Help desk
< July 16	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 18 >

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.

July 17[edit]

Peeter Linnap - how to convert already done Wikipedia work (article) into English ?[edit]

Hello !

Peeter Linnap - how to convert already done work on my bio article from Estonian into English with minimum losses and minimum double work ?

Warmest Regards, Prof.Dr Peeter Linnap Tartu, Estonia Linnapp (talk) 13:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

+ I have it here

https://et.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peeter_Linnap

And I have a ready edited and language revised (native speaker's translation and edit) English version rady to upload, too

Cheers,

Peeter Linnapp (talk) 14:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As well as what Arch dude says, please note that English Wikipedia strongly discourages writing about yourself, anbd that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 15:42, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Linnapp: First, make sure the subject meets the English Wikipedia's notability requirement, see WP:N and (probably) WP:NACADEMIC. If you are not notable, then no article is permitted on the English Wikipedia. Notability is the only absolute requirement for an article. Once you have done this, come back and we can provide further guidance. -Arch dude (talk) 14:06, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, allright with that. Will check it out Linnapp (talk) 07:06, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How do I repeat a reference more than once in an article?[edit]

I would like to know very much. StrongALPHA (talk) 15:04, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @StrongALPHA. That should be done using a named reference, as explained at WP:NAMEDREF. Come back with follow-up questions if you need to. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:10, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Publishing license[edit]

Today I got permission on my gmail from the fkzeljeznicar.ba webpage admin that I can freely upload any image from the webpage on to Wikimedia Commons. I had priorly asked him if the images were free for me to use and reupload. Now, I'm not sure under what license that goes and what kind of source do I put for it. I can't just link my gmail, that's private. Any ideas? Bakir123 (talk) 21:36, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bakir123: Sorry, but that e-mail is insufficient. The copyright holder must release the material under an appropriate license (CC-BY-SA) that allows reuse by anyone, not just use on Commons. The copyright holder may upload to Commons, or the copyright holder may simply place this license on the material on their own web site, but an e-mail to a third party (you) won't work. -Arch dude (talk) 21:53, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Arch dude Is there possibly any other way? I understand the rules but that seems a bit unfair if the copyright holder already gave someone permission. Bakir123 (talk) 22:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bakir123: There's really no way around this because relevant policy requires some way of verifying copyright holder WP:CONSENT. If the copyright holder is unwilling to email Wikimedia VRT, then the only other option would be to publish the image somewhere and release it under an acceptable free license as explained in c:COM:VRT. Even then, VRT verification by email might still be required if there are concerns about the copyright holder's consent. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:18, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly So if I ask the copyright holder if they were willing to send an email to Wikimedia VRT, and Wikimedia approves it, will it be okay for me to then upload the images? I assume that there will be a license available after the copyright holder themselves reach out to the Wikimedia admins? Bakir123 (talk) 23:23, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A copyright holder may license their content any way they want; however, if they want their content to be OK to use on English Wikipedia or any other Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) projects, they need to make sure their choice of licensing meshes with relevant WMF policies. Bascially, this means that the copyright holder releases their content under a license that allows pretty much anyone in the world to reuse their content at anytime for any purpose (including commercial and derivative uses); moreover, once they release their content in such a way, they can't really take their consent back if they subsequently have a change of heart. For reference, the copyright holder isn't relinquishing their copyright ownership or transferring it to someone else in such cases, they're just making a version of their work available to others to use as they please with minimal restrictions and without needing to get separate permission for each re-use.

So, if the website is really the copyright holder of the work (i.e. it's not just simply hosting a work created by another person), and it's willing to give its WP:CONSENT, then all it needs to do is send an email to Wikimedia VRT stating as much. You can ask the copyright holder to do this by following the guidance given in WP:PERMISSION. Another possibility is for the copyright holder to somehow clearly indicate on its website that the work is licensed under an acceptable free license. There are different ways to do this, but some sites like Flickr and YouTube have options related to licensing, and the copyright holder can choose one that is OK for WMF purposes. If the work has been previously published somewhere and the licensing can't be changed to comply with WMF policy, a consent email is going to be needed.

Either you or the copyright holder can upload the file, but only the copyright holder can give their consent. Once you've received confrimation from the copyright holder that they are willing to give their consent, you can upload the file. If they've made the file available under a free license via their website, just provide a url link as part of the source information that shows this to be the case when you upload the file and use the same license the copyright holder has choice for the file's licensing. If they're emailing their consent, add the template {{Permission pending}} to the file's page so others know VRT has been emailed and the license the copyright holder has stated their going to use, The rest will be taken care of by the VRT member who reviews the email. Make sure, regardless of how the consent is given, you provide as much information about the file as possible when uploading it. Finally, if the copyright holder has agreed to give their consent, you should probably upload the file to Wikipedia Commons using c:COM:UPLOAD because Commons is better suited to host such files. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:48, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Creation of articles ?[edit]

Hi everyone,

I have been on Wikipedia (mostly in Serbian) for a few years now. I am the interface administrator (chosen by Serbian Wikipedia) and have created over 800 articles that have been fully approved.

