Help desk
< August 29	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 31 >

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.

August 30[edit]

When could someone get a long term abuse page?[edit]

In the past few days, a bunch of sock puppets have been spamming information about South Dakota Pizza on the Sioux Falls article. (By my count, four). The sockpuppet investigations page lists a lot more. I'm just wondering, when can a sock group get their own long term abuse page? I don't think this disruption is enough for a long term abuse page, but I'm just asking. Weeklyd3 (talk) 00:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PhantomTech is probably best suited to explain this. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:39, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

TLDR: There is disagreement about when someone should get an LTA case page but in my opinion, several months of abuse after an indefinite block where the abuse would not be obvious if seen by most editors, but could be made significantly more obvious with knowledge included in the LTA page.

Thanks for the ping. There is disagreement about when exactly someone qualifies for an LTA case page, but the following information from WP:LTA is relevant:

This page summarises a limited number of long term abusers, to assist members of the community who believe they may have cause to report another incident.
Only add vandals that have a need to be pointed out, especially ones whose contributions could be confused for good-faith edits by somebody unfamiliar with their modus operandi.
Blatant vandals whose sockpuppet accounts would be blocked swiftly as vandalism-only even if they weren't evading a previous block usually do not need to be listed here.

All cases should meet the following basic criteria, which is presented at various parts of the process to create a new case:

The user is banned, indefinitely blocked, or is an IP user that would be indefinitely blocked if they used an account
Abuse from the user continues despite the ban or block being in place
The level of abuse is unusually high compared to other banned or blocked users
There is evidence to support that the criteria is met

Additionally, there are two ambiguous qualifiers:

The abuse has been ongoing for a long period.
In my opinion, this is a balance between keeping information from dying out due to people familiar with the user leaving affected areas and denying recognition. An exact time period is hard to give but a few weeks, probably even months, is likely too short of a time while multiple years would definitely be long enough.
An LTA case is beneficial to preventing the abuse or significantly reduces the resources needed to respond the abuse.
This is also due to WP:DENY, and the point at which the benefit outweighs WP:DENY is not fully agreed on. If anyone can identify the abuse by looking at it, with no previous knowledge of the user, then there should not be an LTA case, there are multiple places within WP:LTA where a message similar to this is given though not everyone agrees with this and not everyone follows this. At it's most basic, an LTA page will link to SPI cases, and give an earliest know activity date. If there is nothing added that cannot easily be found from the SPI cases and that helps identify future abuse, then I'd say a case definitely doesn't meet this criteria.

As a final note, not having an LTA case doesn't mean someone can't be called an "LTA". People are often called long-term abusers even if they don't meet the last requirement I listed for an LTA case, though it could be argued that they should not be per WP:DENY. Hopefully that helps, but let me know if you have other questions or if you'd like me to clarify anything. I haven't looked at the specific SPI you linked, but I can if you'd like information specific to it. PhantomTech[talk] 01:57, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the detailed answer, @PhantomTech! Weeklyd3 (talk) 03:03, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've added it to my watchlist. I'll check everything that comes in for the next six months and report those who are dodgy. scope_creep^Talk 17:35, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question from 50.39.208.57[edit]

My name is Gregg Eugene Harris. The page for me is very much out of date. I am now living in Silverton, Oregon. I operate Silver Falls Terrariums www.silverfallsterrariums.com and I am the Inn Keeper for The Noble Inn www.nobleinn.org. How can I get my page updated? 50.39.208.57 (talk) 00:32, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You need to visit Talk:Gregg Harris and make an edit request by typing {{request edit}}, then listing the changes you would like to see made in a "Change X to Y" format, and citing some reliable sources for each change. Then, wait. Edit requests are handled by volunteers and they can take quite some time. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 01:16, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may also enjoy using the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard to make your request. GoingBatty (talk) 02:46, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

profane subject line[edit]

when searching Boris Johnson, a profane defamatory sub topic came up 2601:803:7F:2510:31AA:7A43:E1E:E565 (talk) 01:05, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you are talking about the song [you might not want to reveal this title]. Sorry, but we don't censor Wikipedia. However, this title can be perceived as defamatory. I really don't know how the search results are ranked, and we can't manually pull a page off search suggestions.. Sorry. Weeklyd3 (talk) 01:08, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, it's even a GA. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:17, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why "Wow"? It's a GA because people such as ISD have put effort in to making it so. Bazza (talk) 08:58, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Wow, I hear you. I await equally defamatory songs about Liz Truss. MinorProphet (talk) 14:09, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No need. Already been done - X201 (talk) 14:25, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Weeklyd3: this title can be perceived as defamatory In matters of speech, Wikipedia only cares about US law. For instance, certain current events are described as an invasion of Ukraine by Russia, which is not allowed by Russian law, and the WMF has been fined in Russia for this. Even if our article about Boris Johnson stated in wikivoice that he was an [expletive], that would not be actionable in the US (only statements of provable facts are). Reproducing what other people have said, with enough context for readers to discern that it is someone else’s opinion rather than Wikipedia’s, is even less actionable.

