently listed in the news articles describing her, and the only source was from an AMA session where she replies that she is of Mexican, Native American, and Lebanese ancestry. Should this mean she should be categorized in those three ethnicities? Should actors and people in general who mention their ethnicity like they're a quarter of this and an eighth of that be categorized as such? It's different from Hayek's article where "Mexican-born" and "born in Mexico" is shown on multiple news articles. <strong style="color:#606060;">AngusWOOF ( bark  •  sniff ) 15:05, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Donating
Hi,

I would like to know why I should donate to Wikipedia after my official articles are rejected for silly reasons. I recently submitted a page for my official social issues based social network (which is supported by the BBC and many others) and it was rejected because I provided 1 article from a newspaper you didn't support.

I would happily donate if your admins/editors would show your support for a Community Organisation.

- Jamie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.3.182.124 (talk) 02:22, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Jamie, without commenting on your quid pro quo assessment, which draft/article might you be referring to? Thanks.  Lourdes  03:37, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The only draft edited by this IP (and other editors to that draft) is / was Draft:Travis Simpkins, but that is not about a social network. It was however, rejected as The Sun (UK) and IMDb are not held to be reliable. Donating is entirely voluntary and a personal decision. Eagleash (talk) 10:01, 29 November 2017 (UTC)


 * While I could not find any specific Wikipedia policy page, I am sure you could fully understand that arrangements to the effect of giving an expedited/lenient review to those who pay for it would probably be to the detriment of our objective to write from a neutral point of view. Tigraan <span title="Send me a silicium letter!" style="color:">Click here to contact me 18:26, 29 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, Jamie. I don't know whether or why you should donate: I don't know whether or why anybody should. I know why I donate: partly because I think it is a valuable resource and I want it to continue to be; at least as much because it is a model of a non-commercial collaborative project, and I wish there were more of these with anything like the reach of Wikipedia.
 * I strongly support the rules which limit the ability of people to promote themselves or their enterprises (commercial or not) - my preference would be to ban paid editing entirely, but the consensus is to permit it under stringent control. I believe that information which is not cited to a published source is almost completely useless (because anybody can come along and accidentally or maliciously change it, and if there is no source, it is impossible to verify it); and that information that is cited to an unreliable source is worse than useless, because even if you check it you've no way of knowing that it has not been made up, mistranscribed, or dishonestly altered. (Not all information even in reliable sources is accurate, it is true, but it's much more likely to be so in a source with a reputation for fact-checking and editorial control). Therefore, unless there is substantial information about a subject in reliable published sources (and for some of the information, it needs to be sources independent of the subject) there is literally nothing that can usefully go in an article. That, in my view is why we insist on the unfortunately-named quality of notability.
 * This has been my personal view, but I think that many people here agree with me. Wikipedia runs on consensus, and like anybody else, you are free to try and change the consensus on almost any of Wikipedia's policies (WP:VP is the place to discuss doing so). --ColinFine (talk) 23:29, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

An academic question
Dear Sir/Madame,

My name is Fabio Fantuzzi and I am a doctoral candidate at Università degli Studi Roma Tre, Rome. I am carrying out a research project on the painter and teacher Norman Raeben, one of the sons of Sholem Aleichem, and on his influence on his art students.

As I found that at that several pages of Ashcan School's painters (i.e. those of John Sloan, Robert Henri and others) mention Raeben among their famous students, I wonder if I can have the contact of the person that edited those page to ask him if he has some information about him.

I thank you in advance for any help and assistance you may give me.

I look forward to hearing from you.

With all best wishes,

Fabio Fantuzzi Dottorando in "Lingue e Letterature Anglo-Americane" Dipartimento di Lingue, Letterature e Culture Straniere Università degli Studi Roma Tre — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fabio Fantuzzi (talk • contribs) 03:49, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Wikipedia pages are edited by lots of people, so it is difficult to attribute the writing of an article to any one editor. However, by viewing the edit history of an article (click the view history tab), you can find editors who have started or improved the article substantially. Many of the articles have been created many years ago, so the page creators may not be active on Wikipedia, but you can still try. You can contact them by leaving a message on their talk page, or emailing them (click email this user while on their user page), if the option is available. <b style="color:#FA0">Darylgolden</b>(<b style="color:#F00">talk</b>) Ping when replying 03:59, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Neither of these facts are properly sourced by 2017 standards of the encyclopedia, so any work done to verify and footnote that information would be appreciated. Carrite (talk) 12:38, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello . That detail seems to have been added to the biography of John French Sloan by on April 1, 2008. LINK. They are still active at WP. Carrite (talk) 12:22, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The detail seems to have been added to the biography of Robert Henri by on Jan. 6, 2007. This also seems to be an individual still active at Wikipedia, although more sporadically so. LINK
 * Hello . The name of Norman Raeben is not familiar to me, so I checked the edit history of John French Sloan and found that his name was added in this edit LINK by on January 6, 2007. My edit only moved it to a different position, and I'm afraid I don't have any knowledge of this artist. Ewulp (talk) 01:08, 1 December 2017 (UTC)


