Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2023 February 2

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 2

Can I edit my university article

Based on Wikipedia rules, am I free to edit the article which belongs to the university that I'm currently studying in? Is it Wikipedia:Conflict of interest? It does not make sense. Because a physicist edits articles in physics more frequently. A Chinese person may edit China related articles more frequently. A human being might edit articles related to humans. There are blurred lines of when it is actually a conflict of interest.

Anyhow, Can I edit my university article? LastElement (talk) 02:02, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@LastElement: COI is a continuum. You must decide for yourself if your relationship to the subject rises to the level of a COI. In general just being a student there rarely rises to that level. Go ahead and declare your relationship on your user page, but be meticulous about using published information instead of personal knowledge. -Arch dude (talk) 02:24, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi LastElement. Are you being compensated (e.g. money, academic credit, internship) in any way to edit the article about your school? Are you being asked by someone at your school to make edits on behalf of the school that reflects the particular interests of the school? Conflict of interest editing isn't something that's expressly forbidden by Wikipedia (unless it's undeclared paid editing), but it's something that's highly discourgaged because it often leads to more serious problems. Because many COI editors often are more WP:NOTHERE than WP:HERE, many of the Wikipedia community are quite suspicious of the motives of any COI editor and mistakenly assume that all COI editors are a problem just waiting to happen. Simply being a student of a school doesn't automatically mean you have a conflict of interest; however, if your edits start to indicate that you're more interested in promoting the school or advocating on behalf of the school than trying to comply with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, then that could indicate that you do have a serious COI and should follow relevant policies and guidelines related to COI editing. If other editors start reverting some or all of the edits you're making because your edits aren't really in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines, and your response is someting like "I go to school here so I know more than you", your Wikipedia experience isn't probably going to be very enjoyable but may also turn out to be very brief.

Since you've made only two edits so far with this account,a nd assuming that means you're completely new to Wikipedia editing, perhaps it would be better to edit other articles not related to your school for a bit to gain some more familiarity with Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines and how they're being applied by others. Is there some pressing reason why you need to edit the article about your school asap? It will, after all, almost certainly still be there after you've become more familiar with Wikipedia, and you might find it a bit easier to edit appropriately and avoid problems with some more experience. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:25, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I was a wikipedia editor more than ten years ago, and I left it to get some time for my job and life. There is no emergency to come out of blue and wanting to edit my university article, but when I see its a short article, and there are bunch of independent sources there which cover the topic, its like a social responsibility to complete it. I do not want to just promote it, but I want to say the facts, based on reliable sources. So now, you feel its appropriate for me to start editing my university article, considering that I'm familiar with wikipedia rules, from my past experience in more than ten years ago (if all the rules have not been changed). LastElement (talk) 02:35, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

A few things based upon what you posted above. First, as long as your edits indicate you're WP:HERE, you probably won't have any problems editing the article. So, if you believe you can improve, then be WP:BOLD and go a head and do so. If someone disagrees with your edits, remember to try use the article's talk page to discuss and resolve things per WP:DR. As long as you don't try use any past connection you may have had with the school as some sort of justification for why you're edits should be allowed, you should be fine. Please understand, you don't need my or anyone else's permission to edit the article. Edits made by COI editors aren't simply reverted because of their COI per se (at least they shouldn't be); they're mostly reverted because they're not very good edits.

Next, if you can still access your old account, you might want to use that instead of this new one you created. It might make it clear to other users that you're not a complete newbie and have some idea about Wikipedia and editing articles. You're not required to do so, but you might find yourself being asked something like "Have you ever edited with a different account?" if you start doing things or knowing about things that a typical Wikipedia newbie might not do or know. If you don't have access to your old account but want to let others know that you did edit Wikipedia before, you can add some information about this to your new accounts user page; for example, "I used to edit using this account ten years ago, but forgot the password" or something like that. You don't have to do anything like this, but some people do.

Finally, if, by chance, the account you were using ten years go was blocked or banned for some reason and that block or ban is still in effect, then creating a new account is going to be considered a violation of WP:EVADE. I'm not saying that this is the case, but just pointing out that blocks and bans apply to the person using an account, and not the account itself. Some people who are blocked or banned may reappear using a new account after several years have passed and may never be noticed; however, many probably end up going back doing what they were doing before or editing the articles they were editing be before and eventually someone notices them. If none of this applies to you, then don't worry about it. If it does, you might be better off requesting that your old account be unblocked so that you can properly return to being an editor in good standing instead of trying to work around the block. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:31, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

CONFIRMATION of NEW SUBMISSION(?)