I am curious as to why two, three articles that I have tried creating in English are not being approved.

I have tried getting clear answers but I did not get any explanation as to why my articles get denied.

Can someone, please, explain me how I get over 800 articles on one Wikipedia, I uuse exact same format on the other an,d it gets denied as if I am nebinewe who just started?

Боки ✉ 22:59, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Боки. The most general answer that can be given is WP:OTHERLANGS. Each local Wikipedia has its own policies and guidelines, and its own community of editors. In some cases, there may be lots of overlapping, but in other cases there may be some important differences. So, when creating or editing content on English Wikipedia, you're going expected to comply with relevant English Wikipedia policies and guidelines regardless of how experienced you are on Serbian Wikipedia. Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources seem to be two areas of English Wikipedia that often differ quite a bit from other language Wikipedias. Given that English Wikipedia is the largest of the local projects in terms of number of articles and number of users, its policies tend to be more rigorously applied than perhaps is done on some other local Wikipedias. When drafts are declined on English Wikipedia, the reviewer almost always explains why. If there's something unclear about that reason, you can adk the reviewer for clarification. --　Marchjuly (talk) 23:20, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

... which is exactly what I have done @Marchjuly but I did not get any clear answer for both of my articles (Jelena Zigon and Slobodan Sarenac).

I am well aware, as someone who has lived in Canada for over 23 years, that English Wikipedia does have different policies and more stricter policies but I really would love to see what I have done wrong as in "treat me like a newbie but don't treat me like I'm stupid", you know what I mean ?

If I create an article, would you be able to assist me in case if they do not approve it (for any reason) and tell me in plain simple English why I did not get approved ?

Боки ✉ 23:24, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neither I nor anyone else asnwering questions here at the Help Desk really has any special priviledges when it comes to creating articles. Everyone is expected to follow relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines and it's near impossible to WP:OVERCOME a lack of Wikipedia notability. If, however, you can provide links to the drafts you've mentioned above, then perhaps someone can clarify why they weren't accepted. For reference, there already exists an article about someone named Jelena Žigon. If that's they same person you're trying to create a new article about, then there's no need for you to do so. You can simply work on improving the existing article if you want. I wasn't able to find anything on a Slobodan Šarenac other than a mention in Serbia in the Eurovision Song Contest 2016. There is a notification about a Draft:Slobodan Šarenac on your user talk page dating back to September 2022 that explains why it was declined. The draft was subsequently deleted per WP:G13 by a Wikipedia administrator (declined drafts need to edited at least once every six months to avoid being considered "abandoned"). This is a non-contentious deletion, and you can request that the draft be restored by either (1) asking the deleting administrator directly on their user talk page or (2) posting a request at WP:REFUND. Once the draft is restored, you can seek feedback at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk or you can continue working on it and resubmit it for another Articles for Creation (AFC) review. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:08, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly I see that my colleague from Serbian Wikipedia, @Sadko, has created Jelena Zigon's file. That's not an issue. The issue is the fact that I do not get a response as to what I am doing wrong in order to get at least one article approved. I will see what I can do in the future (depending on time)

Боки ✉ 16:25, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep up with good work Boki. I have no doubt that you'll find your way in en.wp rules and matters, which indeed tend to be complicated and complex. — Sadko (words are wind) 16:28, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you probably already understand this Боки, but all Wikipedians are volunteers; this means your mileage may vary when it comes to getting replies. So, if you post something and don't get a response in a reasonable amount of time, you can try seeking feedback from others. If you find that your questions aren't being answered by an AfC reviewer, you can always ask them at the AfC help desk or a more general help desk like here or at WP:THQ. Finally, Draft:Slobodan Šarenac was declined on September 25, 2022 by a reviewer named Greenman. I can't, however, find any record of you posting at Greenman's user talk page asking for clarification. I did find a post about you made on the user talk page of a Wikipedia administrator named Vanjagenije the previous day (September 24, 2022), but the post isn't in English and I needed to use Google translate. It appears you were asking for Vanjagenjie to review your draft, but the post was eventually archived without a response. That might've been because Vanjagenjie did check your draft, saw it had already been reviewed, and then decided there was nothing more to do. Do you remember where you asked Greenman for clarification about why your draft was declined? Perhaps you posted something and Greenman just didn't notice it? Did you post something at Draft talk:Slobodan Šarenac? That page was deleted when the draft was deleted and I can no longer see it. If that's where you posted, maybe your question was answered and you just didn't notice it or see it in time. As a posted above, you can request that the draft be WP:REFUNDed if you'd like to continue working on it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:48, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Боки So, I had a look at Draft:Slobodan Šarenac and the talk page, and I've gone ahead and restored them so you can see what I'm talking about and continue working on the draft to try to improve it if you like.

