Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2023 May 1

__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ = May 1 =

How can you change a template title?
How can you change a template title? Bjoh249 (talk) 22:13, 30 April 2023 (UTC)


 * @Bjoh249: You could move it, just like moving an article to change the title. Which template did you want to rename? GoingBatty (talk) 02:25, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Regarding an apparent ambiguity in the way a Category name is worded at "Category:American journalists by ethnic or national origin"
This question is about the Category:American journalists by ethnic or national origin. That Category may need an explanatory header to define what it is for, specifically who it is for?

At the root of the apparent problem is the ambiguity represented in this question, What is this category for, for people born in the U.S. (or, of course, born abroad but to American parents) who are not of anglo-saxons origin but who practice journalism in the US ("America"), OR is it for people born anywhere in the world to parents other than American anglo parents but who practice journalism in the US ("America")?

That is, how is "American" (in "American journalists" in the title), being used there, it is intended to define the nationality of the journalist listed or the job they are performing? Specifically, is "American" being used to group people who are American citizens or is it being used to group people practicing journalism in America (i.e., in the US)?

For example, José Díaz-Balart is on the list, so it can be assumed he is on the list because he is of Latino descent (i.e., ethnicity) but born in the US, which would make him an American by birth (thus, he is an "American journalist" based on being born in America), but Jorge Ramos is also on this list so it can (confusingly) be assumed he is in the list because although he is a Latino not born in the US, his practicing journalism in America makes him an "American journalist".

Mercy11 (talk) 03:43, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Jorge Ramos is a citizen of the United States,, so I have no idea why you are talking about him that way. Who cares where he was born? What's confusing about an immigrant becoming a U.S. citizen? Cullen328 (talk) 08:21, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Because, as says, the category might be seen as ambiguous with regard to its scope.  Wikipedia deals in facts.  Places of birth, citizenship at birth, naturalization--these are some of the facts that Wikipedia might deal with.  It's not "talking about [anybody] that way."  It seems to me, you've grasped the wrong end of his or her question, and then your own wording in your comment seems to suggest some sort of bias or chauvinism in the question.  I'm suddenly reminded of that poor woman in England recently, who asked someone a reasonable and perfectly harmless question, and simply worded it in a clumsy way; now she's fired, and must forever be regarded as a racist--with no evidence that she really is, but in the "walking on eggs" climate of our times, we must put her out to pasture for the sake of promoting "woke." Uporządnicki (talk) 09:30, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * , I've taken the liberty of editing--JUST FORMATTING--your original post to accomplish the link I think you were trying to make. I hope I haven't committed a breach of etiquette.  I'm guessing that you were trying to insert a Wikilink to the category in question, and found that you'd categorized the whole page instead--so you did a nowiki.  To put in a link to a category, what you do is, after the initial pair of square brackets, you put a colon just before the word "Category."  Uporządnicki (talk) 09:38, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

NP -- I always forget about the colon (2 dots), and your formatting edit did exactly what I was trying to accomplish with that link! thx! And, yes, your interpretation of my question is accurate. Mercy11 (talk) 13:50, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Here is another example of the problem as I see it, but this time using categories (not just individuals as I did above with José Díaz-Balart and Jorge Ramos). This presents the problem further. This time I will use an ethnic group, Puerto Ricans. Here I will contrast the category in question, that is, Category:American journalists with a similar category Category:American educators, and "drill up" to those two categories using this ethnic group (Puerto Ricans) as the common ethnic group in both cases:

Category:Puerto Rican educators >>> Category:Educators from insular areas of the United States >>> Category:American educators.
 * COMPARE WITH

Category:Puerto Rican journalists >>> Category:Journalists of insular areas of the United States >>> Category:American journalists

In both of these examples, it is clear that the two Puerto Rican groups (Puerto Rican educators and Puerto Rican journalists) refers to people born in Puerto Rico (rationale: if this wasn't the case, then they wouldn't be located under "insular areas of the United States", right?) Though, granted, there is, perhaps, the remote possibility it could include educator or journalists not born there, but just practicing education or journalism there. However, at a minimum, by categorizing under "insular areas" first, we have removed the possibility that it would include Puerto Rican practicing education or journalism in a location other than PR.

However, following a similar rationale for the Category:American journalists by ethnic or national origin pathway, the meaning of "American" in "American journalists" appears to be lost or, at best, to be defined on the basis of citizenship, as follows:

Category:Puerto Rican journalists >>> Category:Hispanic and Latino American journalists >>> Category:American journalists by ethnic or national origin‎ >>> Category:American journalists.

