Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2020 April 15

Help desk
< April 14	<< Mar | April | May >>	April 16 >

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.

April 15

The great dust bowl page is locked from edits and has miss information

The great dust bowl page is locked from edits, however information on it is wrong and news/ opinion pieces are being written based off this wrong infromation. The page cites the draught happened in waves starting in 1934, however if you follow the source they linked for it only goes to the main site and not a study, from there if you search for "1930 draught" click the first link and check the draught records for 1930-1940 you will see the draught waves started in 1930, with the first major dust storm in 1931. Also other historical and scientific sites back that data up, including the history channel. I hope you can correct this.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:9640:3980:d912:4188:f93a:2304 (talk)

Unfortunately, the Dust Bowl article is a target of vandalism. You are welcome to propose any edits you feel are needed on the article talk page, either as a formal edit request(click for instructions) or even just as a general comment. You will want to make sure that your proposed addition is supported with independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 08:20, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. I may be misinterpreting, but it sounds to me as if you are proposing to add original research. If a reliably published paper presents data and draws conclusions from that data, then citing the paper and reporting its conclusions is absolutely appropriate for a Wikipedia article. If a paper reports data, but does not draw conclusions on that data, then an article may be able to report on that data, but is not entitled to draw conclusions from it, even if the data seem to contradict the conclusions in the paper. (It is possible that, on discussion, Wikipedia editors might decide that the paper is not a reliable source, but that is a different question). I strongly suggest that you raise this for discussion on the talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 09:21, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Tables

I feel embarrassed to ask this as someone with over 11000 edits, but can someone explain table markup to me? I have never fully understood how they work (even after reading how-to guides), and always end up doing something wrong when trying to edit them. Glades12 (talk) 09:45, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@Glades12: Help:Table has details. You can ask a more specific question with a link to a problem table, or post the code here. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: I would like to add back a list entry at Kenji Yamamoto (composer born 1964)#Works, having removed it previously (diff here). Another user edited the table after my edit, so I can't simply paste the old source over the new (as I tend to do). Glades12 (talk) 14:12, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I found a better source supporting the claim, if you're wondering why I want to restore it. Glades12 (talk) 14:14, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@Glades12:  Added in this edit. GoingBatty (talk) 14:18, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Which just added the removed code back with rowspan="1" instead of rowspan="2". You made a mistake when you removed rowspan="2" without adding the year cell to the next row. It was fixed by another editor (changing the year to 2013 in the process, not sure about that). rowspan and colspan can be tricky. Maybe Help:Table#Combined use of COLSPAN and ROWSPAN can help. Focus on cell A if adding colspan to the mix is too much. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:27, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Need to delete all pages for "Sivantos" except the English version

Hi,

I need to delete all pages for "Sivantos" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sivantos ) EXCEPT the English version. Sivantos and Widex merged over a year ago and now form one company called WS Audiology. I work in communications for WS Audiology. How can I accomplish this?

Thanks, Kyra

The Sivantos article will only be deleted if it is shown not to be a notable company (the same applies to Widex. Your or your employers' wishes are entirely irrelevant. We do not delete articles merely because their subjects cease to exist, Wikipedia is interested in preserving notable history. An article about WS Audiology can be created if it is shown to be a notable company. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:38, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Are you saying that you want to delete the pages in Danish, German, French, Japanese, Norwegian (bokmål), Portuguese, Swedish and Turkish (though not the one in English)? If so, then you'll have to ask at the Danish, German, French (etc) Wikipedias. However, before you ask there, please think for a moment. Do you actually want to delete the Japanese page about Sivantos (for example), or do you want to "move" it to (i.e. rename it as) "WS Audiology"? -- Hoary (talk) 13:11, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Kyra, you are a paid editor. This is not a problem, but our terms of service require that you disclose your paid affiliation with these articles. See WP:PAID. You are prohibited from editing or moving these articles yourself, but you are encouraged to make edit requests on the article's talk pages. -Arch dude (talk) 17:12, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Change protected page

Hello there I just want to know that if something is wrong on Wikipedia because it's not true or authentic how to change if page is protected ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Umarabubakr (talk • contribs) 13:22, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@Umarabubakr: You could create a new section on the article talk page and use {{edit semi-protected}}. See Talk:Battle of Badr/Archive 1#Semi-protected edit request on 12 April_2020 for an example. GoingBatty (talk) 14:24, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

100% Valid Added content about Baha'i Faith Deleted

I read the page on the Kitab i Aqdas. I had added a sentence to state that although the Baha'i faith proudly proclaims that equality of men and women set the Baha'i faith apart from other religions, in actual fact women do not enjoy equal rights. For example women cannot be elected to serve on the Universal House of Justice, the highest elected board. Inheritance laws do not give as much to daughters, as they bequeath to the sons. And ‘Abdu’l-Bahá exhorts women:

