Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2021 February 17

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.

February 17

New user landing page

FYI

 – Heading created by Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 01:18, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:New_user_landing_page&page=Gutter+Sirens << https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutter_Sirens — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omeleq (talk • contribs) 00:21, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@Omeleq: I'm not sure what you're asking here. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 01:18, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@Omeleq: The Gutter Sirens page you linked to is on a different language Wikipedia. It has not been created or translated to the English Wikipedia. It would need more sources to satisfy WP:NBAND to be an article here. RudolfRed (talk) 02:09, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

How to move a page from draft

Hey! I’m unsure how to move a draft page ex: Draft: Article Name to where people can just search Wikipedia for it. (Also how do I remove draft from in front of the title?).

(I have at least 10 edits and an account more than 4 days old...)

Thank you in advance! I really appreciate the help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fyrce Crawl (talk • contribs) 00:24, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Fyrce Crawl Even though you are technically able to move the draft into the main encyclopedia, I strongly advise you against doing so. Unless you are greatly experienced in article creation, you should get some other eyes on your draft before it is formally part of the encyclopedia by submitting it for a review(I've added the appropriate information so you can do so at the proper time). It is not yet ready, and would likely be nominated for deletion quickly if you moved it yourself. The sources are not sufficient. IMDB is not considered a reliable source as it is user-editable. The subject's website is also not an appropriate source as primary sources do not establish notability, in this case, that the person is a notable person. To do that, you must have multiple independent reliable sources with significant coverage (not just brief mentions). Please read Your First Article for more information, and possibly use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia. Writing a new article is the hardest thing to do on Wikipedia, at least successfully. 331dot (talk) 00:35, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Fyrce Crawl, I just read Draft:Nathan Haston and I agree 100% with 331dot. Your draft is nowhere near ready for the encyclopedia. If the unreferenced content was removed, there would be very little left. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:40, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Excessively aggressive editors

Can someone help me with:

1. Sonoma County Historic Landmarks and Districts: An editor has removed entries 179 to 192. He refuses to fix and restore the entries. The County of Sonoma (the legal entity) has retained these entries.
2. List of cemeteries in Sonoma County, California: In moving this from List of cemeteries in California (which may have been a good idea), 45 (about 1/3) of the cemeteries were deleted. The editor identified that he had moved the table, but he did not disclose that he had emaciated this.
3. There was an article on Historical Landmarks in Healdsburg, California. These were established by the City of Healdsburg. Yet, super-aggressive editors deleted the article. It might be better named something like Healdsburg Designated Historic Structures, but that can be done without eliminating all the information!

We are trying to make Wikipedia useful for historians and these eliminate that usefulness. Any help will be appreciated! -- Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by MikeVdP (talk • contribs) 02:04, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Mike. It would be great if you could post your question without lots of >, which makes it very hard to read. The place to discuss content of an article is at that article's talk page. If you are having trouble getting to consensus with other editors, then follow the guidance at WP:DR to resolve your dispute. RudolfRed (talk) 02:14, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

I have reformatted the message to be easier to read Vahurzpu (talk) 04:35, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

I accidentally sent my sandbox.

I seem to have misunderstood that a new draft page will be created. I thought it probably contained diffs that weren't related to Oka-Weil theorem, but I might have misunderstood.--SilverMatsu (talk) 02:13, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

SilverMatsu it looks like your draft at Draft:Oka-Weil theorem is submitted fine (though I might have some suggestions for improvement if you're interested). Is there an issue you need help with? Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 03:52, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

No problem for now. Thank you for your support.--SilverMatsu (talk) 03:59, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Copy and paste citations