That is, in this last example, Puerto Rican journalists are, ultimately, being placed under American journalists not because they are practicing journalism in the US (as there are many in the group that never practiced journalism outside PR) but, ambiguously, either on the basis of being US citizens or on the basis of practicing in the US.

If, as in the case of José Díaz-Balart, Category:American journalists is for journalist who are American citizens whose job is journalism, then the category can include US-born journalists who never practice journalism in the US but practice it only in, say, China, because the cat is based on citizenship, not on country of practice.

If, on the other hand, as in the case of Jorge Ramos, Category:American journalists is for people who perform journalism in America regardless of their citizenship, then the category can include non-US born journalists such as those from BBC, Al Jazeera, CBC, etc., because the cat is based on country of practice, not on citizenship. (obviously, I am assuming that journalists from foreign networks work in the US as, at most, residents, not as dual-citizens).

Regardless, my question here isn't why Category:American journalists is grouping on the basis of citizenship or country of practice (or, for that matter, location -- mainland vs insular). My question stems from the fact that, judging by the category name alone, the cat name lends itself to ambiguity and, thus, IMO, there should be a header line somewhere inside the category defining exactly what is the basis for inclusion. Thx! Mercy11 (talk) 21:53, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Digital Downloads
How to create a secure digital downloads ecommerce platform that accepts secure p2p payments?108.216.174.8 (talk) 04:18, 1 May 2023 (UTC)￼


 * That is not a question about how to edit or use Wikipedia. It might be appropriate for Reference desk/Computing; at least they could give some pointers. (Haven't such platforms already been created?  Nevermind; please try the reference desk.) David10244 (talk) 06:08, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Middleton family
Could the file/photo - of John William Middleton in this section of the article  - Family law and woollen manufacturing firms  - please  be made smaller please. I cannot do this, thanks. 115.70.23.77 (talk) 04:27, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * I have reduced the size. If you want a different size now, just change "upright=" to a different number. Here's the relevant help page: Help:Pictures -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 04:54, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Can I add a link to a non-English Wikipedia page?
I am updating Mocca (band) - they are an Indonesian band. I would like to know if it is possible to link to a page on the Indonesian version, regarding films where they appeared on the OST? There aren't English versions of these pages.

https://id.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oh,_My_God! https://id.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senior_(film_2019)

Thank you BJCHK (talk) 12:33, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi BJCHK. The recommended way to do this is to use the interlanguage link template, for example would become  and  would become Senior (film 2019) (ill is just the short form). This has the advantage of letting readers know that the article is from another language version, so they are not surprised, and the red link is intended to encourage people to also create the article on our end if they feel they are able to (and the subject meets our inclusion criteria). For more infromation, you can see the help page at Help:Interlanguage links, and more specifically the H:FOREIGNLINK section. Happy editing! Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:15, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * (of course, for the second link you'd probably want to get rid of the disambiguator in the brackets with  which would show as Senior (film 2019)) Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:22, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Much appreciated! BJCHK (talk) 22:15, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Bertha Benz
The following sentence appears twice: once in the "Honours" paragraph and once in the "In popular culture" paragraph: "In 2011, a television movie about the life of Carl and Bertha Benz was made, titled Carl & Bertha [de], which premiered on 11 May[23] and was aired by Das Erste on 23 May.[24][25] A trailer of the movie[26] and a "making of" special were released on YouTube.[27]". Which one can I remove? Page: Bertha Benz. JackkBrown (talk) 12:57, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * I would remove the one in Honours. It doesn't really make sense there and it definitely belongs in the other section. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 13:20, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Quasicristals
In the article on Quasicristals I found this perplexing sentence: It was demonstrated that these units can be both organic and organic. 2600:1009:B045:C2B9:0:50:5548:DC01 (talk) 13:44, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing out the error. I have fixed it now. In the future you can fix it yourself. Sungodtemple (talk &#8226; contribs) 14:00, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

