Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2021 February 18

= February 18 =

Rush Limbaugh page
They have the wrong date listed for the Game Stop situation, mentioned on the Rush Limbaugh wiki. They have it occurring in January 2020 but it should be 2021. I think its either edit #59 or #60. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6000:CA03:611C:F8BB:6AAA:ECB2:C4BC (talk) 04:26, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Looks like it was kindly fixed by .  In the future, you can report an issue about an article on its associated talk page (e.g. Talk:Rush Limbaugh).  Thanks!  GoingBatty (talk) 04:51, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

about the covid 19 pandemic graph
hi guys i'm sorry i wasn't specfic ABOUt the graph (it's the covid-19 pandemic for New york graph :) it's been 7 days :) on the wikipedia site for NY i hope that helps :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.20.39.215 (talk) 06:01, 18 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm guessing this is about Wikipedia:Help_desk#your_graph_for_covid_19_is_7_days_behind. Try the talkpage of the article/s where you find this graph, though it's possible that editors edit it fairly soon after reliable info becomes available. Consider using some governmental (agency) website if you don't want to wait for the Wikipedians. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:40, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Archived.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  18:07, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The graph is apparently Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/United States/New York State medical cases chart which is displayed in COVID-19 pandemic in New York (state). The latest updates were by Stattracker24. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:18, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Need historical information about how Northern Russians immigrated to America.
I need to know how the Northern Russians immigrated to America in October 1919? Did they take a ship from Ust-Luga to Copenhagen, then a ferry to England to catch the ship? Or, did they take a train from Ust-Luga to Bremen(haven), then ferry to Southampton? Or, did they depart from a different northern Russian port/city? Or, did they take a different route? I need this information ASAP so I can finish my report. Thank you in advance for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:4570:3530:AD6C:54EE:B16D:81B3 (talk) 06:05, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * This talk page is for questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia. Meters (talk) 06:08, 18 February 2021 (UTC)


 * You can try Reference desk/Humanities. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:35, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Notability guidelines
Hi,

I have an artist friend, Tom Cramer, who has had a Wikipedia page since at least 2007 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Cramer), but it has been flagged as potentially not meeting Wikipedia's "notability guidelines". I am writing to enquire as to how one might attempt to meet these guidelines. He is understandably concerned about the effects on his business of having his page removed. I understand that he is a fairly well known artist in Portland, OR, and the larger Northwest, which is a not insignificant art scene.

Any feedback to aid me in this issue would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

Kevin Kraft — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.162.56.215 (talk) 08:28, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I would first say- to be frank, and I apologize- that Wikipedia is completely unconcerned with whether the presence or lack of a Wikipedia article affects someone's career or business. We're just here to summarize what independent reliable sources state about subjects considered notable.  In this case, Mr. Cramer must meet the definition of a notable artist as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources.  The edit that added the notability tag had the edit summary "Most sources are promotional, galleries or personal websites. Third party sources are mostly run-of-the-mill announcements, local gallery listings, etc".  I would concur with that assessment.  The sources in an article must go beyond routine announcements and provide in depth, substantial coverage of the subject.
 * Since you are acting on behalf of Mr. Cramer, please review conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 08:36, 18 February 2021 (UTC)


 * There are a couple of presumably independent reviews in the Oregon Live (including this one, not in the current sources), so I would say there is at least a decent chance to pass GNG. At least it is much more plausible than the average artist article that we get. Tigraan Click here to contact me 09:31, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I would add that it is not "his page", but a Wikipedia article about him. 331dot (talk) 08:37, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Kevin Kraft: Thanks for your responses. I understand that the value of the page to Mr. Cramer should have no bearing on it's notability - no apologies necessary. I would also point out that I identified myself as a friend of Mr. Cramer. I will see if he can provide more non-promotional material of substance for the article.

He also expressed that there used to be pictures of his art included on the page. Were these removed as part of the notability issue? Or as needlessly promotional?

Again, thanks for your responses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.162.56.215 (talk) 00:00, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * In regards to the pictures that used to be on the page, they because there was no evidence of a permission or a free license. Wikipedia cannot host copyrighted content (with a few exceptions), and any files uploaded to this project or its sister project Commons must have permission granted by the copyright holder (who in many cases is the photographer, not the subject or their works) before it can be displayed. — Tenryuu 🐲  ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:27, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Kevin Kraft: Thanks again. How do we demonstrate that we have copyright permission to share the photos?