When copying and pasting a list of citations along with the accompanying article the citations end up not having any reference numbers beside them. They also end up in one block of text, rather than with paragraph breaks. Is there any way Wikipedia can change this, please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.79.120.65 (talk) 09:13, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Make sure that you actually copy the source code for the citation. The source code is visible in the edit box, and looks something like this (when you see this while not editing the page): <ref name="nameofcitation">Citation content...</ref>. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:27, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I didn't make myself clear. I'm trying to paste into MS Word or similar for my own personal references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.79.120.65 (talk) 10:06, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia is web-based encyclopedia. We are not interested in making the change you requested, and it would be technically difficult. You can try finding an more appropriate software tool to convert an HTML page into MS word. You may also choose to use the PDF version of the page, which you can produce using the "download as PDF" in the left-hand column on any page on the desktop version. -Arch dude (talk) 16:41, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Legal question: photograph of public demonstration in Berlin showing minors

I have a photograph of the first Fridays for Future school strike in Berlin on 14 December 2018 that I would like to upload to Wikimedia Commons under CC‑BY‑4.0. The school strike was a public demonstration. I presume the event was registered with the Berlin police and that the mainstream press was invited. But the photo contains identifiable images of minors. I do not know their ages but would guess between 12 and 16 years. The individual faces are one of many but still identifiable. The photo in question has been published here, see uppermost photo:

• web.archive.org/web/20190514094201/https://www.wikitribune.com/article/95062/

Can I upload this photo in original form? Any help gratefully received. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 09:17, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Legally your are subject to whatever US laws there are, and there are no restrictions of photographing minors in public. Given that it’s a highly public/documented event, I cannot imagine the practicality of blurring/censoring faces. German media may blur faces, but foreign press wouldn’t. Shushugah (talk) 09:33, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@Shushugah: many thanks, will respond on your talk page. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 11:12, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@RobbieIanMorrison:I did not see the CC-BY-SA copyright license on that image, but perhaps I did not look hard enough. If there is no explicit license then the image is copyrighted and you cannot upload it to Commons. -Arch dude (talk) 17:48, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@RobbieIanMorrison: I just re-read your question. If you took that image yourself, then you own the copyright unless you conveyed the copyright exclusively to another entity (e.g., in an employment contract). In that case, you are free to license it to us. However, since you permitted it to be published elsewhere, you should be very clear in your assertion of ownership on our image description page that you really, really did take the photo and you permitted it to be used at that other site, because otherwise someone may come along later and challenge your ownership. We get a large number of images improperly copied from the Internet by well-meaning folks who assert ownership, thinking that the act of making the copy is "creating" the image. -Arch dude (talk) 18:27, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@Arch dude: I took the photo and hold the copyright so I can license and publish the image as I see fit. Thank for your observation tho, appreciated. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 18:26, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@Arch dude: your second comment is very useful information. I will make sure that I am very explicit on Wikimedia Commons. I am quite well versed in copyright law, mostly in a European context though. Thanks once again, RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 18:33, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@RobbieIanMorrison: OK, so maybe you can legally publish it on Commons without blurring the faces. My question is, "should you?". What harm would there be in protecting the privacy of minors? Does it reduce the value of the image if we can't identify the individuals? The fact that other media may not choose to do so or not does not affect the answer, IMO. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:24, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

@AlanM1: that is the question I have been struggling with. I wrote and published the original story for the now defunct WikiTribune and that image now only exists on a web archive site. But if I upload that same image to Wikimedia Commons with a CC‑BY‑4.0 license, it will have a wider circulation and even wider potential re‑use. On the other hand, the photo is aging and that is a consideration. When I attended the original event, I was struck by how young the school strikers were. I am still contemplating what to do, but I think the choices are no upload or unmodified upload. I appreciate your feedback. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 07:08, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

CSS

Hi, I am new to Wikipedia and I am looking for a dark mode for Wikipedia but I cant find any I made added custom CSS to the Vector skin: body {background-color: rgb(24, 24, 24);} .cnotice {

   position: relative;
   overflow: hidden;
   background: #f8f9fa;
   border: 1px solid #a2a9b1;
   border-radius: 2px;
   margin-bottom: 1em;
   cursor: pointer;
   color: #222;
   font-weight: 500;

} But it only works on the side and bottom of Wikipedia is there anyone know how to fix/add I. And also how do i make it that it turns black text white and the other texts brightener so I can read it easier. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AAE101 (talk • contribs) 13:56, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Blocked Ips and Users