It says there is an article already named this.
I am trying to publish a page for my cousin who is an accomplished country artist named "Eli Mosley". This is his given birth name. When I try to move the article from draft to (Article), it says there is already an article by this name. When I search Wikipedia for "Eli Mosley", it only comes up with as article named "Elliot Kline". When reading the Elliot Kline article, it says "Elliot Kline (born 1991), also known as Eli Mosley". Is this what is kicking the Eli Mosley title back to me? How do I remedy this? Awoodfin (talk) 15:23, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * What we can do is delete the redirect and that should allow you to move the draft article to the main article space. Then, you would need to add a Hatnote to your article, indicating that some people may be looking for the other person.  I think that may work well.  If you want to pursue that route, I am an admin and have the technical ability to help you with that; however be aware that once moved to the article space, the draft could be nominated for deletion if someone thinks it is not appropriate, usually this is because the subject of the article doesn't pass Wikipedia's notability standards.  -- Jayron 32 15:31, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * (ec) As you have a conflict of interest, you should run the draft through Articles for Creation so experienced editors can look at it and offer suggestions before the draft is placed in the encyclopedia. The review process can also handle the placement of the article at the proper title(currently occupied by a redirect as you have found). 331dot (talk) 15:34, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the info! I may go that route depending on what the admin says. Awoodfin (talk) 15:52, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * As this is my first article, I would feel more comfortable if you believe this is the best course of action and I could definitely use the help. Do you think I should go through the Articles for Creation because of a conflict of interest as 331dot replied just after you? I have 43 or 44 citations in the article so I thought this might get past the conflict of interest. Awoodfin (talk) 15:51, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello, Awoodfin. The first thing I would say is that I would advise any new editor, COI or not, to use the AFC mechanism for their first few articles. The problem is that, until you have amassed some experience, you won't understand what Wikipedia requires of an article. This means that it is likely that the first few times you submit, your draft will be declined, but you will get feedback on what needs to be improved. If you move it to mainspace yourself, then it is likely to get moved back to Draft anyway, or deleted if the new page patroller thinks it's unsalvageable.
 * Looking at your Draft:Eli Mosley, your 43 or 44 citations are far fewer than that because some are repeated (see WP:NAMEDREF). More seriously, many of them are obviously not reliable (eg Facebook, blogs), not independent (eg the Ervin interview) or do not contain significant coverage of Mosley. Almost all information in an article needs to come from sources which meet all three of those criteria (see golden rule) so most references that do not meet the criteria should be removed, together with any information derived only from them.
 * As a separate issue (though easily fixed) Wikipedia articles don't refer to their subjects by firstname. ColinFine (talk) 16:34, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Based on the comments of others who looked at your draft closer, Awoodfin, I would recommend that you go the AFC route to get some more feedback before we move it to the mainspace. There seems to be some concerns about the amount of reliable source material the subject may have written about them.  If the AFC process sends it to the mainspace, someone can take care of the technical aspects of fixing the multiple pages with the same name issue.  -- Jayron 32 17:22, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Policy question
Is there a policy or guideline concerning the practice of reverting talk page edits? I'm sure there is, but I can't find one. Cessaune  [ talk ]   15:55, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Could you be more specific about your situation? I gather you aren't talking about vandalism. 331dot (talk) 15:57, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * More specifically, is there a policy or guideline concerning silent reversion of talk page edits, especially ones concerning political articles such as January 6 United States Capitol attack? When you go to the talk page history, a lot of bad faith rants such as this one are reverted (this is the nicest bad faith rant I could find) but a few good faith stuff such as this are also reverted. I was wondering if there was a policy that deals with the latter situation. Cessaune   [ talk ]   16:10, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Most angry rants are removed as WP:NOTAFORUM or just for the anger. I think the "good" comment was removed because it does not seem obviously pertinent(and the editor cited not a forum). If you feel that this policy was improperly applied, please first bring it up with that editor(though the comment was over a month ago, may be best to let it go). 331dot (talk) 16:21, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Material unsuitable for talk pages may be subject to removal per the talk page guidelines. (bold mine) Also Comments that are plainly irrelevant are subject to archiving or removal. (bold mine) It is common to simply delete gibberish, test edits, harmful or prohibited material (as described above), and comments or discussion clearly about the article's subject itself (as opposed to comments and discussion about the treatment of the subject in the article). (bold mine).  I hope that helps.  -- Jayron 32 17:19, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Restore my page
Good Morning, Could you please restore my page that got deleted? I need to work on it and it was deleted with the name/topic: "Karl Hargesetam". Samnicolebauer (talk) 16:11, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I can find no deleted draft or article titled "Karl Hargesetam". Your account has no edits other than the above, did you create it without an account? 331dot (talk) 16:16, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Was it on this version of Wikipedia? We can only help you with the English Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 16:17, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * There used to be articles about Karl Hargestam and Karl Härgestam. They have been deleted repeatedly over the years. —  Wasell ( T ) 🌻🇺🇦 17:06, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * The page was deleted back in March by . Perhaps they could comment more on the matter.  -- Jayron 32 17:37, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Provided that the reference is to Karl Hargestam, then the answer to that,, is that the article was deleted since it was promotional. Promotional material is not permitted on Wikipedia. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:38, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * If the article is changed so it would not be promotional, how would I restore the information or the Wikipedia page so it could fit the guidelines? Samnicolebauer (talk) 18:43, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Do you have a connection to Karl Hargestam? Any article about him must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about him, showing how he meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Do you have at least three independent sources with significant coverage of him, that are not interviews, press releases, or basic announcements of his activities?
 * Writing a new article is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia, and it is usually recommended to first spend time editing existing articles, to learn more about how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. 331dot (talk) 18:48, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Samnicolebauer, nobody changes the previous article (which Seraphimblade very rightly deleted) to make it not promotional. Somebody wanting to create a worthwhile draft about this person would instead start with reliable sources about him (if these even exist) and create something from these (and only from these). But also please answer 331dot's question above about your connection to Hargestam. (And are you perhaps also known as ?) -- Hoary (talk) 10:55, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
 * There are notable sources about the figure. I do not understand how it is considered promotional if the entire idea is to explain the reasoning of why the figure is notable. I do believe the person's story is notable and there is something that be offered to learn as this person has done a lot of good for their community and the world. In any case, is there a way the page can be restored so it can be written the way a Wikipedia is deemed to be written, even if it is to be written by another third party. 50.91.114.72 (talk) 17:18, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * This person is actually very popular in the sector of nonprofit work. Here's a link to one of the interviews he has given. However, he speaks speaks worldwide on humanitarian issues. You say that someone could start with articles about him, how would one go about this? https://kingministries.com/podcast-episodes/karl-hargestam-one-chance-for-every-person/ TTarlene2013 (talk) 04:09, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Caste organizations are spreading false information
You are helping a large community of caste people who are using their platform to spread false information to people to degrade the dominant caste from the 10th century to the 20th century. And, as they attempted to highlight and change the clause in the article, they refused to empower it to do anything else. velayudhapataiyachi.s 17:20, 1 May 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samathanaprabu (talk • contribs)
 * I am unsure which article you are having a problem with, but I can assure you, I have done nothing of the sort. You should probably assume good faith, and take this up at the talk page of the article in question, noting your concerns along with some actionable changes you'd like to see made.  -- Jayron 32 17:24, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

