Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2020 December 2

= December 2 =

Speedy Deletion
By mistake I wrote an article on my own user page. I deleted that article as soon as I figured out that it was actually on my profile page rather than on a separate page corresponding to its topic. I got confused as I was working on sandbox. Secondly, I finally created an article page correctly and sent it to get reviewed (max 3 months to get reviewed). I noticed a few sentences that I could display better so I changed 2 words from: BUT to but. I published the changes. Next thing that happened, I got the following notice: "This draft may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion because in its current form it serves only to promote or publicise an entity, person, product, or idea, and would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic." I am not why this happened. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Weditor42490 (talk • contribs) 00:37, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , You were writing blatant spam, complete with links to some fashion site hosted on appspot for references. Please respond to the notice on your talk page, I have given you another one. —moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 00:47, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Fuzzbot
The Fuzzbot denied information about ¨Sexy Sadie¨ by The Beatles they said that the changes I made were wrong we indeed they were not — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.115.136.243 (talk) 01:17, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Calling User:Fuzheado a bot is kinda insulting. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Takes a strong man to deny... 02:33, 2 December 2020 (UTC)


 * You made changes to Sexy Sadie without a reference, so another editor reverted them. Your next move should be to discuss your changes with that editor on the article's talk page at Talk:Sexy Sadie to reach a consensus (see WP:BRD). It is certainly the case that one of the changes (i.e., type = Sexy) is incorrect. -Arch dude (talk) 05:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Who is Nathalie Emmanuel's father?
Please be advised of a factual error in your early life section of Nathalie Emmanuel. Her father was never (Joseph James) as it reads, Joseph James is in fact her Step Grandfather. I, JOHN MATTHEW EMMANUEL is her blood father estranged for no reasons by ex wife and 2 daughters. If this was not offensive enough to have been replaced in the media by a step Grandfather makes me so very angry! Get the facts right, do your checks and ammend before I really do go public and upsetting those on the inside that know the truth! Thanks! John Matthew Emmanuel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.255.232.19 (talk) 04:25, 2 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Information in our Nathalie Emmanuel article comes from published sources. We have no mechanism to "get the facts". We just report on what has been published. Feel free to "go public. If reliable source writes a story about it, we can reference that source in the article. If you can point to an existing published source, then please do that on the article's talk page at Talk:Nathalie Emmanuel and we can change the article. -Arch dude (talk) 04:57, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I have removed your phone number to protect your privacy. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:04, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Tag filter search in user contributions not working
Every time I try to search for contributions on my page or another user's page, I try to use the "Tag filter" feature to narrow down my search within the amount of contributions that I/another user did over time. Every time I try to use this feature, it does not work and always displays the message "No changes were found matching these criteria" regardless of what I put in the Tag filter search bar. If any of you can provide me any help for this matter, please let me know. Thanks. Fdom5997 (talk) 05:26, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , just making sure, are you using the strings listed in the "Tag name" column of Special:Tags (e.g.,,  )? Using the terms that appear in a page's history won't display what you want. — Tenryuu 🐲  ( 💬 • 📝 )  08:12, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Why does the "Did you know section?" on the front page have so many bulletpoints about Serious Sam?
It's had at least three points related to this fairly obscure video game franchise in the last month. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.219.21.131 (talk) 12:39, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It would seem that an editor or editors spent time and effort improving that article and worked to get those points on DYK. It is not uncommon for a spat of DYK entries to be related to the same or a similar subject, as people work in particular topic areas.  It's the nature of a volunteer project. If you want to see greater variety, you are free to work in DYK to do so. 331dot (talk) 12:52, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

