Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2023 September 25

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.

September 25

Is there still a HelpDesk mailing list?

I stumbled across Wikipedia:Bad_Jokes_and_Other_Deleted_Helpdesk_Emails which says that there is a help desk mailing list at HelpDesk-l (at) Wikimedia.org. I can't find any reference to this at WP:HELP, Help:Contents, or Wikipedia:Questions.

Does this mailing list still exist, and if so, why is it not mentioned anywhere? Did it get replaced by the IRC channel?

RudolfRed (talk) 00:11, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

I haven't heard of it. It's shown at https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/helpdesk-l.lists.wikimedia.org/ but not listed at https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/?page=8 or https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/?sort=name&page=7. https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/ shows no posts. It is or was apparently for the whole Wikimedia. I don't know the official status but it looks dead. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:26, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply and the links. RudolfRed (talk) 15:30, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Directly quoting a taxon description?

I am trying to add information describing Cubaris. I have a formal description for the genus (only referring to the first paragraph), the wording of it is very dense and objective and I cannot see how I would reword it without making it harder to read. It is from a published journal. Is there any way I can quote it verbatim and make it clear that it is quoting the journal? I'm not sure if saying {journal} describes {taxon} as "{xyz}" would be adequate or if that still violates a policy. There's a policy against long quotes but this can't really be cut down. Thanks! PoetaCorvi (talk) 01:01, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

@PoetaCorvi: our policy derives directly from copyright law. But copyright only applies to "creative elements". When there is effectively only one way to describe something, then the description is not "creative" in the copyright sense and you do not violate copyright law by copying it. You do need to cite the journal to avoid plagiarism and to adhere to our attribution policy. Taking all of this together, in my opinion you should directly quote the journal in this case. -Arch dude (talk) 02:03, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Alright, thank you! PoetaCorvi (talk) 04:46, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

BLP: name of birthplace has changed

I’m looking at a bio of a living person, and the article lead line says the subject was born in Northern Rhodesia, but the infobox says born in Zambia. Same place, but the name changed with independence. It should be consistent. Is there MOS guidance on this point? Thanks. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:13, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

If you believe there is an error, you can voice your doubt in the article's talk page, or propose an edit. It is difficult to say anything more without looking at the article itself. Podstawko (talk) 06:32, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, but not an error. Just a question whether to use the name at the time of birth, or the current name.

@Mr Serjeant Buzfuz The closest guidance I know is Template:Infobox person: "Use the name of the birthplace at the time of birth". I think it's reasonable to state in the article text born "in X, Northern Rhodesia, present day Zambia" or some version of that. See Nikola Tesla for a well-debated example. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:31, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

thanks, thus looks like the closest guidance. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 08:29, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

User:Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, applicable guidance is at MOS:PLACE. Folly Mox (talk) 07:32, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

thanks, will check this as well. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 08:29, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

What is exclusively

What is exclusively 202.80.218.115 (talk) 06:18, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

If you're looking for word definitions, try the Wiktionary. Also, no need to ask the same question in both Help and Teahouse. Podstawko (talk) 06:28, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

delay in sound perception

hi - (i was told to contact this site by wikipedia support) in psychoacoustics, i could not find how long it takes for a sound to reach consciousness. (i thought it takes milliseconds for vision...) thank you 220.245.65.85 (talk) 11:13, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

IP editor, Wikipedia has an article on psychoacoustics, which does not seem to answer the question. You can ask questions which are not related to Wikipedia at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science (other subjects are available). TSventon (talk) 11:24, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

See also Speed of sound. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:50, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Subscriptions

I donate every month, but I still get begging messages from Jimmy Wales. How can I stop these? Cannizaro394 (talk) 11:19, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

@Cannizaro394 Since you have an account, you can switch them off at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-centralnotice-banners. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:30, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