I composed my first article and (I believe) I submitted it for "review"... Would I have received some confirmation (from some person or automatic acknowledgement) that, indeed, I had successfully submitted it for "review"? Curious-curation (talk) 04:00, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Curious-curation. Are you asking about User:Curious-curation/Sample page? If you are, then "no" that page has not been submitted for review yet. Apparently, someone recently tried to recreate an article about Gregory Perkel, but it was moved to the draft namespace as Draft:Gregory Perkel because it was considered not ready for article status. Was this you by chance? If it was and you would like that draft restored so that you can continue working on it, then you can ask a Wikipedia administrator to do so by posting a request at WP:REFUND. I'm not an administrator so I can't see the draft that was deleted. If, however, the deleted draft is anything like what you've been working on in your user sandbox, I'm afraid neither of the two are going to be upgraded to article status anytime soon. Please take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners for some general information about what kinds of subjects are OK to try and create Wikipedia articles about, and how to properly write and source a potential Wikipedia article. In addition, if you're connected to the subject of the article either personally or professionally, you might also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for reference too. Finally, since the subject of the article appears to be still living, it's very important that you look at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons for reference too. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:00, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Account Recovery

We have created Onpassive account long back. We want to recover that account now. Please help us in recovering the account. 115.246.246.179 (talk) 06:46, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP 115.246.246.179. Are you asking about a Wikipedia account or are you asking about something completely unrelated to Wikipedia? If it's the former, please clarify the name of the account and perhaps someone can help you. If it's the latter, then sorry but there's nothing anyone here can do to help you since this page is only for asking about things related to Wikipedia. You can try Googling "Onpassive" and see whether there's any information about it online. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:58, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

There is an account named ONPASSIVE, which has no edits here and was indefinitely blocked on Wikimedia Commons for having a promotional username & spamming in 2020, but it does not have a email adress specified. There is also another account named ONPASSIVE OFFICIAL (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal), which has 1 edit here and was indefinitely blocked for {{uw-spamublock}} (more info there) which does appear to have a valid email adress specified. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:45, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I am an administrator and could view the deleted revision of User:ONPASSIVE OFFICIAL, and it was overtly promotional and completely inappropriate for this encyclopedia. I advise against further editing of that kind. Wikipedia is not a platform for advertising, marketing or promotion. Cullen328 (talk) 07:53, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Reversed edits

Hi, I am a massive fan of the Undead series by MaryJanice Davidson and saw that the wiki page was outdated. For some reason user Sheep8144402 reversed my edits saying they were unconstructive. Just wondering if this person is an admin or something and why my adding additional (missing) information and correcting outdated information is considered 'unconstructive'. Thanks ~AussieAmazon — Preceding unsigned comment added by AussieAmazon (talk • contribs) 07:07, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, AussieAmazon. Your edit began with You'd think that traipsing around Hell with her half sister, Laura, would mean Betsy got to know Laura better. We never address the reader directly. Encyclopedic content is written in a neutral, disinterested tone. We never assume or comment on what the reader might or might not think. Cullen328 (talk) 07:38, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Also, your assumptions seem to go beyond the bare bones facts of the plot into your own personal interpretations. Please be aware that Original research of this kind is not permitted on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 07:42, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Okay, that makes sense. Thank you for explaining. Could you explain the other edits which were removed? Such as updating the number of books in series, and the additional short stories which accompany the main story? I'm a very new contributor and am happy to take direction. ~AussieAmazon — Preceding unsigned comment added by AussieAmazon (talk • contribs) 08:13, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

AussieAmazon, I do not have the time to examine all of your edits, but it appears that you were adding content without providing references to reliable sources verifying your additions. Cullen328 (talk) 08:21, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Please read Referencing for beginners. Cullen328 (talk) 08:47, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Bundling cites