'... Exert your efforts so that you may attain the honour and privilege ordained for women. Undoubtedly the greatest glory of women is servitude at His Threshold and submissiveness at His door;... obedience to and consideration for their husband's. "

My additional content was deleted with lightning speed. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.44.76.141 (talk) 14:34, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! Looking at the Kitáb-i-Aqdas article, I see the edit summary for the edit that deleted your addition says "Source?". OcelotCreeper probably wants you to provide a reliable source for the information you would like to add. I suggest you create a new section at Talk:Kitáb-i-Aqdas to discuss the text you would like to add, and please provide any sources you can. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:42, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes I wanted you to find a reliable source first before you add the content again. Not denying it is false, just saying you need a reliable source for content like that or else someone is going to challenge your statement and remove it. OcelotCreeper (talk) 14:47, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

because Humanna didn't pay for it.

How do I get help to pay for my lunesta prescription? I had to quit taking it because Humanna didn't pay for it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:5B0:2768:F948:4597:1F85:826A:68B0 (talk) 15:10, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

We do not give medical advice --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 15:13, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't think (mostly or entirely) anonymous Internet users are who you should contact first for information like this. Also, this page is expressly only meant for help using and editing Wikipedia. Glades12 (talk) 16:09, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Media Wiki

So is media wiki supposed to auto log you out after sometime? I left Wikipedia logged in for over 12 hours with no activity and it did not log me out automatically, like it did last time... --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 15:13, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Mine keeps me logged in unless I manually log out. If you manually log out on one device, it logs you out on all of them. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:01, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Logging out only makes your account marginally "safer" if the device is shared with others, and even then best practice would be to log out explicitly. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 05:00, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

imposters(tv series)

If this is the first you hear of it, you’re missing out! Imposters stars the beautiful Inbar Lavi, Rob Heaps, Parker Young, and Marianne Rendon. The show follows Maddie (Lavi), a con-artist who marries her victims only to steal their money and valuable possessions before taking off and disappearing.

Maddie is good at her “job,” but she underestimated her victims. Ezra (Heaps), Richard (Young), and Jules (Rendon) find each other and decide to team up to track down and confront Maddie.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.109.198 (talk • contribs) 15 April 2020 16:07 (UTC)

Will Netflix pick up for season 3?

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.109.198 (talk • contribs) 15 April 2020 16:11 (UTC)

I don't see any mention of it on the Wikipedia article Imposters (TV series) or the corresponding talk page. I suggest you try a Google search for imposters netflix "season 3" and see what the reliable sources say. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 17:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Age showing only months (not years)

For the date founded for WeLab Bank, I have used the normal formula for showing the founding date and age (for years ago); however, it keeps showing as "19 months ago" instead of "1 year ago", despite it working perfectly fine on other Wiki articles.

Could someone help? Thanks!

CityPride (talk) 16:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@CityPride: Doing some quick testing on {{Start date and years ago}}, it seems that if the time is less than two years it outputs in months, but if the time is two years or more, it outputs in years.

• {{Start date and years ago|df=yes|2018|04|30}} outputs "30 April 2018 (2018-04-30)"
• {{Start date and years ago|df=yes|2018|04|10}} outputs "10 April 2018 (2018-04-10)"

Do you have an example for another article where the same template outputs "1 year ago"? GoingBatty (talk) 17:39, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Apparent biased editing of CPRIT article

I started the article on the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) last year. Others have added to it since. I do not think I “own” the article and have not modified it since the first day. I believe in Wikipedia’s ethic and it’s ok with me if others contribute.

However, some of the recent changes appear to have been made by a public relations promoter. This state agency faced many charges of misconduct during its early years. I’m sure it was embarrassing to CPRIT management. I documented sources. I think my original had a neutral point of view, but that’s not for me to decide; it’s for the community.

But one Wikipedian, who has never contributed to any other article, has made changes to paint the agency in a more positive light and it’s going too far. When I documented a negative with a link which later expired, he did not seek to find a good link, but deleted the negative statement. He has put in what is to my mind irrelevant material about politicians’ statements from over 10 years ago promoting the new agency. Lately he has put in text about how some of the CPRIT grantee scientists later got awards from other organizations, which seems to me irrelevant.