That seemed to work! Many thanks for the reply. Although, I suspect a lot of other donors would like a simpler way to be recognised as donors. Cannizaro394 (talk) 15:19, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Donors have no advantage as Wikipedia editors, so there is no merit in linking their editing account to their donations, even if this were possible. A lot of would-be donors would also benefit from knowing that the Wikimedia Foundation has annual revenue in excess of US $155 million, current assets of about US $240 million, and an endowment of over US $100 million. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:48, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

the app

why did you make it to where you can edit this and make changes because the stuff can be ronge. 75.103.171.145 (talk) 13:13, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Because Wikipedia is the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. The "anyone can edit" part of that is a core part of the product/experience/community identity. Yes, changes can be wrong, and the community depends on thousands of volunteers to monitor and fact check changes. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 13:19, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

The English Wikipedia has 6.7 million articles. It is by far the largest encyclopedia in the world. Nobody paid anyone to write these articles, and nobody exerts overall control of them. Instead, all the millions of writers are responsible for monitoring and correcting each other's errors. If a professionally-written and edited article would on average cost $500, then these articles would have cost more than $3 Billion. If you do not trust Wikipedia, you are free to use a different encyclopedia, but multiple studies have shown that Wikipedia is at least as reliable as other major encyclopedias. -Arch dude (talk) 15:42, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Gray haired userbox

I tried several searches, but does anyone know if there is a userbox for adding to your page when you work with an editor who wasn't yet born when you started editing wikipedia? Naraht (talk) 15:51, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't even want to know if that's a thing. I was born before the interwebzy was invented.

Is there a user box for frumpy, gray-haired old lady who doesn't understand the fascination with Tube personalities? Knitsey (talk) 15:55, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

There are generation userboxes and age group ones.

{{User GenerationX}}  {{User quadragenarian}}

Podstawko (talk) 16:26, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

@Naraht and Knitsey: You can try this advanced search, which models how to search for user box templates with specific words in them, even if they are in user sandboxes or otherwise hidden away and not mentioned in the Userbox gallery. Just substitute in whatever word or words you are looking for. (Note: the asterisk is a wildcard which matches any suffix.) I already tried 'gray-haired' and 'frumpy' searches, and no luck there! Good luck, Mathglot (talk) 20:55, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Boomer? BOOMER? I'm not that old. That's a useful link though, thank you @Mathglot:, appreciated. Knitsey (talk) 21:01, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Like I said, it models how to search; use your own keywords to customize. Mathglot (talk) 21:03, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

It was funny, I was joking. I'm going to have a rootle, Knitsey (talk) 21:08, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Read that way, it was funny. Emojis are your friend. Mathglot (talk) 21:37, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Why was my article on "Anas Haloui" moved to Draft?

Greetings,

Few minutes ago, I've published an article on the Moroccan boxer, Anas Haloui, which was moved to drafts by Fram, in which the notification stated: "Fram moved page Anas Haloui to Draft:Anas Haloui without leaving a redirect: Needs complete rewrite to remove WP:POV promotional language, and the accompanying paid-for (mainly Indian) "articles" used as references." I have a couple of questions regarding that: (1) Does moving my page to "draft" means that it is still under review? (2) Why was it moved to drafts? Am I doing something wrong? I've drafted many articles before in English and Arabic and I've used the same guidelines for English wikipedia, and added the guidelines that was advised to me on September 5 by the community from Help Desk regarding Sportspeople, but the article was still taken down. (3) Is it possible for another reviewer to have a look over my article? I've visited Fram's and he seems to have moved a lot of other people's articles to draft as well. I look forward to hearing back from you. Thank you for your time and patience.

Best wishes, Yara Elhawary ~~~~ Yara Elhawary (talk) 16:01, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Fram moved it to Draft because in their opinion it is not ready for main space, and needs work to make it so. If you're not clear what needs doing, I suggest you ask Fram. When you think it is you can submit it for review.