I've recently learnt how to do this, while doing a bit on Belton House. I think it definitely looks more appealing than a great string, as well as making it easier to read. However, I can't work out how to deal with a duplicate reference that I want to appear both in the bundled cite and standalone. Without bundling, I'd just run it through Refill, but that doesn't work. An example is the Orangery reference 98, which also appears in the bundled cite 103. Is there any solution to this? I've looked here but can't find an answer. Any advice greatly appreciated. KJP1 (talk) 17:08, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@KJP1: You have already exercised your editorial judgement to modify our default citation scheme to make the article text easier to read. Speaking personally, I like the result. You can continue to modify our unofficial rules to achieve your goals. In this case I would place the source in the "sources" section and refer to it as a source, using the same source citation scheme as you do for your other sources. -Arch dude (talk) 17:26, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@Arch dude: - Ah, thank you. I have seen template cites like {{NHLE}} used like an sfn book and placed in the Sources. I've not used this approach and will give it a try. And glad you liked the look of the bundling. A string of a dozen or more cites did look pretty dreadful. As importantly, it didn't find favour at FAR, and trying to save the little bronze star is the point of the Belton work. Thanks again. KJP1 (talk) 18:20, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Peppino D'Agostino

Hello, my name is Peppino D'Agostino and I have a page on Wikipedia. When somebody search for my name two pictures appears: one with my age and one with my albums. The page that display my age is incorrect. Right now it appears that I'm 72 years old. My age is actually 66. I was born on October 1956 and I can prove it. This mistake needs to be fixed because I'm an entertainer and potential client may be mislead by this false information. I've been trying to correct the mistake about my age for years. Can you please please help me? I'd appreciate it. Thanks Peppino D'Agostino guitarist. Seagull1056 (talk) 17:55, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello. The Wikipedia article Peppino D'Agostino does not mention your age anywhere.

Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that particular text was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information, but Google's Knowledge Graph has a "Feedback" link where anyone can mark a field as wrong. The same feedback facility is also provided on Bing and some other search engines. ColinFine (talk) 18:04, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Just happened to be here and saw this. For me, the bigger question is how a BLP with one cite, and that not a strong one, has survived for 17 years. KJP1 (talk) 18:26, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@ColinFine This information has probably been scraped from wikidata (d:Q3899403) where the incorrect date appears with the claim it was copied from the Italian Wikipedia (where the date was added unsourced by an IP in 2011 [1]). 163.1.15.238 (talk) 18:29, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

And changed to 1957 by AndreA in this edit a couple of weeks ago. Thanks for finding it.

I have updated it in Wikidata, but I'll ask at D:WD:Project chat how it should be handled.

Seagull1056, if 163. is correct that that is where the date is coming from, this should fix it; but we have no control over how long Google will take to update it from Wikidata. ColinFine (talk) 19:26, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Further comment, Seagull1056: the date in it-wiki, by which I updated Wikidata, is 1957; but you say it is 1956. Do you have a reliable published source for that? If you have, and you can provide it, then I can update the English article, the Italian article, and the Wikidata item, from it. But we do require a published source. (Unpublished information, such as birth certificates, are not acceptable). --ColinFine (talk) 19:44, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

In the Oct. 05-2016 San Luis Obispo article article they mentioned that I'm celebrating my 60th birthday.

https://www.sanluisobispo.com article 106186492

Peppino D'Agostino to bring guitar wizardry to SLO county:

October 5, 2016 - D'Agostino, who celebrates his 60th birthday this month, has reason to believe in music's power. Since leaving his native Sicily for the Bay.... 2601:644:81:FC20:39F2:A659:6A1E:7C4B (talk) 20:31, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll add the reference. ColinFine (talk) 21:36, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

OK, Seagull1056. I have now corrected the date, citing the source you gave, in English and Italian Wikipedia, and in Wikidata, so I would expect Google to pick that up - but, as I said earlier, we have no control over how long Google will take to do that.

The article Peppino D'Agostino is in very poor shape, because it has essentially no citations to sources which meet our Golden rule - published in reliable sources, independent of the subject, and having significant coverage of them. (The two sources currently there do not meet this: the Tribune, which I added, is based on an interview and so is not independent, while Guitar Player is probably not independent and has only a paragraph on your playing). If you have any sources which meet these criteria, Peppino, please cite them on the talk page (you shouldn't edit the article yourself because of your conflict of interest), and I will see if I can improve the article with them. --ColinFine (talk) 22:22, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Colin,

Thank you very much for your help in correcting my date of birth!

