Help desk
< October 19	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 21 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

October 20

Problem with bot

A bot tagged a image here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Seven_Sages_of_Greece.jpg now after the bot resized the image, considers it not free, and states it will be deleted because it is not used in an article. However, the image is still used in article space, and it is unclear why after resize it should be suddenly unfree.... prokaryotes (talk) 00:12, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's not saying the current version will be deleted: only the previous version, as that is not being used in any article. Adam9007 (talk) 00:16, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, just noticed this, a bit confusing. prokaryotes (talk) 00:25, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Prokaryotes, I've reverted the bot. In cases like this, where the text itself is the only copyrightable element (it's just a lot of characters, not some original image), the resolution doesn't matter for copyright purposes; if reduction is necessary, the proper approach is cropping to get rid of some of the text. Nyttend (talk) 05:09, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Maproom and Prokaryotes: Well, all that is all nice and fun, but if the author is Arthur Surridge Hunt as claimed by the file info, he died in 1934 (and 2017 > 1934 + 70, the UK being a 70years post mortem autoris country). Putting aside the original copyright of whoever wrote the fragment in ancient Greek (...) it would mean the file itself is free, cropping or not. This seems to be what the original complaint was about.

My money is that for some reason the image was tagged as non-free (I am not going to bother looking at the page history to know what happened) and then a bot decided that its resolution should be reduced (not that the bot decided on its own to reduce resolution and un-free the image). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:42, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tigraan, the someone was Prokaryotes; here is the original revision of the page, as it was when Prokaryotes uploaded it. Nyttend (talk) 11:47, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I made it a free file. The confusing thing is that the archive.org link gives a 1959 publication date, but of course the original was published while the authors were alive, in 1932. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 12:05, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

However, this is a page from a compilation first published in 1941 and republished (and possibly re-edited) in 1959. Editors have a copyright in the collection as a whole (selection, composition, layout) and in any substantive ("creative") modifications. I think the assumption that there is no post-Hunt copyrightable material here is reasonable, but it is hard to prove. Ideally, we would find a work by Hunt himself that includes this passage. -Arch dude (talk) 15:23, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh. Well, that serves me well for trying to touch a copyright issue. Feel free to revert me, I will leave that to wiser people. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:36, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not competent to do it, but it would be better to find Hunt's original of this, which is somewhere in the 14 volumes of Oxyrhynchus Papyri that he and a co-author published in 1904, and reference it directly. Those are out of copyright and are available on-line. In my opinion there is no value in using an image of a page of a 1959 book (or even of a 1904 book) that contains only typecast English words: a referenced quote is better. However, Hunt's work also contains some plates of the actual Papyri, so you may get lucky and find this particular Papyrus fragment there, and that would certainly be a good image for us. (Fun fact: "papyri" is the plural of "papyrus". the things you learn while editing the help desk). -Arch dude (talk) 16:16, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

James Martineau

If you are interested - there is a HUGE picture of James Martineau half way down on his page. Should it be made smaller? I cannot do this myself - Thanks 139.216.210.155 (talk) 00:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Have done this edit. NZFC^(talk) 02:01, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gnostic Gospels

Why is the talk page of the category showing up in the category at Category:Gnostic Gospels. --RAN (talk) 01:50, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a mess. The category talk page has a bunch of project templates. These templates are intended for use in article talk pages. Unfortunately, they are adding the talk pages including this one to categories. I'm not sure how (or if) this should be corrected. -Arch dude (talk) 03:27, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted both pages. After waiting some minutes, I undeleted the category and then created the talk page anew with the same contents. It's fine at the moment; let's see if "fine" persists. Nyttend (talk) 11:50, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How can I increase the size of Font .I cant read this size of font

How to Increase size of font. I cant read Wikipedia as font writing to small. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Advent59 (talk • contribs) 02:20, 20 October 2017 (UTC) [reply]

The font size is controlled by your browser. Look at your browser's help text, or do a web search : e.g., google for "chrome font size" or "firefox font size" or "ie font size". -Arch dude (talk) 03:18, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Advent59: Some users accidentally change their browser font size, e.g. by holding down Ctrl while scrolling on the mouse. In many browsers, Ctrl++ zooms in, Ctrl+- zooms out, and Ctrl+0 resets. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:12, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About.com as a source