Possibly malicious external link
When checking ref 2 on Ajita Wilson, Firefox warns me of a cryptomining attempt. Is there anywhere to report such possibly malicious external links? (I expect that it was linked in good faith but the website changed later.) I've found the spam blacklist and RS pages but nothing quite seems to cover this case. Thanks, Certes (talk) 12:04, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * . Thanks for reporting it. Since that link is to a blog, it is not appropriate as a citation and could just be deleted. That doesn't leave much evidence of Notability (people) so the whole article needs to be either properly referenced or deleted.--Shantavira|feed me 14:50, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

NNPOV linking?
Would linking only one of a list of competing organizations or companies be viewed as NNPOV? For example, someone goes to city articles and only links Burger King, but does not link McDonalds or Wendy's?Naraht (talk) 13:29, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Are you talking of wikilinking Burger King while leaving plain text McDonalds? I don't see that as a problem unless they remove existing links. There is no obligation to add wikilinks in similar places just because you do it in one place. Some editors use AutoWikiBrowser to quickly add wikilinks to one term in many articles. That is allowed. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:51, 18 February 2021 (UTC)


 * (e/c):Are you referring to links to Wikipedia articles, or external websites? Either way, in an article about a particular city it would usually not be appropriate to include links to individual businesses, especially common franchises, unless they were headquarted there or the main employer in the city. It's true that many city articles do have those links, but they are probably put there for promotion and would be better removed. Please see External links and MOS:OL for Wikipedia's policy.--Shantavira|feed me 13:58, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , : Primehunter...Yes, I'm talking about that sort of wikiliking situation. And for this, I'm using find link not AWB, though I do use AWB for other things. Shantavira: I just pulled that out as an example. I'm not linking to Fast Food places. I'm linking Fraternities and Sororities and with the tool it is easier to track down some F&S than others: Any occurance of Gamma Phi Beta is going to be for that sorority, but Alpha Phi in addition to that sorority might be part of Alpha Phi Alpha, Alpha Phi Delta, Alpha Phi Omega, etc.Naraht (talk) 14:11, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Why the weird letter-indexing in category pages?
I'm a moderately experienced Wikipedia editor. But the alphabetized indexing of the automatically produced page Category:Tennis records and statistics looks strange, and I wonder why it happens.

For example, in the first list on the page, "Tennis rivalries‎" is under R, but "Tennis rankings‎" is under T.

In the second list, some items are alphabetized by their first word, which makes sense; or by their first word after "tennis," which is a little weird but I guess makes some sense; but then there are others: "List of Open Era men's singles tennis players by career match wins" is under A, "List of tennis players by number of wins in one doubles tournament" is under D, "Tennis Pro Tours" is under M, "All-time tennis records – women's singles" is under T (though the equivalent men's category is under R), and "Lists of tennis records and statistics" is at the top under no letter. Et cetera.

Why? Where do these letters come from? Is this a bug?

Thanks.

Sullidav (talk) 14:09, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * This is set in the category (or page) itself. At Category:Tennis rivalries, the category is written as "Category:Tennis records and statistics|Rivalries", whereas Category:Tennis rankings lists just "Category:Tennis records and statistics". Hope that helps. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski  (talk • contribs) 14:12, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , this is because of sortkeys. For instance the article "List of Open Era men's singles tennis players by career match wins" is configured to use the value "atp" to categorise it. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 14:13, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, got it. Many of these sortkeys make no sense. Eg, the ATP in the first one, the M for tennis pro tours, etc. I guess the thing to do would be to edit the sortkeys, or ask why on the talk pages. Sullidav (talk) 14:20, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Some sortkeys are from before a page move and should be updated. List of ATP Tour players by career match wins was moved to List of Open Era men's singles tennis players by career match wins in 2017 but still has the old "atp" sortkey. Some pages get poor sortkeys because an editor copied the category code including a sortkey from another page. If a sortkey looks meaningless or too hard to make sense of then just fix it. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:25, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * "List of ATP Tour players by career match wins" was moved to "List of Open Era men's singles tennis players by career match wins" on 11 September 2017, which explains why it was originally sorted as ATP. TSventon (talk) 14:33, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, all. I edited about 15 sortkeys and default sorts, so the alphabetization on that category page makes somewhat more sense. Sullidav (talk) 15:11, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