 * If the edit was from 2007, probably was a relic of WP:OR or copy from unreliable source, that was not removed due to low edit activity of the page. And it would be a circular referencing to use wikipedia as source. If you can't find any academic paper or book that was WP:reliable source (that outside the world of wikipedia) to prove the statement, they were probably not true at all. Matthew_hk   t  c  02:55, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Editor making mass changes to EL sections
The editor is making masses of changes to External Links in a very large number of pages. The timings indicate that they are spending very little time (typically less than 30 seconds) pruning the EL sections. Now I know that the EL section is one that is prone to abuse, and prone to spamming. But they seem to be removing all but the one main "official site". Any other links are just cut. No attempt is being made to incorporate the links into the body.

As an example, the edits to AsciiDoc at removed all three non-official site external links. One link was broken, but I would consider two of the three to be useful, relevant, non-spammy additions to the page.

My reversal of one of their edits was thanked by another user, but reverted by Stesmo. In this case, they were to the same official site, but added useful commentary and easy navigation to an important part of that site. Their justification was that it violated WP:ELPOINTS 4, but that is a guideline, not a rule, and there is still justification for keeping those links.

My fear is that they are removing large amounts of useful content from wikipedia with very little thought. The rate of their changes indicates they cannot be effectively reviewing their edits, and requires a large amount

Is this acceptable behaviour? Is their any way to slow them down so their edits can be effectively reviewed?

Thanks for your help.

peterl (talk) 11:57, 29 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm with . If the official site links in turn to those other three sites, that's fine, readers can find them that way. And if it doesn't link to them, then why should we? Maproom (talk) 12:03, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Edits look good to me. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 14:53, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

editing Harris Search Associates wikipage
Good morning. Harris Search Associates wiki page was deleted - it was listed under executive search firms. The fellow who developed it believed he had been careful to have it properly documented - can it be revisited? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JeffreyGHarris (talk • contribs) 12:33, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, if you (or any user) represent or work for the organization you mention, you/they need to review the conflict of interest policy at WP:COI and if you are employed by this organization, the paid editing policy at WP:PAID. The latter is required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use for paid editors(if you are paid).  I can't see the content of the page to know what was wrong with it(though an administrator can) but it was speedy deleted as promotional.  This could be if it was actively promoting the sale of a product or service, or merely telling the world about the company(even if not selling something).  All articles on Wikipedia must indicate with independent reliable sources, that is, sources written by third parties not associated with the company, how it meets the notability guidelines at WP:ORG.  Not every company merits an article here, even within the same field. 331dot (talk)
 * . I also cannot see the deleted page (I am not an administrator). But in addition to the points made by 331dot, please understand that any Wikipedia article about Harris Search Associates would not be owned by or controlled by Harris Search Associates, should not be directly edited by them, and should be based almost completely on what people who had no connection with them had published about them in reliable places. Many people have the mistaken idea that Wikipedia can or should be part of their marketing strategy or their online presence. It cannot and should not. --ColinFine (talk) 23:34, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Sandbox
My sandbox does not have the edit option. How do I fix this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nastaranalqaddoumi (talk • contribs) 12:36, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The edit link is above near Read and View history links. Ruslik_ Zero 18:14, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