What should or can I do? Carax (talk) 19:50, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Carax, I've had a look, and it seems you're right - fairly clear COI editing. I've placed a template on their talk page with information. If you think any more action is required, or obviously promotional editing continues, you can open a thread at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 20:12, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Wants to know the time

I have updated my brothers page can u pls tell me by what time It can be publish — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devdeepdv (talk • contribs) 15 April 2020 20:00 (UTC)

Your edits were removed by a Wikipedia editor because your edits were not neutral. Further, as he is your brother, you need to learn the conflict of interest rules on Wikipedia - I posted a notice on your page. In general, you should not edit the pages of people you are associated with, and always you need to be neutral. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 20:19, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Devdeepdv: Hello, presumably you are referring to Bhaswar Chattopadhyay. Please link to any pages you wish to discuss. Your edits were published as soon as you 'saved' them. Unfortunately they have been removed (reverted) by other editors. Detailed explanations have been left at your talk page and you should also check the page history at the article. If you wish to discuss, please contact the other editors involved. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 20:21, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Cross-namespace links?

I came across an example at xkcd of an in-text link from article namespace to WP namespace. I thought that this was unusual, but I couldn't find anything in the MOS against it. Is there a guideline somewhere discouraging such cross-namespace (excluding Template, File, and Category namespaces for obvious reasons) links, or are they fine? — MarkH₂₁^talk 20:38, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I am not aware of any specific guideline. There is Wikipedia:Cross-namespace redirects, which does not shine much light on this issue. Out of curiosity, what is linked? I could not find it from looking briefly at the article. If it is helpful, I guess it should be kept, but if it is unhelpful or there is an alternative, removal may be preferable. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 20:52, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@El cid, el campeador: There is a link to WP:SEMI in the caption of one of the images from the comics to point to a reader what SEMI-PROTECT THE CONSTITUTION refers to. Since the comic is directly referring to internal WP protecton, this is a bit unusual. — MarkH₂₁^talk 22:16, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@MarkH21: The link is correctly wrapped inside an {{srlink}} template. That template's documentation explains its purpose, and has a link to the relevant part of the manual of style. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:00, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Edgar Yaeger Not good on computer asked my web designer to add info regarding my web site

I enjoy and have financially supported Wikipedia.

I'm in my mid seventies and no very little about computers. My web designer helped me put together my website edgaryaeger.com

For thirty years I was Edgar's friend and most of that time his agent. Mr Yaeger has pieces in many Museums, was a renowned WPA artist and he has his papers and some art in the Smithsonian. I asked my web designer to place his Biography into Wikipedia. He said he did but it was removed. He sent me a note you sent to him but I do not understand what your requesting.

I own the web site, the material we are trying to include is my material and I own the web site????????????

Respectfully, John Joseph Jr

[address and email addresses removed] 2601:40C:4302:3540:6DA7:7A10:ECEE:92A5 (talk) 20:46, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

It appears that the issue about the edit to the Edgar Yaeger article is documented at User talk:76.112.168.93. It seems that DatGuy was not able to tell that you were giving permission to have your content added to Wikipedia, and removed the information to protect your copyright. Per Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide, it seems you could have a conflict of interest. Instead of directly editing the Wikipedia article (or asking your web designer to do so), I suggest you start a new section on Talk:Edgar Yaeger, disclose your relationship with Mr. Yaeger, and discuss your ideas for changes to the Wikipedia article. GoingBatty (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for wanting to improve Wikipedia.

Wikipedia has had an article Edgar Yaeger for 13 years. It still has scope for improvement. Yesterday someone added a lot of content to it, copying it from https://www.edgaryaeger.com/lifeandwork. This was removed two minutes later (those guys are fast!) as a copyright violation. Wikipedia takes copyright law seriously. To use that material (assuming it is suitable for Wikipedia) will require the owner of edgaryaeger.com to give their legal consent to this material being released in a form of copyright which allows its use, not just in Wikipedia, but by anyone who chooses to re-use Wikipedia's content – that's quite a legal hassle. We can't just take your word for it, we don't even know that you really are the owner of that site. No doubt some editor better informed than me will post here telling you how to go about it. Maproom (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I have removed your "street address" and email addresses. We only reply here. ¶ Authorizing the reuse of the material in Wikipedia and elsewhere is simple enough. Use CSS to specify the preferred appearance of p.legalstuff and then add the following to the foot of the page: <p class="legalstuff">Text is available under the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_License">Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License</a>.</p> (The markup will be gobbledygook to you, but easy for any web designer to understand. But it will be your job, not the web designer's job, to understand the gist of what it says, and to be sure that you agree to it. See Creative Commons license for an explanation.) ¶ However, affixing this to the web page would in itself do nothing to make the material more worthy of recycling in Wikipedia: (i) it's uncited: there's no indication of how the author knows (authors know) it; (ii) the author is (authors are) not named; (iii) an important purpose (possibly, the primary purpose) of the website is to sell Yaeger's work, so arguably the author has (authors have) a conflict of interest. -- Hoary (talk) 22:42, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Profanity in dicussions