, Wikipedia is not about "empowering" (or disempowering) anybody. It is about summarizing what reliable sources say about a topic. That is all. As Jayron says, if you have a problem with a particular article, discuss it on the talk page of that article. --ColinFine (talk) 18:16, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * "vanniya" is low cast in tamilnadu at india, velayudhapataiyachi.s 23:18, 1 May 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samathanaprabu (talk • contribs)
 * If you have an issue with the article Vanniyar, you may discuss how to improve the article at Talk:Vanniyar. I see you have created Draft:VANNIYAR, which will not be published as an article because Vanniyar already exists.    GoingBatty (talk) 02:49, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Copy of license in Albania
Copy of license in Albania ArtaTopalli (talk) 17:30, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry, is there a question we can help answer for you about using Wikipedia? -- Jayron 32 17:32, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Alathurpadi Dars
Reference help requested.

What's the error? is it still existing?

Thanks, 103.179.196.104 (talk) 18:45, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * You defined named reference ":0" twice. Sungodtemple (talk &#8226; contribs) 18:49, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

how can I ask a question
how can I get information from Wikipedia? Maxinky (talk) 19:21, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * If you mean how can you locate a particular article about a topic, you may use the search bar at the top left of the screen. For example, if you type in "Joe Biden" it will take you to the article about Joe Biden. 331dot (talk) 19:23, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * To add a thought, WP's search box is generally limited to finding articles based on their specific titles. It cannot be used to search for specific information within articles (except where "redirects" apply). Better to use Google or a similar search engine. Often, the Wikipedia article containing the information you requested will be among the initial search results. So if you search on "when was Joe Biden elected to the Senate", the first search result will be the paragraph within Biden's Wikipedia article that contains your answer. And to try to limit the answers to content in Wikipedia, enclose your Google question in quotation marks, followed by the word Wikipedia outside the quotation marks. Allreet (talk) 16:57, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Image modification
Hi, I won't be long. If an image of a person or group of people has a drop shadow on it (as in, baked into the image) is it safe to remove it and modify it without the drop shadow if it is licensed under CC-BY-SA 1.0-3.0? I feel like I should be asking this question on Commons but I don't know how to navigate that site. — theki   (hit me up)  21:32, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * @Theki: Hi there! The Commons Help desk operates the same way this one does - see c:Commons:Help desk.  Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:39, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Going to go ahead and mark as resolved while I ask my question there. Cheers. — theki   (hit me up)  03:41, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Is dangerous content allowed?
In other words: Does Wikipedia remove infohazards such as information on how to build a bomb?

