Help desk
< May 17	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 19 >

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.

May 18

Positioning a template

Can we set the position of templates (especially small "box" templates like userboxes), like we do with images by using "right" or "left", for example? - Alumnum (talk)

Hello Alumnum, you could see Wikipedia:Userboxes for understanding this. Search for the terms float or align. Come back if something is not clear. Thanks. Lourdes 03:18, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can we reference magazines and books without violating Wikipedia guidelines as long as we reference and paraphrase?

I recently uploaded an image without going through the due process of verifying that I have permission to use it. I removed it from the page I was editing with the intention of adding it back only after securing permission. However Wikipedia notified me that "All or some of your addition(s)" has had to be removed. Are the text portions at risk of deletion even though they are paraphrased and referenced? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lisalbf (talk • contribs) 03:11, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your title is a tautology. Following Wikipedia's policies and guidelines means referencing and paraphrasing books and magazines.

This isn't about the image. Some of the text was removed the article -- text that was not paraphrased but copied from a website. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:20, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lisalbf hello. To add to Ian's reply above and to answer your question: the copyrighted text that was inserted by you without permission has already been removed by Diannaa. Please carefully read the message that Diannaa has left on your talk page, including especially the blue linked guidelines and policies. Please follow them appropriately and please do not reinsert copyrighted text which goes against our policies and guidelines, however well referenced the text may be. Please write back for any further assistance. Lourdes 03:23, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Intro needs further paraphrasing. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:26, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What if a company wishes that information reflected on their websites is copied almost ad verbatim?

The company of the page I'm editing wants the wording to remain unchanged for the sake of consistency. Is the Declaration of consent for all enquiries the only way to go about ensuring that is the case? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lisalbf (talk • contribs) 03:45, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Their wish does not override our policies on copyright, neutrality, and not advertising. Even if they donate the prose to us, we're still free to change it to suit our policies. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @Lisalbf: In terms of copyright either a declaration of consent or a notice on the page in question that the material was licensed under a free license would be acceptable. However, Wikipedia is not here to advertise or promote a company. To be frank, we do not care one bit what a company wants to say about itself. They are non-neutral, bias, and have a specific point of view that in incompatible with Wikipedia's goals. Copying such material onto Wikipedia, even if under a proper copyright license, would be very very unwise. Not only that, but all material on Wikipedia should be sourced to third-party, independent sources. Not to the topic. That is how it works here. We aren't another outlet for a company to promote themselves. --Majora (talk) 04:14, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request explanation

Hope this is the right place to make a bug report. When I try to edit Antikythera mechanism and click "Submit an edit request" I get taken to a page which says "Follow the instructions below to submit an edit request" including "Write your request below the <!-- State UNAMBIGUOUSLY your suggested changes... line and above the <!-- Write your request ABOVE this line ... line."

But those lines don't appear like that, there's some "subst:void subst:^" markup instead. --81.131.105.151 (talk) 08:12, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have corrected the explanation to match the current behaviour.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 09:57, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How we can use wikipedia without using code?

There is not find editing samples where i can use plain text ! Of course as wikipedia so big somewhere is more ediitng readings.11:08, 18 May 2017 (UTC)1man2you (talk)

In order to use plain text without code on Wikipedia, you use nowiki tags (<nowiki>...</nowiki>). However, those tags should not be used on articles. —MRD2014 📞 contribs 14:24, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You might be asking about the Wikipedia:VisualEditor, which allows you to edit using plain text. However, that can only be used on articles, not talk pages or other types of pages (like this one). ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 14:31, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Correct use of Jr./Sr. in article titles.

I recently created an article Samuel Wright Sr. (the 'Sr.' was necessary because there was already an article for his son Sam Wright.) As far as I can tell I followed WP protocol correctly. However, when I add categories to the article, it is being listed under 'S' for 'Senior', rather than W for Wright. Please help. tnx--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:34, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It was being sorted into S because of Samuel using simple alphabetical order. I added {{DEFAULTSORT:Wright Samuel Sr}} so it will be placed in the W section of categories

RJFJR (talk) 14:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@RJFJR, thanks!!. Didn't realize it wasn't related to the Sr. title.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:52, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How do we add picture to the infobox? And how to find that jpg thing?

Should I copy the images or something?

