Help desk
< June 13	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 15 >

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.

June 14[edit]

Question about RPP[edit]

Apparently some random youtuber has mentioned the town of Slough in England in a video, and now the article is being the target of drive-by edits. I put in a request for page protection earlier today, but the vandalism is still going on. Do you know how long it usually takes for a page to be protected? Thanks! –FlyingAce^✈hello 04:00, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just reverted to the last version you edited. It looks as though there's a bit of a backlog at RPP. If no admin with a bit of free time happens to see this thread soon, you might consider leaving a brief note at WP:AN advising of the backlog. Rivertorch^FIRE _WATER 04:08, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done Protected for two weeks. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:39, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So, of course, the guy is harassing me now.

···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 20:12, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

*facepalm* The nerve of some people... –FlyingAce^✈hello 13:41, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Question about including images regarding legal circumstance of US.[edit]

Brief question i could not find a direct anwer yet. I know that Wikipedia as an encyclopedia does not censor content as far as i am aware of. However i am not sure, if it comes to that, if there is a legal issue?. If there is none i assume images of such kind could be included. Thanks for responses in advance.--Joobo (talk) 09:26, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joobo. Does WP:CENSOR answer your questions? It says "Content will be removed if it is judged to violate ... or the laws of the United States (where Wikipedia is hosted)". --ColinFine (talk) 10:46, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ColinFine: Exactly that is what i found and read already; however i am actually wondering if the particular explicit images do somehow conflict with US law. Are the legal experts here on wiki to give a quick response? --Joobo (talk) 11:03, 14 June 2017 (UTC) - Also i found that https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:2257 . So if a legal expert has knowledge about that it would be grat to get some information.--Joobo (talk) 11:36, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. Justice Stewart famously said "I can't exactly define pornography, but I know it when I see it". Another quote to keep in mind is "A law is a guess about what a judge will do". For my part, I don't see it helpful or necessary to include those photos in the article, so I'd let it go. You could run an WP:RFC at the article talk page and see if you can get consensus to add the photos. If you cannot (which is likely I would think), then it's a moot question. Herostratus (talk) 12:52, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Or one just can include the images, because they simply are illustrating what the lemma is about? I see no reason to not include images depicting the Lemma, or why woudld there be any objections to not do so. You also got images here Sit-up. The only difference is that some personally dont find it "right", however those feelings are nothing an encyclopaedia should be concerned about. Again only question is about possible legal obstacles.--Joobo (talk) 13:49, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Bearian:. I found you on wikipedia and see that you have some knowledge concerning US laws. It would be splendid if you could give a brief response to the question if there are any possible legal problems by including such images on the en. wikipedia. i also stumbled across https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:2257. Maybe you know about the legal circumstances and answers. Again thanks a lot in advance for possible answers.--Joobo (talk) 13:59, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your faith in me. However, I must answer, "No." I never answer legal questions on Wikipedia, for that would be legal advice. On the other hand, I am in the habit of warning people - the duty of care is the duty to warn. I warn you to not do anything remotely in violation go of United States copyright laws. Always err on the side of caution. Just don't do it. My instinct when I was a sysop was to delete all possible copyvios, even if it was a close call. If you find that you have a special urge to do something illegal here, then it might be a sign that you have fallen into the honey pot. I am also very busy with a second graduate degree right now, and so I am very limited with my time; so, regrets. Bearian (talk) 22:27, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That is also why i am so cautious about including particular sorts of images. However i do not believe the copyright would be an issue here but rather the question regarding the explicit material. Maybe i got to ask other users who are somehow familar with that, eventhough as often times in legal matters it is not that easy to give a quick correct answer, Thanks for the quick response anyway @Bearian:. --Joobo (talk) 22:37, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We never give legal advice here, for both practical and legal reasons. However, sexual images in Wikipedia are used to illustrate relevant articles, and I don't see any way in which that could be considered illegal in the 21st-century United States. I'd certainly never hesitate to do so if it were appropriate. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:54, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for some user page "fluff"[edit]

I'd like to celebrate my tenth "anniversary" as a Wikipedian with a bit of fun decorative "fluff" on my user page, but I have no idea where to start. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:17, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're a little short of the 78,000 edits for Wikipedia:Service awards#Master Editor IV (or Looshpah Laureate of the Encyclopedia). You could display the preceding Master Editor III until then. There is also Wikipedia:Ten Year Society. I see you already use {{User Wikipedian for}}. See Wikipedia:User page design center for general tips unrelated to service time. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:34, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks PrimeHunter, I think the "Ten Year Society" is very suitable. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:57, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dodger67: It's all informal anyway, but deleted edits are contributions/edits, and adding them in you have almost 83,000 edits so Looshpah Laureate seems a fit.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:54, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(It turns out the page covers this: Wikipedia:Service awards#What is counted?.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:55, 14 June 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Indeed, the vast majority of my deleted edits are pages I tagged for speedy deletion in the course of reviewing drafts and new articles. It would be quite unfair to exclude such edits as they are improvements to the 'pedia. I've looked around for a birthday cake with ten candles but found nothing suitable. (Though I need to watch my weight anyway....) Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:53, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dodger67, how about a homemade one? [1]

Commons also has a "Cakes prepared for the 10th birthday of Wikipedia" category – some of them seem quite fitting: [2] –FlyingAce^✈hello 14:08, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Problem[edit]

Nick Hoffman's page keeps getting deleted and redirected back to a band he is a member of, The Farm. The other two bandmates have their own individual pages, but Hoffman's keeps getting deleted. He is also the host of his own show. Why does his keep getting deleted while the other two are allowed to have it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjacobs (talk • contribs) 18:50, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Various editors have concluded that he's not notable enough in his own right to justify a separate article about him. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:56, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Political Candidate[edit]

Hi there, I was thinking about making a page for a political candidate in my area that is running for the US House of Representatives in 2018. She has filed the appropriate paperwork with the FEC, but still has to get through the primaries and the general election. Would she be notable enough to have a page yet? Or does she have to get a little further in the process? There have been some news articles written about her, but not many. Here's her FEC page https://www.fec.gov/data/candidate/H8TX31033/?tab=about-candidate her campaign site: http://christine4congress.com and some press about her http://kdhnews.com/news/briefs/leander-doctor-running-for-congressional-seat/article_0708c6aa-3cfa-11e7-b102-e32cf76ff5ff.html https://www.etypeservices.com/SWF/LocalUser/Williamson1//Magazine170756/Full/index.aspx?II=170756#3/z https://www.majority60.com/single-post/2017/06/06/For-Those-About-To-RESIST-I-Salute-You TarynCasaubon (talk) 20:42, 14 June 2017 (UTC) Thanks! Taryn[reply]

Not an expert on this, but I think you might fall afoul of WP:SUSTAINED currently. Cheers! DonIago (talk) 20:45, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A mere candidate (or even major-party nominee) for public office, especially below the level of President of the United States, is not inherently notable. Most doctors are not notable enough to justify an encyclopedia article about them, and it appears she falls in that category. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:59, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Target[edit]

In HTML there is a target attribute to make pages open in a new tab - is there such a thing in wikitext? HillelFrei^{• talk •} 22:49, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi HillelFrei. Nope, you can't do this on Wikipedia (no equivalent of <a href="url" target="_blank">...</a>). However, you can tell most browsers to do this by default. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:35, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@HillelFrei: You can also do a Ctrl-click (or Command-click in MacOS) to open the link in a new tab. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:37, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]