My eyes aren't working
I can't see why a map isn't appearing in the infobox at Ken Bridge. I've copied the infobox template from Ballindalloch Railway Bridge, which has a map and all the same parameters filled in (as far as I can see), but I'm not getting the map. Any ideas? Thanks Girth Summit  (blether)  15:01, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * @Girth Summit, Ballindalloch Railway Bridge has a map on its wikidata item, so the table may be using that. You could try creating a wikidata item for Ken Bridge. TSventon (talk) 15:13, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Or see Template:Infobox bridge. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:21, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks guys - I didn't realise that wikidata items could affect how the article is displayed (to be frank, I don't really know what a wikidata item is!). I'll play around with the Map fields in the infobox and see if I can fix it that way. Girth Summit  (blether)  15:25, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * @Girth Summit, Ken Bridge already had a de Wikipedia article and wikidata item so I have linked the en Wikipedia article and it now has a map. TSventon (talk) 15:36, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , ooh - I also changed the turned on the mapframe entry in the infobox at about the same time - I thought that's what turned the map on. I'll play around a bit more and try to work all this out. Thanks for the help. Girth Summit  (blether)  15:39, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * @Girth Summit, I linked the wikidata item at 15.31, shortly before your edit at 15.34 and the previous versions of the infobox now show a map, so the wikidata link does add a map. If you unlink and relink the wikidata item, that could show that your edit also adds a map. TSventon (talk) 15:49, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , I don't understand what's going on. I unlinked the Wikidata item, and the map was still there. I then deactivated the mapframe parameter in the infobox - and the map was still there! It's got a map now anyway, so I'm happy with that - I relinked the item.  Girth Summit  (blether)  15:55, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * @Girth Summit, I previewed overwriting my sandbox with the Ken Bridge article and got a map with mapframe = yes and coordinates = the coord template moved from above the infobox. The persistence of the map when wikidata is delinked may be due to a cached version of the article. TSventon (talk) 17:53, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , ah, yes, I didn't think of it possibly being cached. Oh well - I've learned something today, so thanks for that, and for tidying up the infobox while you were there. Please accept a virtual beverage of your choice from me :) Girth Summit  (blether)  17:57, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Photo montages of cities' articles
Hi, i don't know if i'm right here, but it would be nice if someone could help me - i tried to make look nicer some photo montages of some cities, but there is someone - and (s)he is the only one who keeps doing it all the time - who reverts my changes. The cities affected are mainly Lübeck and Dresden, but also Schwerin, Stralsund, Erfurt, and Leipzig. It would be nice if someone could have a look at my changes and at the changes of the user who reverts my edits all the time, and also at what (s)he wrote on my talk page. One of her/his arguments is, that no photos of buildings' interiors may be included in photo montages of cities. I'd like to know if that is correct, and how many photos are allowed in a city's photo montage. Thank you in advance.TheCarlos1975 (talk) 16:16, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, . I have no opinion on whether your montages are an improvement. But you've been asked to discuss the issue, either on the talk page of the relevant article(s), or on 's talk page. As far as I can tell, you've done neither. Btw, Oliszydlowski identifies as male. Maproom (talk) 17:01, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your answer. Then i would still have some questions: Which changes have to be discussed on talk pages and have to reach consensus there? Is it true that no interiors may be included in photo montages? And how many photos may be included in a photo montage?

Example Lübeck: i made this photo montage:

and the user changed it to just this one photo: I don't understand why i would have to reach consensus for the photo montage because everyone can see that it is an improvement. Thank you again.TheCarlos1975 (talk) 17:31, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * You need to raise this at talk:Lübeck. Mjroots (talk) 17:45, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, is that really true? The user reverted all my changes at all cities' articles, and he is the only one who seems to dislike the photo montages, because they were there since months. This would mean that i would have to discuss every single photo montage on every single talk page, most probably just with the one user, because he is the only one who reverts my edits. Is there any other solution? Thanks.TheCarlos1975 (talk) 18:02, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * if they are reverting your changes, you should ask them why on the article talk page, then try to reach an agreement with them. Simply re-instating them without discussion is edit warring and disallowed. Elliot321 (talk &#124; contribs) 18:33, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * - as this is affecting a number of articles, it might be worth discussing at WikiProject level. Try WT:GER. Mjroots (talk) 18:36, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you and  for your hints and tips.TheCarlos1975 (talk) 18:43, 18 February 2021 (UTC)