Fram's second point is that most of the references are to unreliable sources which are known to publish disguised advertisements as articles: you need to find better sources. (I have not studied your article, so I am not expressing an opinion on it). ColinFine (talk) 16:09, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

And regarding "promotional language": as an example I noticed, the final paragraph Haloui’s rapid rise to national – and international – recognition not only captivated the attention of sports media, but turned him into a source of inspiration for future generations, when translated into non-promotional language is - an empty space. It says nothing at all of encyclopaedic value. No article should ever speak about a subject like that in Wikipedia's voice. --ColinFine (talk) 16:13, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your response! This was very helpful. I'll take the matters to Fram then. ~~~~ Yara Elhawary (talk) 16:26, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

I had a look at the draft, and agree with Fram and Colin: it's full of smarmy, fluffy praise intended to paint the guy as a marvel and a role model for the ages. He's an athlete, not a saint and not a glorious inspirational figure for Moroccan-descended youth of the future. We have no place here for hagiography. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:14, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello Orangemike, thank you for your response. I do agree that the final paragraph had a great deal of praise, however I am unable to find other boasty expressions throughout my article. I've taken inspiration from articles written on other Moroccon boxers, including Yassine El Maachi, Moussa Gholam, Ait Hammi Miloud, Said Ouali, Said Rachidi and Khalid Rahilou, to state a few, and have toned down my writing to neutral. Could you kindly advise on which parts of my article you perceive to be praise? That'll help me to watch out from now onwards. Thank you. ~~~~ Yara Elhawary (talk) 16:33, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

"honed his art" "honed his techniques under the guidance of seasoned coaches... while preserving his Moroccan cultural roots" "two prestigious titles" "he stood out for his boxing techniques and ability to handle the pressure of high-level competitions" "serving his reputation as an international contestant". This is peacock language, plus again an attempt to portray him as a role model for people of Moroccan culture (why should readers of an encyclopedia care?). --Orange Mike | Talk 18:24, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing those articles to our notice. I have tagged them all for their utterly inadequate sourcing, except for Moussa Gholam, which does appear to be well referenced, and has its references cited inline. Do not use any of the others as a model for how to write an article. ColinFine (talk) 17:17, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much Orange Mike and ColinFine for your kind feedback! I will refer to Fram for advice and modify my article accordingly.

You're welcome ColinFine, I'm glad that I was of help in some way. Yara Elhawary (talk) 12:42, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

view my account

dollar amount 66.37.249.230 (talk) 16:23, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

review my account dollars 66.37.249.230 (talk) 16:24, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello. If you are asking about your donations to Wikimedia Commons, then please send an email to [email protected]. Cullen328 (talk) 16:51, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Question on COI by NASMemoirs

What should someone do when their edits are marked as a COI, but they do not believe there is a conflict of interest? I am working for an organization that produces memoirs of scientists. We do not write the memoirs, those are written by other scientists who worked clostley with the deceased indiviudal and volunteer to author a memoir. We would like to add a link to the memoir from deceased's Wiki page, however it was marked as being a COI. Thank you! NASMemoirs (talk) 18:17, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

@NASMemoirs, first of all, your user name might be a problem - it seems to represent your organization rather than you as an individual. I'd recommend either getting it changed (see WP:CHUS) or abandoning this account in favor of one with a more individual user name.

Second, your organization produces the memoirs - it doesn't make much difference that you didn't write them. You certainly have a conflict of interest, and you may even count as a paid editor. Please review WP:COI and WP:PAID closely. 57.140.16.29 (talk) 18:22, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

@NASMemoirs: You work for the publisher and you are adding a link to a work it publishes. This makes you a paid editor by our definition, which also means you have a conflict of interest. A lot of links are added that should not be, so much so that we refer to this as WP:LINKSPAM. But don't despair! Change your user name, declare your paid status, and then make a recommendation on the article's talk page to add the link, providing a justification. Add {{Edit COI}} to your request. A disinterested editor will come along and evaluate whether or not the link adds value to the article and will add it if appropriate. -Arch dude (talk) 18:35, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Why

Who are the first parson in this word Zanokuhle zulu (talk) 18:32, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

@Zanokuhle zulu, do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? 57.140.16.29 (talk) 18:47, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