Is using profane words allowed? SpinnerLaserz (talk) 21:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

It depends on the context. Personal attacks are never allowed, but as long as a conversation is civil, you shouldn't have too much of a problem. I would suggest though that you treat Wikipedia as any public place, though. Do you intend to use a lot of profanity? 331dot (talk) 21:29, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I am not sure as I usually dont type in profanity but I am that worried elementary school students may see this word. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 21:35, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

SpinnerLaserz It is possible that children would see any profanity here- but Wikipedia is not censored for the protection of children(or any reason). Children should have supervision when using Wikipedia, not just due to profanity, but subject matter that is inappropriate for them. 331dot (talk) 22:28, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Also, on the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Discretionary sanction notices on Joe Biden articles, one user used a profane comment. Is this count as WP:INCIVILITY— Preceding unsigned comment added by SpinnerLaserz (talk • contribs)

I was clearly quoting this edit summary. And the editor has apologized for what he/she said here--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 22:37, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

F**k, yeah! Totally allowed. Seriously, though, as well as depending on context as 331dot pointed out, we have an international audience here, and although we all speak English to at least some extent, what's taboo varies between cultures. For example, bugger might cause conniptions in England, but in Australia it's so mild that it famously featured in a car ad on prime-time TV.

As to incivility, I could call someone 'stupid' and that would be an uncivil personal attack. If I called them a 'f***wit', it would still be an uncivil personal attack, but may raise slightly more opprobrium.

The reverse case, of throwing rude words into a discussion for effing emphasis, is different. In my experience, most people here would not consider that necessarily uncivil in itself (depends on context), but some do take issue with gratituitous swearing. However the counter-argument "it's not my job to protect your precious eyeballs, if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen" has been misused to excuse true incivility and even abuse.

We try to consider behaviour rather than just whether a person uses certain words. If someone loses their cool then apologises, as SʿabS described, that's viewed differently compared to someone who loses their cool then digs in and berates everyone else around.

I think I could have written out the f-word in full in those three places above and not crossed any bounds, just erring on the side of caution. Sorry for the long reply: I had wanted to write just the first two words for effect, but then you got me thinking more about the subject. Pelagic (talk) 22:32, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

P.S. Anybody know how I could have done the search link as an internal wikilink that produces a SERP? Special:Search/Fuck takes me straight to the top hit. (Please ping if answering this.) Pelagic (talk) 22:32, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

SpinnerLaserz In real life I swear a bit - even in front of my teenage kids when I'm really frustrated. (my wife tells me off, of course). But on Wikipedia I feel there is absolutely no excuse for it, just as there is no excuse for swearing in the average professional workplace. Here on Wikipedia, which is almost 20 years old and now taken very seriously by sites like Google, one has all the time in the world to type, and plenty of time to think - unlike in real life. If editors here cannot control themselves sufficiently and cannot express their frustrations coherently, then swearing in edits or edit summaries is just a sign of immaturity and ignorance which any editor should call out. Give me one good reason why we should not respect one another here, even if we totally disagree. Using profanity here is not appropriate - though it is not policy to ban it if not directed aggressively towards another individual. It does, however, lower the tone of any argument and simply serves to highlight a person's ignorance or stupidity - just as it does with me on the rare occasions when I, myself, descend into a tirade of words in front of one of my own family members. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:44, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Journal cites. A couple of style standards.

First, I am an experienced editor and well aware of technical capabilities available. These questions are "style" questions:

1. I have seen many articles were |url= is removed from cites if it points to the same page as |doi=. I have seen it done so often that I assumed it was a "style" standard. I attempted to find a documented standard with no luck. Is there a "style" standard or is this simply a personal preference? (My preference is to remove the redundant URL.)
2. Author lists. Should all authors be included in the cite template? The number displayed can be easily reduced using the |display-authors= parameter. (Personally I think all authors should be in the template.)

User-duck (talk) 21:25, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@User-duck:

1. Template:Cite journal#Identifiers states "When an URL is equivalent to the link produced by the corresponding identifier (such as a DOI), don't add it to any URL parameter but use the appropriate identifier parameter, which is more stable and may allow to specify the access status. The |url= parameter or title link can then be used for its prime purpose of providing a convenience link to an open access copy which would not otherwise be obviously accessible."
2. I don't see anything in Template:Cite journal that says how many authors you should (or shouldn't) include. GoingBatty (talk) 21:38, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

That needs fixing. cs1|2 doesn't care about open access, just free-to-read. I'll fix that.

