Help desk
< May 30	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	June 1 >

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 31

Comment

Hi, I asked User talk:Prikryl a question and he gave received a reply to me that was snarky and rude. It's not what he said, it was how he said it, like he had no respect for me. This is not the first time he has done this as back in February, he made a comment on the Talk:2024 Women's U-19 World Floorball Championships page which had the same level of disrespect again, calling what I said completely irrelevant.

I feel that some people treat me with no respect on the site and I'm very sensitive and I feel I get these responses too often when I try to be civil with people and they just make hurtful responses and don't care about being civil. It's not the spirit of Wikipedia. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 10:05, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ILoveSport2006 The comments you received from @User:Prikryl appear quite reasonable to me. I suggest you take their suggestions on board. This is a collaborative project and editors here expect feedback. If constructive criticism upsets you, perhaps this is not the place for you. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:45, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shantavira Calling my opinion irrelevant and saying (something you hardly ever do) is not constructive. Did you even read mine and his response? I receive this snarkiness from other people too. Just give me the constructive criticism and move on. Don't make snarky comments. How can you say what all he was saying was constructive. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 11:02, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shantavira The help desk is supposed to help me, not make me feel worst. Can you not say If constructive criticism upsets you, perhaps this is not the place for you. Do you want me to feel worst? ILoveSport2006 (talk) 11:09, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prikryl says nothing rude either in his talk page or in Talk:2024 Women's U-19 World Floorball Championships. And if you want specifics, "And what 'looks aesthetically better' is imo completely irrelevant" is fine too. (If, making a design or other editing decision, I were to appeal to some criterion that you found irrelevant to the concerns of Wikipedia's goals, guidelines, policies, etc, then you'd be welcome to call it "irrelevant". You could use "immaterial" or "inconsequential" instead; if you wanted to be ambitious, you could even try something like "nugatory". I'm not saying I'd agree with you: I might disagree. But I wouldn't complain that you hurt my feelings -- primarily because you wouldn't hurt my feelings.) And so I second Shantavira's suggestion above. -- Hoary (talk) 11:42, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hoary @Shantavira Even though I understand your points (although, personally, I disagree), you need to understand that in the past, I have received actual personal comments from people that have upset me. So I probably have a lot of paranoia. I probably do take comments the wrong way because I assume they re going for the you're an idiot tone. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 12:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ILoveSport2006 It's really hard to understand tone in online written communications, and as we're a global project there is a myriad of communication styles, some of which may come across as brusk or rude. In the gentlest possible way, I think it's important to have some thick skin and not to take things personally when faced with that.

Wikipedia is not a project that is worth getting upset, paranoid, or anxious over. Qcne (talk) 12:21, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Qcne True. It is sad my brain works like that. I have to stop that. Thanks for the advice. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 12:29, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page Title

Hi, I was looking to make a page for the web development software Framer, however since the page 'Framer' is taken I know I will have to append something in parenthesis to the title, and I'm not sure what to put. Thanks! - LostInInfinity (contribs • talk) 13:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Framer (software) would be a good option, in my opinion. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:54, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's also the name of the company (Framer Inc; b

.

based in Amsterdam), so would that change anything? - LostInInfinity (contribs • talk) 19:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how that newline appeared, I deleted it while editing. Apparently the Wikimedia mobile editor is still broken. - LostInInfinity (contribs • talk) 19:01, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LostInInfinity: Please do not proceed until you are very sure that Framer is notable by the Wikipedia definition of the term, and that other editors will agree with you. See WP:NCORP. If it's not notable, it cannot have a Wikipedia article, no matter what else you do, and you will be wasting your time ans ours. See WP:AMOUNT. -Arch dude (talk) 16:46, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure this article qualifies, as well as this one - LostInInfinity (contribs • talk) 18:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LostInInfinity: TechCrunch is slightly problematical: see WP:RSP. Tech.eu is not listed there either way, so you might want to go to WP:RSN and ask. Both of these pieces look to me like the kind of reportage my marketing guy got published in the trade press for my company, and if so they are not "independent". I'm just one editor and I would not vote for deletion of your article, but I would really prefer a stronger source. -Arch dude (talk) 19:33, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'll look for other ones. One last question, do list articles (like "Top 10 best website builders") count as articles? Thanks! - LostInInfinity (contribs • talk) 20:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to upload a different version of a file (or revert it to an older version)?

The page File:Stjepan_Vuk%C4%8Di%C4%87_CoA_element.png has a flag which should have a transparent part in it. Is there a way to do this and make it transparent? 7s3s (talk) 19:49, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@7s3s As with almost any file you find on Common (this one is File:Stjepan Vukčić CoA element.png), you are free to modify it and re-upload it. In this particular case the best solution might be to redraw as an .svg file with transparent background where required. If you can't do that yourself, you can request it be done for you. See WP:LAB Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do you reupload it? 7s3s (talk) 17:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request help