I couldn't find any content policy about this. C. Scheler (talk) 22:17, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi . Wikipedia articles aren't really intended to be a guidebook on how to do something regardless of whether its considered dangerous; so, any article that simply lists the steps needed to create anything or do anything is probably going to be seen as a violation of WP:NOT. However, an encyclopedic article which can be reliably sourced on "homemade" stuff might be acceptable depending on whether it's considered to be Wikipedia:Notable. Moreover, any type of DIY content which is completely unrelated to Wikipedia that someone adds to their user page is also likely going to be seen as a violation of WP:UPNO. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:02, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @C. Scheler In addition,  Wikipedia is not censored.  That's probably the closest you'll get to a policy on "infohazards". David10244 (talk) 11:54, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Adding photos with the permission of owner
Hello. I have been updating Mocca (band) and was hoping to add a couple of images to the article, specifically the cover of their 2012 documentary Life Keeps on Turning (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2127326/). As the image would appear in the Film and TV section, rather than the infobox, I was wondering if it is possible to add the image as fair use? (I've only been writing about deceased people so far, so this is new territory for me...) In case it helps, I have been in touch with the band's manager and know I could get permission. Thank you in advance BJCHK (talk) 22:56, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello, . Non-free film covers can only be used in an article about the film. On the other hand, if the copyright holder is willing to freely license the image in an acceptable fashion, then the image can be used anywhere for any purpose. Have the copyright holder follow the instructions at Donating copyrighted materials. Cullen328 (talk) 23:11, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi A couple of things about WP:CONSENT: (1) only a copyright holder can give their consent and (2) consent can't be limited to Wikipedia (i.e. educational or non-commercial) use only. The band and its representatives can only give consent to works that are 100% the intellectual property of the band. If there are other copyright holders involved, then you will need to get their consent as well. So, if the filmmaker who created the documentary about the band has retained some copyright ownership over it, you will need to get the filmmaker's consent as well.As for fair use, "non-free content use" is sort of Wikipedia's way of incorporating copyrighted content into its articles; Wikipedia's non-free content policy, however, has been set up to be intentionally more restrictive than fair use and it's this policy that matters. When it comes to things like copyrighted album covers, film posters, publicity photos, etc., Wikipedia could almost certainly use them under a claim of fair use, but further requires that each use satisfy its non-free content use policy. For non-free film posters, for example, using it in the main infobox or at the top of a stand-alone article about the film the poster represents is most likely not going to be a problem; using it on other articles or other ways, on the other hand, is trickier and typically requires a very strong justification for non-free use. So, simply adding the documentary's cover art to a sub-section in an article about the band is probably not going to be allowed unless there's quite a bit of sourced critical commentary about the cover art itself (not the documentary, but the cover art itself) found in that particular sub-section to justify the reader needing to see it. If there's no significant loss in reader understanding of what's written in that section caused by omitting the cover art, then it's non-free use is most likely going to be considered decorative and won't be allowed.Since copyrighted content that has been released by its copyright holder under an acceptable free license is not subject to Wikipedia's non-free content use policy, it's much easier to use and is always preferred to non-free content. Copyright holder consent is not necessary to use something as non-free content, but there are lots of restrictions that need to be met for such content to be considered OK to use.  -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:25, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you @Marchjuly much appreciated - that really helped me get a handle on matters. BJCHK (talk) 09:40, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I didn't mention this before, but I'm going to now. There's nothing wrong about contacting the band's manager to try and get their consent for images. Just take care that whatever contact you make doesn't run afoul of WP:COI or WP:PAID. You may have the best intentions in making contact, but the band and its representatives might not fully understand things like COI, PAID and WP:OWN; in order words, they might mistakenly think that you are now their way to exert some editorial control over what's written about the band on Wikipedia. If the manager starts to try and move you in that direction, you should try and explain to them how Wikipedia works, and that they themselves would be better off requesting changes on the article's talk page instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:15, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks @Marchjuly - it's all good on that point. They were just happy to have a page that was correct and in an acceptable state (plus they pointed out autocorrect had named one of the band members Dodo, instead of Dodi, which was a Good Spot) BJCHK (talk) 05:22, 3 May 2023 (UTC)