Too much of a thing is too much of a thing. This diff shows the addition of a 776-author {{cite journal}} template (thankfully truncated for display to a mere 30 authors). The purpose of a citation is to help readers find the source that supports our articles. I rather doubt that it is necessary to list all of the authors of any source beyond a handful of primary authors. This is why we have |display-authors=etal.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:56, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

UTC Time

Is there any option or user script to change timestamps in the revision history to Eastern Standard time? Jcoolbro (talk) 21:32, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Jcoolbro, in your preferences, on the Gadget tab, select Change the UTC-based times and dates... option. It will show all dates in the time zone you select in your preferences on the Appearance tab. Schazjmd (talk) 22:02, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

If you mean the page history and not the actual revisions then it's controlled by your time zone at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:59, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Can I report an editor for their actions outside of Wikipedia?

A Wikipedia user Twitter that is full of explict Chaturbate porn. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 21:52, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

You should not doxx any editor and you should not engage in WP:OUTING. Do you always doxx other editors? You have previously made comments about a Twitter account that you said belongs to me. I remember you said that I support Houthis blah blah. Also, whats "Chaturbate porn"?. How do you know all of these stuff?--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 22:04, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I am not talking about you. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 22:06, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I never thought you were talking about me. I don't watch porn, God forbid. I am talking about you going to google and searching for twitter accounts of editors in Wikipedia.-SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 22:09, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@SpinnerLaserz: No, you cannot report a user for off-Wikipedia actions. If you see porn on Twitter, report it there. RudolfRed (talk) 22:13, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 22:14, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

SpinnerLaserz: how did you find that (unnamed) editor's Twitter account? --MrClog (talk) 22:18, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Never mind, please no further comments as it's solved by RudolfRed. I just going to report to Twitter instead, SpinnerLaserz (talk) 22:21, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@SpinnerLaserz: I understand that your question has been answered, but you researching a fellow editor's Twitter account is a serious concern and can easily be perceived as harassment. So I'm still wondering how you found the editor's account: did you Google the user's name? Or something else? --MrClog (talk) 22:35, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

For the former yes but I did report that account to Twitter. But I am not sure because most usernames are coincidental. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 22:36, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Porn is allowed on Twitter as long as it's tagged as "explicit content". --47.146.63.87 (talk) 04:58, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• (edit conflict)@SpinnerLaserz: The only time you should go looking up a user's off-site name or activities is if there's potential undisclosed paid editing (and you still don't post anything on-site), and maybe if offsite-canvassing is bringing in WP:NOTHERE. Even in those cases, you don't just post links on this site or even tell people how to find them (in both cases, you email different folks. Otherwise, looking them up is wrong on your part because it's an invasion of privacy. Even if WP:OUTING was not policy, a user looking at or even sharing porn off-site is generally their own damn business and wouldn't be actionable (otherwise we'd only have one of these userboxes). The only exceptions would be if it was child porn (in which case we would block them on the spot -- but we'd have to know for sure that it was their account and not an impostor) or if they were sharing it on-site in violation WP:SPAM. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:37, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Alright, thanks for the advice. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 22:50, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Asking for help to fix a picture

If anyone is able to do this, the image of Pacific Community: File:SPC_MemberMap-2016.webp needs to be changed so Mexico/Central America aren't highlighted.2601:640:4000:3170:C98:399D:D612:1EDE (talk) 22:25, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Someone is going to have to carefully mask the image - it's beyond my graphics design skill. The image on the organization's web site is less useful since it doesn't show the country detail - just pins in the ocean. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:53, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I have done this. However, I need to obtain some advice about upoading (because it was a .webp file; maps should be .png if not .svg). I'll get back when I have the answer and have successfully uploaded. SCHolar44 (talk) 08:03, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

User:2601:640:4000:3170:C98:399D:D612:1EDE, I will upload a fresh new version, amended as you asked, in a few hours' time, and let you know here. (PS: If you create a User Page, this message would get to you automatically.) SCHolar44 (talk) 02:45, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I did so, but a user picked up the fact that the original image was "All rights reserved" and summarily deleted it. Ironically, the original image, all 39 kB of it, was not deleted, even though I mentioned it. I have e-mailed the head office of the Pacific Community for a map they can licence but haven't heard from them. Pacific Time? I'll bow out now. SCHolar44 (talk) 12:31, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Is this username allowed?

The Masterplan of George Soros (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I wonder if this username is allowed per WP:BLPABUSE?-SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 23:36, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@SharabSalam: I suggest you read the info at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention and follow those directions. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 23:53, 15 April 2020 (UTC)