 * . In reply to your repeated question, any edit that might be controversial, or that somebody has already disagreed with, should be discussed on the talk page: see WP:BRD. Vandalism aside, every single edit that is made to Wikipedia is an improvement in the eyes of the editor who makes it. In many cases almost everybody would agree; in others, opinion can be sharply divided. Your statement "because everyone can see that it is an improvement" is plainly false, because Oliszydlowski clearly does not see that (I am not taking sides on whether or not it is an improvement, it's the "everyone can see" bit I'm saying is false). --ColinFine (talk) 22:06, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes i see your point that every edit, no matter what kind of, is an improvement in its editor's eyes. Thanks for the answer.TheCarlos1975 (talk) 17:14, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Orca
How come wikipedia that is supposed to be a reputable media or information page still uses the term killer whale and not what it is, an Orca?

Could you guys please correct it to the correct term? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:BCA2:CA00:BC46:CA34:4A7E:C684 (talk) 16:51, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Please see the discussion at Talk:Killer whale, and feel free to participate to help improve the encyclopedia! GoingBatty (talk) 17:00, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia uses the WP:COMMONNAME for things, so killer whale is used over orca; both terms are used in the first sentence, and an etymology into orca is present in one of the first section. If you feel that pointing out that orcas are not true whales, you're going to want to go to the talk page and start a discussion there. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:03, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia uses the name for things used by most of the English-language sources, whether or not that is the official or technical name. The first sentence of Killer whale says 'Although the term "orca" is increasingly used, English-speaking scientists most often use the traditional name "killer whale"'. As long as that remains true, "Killer whale" is the appropriate name for the article. Orca exists as a redirect to it. If you believe that that statement is no longer true, please start a discussion - or rather, join the existing discussion - at Talk:Killer whale. --ColinFine (talk) 17:08, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Change name of wiki page
I need to change name of wiki page (Middle Name None) to match name of the article submitted. Article is MimiMacFarland. Can you help me with this? How long is the process? I have seen that over 3400 articles are in line to review. It's not a concern. Thanks. Garland Jenkins. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MiddleNameNone (talk • contribs) 20:01, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * If you are referring to your user page, it has been deleted. Your user page is a place to tell about yourself as a Wikipedia user, it is not for drafting articles. You may do that at articles for creation, but it's a good idea to learn more about Wikipedia first, as successfully writing a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. Please read Your first article and use the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 20:13, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Editing and Referenceing
Hello There!

My name is Treven Hooker. I recently made an edit to the page about the Santa Rita Mountains, revising incorrect information. I added the correct info and provided my sources. It was reverted moments later by another user, who said the revision was not constructive, and to practice using Sandbox. I would like some help understanding how I can add this correct information to the page in the most appropriate way.

Thanks, t — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonorandesertlearner (talk • contribs) 21:20, 18 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi Sonorandesertlearner, welcome to Wikipedia. Your edits may have been reverted because it was not clear what you were trying to do. It takes a while to become familiar with how to contribute, so I have left a message with a link to a tutorial on your talk page. The editor who reverted your edits, Spudlace, has suggested that you discuss the change you want on the article talk page, Talk:Santa Rita Mountains, so that is probably the best thing to do next. Please sign your posts on talk pages with four tildes like this ~ . TSventon (talk) 22:38, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

About Brookes Shawnigan Lake
Hi:

Brookes Shawnigan Lake sold their properties 2371 Shawnigan Lake to St.John's Academy Shawnigan lake, they move to a new location and the new name is "Brookes Westshore", could you update the name "Brookes Shawnigan Lake" to "St.John's Academy Shawnigan Lake".

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guohaifengcanada (talk • contribs) 22:26, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , this is better discussed on the article's talk page. If there's a reliable source that'd be even better. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:43, 18 February 2021 (UTC)