How do I add a date and month of birth?
Merle Lawrence states the year of birth. How can I add day and month on this site? Merle Lawrence — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rumours54 (talk • contribs) 15:06, 29 November 2017 (UTC) }
 * Dear Rumours54, to edit the page, click the "edit this page" tab at the top of Merle Lawrence. You can click the "edit this page" tab on any other Wikipedia page to learn how other pages have added the date and month of birth. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 16:59, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Notice however, that per our policy of privacy of personal information inside articles, we should not state the day/month of birth in articles of living or recently deceased (emphasis added) persons. "Recently deceased" is voluntarily a sloppy standard because it usually applies to controversial figures (for instance, when a high-profile politician dies, smearing rumors from political opponents continue to circulate and should not be referenced without good sourcing), so I think in that particular case it does not apply, but this should have been mentioned by Taketa in their answer. Tigraan <span title="Send me a silicium letter!" style="color:">Click here to contact me 18:17, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * - WP:BDP, the person is confirmed death by the reliable sources on the bottom of the page. "Anyone born within the past 115 years is covered by this policy unless a reliable source has confirmed their death. The only exception would be for people who have recently died. I do not consider 10 years recent, though this is open to discussion. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 18:41, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree with your assessment; actually, the "recently deceased" stuff got me carried away a bit. The main point is that (IMO) you should have mentioned the BLPPRIVACY policy even if it does not apply. It is not a stretch to assume that if you tell someone to add the date of birth for person X, they will want to add it for person Y, so you should as well say what the rules are even if they do not apply to X. (But maybe we can take this to one of our talk pages if you want to discuss it further?) Tigraan <span title="Send me a silicium letter!" style="color:">Click here to contact me 18:47, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Edit count
Hello, I was trying to retrieve the edit xount for Special:Contributions/InternetArchiveBot but the corresponding page cannot be loaded. Is there a general problem with edit count?--Herfrid (talk) 16:21, 29 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Hey Herfrid. Seems to partially work for me. Although it looks like the edit counter can't handle an account with more than 350k edits, and this bot has almost two million.  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk   16:26, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid you're right! Maybe I just wasn't patient enough... Thank you anyway.--Herfrid (talk) 16:31, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Dear Herfrid, maybe Central Auth can help you quickly get some basic numbers. All the best, Taketa (talk) 17:00, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank you very much!--Herfrid (talk) 17:03, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Is there a place where I can ask for a source to be translated?
Specifically. I can read a little Spanish but for El Tatio I need to have it almost entirely translated and that is beyond my knowledge of Spanish. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:26, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * as well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:48, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Dear Jo-Jo Eumerus, perhaps you can ask one of the people here. - Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 16:55, 29 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Dear Jo-Jo Eumerus
 * I am fluent in Spanish and have done translation work in the past. I would be willing to translate the journal article . I have had a quick read and it seems relatively straight forward. Are you able to send me the text that you have translated so far, and I should be able to fill in the blanks? Translating a journal article is a big job, and it may take a week or two to complete the task. Due to other commitments, I would not be able to start on it until next week. The second article appears to be an abstract only and already has an English translation. Therefore the second article does not appear to need a translation. BronHiggs (talk) 20:56, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * To be honest I didn't attempt any translation myself; I can only read Academic Journal Spanish. The other article has a Spanish full text here. I don't have a deadline, fer sure. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:03, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Dear Jo-Jo Eumerus I am prepared to translate the first article on a volunteer basis. But it is very labour intensive because of its length and the amount of technical language. I do not feel that I can translate two academic journal articles in quick succession. Perhaps you might like to shop around for a different translator for the second article? I will get started on it next week and post the translation on your talk page when it is completed. BronHiggs (talk) 23:22, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll look for a different solution on the second article. Incidentally, I am not sure if it should be posted on the wiki; the SciElo article is under a noncommercial license and thus not compatible with our copyright licenses. Would email work? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:37, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Reversing a page move
How do I undo a page move, to restore the previous title? Thanks. Loraof (talk) 18:23, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Moving_a_page seems to say you can just re-move the other way even without admin rights. If you actually need an admin to delete the redirected original page first, WP:G6 applies (assuming the move is uncontroversial, but if it is not, you should not want to move unilaterally in the first place). Tigraan <span title="Send me a silicium letter!" style="color:">Click here to contact me 18:30, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Push pin maps
So looking at Big South Fork of the Cumberland River, apparently to get a pushpin map, somehow Template:Infobox river works with Template:Location map works with Template:Location map USA Tennessee works with  in order to make magic happen. But... I got no magic. I'm not technically gifted. G M G <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk   22:51, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

regarding the header to your current fund-raising drive
>> WIKIPEDIA communicated thusly: "We ask you, humbly, to help."

>> By way of asserting humility, ye provest thyself proud. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.244.82.164 (talk) 23:00, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

>> Thank you.  Lourdes  03:58, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I completely and utterly fail to understand your reasoning. -- Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  01:43, 1 December 2017 (UTC)