A question about articles for deletion

Hello, Help Desk! I've been the nominator for an Articles for Deletion recently, and I wanted to know if it's against policy to ask around for people to join the discussion (I know you cannot ask in people who you KNOW are biased towards or against the article so you can stack the vote), as it has been relatively slow. Thanks for the help! Industrial Insect (talk) 18:34, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Industrial Insect, according to the guideline WP:CANVAS "In general, it is perfectly acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, provided that it be done with the intent to improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve consensus". Sincerely, Novo Tape (She/Her)^{My Talk Page} 18:37, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Is there any good place to ask for help (the article in particular is about someone from the tech industry)? Industrial Insect (talk) 18:39, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

nvm just read the link lol. sorry for the hasty reply Industrial Insect (talk) 18:40, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Glad I could help! Sincerely, Novo Tape (She/Her)^{My Talk Page} 19:43, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

I want to create wiki page for my company

I want to create wiki page for my company. Our competitors have one so wondering how to create one. Nanoo.shashwat (talk) 19:22, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

@Nanoo.shashwat Please do not.

If you choose to you must read WP:PAID and declare your interest. You are very unlikely to be able to be unbiased. The article you might choose to create is not under your control, and will cover the poor elements as well as the good.

Further, adverts are not allowed 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:26, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

@Nanoo.shashwat: Hi there! You might also be interested in reading the essay at WP:BOSS. GoingBatty (talk) 04:42, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Help with images to contribute to the Wikipedia requested images of firearms project.

Hello! I'm a paid disclosed contributor for GunBroker.com. Per our User Agreement, we own the copyright to any images uploaded to our site. This means we have a huge library of images available for a project: Category:Wikipedia requested images of firearms. I tried to post an image & release the rights, but it was flagged for copyright violation & I can't seem to figure out how to avoid that in the future & properly release the copyright for our images. I tried to find out via Commons, but have received no reply. Can anyone help or steer me in the right direction? Thanks in advance! LoVeloDogs (talk) 19:24, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Here, use WP:VRT, on Wikimedia Commons, use c:COM:VRT to lodge your right, your licence, to upload 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:27, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

@LoVeloDogs forgot to ping 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:30, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll look into those channels, much appreciated! LoVeloDogs (talk) 20:27, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

@LoVeloDogs Appreciate the donated images. The various firearms articles and projects on here sometimes suffer for want of quality images. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:34, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, and there are so many pages that don't have any! LoVeloDogs (talk) 21:16, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

@LoVeloDogs: There are a couple of things that probably should be mentioned that weren't really mentioned above. First, if you're going to upload images from your site, you should probably upload them to Wikimedia Commons instead of (English) Wikipedia. Wikimedia Commons, Commons for short, is better sutied to host the images you seem to be willing to upload because it's a global project that all the various Wikimedia Foundation projects are able to easily use, whereas images uploaded locally to English Wikipedia can only be used on English Wikipedia. Since it's possible that articles about the same firearm or weapon exists in multiple language Wikipedias, uploading your images to Commons will make it much easier for articles on Spanish Wikipedia, French Wikipedia, German Wikipedia, Chinese Wikipedia, etc. to also use those images. For more information on uploading images to Commons, please see c:COM:L, c:COM:ENFORCE, c:COM:LRV and c:COM:REUSE. Next, it's important to understand that while the Wikimedia Foundation is happy to host your images, there's no guarantee that they will all be used. Local Wikipedias tend to determine which images get added to articles by WP:CONSENUS. High-quality acceptably licensed images shouldn't be a problem for most people, but any disagreements over image use will need to be resolved through discussion just like an agreement over textual content. Thirdly, you should also try to make your images watermark free if possible. Informtation about the source of the image can be added to its description on each image's page, but anything that appears to be an attempt at promoting your website (either by adding content about the website to article or image captions or by watermarks) is going to be frowned upon and most likely cropped out. A clean image of the firearm on a simple plain background is all that's really needed. Finally, it's important to understand that there's no way to image the reuse of your site's images to "Wikipedia use only" or "non-commercial use only". Others will be able to download the images from Commons and pretty much reuse them anyway they please as long as they comply with the terms of the copyright license you decide to use. If your site finds others using its images in ways it doesn't like or in ways that don't comply with their licenses, your site, as the copyright holder, willl need to resolve things; in other words, the Wikimedia Foundation won't intervene on your behalf and you will be expected to enforce the terms of the license. I'm not trying to discourage you from uploading any images, but you should make sure you understand all that entails be for doing so because once you upload something under the types of "free licenses" that the Wikimedia Foundation accepts, it's kind of hard to reverse the process and get them deleted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:57, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Wijipedia's obsession with Jews