Wikibeluser, yes it can be confusing. Take a look at these pages which provides a bit of guidance. WP:PIC and WP:IMAGES Gtstricky^{Talk or C} 15:27, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Henrys Silva

Can You move the article Henrys Silva to the regular main Article from the draft article. 2600:8803:7A00:976A:39F2:723D:1FE9:7624 (talk) 15:58, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey anon. At this point, the answer is probably no, not really. The draft doesn't currently include any sources to back up the information in it. Information on Wikipedia needs to be sourced so that it is verifiable by readers, and this is especially important for articles which are biographies of living persons. TimothyJosephWood 16:05, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If the draft can be improved to the point of being appropriate for moving, may want to think about including a Template:Other people5 template, as there's also Henry Silva. DonIago (talk) 17:02, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

stopping speedy deletion of image

Hi, My question is how to delete a notice that is in the form of a template. The deadline is today. The template's instructions say to delete the message if the issue is addressed, to prevent speedy deletion of an image. I do not see how to do that. Here is the story: The article Herb Kawainui Kāne used to include an important image, now slated for speedy deletion, as it no longer is used in an article. I can fix that eventually but not by today's deadline. Although I am experienced, I am very rusty. So functionally a novice again, hence posting here, with apologies if that is inappropriate. There is a good chance deletion will mean a loss of the image to future researchers, as it is rare, and has other social value beyond this article. I have posted a slightly more robust defense on the image file page but this is all I can do for now. I need a hand. Could someone experienced help by deleting the notice or otherwise putting a hold on the speedy deletion? Give me a chance to figure out how to rescue this situation. Why the rush anyway? Alawa (talk) 18:52, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The help page is for anyone, not just newbies, but it's helpful if you provide links. I'll let someone more familiar with image policy reply, but I think the image you're referring to is File:Ancient Punaluu, Hawaiʻi Island by Herb Kane.jpg. Don't panic—deleted files can be restored if there's a policy-compliant reason to do so. Rivertorch^FIRE _WATER 20:01, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like what happened is that the fair use rationale provided on the image page did not include a link to the page where the image was used. So a bot came along and removed the image from the page thinking there was no fair use rationale provided for the image to be used on that page. Then another bot came along and tagged the image for deletion because fair use images that are not used in any articles must be deleted or they are violating copyright. I wikilinked the name of the article in the fair use rationale, restored the image to the article, and took away the deletion tag. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:16, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! For a brief time my faith in Wikipedia was shaken, but you have restored it. Alawa (talk) 16:52, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

cant i put my own password?

can‘ti put my own password — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.160.12.30 (talk) 19:43, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you refer to but you choose your password when you create an account. Later you can change it at Special:Preferences. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:12, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External website using wikipedia content to sell goods and services

I came across the website, Maria Online http://www.maria-online.com/finance/article.php?lg=en&q=Consumer_behaviour and note that it has copied the entire article Consumer behaviour word for word and then added clickable links to book titles and journal titles (in the references and further reading section) inviting visitors to purchase these items through the website. I have noticed that many websites copy wikipedia content, with and without permission, but using wikipedia content to promote sales is appalling. Is there anything that can be done about this? BronHiggs (talk) 21:58, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BronHiggs: The creative commons license that everyone agrees to put their work under when they hit "save changes" expressly allows for the use of any text in any manner provided it is sourced back to Wikipedia in some fashion per WP:REUSE. The specific site you linked to sources the material so they are perfectly within their legal right to do whatever they want. If the content is ripped without sourcing and you are a major contributor to the article you can send them one of the various notices at WP:Takedown asking them to source the content. Technically, you need to be a major contributor of the article's text to make any legitimate takedown claim of material that violates the creative commons license. Otherwise, you can always notify the editor that is. --Majora (talk) 22:09, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BronHiggs. Like so many, this site fails at compliance in that they miss the license posting requirement, but at least, unlike most, they hyperlink our article – which is sufficient for suitable credit under CC BY-SA 3.0. There are so many more that don't make any effort to comply, and really, as failures of compliance goes, not providing credit is the part that rankles. You can send them an email about this one aspect (I have sent many, and, very occasionally, it's effective) but I wouldn't bother here given the credit actually provided, and as Majora tell you, only a major contributor can escalate to a DMCA take down notice – though you could add a report at Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks#How to list new mirrors. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:37, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh you're right Fuhghettaboutit. They did forget about the license posting requirement. My mistake. I'm assuming they probably thought that linking to the WP:General disclaimer that has the license was acceptable. --Majora (talk) 00:45, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Original theories on talk pages

Greetings. Is there an existing talk page message box for reminding users to provide reliable sources for factual claims on talk pages, rather than proposing their own novel theories? I'm thinking of talk pages that tend to attract speculation about the origin of words and phrases, such as Talk:The full monty (phrase) and Talk:The whole nine yards. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 22:39, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's {{AEIS}} (or to a limited extent {{uw-chat1}}, {{uw-chat2}} etc), but I'd be very wary of using them. A lot of posts like this look worthless because the editor in question isn't familiar with Wikipedia's jargon; what looks like "please include my original research!" actually means "I believe this is true but have been unable to find sources for it, do you think it ought to be included if sources can be found?". ‑ Iridescent 22:44, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I meant a message box to be placed at the top of a talk page as a pre-emptive warning – similar to {{Notaforum}}, just relating to the issue of original research. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 15:36, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]