video contradicts official source
Hello, do we at WP follow official sources even when there's video evidence showing those official sources are wrong? --Dutchy45 (talk) 12:47, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It would help to know if you are referencing a specific situation, but in general, Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state, not necessarily what primary sources state(which is what I assume you mean by "official"). If different sources have different interpretations of the same event or person, those differing sources are given appropriate weight in the article, as determined by the community. 331dot (talk) 12:50, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * In this case it is a specific situation, but I can easily foresee this happening again. Hopefully you don't mind a link to a short convo I had with a more experienced editor on his talk page where everything is laid out: Item nr. 39 on User talk:SuperJew. I should add that on-line newspapers here report both versions of the fact. In 1 case 2 different journalists from the same! paper wrote different things. I'm surprised you didn't even mention video in your reply. Is there not even a passing thought as to what everybody can see with their own eyes? Dutchy45 (talk) 13:16, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Video of a match is just a primary source(the match itself). If the sources are incorrect with their statistics or reporting, you will need to speak to those sources to get them to issue a correction or retraction. If there are other reliable sources that discuss an error in a penalty call or in statistic keeping, those could be offered, but not video of the game itself.  It is not uncommon in sports for referees to get a call wrong despite video of the game at odds with that call.  The same thing is happening here. 331dot (talk) 13:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Placing a warning about unencyclopedic style
How does one place the notice at the top of a page that warns the reader the page is not written in an encyclopedic style? Kubrickrules (talk) 15:04, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * you can add to the top of it, as it appears when viewing this page. Note that if you enable Twinkle, tagging articles gets much easier. Do you have any particular article in mind? Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:56, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Forgive me because I still don't know all the intricacies. I ran across this page for an English band (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_Head_(English_band) ) It was clearly written by one of the band members as an opinion-based, personal account instead of as a neutral biography. In other instances like this, I have seen very large, bold warnings at the tops of the pages, and was thinking that this page is a candidate for one or more of those warnings. The page absolutely needs a heavy cleaning and re-write. I'm not sure I'm up for a re-write, but at bare minimum, I (or someone else) could at least place the bold warnings for now. Kubrickrules (talk) 17:59, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * there are more of these warnings, fititng all different scenarios. Template index/Cleanup (click the blue text) covers all of them at length. I am not familar with that article and don't currently have enough time to do an at-length examination there, but I do notice that the article already has a few tags (One at the very top and a few others at the start of some sections). Maybe a different responee here can assist you better. (Note: Please indent your posts with one more : than the person before you. See WP:INDENT) Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:46, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * On second glance, I do see a large citation warning already there, but I will look for the other one appropriate for the writing style at the link you provided. Thank you.

Contributions
I am in my mid 70's. I am on limited social security. I have no money to contribute, I barely have money to eat. I appreciate your website very much and will miss being able to continue my knowledge search, but will no longer access your sight because I must contribute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.247.202.110 (talk) 16:10, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello, you do not have to contribute to use the site; donations are purely voluntary. Unfortunately, if you edit from an IP addrees (I.e. without creating an account) the software cannot tell whether you have donated or not (or even if you are the same person who last used that address) and any banners you see asking for financial help will continue to display. Please continue to use Wikipedia for your research and thank you for doing so – it's why we volunteer here. If you feel like editing at any time, please try the WP:TUTORIAL for help in getting started. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 16:28, 2 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Hello! WP is funded by donations, so it never stops asking for money. However, you are very welcome to read or edit it without donating. And while it's prudent for an org like WP to worry about the future, currently it's doing ok. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:29, 2 December 2020 (UTC)


 * The message to take away here is if you do not want to see the banner asking to donate, please create an account. I haven't had to disable the banner in a very long time, but I think it can be done by going to your account's preferences, navigating to the "Gadgets" tab, and checking the "Suppress display of fundraiser banners" item. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  21:53, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Dialogue with the editor on requesting an insertion into a semi-protected page
At 06:51, 27 November 2020 (UTC), I posted a requested insertion for the semi-protected article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Flynn. My request is #30 on the Talk page for the article. Thus, it is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:United_States_v._Flynn#Proposed_illustrations_for_the_existing_paragraph_that_describes_the_DOJ's_misleading_filing_of_McCabe_evidence. I believe that I used the appropriate template for such a request.