Is about.com a reliable source for a Wikipedia article? This article has it as its only source, and I'm not sure if it counts. Thanks. Antrogh (talk) 03:02, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Questions about specific sources are answered at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. There is a search feature there. about.com appears to be a perennial favourite, and the answer appears to be :"it depends". Perhaps you can look at some of the answers there, and if none of them are congruent with your example, ask your question there. -Arch dude (talk) 05:36, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Antrogh, who are Stan & Debbie Hauter, and who reviewed their work? Remember that this website, which publishes on a ton of sources, cannot be a specialist in all of them, and if they hired lots of specialists (as a professional encyclopedia's editorial board does), they'd be attributed. Lacking any evidence of the first, and having evidence against the second, we have to conclude that it's not a reliable source. Nyttend (talk) 11:53, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Geisslerlieder

Moved from Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard § Geisslerlieder

– Alex Shih ^Talk 05:01, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article Geisslerlieder, basically is about songs. However it is totally skewed without giving any references on most parts. Should this be nominated for AFD? prokaryotes (talk) 01:49, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article has general references - not specific ones - see Wikipedia:Inline citation. You could ask for in-line citations using Template:More footnotes. It would have been better to ask this at WP:Help Desk. Rmhermen (talk) 01:58, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(1) Skewed in what way? (2) AfD's under what policy? It doesn't have, and should have, footnotes, but it does cite two apparently legitimate sources. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:01, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, these are not really questions for AN. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:01, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. So far when i looked at the two cites they were about music in general. prokaryotes (talk) 12:58, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cannot create a Wiki article

I would like to create a much needed Wiki article on dual citizenship in Lithuania. Here is the issue: I cannot in any way get passed "Before you create an article" page (https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:New_user_landing_page&page=Dual+citizenship+in+Lithuania). I've tried seemingly everything. I am familiar with referencing, notability, archiving and so on. While I do not know everything about Wiki, no "rookie course" is necessary as my German account has created 100+ Wiki articles.Istorijos.archyvas (talk) 08:42, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by not being able to get past the page you linked? It's unclear what your specific problem is. Tell us what things you have tried so that we can understand what your problem is. - X201 (talk) 08:47, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also: You haven't got a German account under that account name. You only need one account for all Wikipedia sites now, you can use your German one here.- X201 (talk) 08:50, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would assume the problem Istorijos.archyvas is meeting is that they cannot create an article directly in the mainspace due to WP:ACTRIAL. If so, the simplest is probably to use through the Article wizard. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 09:51, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
... ~~or use the German account as suggested by X201~~. Dbfirs 11:41, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Dbfirs: I do not think you get WP:AUTOCONFIRMED by edits of other wikis. (At least, on fr-wp you don't get access levels based on en-wp edits; it seems unlikely to be different the other way around, and could not find documentation to the contrary.) Maybe a Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Confirmed would be accepted based on sister project edits, but I am not sure it is worth the hassle. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:48, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, sorry. I've withdrawn my suggestion above. I'd assumed that a long-standing editor on the German Wikipedia would automatically have autoconfirmed status on the English, but it seems I'm wrong in my assumption. Apologies. Your solution is therefore most appropriate, or Istorijos.archyvas could just make a few more edits under that user name and wait until the 20th, or make ten edits here using the German account. Dbfirs 11:59, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Istorijos.archyvas: You can create articles in mainspace at the English Wikipedia when your account is four days old and has ten edits. You passed four days an hour ago and have seven edits so just make three more edits anywhere at en.wikipedia.org. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:56, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the instructions for making a notice appear whenever someone attempts to edit a page?

What I want to do is to make it so that whenever someone tries to edit List of Subaru engines they get a big notice saying "Stop! If you are about to add information on the engine codes EZ30R, EZ36R, EJ20T or EJ20TT, STOP NOW! Those engines do not exist. Someone put some false information on the Internet and it has spread to multiple site that are too lazy to check the official Subaru sources."

--Guy Macon (talk) 10:02, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Guy Macon: You are looking for Wikipedia:Editnotice. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:14, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Guy Macon: That sounds to me like overkill. Would it not be better to create a new section ('Apocryphal engines', perhaps?) in the article detailing these facts (with an appropriate citation or two, of course)? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.211.128.226 (talk) 10:22, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely there are no sources for "engine XXX does not exist". But this looks like a good case for a WP:COMMENT. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:33, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alas, the false information gets inserted in random places in the article, so a comment is of little use.