Hi. Once when I contributed with the IP address I was unfairly blocked. Can blocked IPs and users who are banned be prejudiced? Dr Salvus (talk) 14:09, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Dr Salvus Is there a specific situation you are referencing? I don't understand. 331dot (talk) 14:26, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Question

What does depth mean in the Wikipedia? 223.238.192.255 (talk) 14:19, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Please be more specific about what you are referencing. 331dot (talk) 14:25, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

If it's about comparison of Wikipedia language versions then it probably refers to meta:Wikipedia article depth. If it's about discussion of whether an event should have an English Wikipedia article then it may refer to WP:DEPTH. We really need more than one word to answer a question properly. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:28, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Table corrections needed on Jimmy Wakely

Could someone with experience in tables please look at Jimmy Wakely? For some reason, even the "Notes", "References" and "External links" sections appear inside a table. I don't know how to correct the problem. Eddie Blick (talk) 17:03, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

 Fixed, Teblick. It was the usual problem of the table not being closed. I added the closing "|}" (on a line by itself). --ColinFine (talk) 17:15, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, ColinFine. I appreciate your quick response. Eddie Blick (talk) 17:22, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Space after a colon within double square brackets in wiki markup?

In recent edits such as here and here but also others, User:Anna Rushmore has inserted a space after a colon within double square brackets in wiki markup: for example, [[Image: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at Columbia 6 by David Shankbone.jpg]] and [[Category: Theories of aesthetics]]. This seems to me to contradict guidelines and common practice; none of the example markup in H:IUI, WP:EIS, and H:CAT shows a space after a colon within double square brackets. I am inclined to revert these edits by User:Anna Rushmore; would I be justified in reverting? Thanks, Biogeographist (talk) 18:10, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Biogeographist It's a pointless cosmetic edit. I'd advise them to uh, not do that, and if they really had no reason for it then reverting it should be fine (though generally making cosmetic edits is annoying). Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 18:47, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@Elliot321: If "cosmetic" implies improvement, then it doesn't seem to be cosmetic to me to insert a space after a colon in only one of a list of categories. I would call that anti-cosmetic inconsistency! Biogeographist (talk) 18:52, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Biogeographist Cosmetic just means that it doesn't change the way the page looks - only the source code for it. Generally edits that are only cosmetic tend to be frowned upon as they fill up edit histories with meaningless things. That said, you can revert said cosmetic edits especially if they bad. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 18:54, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

I imagine Anna Rushmore did this because it's appropriate in English grammar to do so. However, these are wikitext, not English sentences, and the house style is to not insert a space after the colon, any more than we insert a space after the "." before "jpg", which, unlike the space after the colon (which is quietly ignored by the wiki software), would cause the image to not be displayed. Whether reverted or not, it should be mentioned to the editor, which we've hopefully done (via ping). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:13, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Confusão de identidade fotográfica e atribuição errónea de livros de uma autora para a outra.