At 19:16, 28 November 2020 (UTC), my request was rejected by @Seagull123.

At 23:09, 28 November 2020 (UTC), I addressed Seagull123's objections in a response on the Talk page.

It is now December 2, 2020 at 6:02:24 pm (UTC), so (if I do the arithmetic right) it has been about 3.5 days. Perhaps I am just being impatient, but I also fear that I may have done something wrong such that I will not get Seagull123's attention unless I correct what I did.

I did two things:

(1) I changed the field in the template in a fashion that I thought would bring renewed attention.

(2) I attempted to direct Seagull123's attention to my update by writing @Seagull123 in what I thought was an appropriate manner.

Because I am a novice at both of these techniques, what I am now asking is for you to take a look, and see if you can spot whether I did something wrong, and if so what it was. I am deliberately choosing to not describe exactly what did, thinking it will be best if you were to infer it from the edit history.

(3) I also tried to understand how I might directly message Seagull123 (apart from what I did in (2) above), but was not able to figure out how to do this from the documentation.

Thank you for your help.

GreenEyewash (talk) 18:21, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * You can use to let that user know you replied to their comments.  If they do not respond, they are probably busy working on other things, or perhaps not interested in pursuing this edit request currently.  Note that there is a huge backlog at CAT:ESP.  If the editor that originally questioned your request doesn't handle it, just be patient and another volunteer will eventually get to it.  RudolfRed (talk) 18:50, 2 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi I've replied to you there now. You may want to read Help:Notifications for more on how to notify other editors.  Seagull123  Φ  18:20, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Contested 2020 Elections
Given that massive Election Fraud is being discovered and investigations beginning in many of the 2020 Elections, can you please remove any and all references to Joe Biden as "President-elect"? Under the circumstances that reference is grossly inflammatory, and practically hate speech. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walter.e.steele (talk • contribs) 18:47, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello IP editor Walter.e.steele. Please read WP:VNT, which explains that Wikipedia is based on what reliable, published, independent sources say about a topic, not "The Truth". Your sources may not qualify as reliable sources.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:03, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Not to mention there have been 0 actual findings of fraud that would remotely change the outcome. Praxidicae (talk) 19:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Care to mulligan on the topic area you want to get involved in? Coming into a topic area and spouting debunked conspiracy theories no credible source is taking seriously is a very good way to see yourself facing sanctions. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Takes a strong man to deny... 21:26, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Given that our duly elected President is speaking right this minute about the Election Fraud, those here who want to contest my comment appear to be Fascist thugs. Sanction that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walter.e.steele (talk • contribs) 21:51, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I find it funny when the far-right screams about their ultimate style of government as if it were leftist. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Takes a strong man to deny... 23:49, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

How to make my page accessible
Hello please how do I make my page accessible on google because I just finished up with creating my first page but can't find it's on google when I shearch the name of my site — Preceding unsigned comment added by Burryconnect (talk • contribs) 19:49, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Burryconnect, I see several problems. First, your user page, User:Burryconnect, is not the place for an article. You must immediately move that material to Draft:Burryconnect. Then, please read and take to heart all of WP:Your first article. Sourcing is vital. Finally, you must get a new user name, as it is a company name. See: Username policy.--Quisqualis (talk) 20:08, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

I Contributed An Update To WHYN-FM But Now The Infobox Won't Display Properly/I've Been Unable To Fix It
After adding information for the brand new WHYN-HD2/W247DL ("97.3 The Beat") to the WHYN-FM article, I've noticed that the Infobox now doesn't display properly! I must have made at least a dozen attempts to repair the error but it just continues to not display. Can somebody please repair the error ASAP? I don't know how to fix it. I've already tried at least 10 times but to no avail.DizzyMosquitoRadio99 (talk) 21:35, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed, there were some curly brackets that didn't have matching closing brackets. – Thjarkur (talk) 21:46, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Reference image published by CDC via tableau?
In a Wikipedia article, I would like to embed the graph at https://public.tableau.com/views/COVID_excess_mort_withcauses_12022020/WeeklyExcessDeaths?:embed=y&:jsdebug=y&:toolbar=n&:tabs=n&:display_count=n&:origin=viz_share_link

Such images are public domain with appropriate citations (see https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/citations.htm).