Of course, many persons "perceive" certain things as objectionable for various reasons, but we don’t listen to them. Maybe Google does, but that is a question for them. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 16:01, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@X201: Reminds me of the follow-up Alistair MacLean novel, or maybe the film version... MinorProphet (talk) 17:16, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is this Article Approved?[edit]

Is this Article Approved? Draft:Aniket Dey 103.51.148.84 (talk) 07:47, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We don't need the whole url. The draft has not been submitted for a review, I will add the appropriate information to allow you to. 331dot (talk) 07:56, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@103.51.148.84: Nothing I see there demonstrates notability. He was nominated for a position, wrote a book and was arrested. A nomination isn't really news. See WP:TOOSOON Avoid repetitive sources without a writer's name. That usually indicates a lazy cut and paste of a press release. For the book to be notable, you need an in dependent review in a reliable source. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:17, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image lost in translation[edit]

Hello! I am trying to translate this page from English to French (here's my final version), but I noticed the first image didn't make it through, while the second did. Did I mess up somewhere, and if so, where? (apologies if this type of question has been answered before, I couldn't find anything in the FAQ) ~~~ Inkins (talk) 12:07, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The image File:Rubbletrench.png is uploaded locally to the English language Wikipedia, that image isn't on the French Language Wikipedia (at least not with the same name). The file appears to be a candidate for copying over to Commons, from where the French WP could easily link it. I've never transferred an image before, I'll find out what is involved. - X201 (talk) 13:08, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Inkins It just need to be transferred to Commons to be used on the French article. Copyright looks OK to me, so you can do this at the file's location here by following the instructions. (Maybe X201's going to do it) Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You could also post a request for a translated image at fr:Wikipédia:Atelier graphique/Images à améliorer, or do it yourself if you have suitable software. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:20, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've transferred the image to Commons and got it to appear on your FR version. It will need to be translated at some point. It may be worth pinging @Kickstart70: who created the original image to see if they could help. - X201 (talk) 13:27, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re-submitting draft page for publication[edit]

Hi there,

I submitted a draft page (WagerWire) on Aug. 5, which was declined that same day. I edited it and re-submitted on Aug. 10. The box at the top of my "Read" tab, it still says declined. I want to make sure it is being reviewed again as I believe I addressed all of the editors points. Can you please help confirm that page is in the review cue?

Thank you!

Bailey Baileyirelan (talk) 15:07, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Baileyirelan, you did not resubmit it. You need to click the "resubmit" button to do that. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:15, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you submit, I will need to reject as a clear fail of WP:NCORP. Wikipedia is not an advertising platform. scope_creep^Talk 15:21, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Baileyirelan Details about funding rounds are not necessary, and don't add encyclopedic value to the article (and these details don't add to the company's notability). You should remove that section. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 09:20, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Basic citation type[edit]

Hi Folks!!, I'm looking for a basic citation for Ref 22 on Harro Schulze-Boysen. It has a couple of pieces of info, location, date, publisher. Its a report. I thought there was basic citation template for this, that stated as "Citation" but I can't find it anywhere. Thanks. scope_creep^Talk 15:26, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I found cite report, and it is a report, which is quite close. I supposed I can use that. scope_creep^Talk 15:31, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

{{cite book}}:

{{cite book |last=Schulze-Boysen |first=Harro |date=1994 |orig-date=1932 |title=Gegner von heute – Kampfgenossen von morgen |publisher=Fölbach Verlag |location=Koblenz |edition=4th |isbn=3-923532-24-5}}

Schulze-Boysen, Harro (1994) [1932]. Gegner von heute – Kampfgenossen von morgen (4th ed.). Koblenz: Fölbach Verlag. ISBN 3-923532-24-5.

which more or less mimics the style chosen by the editor who added the citation. {{cite report}} has a different style:

{{cite report |last=Schulze-Boysen |first=Harro |date=1994 |orig-date=1932 |title=Gegner von heute – Kampfgenossen von morgen |publisher=Fölbach Verlag |location=Koblenz |edition=4th |isbn=3-923532-24-5}}

Schulze-Boysen, Harro (1994) [1932]. Gegner von heute – Kampfgenossen von morgen (Report) (4th ed.). Koblenz: Fölbach Verlag. ISBN 3-923532-24-5.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:38, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

re tag "Tag: Disambiguation links added"[edit]

Other than waiting for a notice on my talkpage, is there a tool I can use to find why "notice Tag: Disambiguation links added" showed up when I did &action=history to review a series of edits. Nuts240 (talk) 22:40, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Nuts240: Please always post a relevant link or example. I guess you refer to [1]. I have enabled "Display links to disambiguation pages in orange" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. It displays checks in orange. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:22, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]