I'm not used to wikipedia and I didn't realize that I'm not allowed to make the changes myself. After erroneously making the changes myself yesterday, one of wikipedia editors (his name is Wassel) erase all the changes I've made spending hours on my computer... I contacted wiki proficiency to help me with the process but they wanted $499 dollars for basic changes and I don't want to pay that amount. It's very frustrating for me because I'm just trying to update my page in order to make it more current. Mind you that the current Peppino D'Agostino wikipedia page hasn't being corrected for over 17 years! In addition to my wrong date of birth, the page is extremely old. In the years following, I've done a lot of projects, and the public should be informed about it. Isn't true information the mission of Wikipedia after all? Even though I now understand what happen with erroneously making my own changes to the site, now what am I supposed to do to update my wikipedia page with true informations? Do you have any helpful tips for me? I'm very grateful for your answers. Seagull1056 (talk) 17:52, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

It's good you did not elect to pay that money. People who offer those types of services are usually terrible at their jobs, and are just trying to scam money from people like yourself. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:59, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

What's the solution then? Seagull1056 (talk) 18:09, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

@Seagull1056 As ColinFine mentioned, you should place suggested changes on Talk:Peppino D'Agostino and editors with no conflict of interest will consider them for incorporation. Be as specific as you can (e.g. Change "X" in section "Y" to "Z" using this reference). There is a template you can use, namely {{edit request}} (click for instructions). Using the template has the advantage that it draws attention to the request to some editors who specialise in responding to them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:29, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Probable vandalism on a draft page

I have a draft for the song Is There Someone Else? by The Weeknd, but it keeps being edited by a user known as GrandePOV (they don't have a user page). GrandePOV keeps inserting information about a non-existent remix with Ariana Grande, supposedly featured on an album called Heartless (which, as far as I could find, is a fan-propagated non-existent cover album of The Weeknd's After Hours), along with the discography template and other elements. I keep reverting the page and it's always reverted back. GrandePOV also has their own draft page (without the question mark) that says the same thing. I really do not know what to do, so I hope that a staff member could help me out or something.

Sincerely, Dontuseurrealname (talk) 18:11, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Behavioral issues aren't really the sort of thing the help desk is for, but I am an admin here and am looking into this. It looks like this person may be promoting hoaxes, so that's a problem. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:51, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and opened a discussion at WP:ANI about this, your input could be helpful there. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:00, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I've warned them not to create hoaxes on Wikipedia. Let me know if it happens anymore, and I'll take care of it. Sergecross73 msg me 18:07, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Changing Charlotte Checkers Logo

Hello, for years I've tried to address the incorrect logo on the Charlotte Checkers Wikipedia page. As the team's Director of Creative Services, I'm trying to upload the correct version but can't seem to get it to work. The file currently in place is an incorrect file and needs to be removed. Zacharvey2019 (talk) 21:32, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

This is a new account. Under what account(s) have you been trying to do that? --Orange Mike | Talk 21:44, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, it's been a couple years since I've last tried because I got nowhere with it then. I made a new account to try again. Is this something you can help me with? Zacharvey2019 (talk) 21:47, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

 Working on it right now. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:57, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done. It is now in the article. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:03, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much!!! Zacharvey2019 (talk) 22:10, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Zach, before you do anything else here you are required to make full disclosure on your userpage of your status as a paid editor and your conflict of interest. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:16, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I am not a paid editor, and I have no conflict of interest. @Beeblebrox was able to change the logo to a correct version so we're all set. Thank you. Zacharvey2019 (talk) 22:19, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

You said you are the "team's Director of Creative Services" which means you are actually both of those things, but if you don't plan to edit the article further we can just let that be. Otherwise, you should follow the instructions in the template I left on your talk page. Paid/COI editing is looked upon very dimly here, but there is a correct way to go about it. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:22, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

question

How in the hell do I find a biography of someone 1946silvershell (talk) 23:06, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

There is a search bar at the top of the screen. It used to be in the right corner, but it is now more to the left. 331dot (talk) 23:19, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@1946silvershell: Depending on your screen and settings, you may have to first click a magnifying glass icon. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:30, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@1946silvershell I was tempted to write an answer full of cuss words, but I decided against it, since good answers have been posted. David10244 (talk) 09:55, 4 February 2023 (UTC)