Why are subjects who happen to be of Jewish heritage almost always identified as such, even when the fact has zero relevance? It isn't done with any other group. We don't read that X is Roman Catholic unless X's religion is material. Etc. If someone's parents were Christian immigrants from Poland they're referred to as Polish immigrants. If they were of Jewish background they're labeled Jewish immigrants from Poland. What's the thinking? This strikes me as a Hitlerian focus on Jewishness, having to do not with religion but with blood lines. 2600:4040:9AC9:9800:E998:A10B:9065:7EAB (talk) 23:23, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Jewish is both a religion and ethnicity. It's often mentioned as an ethnicity in places where a religion would not have been mentioned. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:40, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Sure, but my point is that other ethnicities are not often mentioned. An American is usually just an American, but an American of Jewish descent is always a Jewish American. 2600:4040:9AC9:9800:E998:A10B:9065:7EAB (talk) 23:52, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

See https://www.commentary.org/articles/edward-kosner/jew-tagging-wikipedia/ and discussion on Wikipedia [1], [2] for additional context. Umimmak (talk) 00:07, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Many people's biographic articles do mention their complicated or non-obvious ethnic, national or religious background, often right in the first sentence, examples including African Americans, Polish and naturalized-French, Welsh-born Poles, Austrian-Americans, Indigenous Canadian-Americans, etc.  Podstawko (talk)  00:24, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

This is a genuine issue on Wikipedia. For various reasons, some Wikipedia contributors consider noting that someone is Jewish (however defined) as being worthy of comment in contexts where general coverage of the individual concerned elsewhere doesn't suggest it is merited. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:28, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Also mentioned in Signpost, in this issue. Mathglot (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for linking to the Kosner piece. Good to know I'm not alone in noticing this and finding it objectionable. I've observed excessive Jew-tagging repeatedly, most recently (today) in the entry on lawyer Abbe Lowell, where far done qe learn that "He also serves as vice president and general counsel of the Jewish Community Center of Greater Washington in 2020," so why is it tossed in near the top, so flatly: "Lowell was born in 1952. He graduated from Columbia University in 1974, and Columbia Law School in 1977. Lowell is Jewish." 2600:4040:9AC9:9800:E998:A10B:9065:7EAB (talk) 02:12, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

I went ahead and took that sentence out of Lowell's article as it did seem undue there. Please feel free to draw attention to other specific articles that discuss their subject's Jewish faith or ethnicity in ways that appear to be inappropriate. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 14:32, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for this. I would say that any extraneous (which is to say, not pertinent) mention of a subject's religion or ethnicity--Jewish or otherwise--is, well, extraneous. If, like Lowell, the subject is an officer of a Jewish organization, fine; say so. If he isn't, why are we supposed to care what religious house his/her great-grandparents may or may not have attended? And why is the fact given so prominently, as if it's an important, basic part of the subject's identity, whether or not the subject considers it so. Isn't there already enough us-versus-them-think in the world? Still, my original point in all this was not so much that these extra "facts" are being inserted as that in my observation it is almost always a subject's Jewishness that is noted for no clear reason. I can't think of the last time I saw someone needlessly identified in a Wikipedia biographical article as a Presbyterian or a Greek-American two or three generations removed. There probably are some--and I'd object if I saw them--but I'm pretty sure the number of Jews so identified wildly outweighs all others. And I have no idea why. Again, thanks for taking this seriously. 2600:4040:9AC9:9800:E081:3B72:4A5D:BA22 (talk) 19:06, 26 September 2023 (UTC)