Extended content

Exmos. Senhores: Venho através desta solicitar a Vexas que desfaçam um equívoco entre duas escritoras homónimas mas que nada têm a ver uma com a outra. Faço-me entender e passo a explicar: O meu nome literário é Ondina Ferreira. Nome completo: Ondina Maria Duarte Fonseca Rodrigues Ferreira, nascida no mar, a bordo do paquete português Guiné em viagem do Porto Grande da ilha de São Vicente, Cabo Verde, para o porto de Lisboa, Portugal, a 17/08/46. Sou uma Contista cabo-verdiana. Professora de profissão. Actualmente aposentada. Exerci vários cargos no meu país. Membro de Governo e do Parlamento cabo-verdiano. Directora Executiva do IILP -Instituto Internacional da Língua Portuguesa. Publiquei vários artigos de opinião e de ensaio - sobre a Literatura cabo-verdiana e a Língua portuguesa/crioulo nas ilhas de Cabo Verde - em Jornais e periódicos cabo-verdianos. Possuo um "blog" «Coral Vermelho» onde venho registando com alguma regularidade, a minha escrita reflexiva/ ensaística. Possuo Licenciatura em Filologia Românica pela Faculdade de Letras da Universidade Clássica de Lisboa e mestrado em Ciências da Educação, pela Universidade de Massachusetts, em Amherst, EUA. Obras publicadas: «Amor na Ilha e Outras Paragens» com o pseudónimo de Camila Mont-Rond, em 2001, edições Artiletra. «Maria Helena Spencer - Contos, Crónicas e Reportagens» Edição da Biblioteca Nacional de Cabo Verde, 2005. «Elas Contam» 2008, com a chancela das edições da Biblioteca Nacional de Cabo Verde, cidade da Praia. «Baltazar Lopes da Silva e a Música», Biblioteca Nacional de Cabo Verde, Cidade da Praia, 2007. «Contos com Lavas» Edição de Autor. Praia, 2010. «Inquietações em Crónicas Datadas» em parceria com Armindo Ferreira. Edição de Autor. Praia, 2010. Ora bem, vamos ao que me trouxe até aqui: No vosso registo encontrei a minha fotografia como ilustração da biografia da escritora brasileira Ondina da Silveira Ferreira (1909-2000) natural de São Paulo, Brasil. Ela já falecida. Eu por cá ainda ando. Sempre a escrevinhar. A fotografia minha que se encontra nos vossos registos como sendo de Ondina da Silveira Ferreira (1909-2000) poderão V.exas confirmar, reitero, como sendo a minha pessoa, consultando o Jornal «Expresso das Ilhas», edição de 2020 onde tenho colaborado com Artigos de opinião e, normalmente, é a fotografia que ilustra os meus Artigos. E há mais, algumas das obras acima referidas, surgem na biografia da falecida escritora brasileira como sendo dela. Por outro lado, se se dessem ao trabalho de ler, nem que fosse a primeira página haviam de reparar que ambas usamos a Língua portuguesa, é verdade, mas com uma diferença digna de nota: Ondina da Silveira Ferreira (1909-2000) escreve naturalmente na variante brasileira da Língua portuguesa. Eu escrevo na variante de Portugal, ou, hoje dita, variante europeia da Língua portuguesa, que é para o falante cabo-verdiano escritor, ou com literacia, a norma culta da sua escrita. Nela, nessa mesma norma da Língua portuguesa, versaram conhecidos autores cabo-verdianos como Baltazar Lopes da Silva, Jorge Barbosa, Manuel Lopes, António Aurélio Gonçalves, Maria Helena Spencer, Arménio Vieira, entre outros, escritores, poetas e pensadores oriundos das ilhas atlânticas do Arquipélago de Cabo Verde. Grata pela vossa atenção e espero que com os esclarecimentos ora prestados, se desfaça a confusão da(s) Ondina Ferreira. A primeira, brasileira (1909-2000) e a segunda -remetente desta nota - cabo-verdiana. Subscrevo-me atenciosamente:

Ondina Maria Duarte Fonseca Rodrigues Ferreira 41.215.215.241 (talk) 18:19, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Spanish Wikipedia help desk is at [1]. RudolfRed (talk) 18:38, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Portugese help desk is at pt:Ajuda:Tire suas dúvidas. -Arch dude (talk) 18:43, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Where to edit "New section" code

After going to an article's talk page, pressing the "New section" tab, and publishing the changes, I am prompted with a dialog box to enter an edit summary. However, the edit summary text box is darkened and I am unable to modify its contents. The default edit summary is currently /* NEW_SECTION_NAME */ new section. I would like to correct it to /* NEW_SECTION_NAME */ New section. Where can I find the source code for the "New section" tab to make this modification? Somerandomuser (talk) 20:12, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@Somerandomuser: AFAIK the edit summary for creating a new section cannot be changed, unless your editing tool uses the API, which has a seperate param for the edit summary and the section title. Victor Schmidt (talk) 21:22, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