Is there an existing Wikipedia article which embeds an image from CDC tableau which I can use as an example? If not, can you please provide an example of the Wikipedia edit source appropriate to embed the image at the URL above along with the appropriate citation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by OneSkyWalker (talk • contribs) 22:10, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * the first link says "© 2020 Tableau Software, LLC, a Salesforce Company. All Rights Reserved". I don't see anything on the CDC page that contradicts that.  Can you explain how the two are related?  RudolfRed (talk) 22:29, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * And the direct answer to your question,, separate from the copyright issue, is that it is not possible to embed anything from an external source in a Wikipedia article. All images must first be uploaded either to Wikimedia Commons or to Wikipedia. But getting the copyright right is the first step always. --ColinFine (talk) 22:47, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * That CDC link says its content is "public domain, unless otherwise stated", but the content in question has an "otherwise stated" copyright that means it is not compatible with Wikipedia's licencing. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:47, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Your best move is to find the data at cdc.gov, and then create an equivalent graph using gnuplot or any program you are happy with. Your graph will be your own work. If you wish to tackle this, I can help after you find the data. This has big advantages, as we can document the method and source, and then update as the CDC adds more data. We will not use any "creative elements" from the tableau.com graph, so we will have no need to reference it at all. -Arch dude (talk) 00:40, 3 December 2020 (UTC)


 * My thanks to everyone for the helpful information you have provided!


 * ,, and  Thanks!  You are correct that the URL I cited has "© 2020 Tableau Software, LLC, a Salesforce Company. All Rights Reserved" so that page is copyrighted.  But the graph is published by the CDC at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm#data-tables with no copyright statement and the graph has an icon to download it with no copyright notice.  In addition to the CDC citations web page cited above, I see the statement at https://www.cdc.gov/Other/policies.html ("Most of the information on the CDC and ATSDR websites is not subject to copyright, is in the public domain, and may be freely used or reproduced without obtaining copyright permission.") which suggests to me that I can download the graph and the upload it to Wikimedia Commons?  Has a CDC graph already been uploaded to Wikimedia Commons the metadata of which I can use as an example if I choose to do that?


 * Thanks! Your suggestion has some merit. I can easily download the data.  However, the "secret sauce" in the graph is the gold line indicating the threshold above which the number of deaths are considered excessive.  I can calculate the standard deviation for each week in the year going back a decade or two and compute two standard deviations above the mean, but that is rather unsophisticated because there will only be 20 data points each week (if I look back 20 years) making a standard deviation calculation questionable and the standard deviation calculation does not consider issues such as population growth, changing demographics, etc.  Of course, the CDC estimate could be equally naive.  I can download the data for the gold line in the graph so I can easily compare any estimate I generate to the estimate generated by the CDC for each data point.  Please let me know your thoughts in light of the additional information I have provided.


 * OneSkyWalker (talk) 20:45, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * if Tableau did not document how they created the threshold line, then their graph is not a reliable source anyway. It's better to construct your own threshold as you outlined, because you will document your methodology on the description page of the graph you upload. This will not violate WP:OR because you are just using mathematical computations. In the few cases where I have created a plot, I have provided the entire gnuplot input as part of the description. -Arch dude (talk) 21:09, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Phooey. I spent about an hour rummaging and can't find weekly mortality statistics from the NCHS prior to 2014.  I modified my spreadsheet to compute standard deviations for each week in years 2014 through 2019.  That is only six data points per week, so standard deviations are suspect.  Still, it looks a lot like what I see from the CDC itself. OneSkyWalker (talk) 08:48, 5 December 2020 (UTC)