You say you don't understand why it wasn't approved. It wasn't approved because as written, the draft didn't show that Šarenac meets the notability requirements.

What are these requirements?

People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

How do you demonstrate that an article subject meets those requirements? By citing sources that meet those requirements.

You cited 3 sources in that draft.

Слободан Шаренац, МВП интервју (21.01.2013), Retrieved January 28, 2016 - This appears to be an interview of Šarenac. As an interview of him, it fails the criteria of being independant of him. It is him telling his story and saying what he wants to say, possibly painting himself in a good light. It is inherently not neutral in its presentation of him. We need to be able to summarize what people who have no incentive to portray him in a particularly good or bad light have said about him. If the main or only source we use is his own words about himself, we cannot write from a neutral point of view.
Аljazeera. "Слободан Шаренац-профил". Retrieved January 28, 2016. - This is very brief, only about 2 sentences. It fails to be significant coverage.
"Šarenac u "Šarenici": Porasli smo na 2 metra!".{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link) - This is another interview with him. It has the same problems as the first source.

Basically, in order to show that he is notable and get the article accepted, you need to find more than one source that talks about him in some length and detail, but was not produced by him or his employers. He can be quoted, but it should not be a straight up interview. Does that help? ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 22:17, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ONUnicorn This is exactly what I was looking for ! True feedback ! Thank you ! Now, my question is since he is sports reporter, most of the stuff about him is him commenting on sports events, which is in the form of interview.

He is one of those people that (somehow) escapes paparazzi pictures and media gossips so you can't find as much news about him (other than his wife being involved in car accident few months ago and few more of his, again, interviews where he talks about certain sports events)

I am not sure how to go about that part.

Can you, please, help me ? I mean, this guy is ex-yu sports legend when it comes to reporting. He definitely deserves his spot on English Wikipedia.

Боки ✉ 23:35, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Боки. As ONUnicorn explained, you need WP:INDEPENDENT sources, which interviews with or by him are not, and you need significant coverage, which is more than his wife's accident. A book with the biographies of the 25 top sports reporters in Serbia with an entire chapter about Šarenac, would be one significant source. A cover article in a sports magazine by an independent journalist that followed him around for a week on the job, writing about his life and his career would be another significant source. A third one like those two, but completely apart from them, would probably establish notability. But from what you have indicated so far, it doesn't sound like he is notable in en-wiki's definition. Can you come up with three, solid sources such as the ones I have indicated?

Sarenac: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Zigon: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Perhaps these links will help. Please note that your sources do not have to be in English, but if there are sources in English that are just as good as the sources in Serbian, then English sources are preferred. Mathglot (talk) 08:23, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathglot and @ONUnicorn - Thanks for your feedback and assistance. I have edited Draft:Slobodan Šarenac with more reliable sources. I am not sure if this is good enough.

@Sadko: As someone from Serbian Wikipedia, can you, possibly, assist and give your opinion on what else I can add to make this article (finally) approved?

Боки ✉ 14:51, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Боки: When it comes to journalists and sport commentators from the Balkans, you should write articles about only the best in their respected fields. I'm not sure if our colleagues from the West are going to share your opinion that Šarenac is notable.

You need to expand the article a bit. Try to add more sources, ideally Euronews Serbia, N1, BBC in Serbian and media outlets like that. If I were you, I would move the text about his private life under Biography (not to mention that better sources are needed, per BPL). Try to fix your link for Treći kanal RTS.

Did he win any awards? That's important.

Cheers. — Sadko (words are wind) 15:06, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sadko Are you recommending I move to another topic possibly since this one is definitely hard one to get approved ? Боки ✉ 15:08, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Give it another go. If they decline it, just WP:LETITGO and find other interesting topics. I have some ideas, if you should need them. — Sadko (words are wind) 15:27, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Psakoudia - needs a tag or something for lack of citations[edit]

I don't know the correct tagging for this but this article needs a tag to show that most of it doesn't have citations Saikyoryu (talk) 23:58, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Saikyoryu, the huge list is at WP:Template index/Cleanup. In this case it sounds like you want {{more citations needed}}. 97.126.97.156 (talk) 01:18, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]