It's MediaWiki:Newsectionsummary and can only be edited by administrators. I don't see a good reason to change it. Thousands of editors are used to it and it's a default for all MediaWiki wikis. Some editors may wonder whether it's really a new section or a fake edit sumamry if they notice a difference. The edit summary examples at Help:Edit summary start with a lowercase letter. That's normal and accepted. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:32, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Okay, thanks for the explanation! I just wanted to make things more consistent. However, I understand that a change like that will affect many users. Somerandomuser (talk) 05:39, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

PIN

Personal identification number — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wargak nhial logote (talk • contribs) 20:20, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Wargak nhial logote Welcome to Wikipedia! Did you have a question about our article on Personal identification number? If so, Talk:Personal identification number is the right place to ask it. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:33, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

GSM

Global system for mobile communication — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wargak nhial logote (talk • contribs) 20:22, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@Wargak nhial logote: Do you have a question about using Wikipedia? If you want to test editing, use the WP:SANDBOX. RudolfRed (talk) 20:29, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Academic bio: internal links for degrees, and when should I repeat links

I'm updating a scientific biography: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Gross.

1. This bio is about an American scientist living in the USA writing a letter to President Bush. When listing the Department of Energy, should it be listed as the United States Department of Energy?

Thank you, Martine Martine. 22:12, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

MartineWhite You might want to take a look at what the Manual of style says about linking, specifically the sections on overlinking and duplicate links. Generally speaking, you should link words and phrases that the average reader would not understand, or would want more information about. You should only link things on their first appearance in the article. (By the way, I converted your numbered list so it's easier to read - I hope you don't mind.) ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 23:13, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Dear ONUnicorn, thanks very much. I appreciate the renumbering. I had read the linking section, but I will make note that I should only link the FIRST mention of a topic. Do you have any suggestions for the grammatical questions about degrees (#1). Thanks again, Martine Martine. 23:24, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

MartineWhite I probably would not link the degrees, certainly not in the text, but in the infobox I don't think it's that big of a deal if you want to link them. I think most people reading about an academic know what a PhD is, and don't need to be distracted trying to read the article on it. Likewise, I would not link Washington DC (#6), because the article on that city covers a broad topic that would not enhance the reader's understanding of David Gross. That's what is meant by overlinking. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 23:31, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

OK, that makes sense ONUnicorn- although Gross is very political. My other scientist is from Rotorua, NZ, would I link that city? It is an unusual city, home to many aborigines (not him) and, like Yellowstone, geological wonders. I did add him to the People from Rotorua category. Thanks again, Martine Martine. 23:40, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Maybe linking Rotorua, NZ would be helpful, maybe not. As the section on overlinking says, "A good question to ask yourself is whether reading the article you're about to link to would help someone understand the article you are linking from." You should generally avoid linking major locations with which most readers are likely to be familiar, however Rotorua doesn't seem as well-known as the examples given in the MOS (Berlin, New York City, etc.). Again, would reading the article on Rotorua help someone understand the article on the scientist from there? ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 23:51, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi ONUnicorn, Terrific! Thanks for being so helpful. I have only one query left, This bio is about an American scientist living in the USA writing a letter to President Bush. When listing the Department of Energy, should it be listed as the United States Department of Energy? Martine. 00:00, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

I would just write Department of Energy, and that one I would link. The link would make it clear that it wasn't some other country's DOE. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 00:04, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks ONUnicorn! You're great to work with! Martine Martine. 00:08, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

your graph for covid 19 is 7 days behind

Hi Wikipedia can U guys PLEASE UPDATE your graph for covid 19 Every other day? because I'm getting bored WAITING for 2 weeks just for u guys to update your graph for covid 19 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.20.39.215 (talk) 23:29, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, you posted something similar to this last week. At that time, someone asked which specific graph is in need of updating, as we have several articles about COVID 19 in various areas of the world, and many of them have graphs. Please be more specific next time. Also, we are all volunteers, and people occasionally get busy with other things, which could explain why a graph has suddenly stopped being updated. Again, if you let us know which graph, it'll be easier to figure out who had been updating it, and if someone else needs to take over. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 23:34, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

feel free to update it yourself or, if you can't, make a requested edit there Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 01:05, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