This edit request I made was declined twice by @Pppery with no explanation about why it was declined except stating that it was a waste of time. However, the request I made was clearly outlined in this guideline page. Why was it declined? 2003 LN 6 20:12, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you care so much whether a redirect has a blank line? Drop the stick. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:14, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery: I know it does not matter much, however I am opposed to non-guideline conforming instances where a minor fix would be extremely easy to perform. 2003 LN 6 21:07, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm opposed to you creating makework for others by obsessing over trivial issues. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:10, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean it can work either way. WP:BROKE may explain your opinion here. I just believe that a simple fix would be good to maintain style. You can choose to decline, but I would still like a reason for declining the offer instead of accusing me of makework. I am only attempting to systematically revise and improve the redirect according to the guideline and mean no harm to anyone. Please check my contributions around late May 29 and you will see that I was formatting many redirects and wanted to keep a uniform style. Thank you! 2003 LN 6 01:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an admin, but Pppery's refusal seems reasonable to me. For those who don't feel like clicking through, the guideline's guidance reads Use of a blank line between the redirect target link and all rcats and category links promotes readability of the code. There's not even a "should" or "recommended" in there. The presence or absence of a blank line amidst *checks notes* four lines of code, which makes no difference to the rendered page, which is only visible if people click through the "redirected from" link: this is truly a triviality, like reordering citation template parameters or capitalising the first letter of template calls.

2003 LN6, focusing on deeply unimportant matters such as this is unlikely to win you much social capital on this project. You seem to do a lot of good work in antivandalism, so thank you for that. The issue here is not worth pursuing further. Kindly, Folly Mox (talk) 01:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see, so there are many different acceptable formats for redirect categorization? 2003 LN 6 01:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any guidance of type "guideline" describes one of multiple acceptable practices. Rigid adherence to the letter of every recommendation made in projectspace is both impossible due to internal contradictions and additionally not the vibe. Folly Mox (talk) 03:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Folly Mox: Thank you! I will not pursue the subject further. 2003 LN 6 04:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As per Wikipedia:Edit requests, you can start a discussion on the article's talk page to seek other editors' opinions and hopefully form a consensus. If not enough participation was received, consider starting a Request for comment. Help desk isn't a great place for such discussion, as the whole discussion would be archived 4 days later, so better hold a discussion on the talk page of the intended article. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 01:42, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vincent Longo contribution (bio)

Howdy--My article was accepted! (Yay--and thanks to spinster300 for editorial assistance!). However, I've noticed other bios of famous make-up artists include lists of their famous clients, which we had in a late draft and which featured citations name by name, but that content was removed by the editor before the draft was published presumably because it was deemed inappropriate/irrelevant --something about fame by association. Of course, when you're a famous make-up artist, your client list is your resume and the reason you get to judge Miss USA or appear regularly as "the" expert on Regis & Kelli, et. al. Their fame--is partly the creation of the makeup artist since he/she is the one who provides their "looks" on red carpets, magazines, awards shows, editorial spreads, etc. Also, my subject, is known for his philanthropy, in particular, for a star-studded, "party of the year" event he he co-hosted in Cannes in 2002 that was reported on in major gossip/celebrity/society publications around the world, and which I cited extensively. I want to bulk up the section on his philanthropy (which is linked to his work as a celebrity make-up artist and the owner/founder of a revered cosmetics brand) but worry that such content will be deemed inappropriate. I also don't want to "rat out" any wikipedia bios that do the things I was told I couldn't do. I merely want to include such related and well-documented content too! (LOL). Help? Flgreene13 (talk) 22:19, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flgreene13, thank you for disclosing on your user page that you "have been paid by Frederick L Greene- Copywriting on behalf of Vincent Longo for their contributions to Vincent Longo." Simply make your edit requests on Talk:Vincent Longo. Please do "rat out" any Wikipedia bios that are promotional. -- Hoary (talk) 23:14, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Hoary! I'll take your advice! Flgreene13 (talk) 01:27, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Flgreene13 Wikipedia content is based on reliable sources that are independent of (in this case) Vincent Longo. If you can find newspaper etc. articles that mention his make-up in connection with some other celebrity then that could be valid extra content for the article on him, provided they were not just parroting some press release. There is an edit request wizard that will highlight any suggestions you make for uninvolved editors to review. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:21, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Using Wikipedia for collective visioning

Hello. I am working with others to collectively envision realistic "storylines" of our future based on current and anticipated events and technologies. Would this use case be allowed on Wikipedia given its current policies. I can provide more details if needed, but perhaps this is enough. Thanks! 130.51.143.37 (talk) 23:54, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia content is based on content verifiable in published reliable sources only. You seem to be describing collaborative original research from contributors, which is not permitted. So sorry, no. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Too bad. Are you aware of any Wiki-like platforms that might be open to this use case? Thanks for your help. 130.51.143.37 (talk) 00:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Google for "free wiki host". You are of course free to link from your wiki's pages to articles hare on Wikipedia. If you are adventurous, you can implement a mediawiki wiki on a virtual server on the Internet instead of using an already-implemented wiki host. -Arch dude (talk) 00:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@130.51.143.37: I recommend trying your luck at Miraheze (on which I am a user)--but there's a modest barrier to entry (thanks to their "Request Wiki" feature). Make your best pitch and hope for the best; come back and remind us if you and your team made it through. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 07:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]