I just tried putting in an edit notice[1][2] but it displayed when I read the page, not when I opened an edit window. Could someone take a look and see what I did wrong? Wikipedia:Editnotice#Other namespaces says "Editnotices for other namespaces and for user subpages can be created and edited only by admins and template editors" so I was expecting an error message about not having the proper permissions. -Guy Macon (talk) 18:32, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It has to be created at Template:Editnotices/Page/List of Subaru engines. Only admins and template editors can edit there. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:38, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Information on how to request one is at WP:Editnotice.Naraht (talk) 20:03, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with Wikilink

It looks like Minchee and the Portuguese article Minchi refer to the very same thing (a kind of meat dish in Macau) and I cannot Wikilink the Portuguese "Minchi" into the English "Minchee". Komitsuki (talk) 11:36, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

They had separate Wikidata items. I have merged them at Wikidata. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:09, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Komitsuki (talk) 12:42, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Added TemplateData for Template:Infobox_synthesizer, but no info is showing up in the visual editor.

I've added TemplateData for {{infobox synthesizer}} on the documentation page of the template, but after 12 hours there's still no template parameter information in the visual editor. Did I do something wrong? — Kakurady (talk) 12:54, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Break for editing"?

Excuse me, but what exactly is meant by that term here? And can one still give a vote on that issue?--Cleph (talk) 13:39, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A section header created so that those who respond don't have to load *all* previous responses into their edit window. And definitely. And I'm not sure that VPP is the place for such a significant vote, but I'm not sure what is the place. I've already voted to Keep the RD.Naraht (talk) 13:47, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! Best regards--Cleph (talk) 13:49, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I will opine here that 'Break for editing' and 'Arbitrary break' and other such headings are the epitome of poorly chosen names. These section headings are included in watch lists and article histories but, in the context of these lists, give no indication of the discussion's subject. I urge anyone who is adding these kinds of section headings to choose a name that reflects the topic of the discussion.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:40, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Album Art Help

I'm a beginner to editing and creating Wikipedia articles, so please go easy on me. When I insert the link to an album art image on the album info template, it doesn't appear. Why is that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justus et peccator (talk • contribs) 17:19, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I presume you are referring to User:Justus et peccator/sandbox, where you are trying to link the infobox template to an external image. The Template:Infobox album gives instructions for the "cover" parameter: Upload a copy of the album cover (under fair use). The image will display in the infobox in its real size, capped by the value of the user's "Thumbnail size" parameter in his or her appearance preferences. I hope this helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:27, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As Eggishorn said, you must upload an image. But uploading an image is a daunting task for a new editor. Please do not get discouraged. We try to make it as easy as possible, but we also take copyright law very seriously, and this forces us to ask a bunch of complicated questions. -Arch dude (talk) 00:03, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bear in mind that non-free fair use images can be used only in article namespace, not in a draft in userspace. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:10, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Elijah Muhammad

The Muhammad Speaks Newspaper was the 1st. paper , not the Final Call.

Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.184.216.45 (talk) 20:08, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which of our 5 million articles does this refer to? RJFJR (talk) 12:12, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure where the disputed claim is made, but likely something related to Nation of Islam. Muhammad Speaks and The Final Call were founded by Malcolm X and Louis Farrakhan respectively, so it's probably something about being the first official publication of Nation of Islam. Mduvekot (talk) 12:53, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hide page HotCat categorisation in my watchlist

I already have page categorisation checked in my watchlist "hide" options. However, I continue to see categorisations made by the HotCat gadget. Is there any way to hide these as well? Thanks.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 20:09, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cpt.a.haddock: "Hide categorization of pages" only affects category pages you are watching. It hides pages being added to or removed from the category. There is no feature to hide categories being added to a page you are watching. For the specific case of HotCat, I guess a user script could be written (not by me) to look for "using HotCat" in the edit summary and hide the edit after the watchlist has loaded. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:33, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: Thank you. I suppose the other thing that could be done is to get the HotCat script to mark its edits as minor (by default).—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 09:52, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it would follow Help:Minor edit. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:56, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]