I'll also mention WP:NOTNEWS. Wikipedia is not meant to be an up-to-the-minute news source – there are plenty of those in the world, including those which our articles rely on for their data. Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, is really meant to take a longer-term, historical summary view of things. I suggest you look at the cited source for whichever article it is if you want current data. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:56, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Using "thanks" while blocked

I thought the software prevented this, but I was just thanked by someone I blocked. Now I see at WP:Thanks that "There is no way to prevent users from thanking you.". Is this a change? Does this really mean that if a troll wants to pester people by thanking them from a blocked account, the only thing that can be done is that each and every target of the harassment has to turn off notifications from that user?? That seems suboptimal, to say the least. Is there really no technical way to prevent a blocked user from pinging as many people that they want to annoy as possible? --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:46, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

You could suggest changing this at WP:VPI. Not sure if it is something en Wiki can implement itself or if it requires change to MediaWiki software. RudolfRed (talk) 01:04, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed:: Just to follow up and fix my error for posterity, so I'm not helping propagate fake news in the help desk archive: A blocked user can't thank others for edits made on pages they're blocked from editing. After blocking, someone thanked me for an edit to their talk page because they could still edit that page; removal of talk page access fixed that. So there's no bug to fix, just my confusion. I'll try to find a good place to document this at WP:THANK. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:01, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

I assume meta:Global locks prevent all thanking. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:50, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

May a COI editor delete "duplicate & over-links"?

Hello This page has many duplicate links. May I delete those secondary links myself? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Gross Thanks, Martine Martine. 00:15, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello MartineWhite. Yes, minor typo fixes, removal of duplicate links and such like are perfectly OK to be removed by an editor with a conflict of interest. It's still a very good idea to leave an edit summary, explaining what you're doing, and declaring any COI. But I see you already have a clear WP:COI statement on your userpage, which is great, thanks. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:25, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Nick Moyes! Much appreciated. Martine Martine. 01:11, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

request edit

16:28, 17 February 2021 Jimfbleak talk contribs deleted page Draft:Taisir Subhi Yamin (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of https://staff.najah.edu/media/user/curriculum-vitae/2020/08/19/Taisir_Subhi_Yamin_EU-CV_2020.pdf) 06:17, 9 February 2021 Graeme Bartlett talk contribs restored page Draft:Taisir Subhi Yamin (24 revisions) (requested by 2600:8807:C243:7200:A4E3:E3F0:3513:74ED) 20:30, 8 February 2021 Liz talk contribs deleted page Draft:Taisir Subhi Yamin (G13: Abandoned draft or AfC submission – If you wish to retrieve it, please see WP:REFUND/G13) Tag: Twinkle I'm writing about the page listed above. I have been trying to publish it for a while now and today I noticed that it was deleted. I don't understand how it has been deleted due to a copyright infringement if the same person who wrote the information in Al Najah university website provided it for this article nor that the university has a problem with it!! This article is about a professor who has given so much to the gifted education field. His name can be found in his colleague's Wikipedia pages such as Joan Freeman (British psychologist). This is discrimination against a great Professor who gave contributed so much. He was the gifted education world council's president for 8 years and created the Epoc system to identify gifted kids in the early stages of their lives so their giftedness get recognize and then teachers implement the right programs so these kids grow to their full potential.

HI there! I removed the {{request edit}} template, because that is intended for an article's talk page, not this page.

It would be challenging for Wikipedians to know that the author of the university website and the author of the draft were the same, and even more challenging to determine that the university gave permission for the same text to appear on Wikipedia. You should be focusing on what independent sources have published about the professor to demonstrate that he meets Wikipedia's standards for inclusion - called "notability" - and paraphrasing/summarizing those sources. It also seems like you might have a conflict of interest to disclose on your user page. GoingBatty (talk) 03:01, 18 February 2021 (UTC)