June 15

Exactly what the title says. I accidentally created a redirect while trying to move/archive the page user_talk:CherrySoda, which links back to the main talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CherrySoda (talk • contribs) 02:48, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you want a page in your user space deleting, you can tag it with ((Db-u1)). - David Biddulph (talk) 03:19, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

But are you sure you want User talk:CherrySoda/Archive 1 deleting? Don't you want to replace the redirect content with the content of User talk:CherrySoda/Archive? When you say "making it inaccesible", do you realise that if User talk:CherrySoda/Archive 1 redirects to User talk:CherrySoda it shows (at the top) "(Redirected from User talk:CherrySoda/Archive 1)" with the link back to the archive page being clickable? --David Biddulph (talk) 03:27, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@CherrySoda: I've deleted the page under WP:CSD#U1 (yes, it should have been WP:CSD#G7, but no harm done). You can always recreate it if User talk:CherrySoda/Archive gets too large. Mjroots (talk) 07:37, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Notability (people) says people may be notable if "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times." Is there any cutoff in practice for such offers - for instance in the case of a British person, would receiving an MBE be likely to qualify? rossb (talk) 05:13, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I believe that consensus is that only the higher orders of the OBE are considered to be sufficient to presume notability. I'll look for the link. Meters (talk) 05:20, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Have not found the discussion link yet, but here is confirmation that my memory is correct Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Orders,_decorations,_and_medals/Archive_6#MBE_recipients_all_notable_or_not?.

Perhaps user: Necrothesp can point us to the link before I stumble on it. Meters (talk) 05:28, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, can't find the full discussion. You'll have to wait for someone else to provide it if you want/need it. Meters (talk) 05:38, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We have always considered that CBE and higher are sufficient for notability under WP:ANYBIO #1 (i.e. CBE, CVO, CIE, CMG, CSI, CB, CH, OM and anything that carries the title of Sir or Dame). That comes from long consensus at AfD. See here. OBE, MBE, LVO and MVO are not generally considered to be sufficient to establish notability under ANYBIO, although they do of course add to the chance that a recipient may be notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:24, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm certain I've seen statistics somewhere about what proportion of article views from mobile devices never go beyond the lead, versus what proportion involve the reader clicking at least one section heading to open a section. I can't find those statistics. Can anyone else? Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 11:17, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I see where I can only request a password reset once per 24 hours. My user name was recognized and my email address and it said a reset was being sent to me but I did not receive it. Please help. I suppose another alternative is to re-register with a new user name and password. Do I also need a "new" or different email address? regards

You can have multiple accounts under one email adress, but before that, please check your spamfolder. Password reset emails are known to land there rather frequently. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:34, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Note: In case of interest.--Hildeoc (talk) 15:34, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is there a policy or guideline which asks not to use photoshoot images in BLPs? Special:Diff/1028713024 -- DaxServer (talk) 17:34, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DaxServerNever heard of one. And while I'd expect an image like this to be "ripped" from somewhere, per the info on Commons, that is not so. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:08, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Non-free images of a living person are almost always considered to fail WP:NFCCP#1, replaceability, as an image of that person could be created. Photoshoot images are almost always copyrighted but I see this one isn't (assuming the Flickr page is the photographer uploading the image under a public domain license) so that would make it fine for use. We go by recentness and quality of image when there are multiple free images available. — Bilorv (talk) 18:11, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Bilorv @Gråbergs Gråa Sång Thanks for the clarifications. -- DaxServer (talk) 07:39, 16 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello,

I would like permission to use some of information and the photo from the article at this link on your site, entitled Africatown. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Africatown I plan to use it in the front pages of my children's book. I will credit Wikipedia as the source.

Please let me know if that is okay.

Thank you, Jerrye Sumrall — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.250.216.24 (talk) 17:46, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Absolutely, Wikipedia is published under a Creative Commons license license, which means that it can be reused for many purposes. See Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. As long as you credit Wikipedia, this is permitted. I'd recommend you use a "permanent link" URL to do so (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Africatown&oldid=1028457479). Most images come from Wikimedia Commons, such as the one at the top of Africatown—File:Welcome to Africatown (cropped).jpg—and can also be reused. You should preferably credit the listed author of the image and link to the URL of the specific image page. If you click on an image in an article and see it's hosted on Wikipedia directly with a "fair use" rationale, then this means it is copyrighted—it wasn't Wikipedia volunteers that made it and whether you can reuse it depends on copyright law in your country. — Bilorv (talk) 17:59, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! See this link: Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. I don't know which photo you mean, but click it and then the "More details" button for info. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:00, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is there a template for the citation of primary sources such as diaries, private papers, or syllabi? I am working on a very controversial class offered in the 70s in Nebraska, and the course syllabus would be helpful to quote from. I will primarily be looking at secondary sources, but there is a use for primary ones under policy. Urve (talk) 17:51, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Urve: You may be looking for WP:PRIMARY for guidance. There are templates related to primary sources, but the ones that I found (((Primary sources)) and ((Primary source inline))) urge for their reduction rather than just asserting something is a primary source. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:59, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tenryuu, no, I am already aware of the policy. I am asking if there is something like, e.g., cite journal for diaries or syllabi or whatever. I can do it manually, but the use of citations is sometimes easier for humans to parse and is more consistent. Urve (talk) 18:02, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(edit conflict) Note that "diaries" and "private papers" could fail the verifiability requirement "attributable to reliable, published sources" (emphasis mine). The material should at some point have been made widely available. For instance, I can't cite my own diary even if I'm a world-leading expert in something and I would be reliable for the information per WP:SPS if I wrote it on a blog. Is that the case with these sources? It seems to me that if it's published then the method of publishing would lead itself to an appropriate citation template (e.g. ((cite book)) if the diary was published as a book). But the technical thing you're looking for may be just ((citation)) itself (or take a look at a list like Template:Citation Style documentation/cs1). — Bilorv (talk) 18:05, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bilorv, thanks. The definition of published is unclear, but they're widely available in university archives (and have been quoted in some secondary ones - so I'll probably just quote those instead) - so if that's the bar, it seems acceptable. Will think some more. Thanks for telling me that the citation template is fine enough - wasn't aware. Urve (talk) 18:14, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, I believe that being available in university archives is fine for verifiability. — Bilorv (talk) 18:18, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In recent months there has been debate on this page: Talk:Finasteride. I observed it but was not involved. On May 3, selected topics on Talk:Finasteride were archived by an editor who had not been involved in the discussions to that point, as far as I know. Why were those topics archived, and is there a policy on archiving discussions on Talk pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.84.167.43 (talk • contribs) 18:47, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The information on how and when to archive discussions is at Help:Archiving a talk page. As for why those particular discussions were archived, it's probably best to ask JzG, as JzG is the one who archived them. However, if you will notice, JzG left a closing statement before archiving those discussions indicating that the "OP is Doors22 evading a block." There is a history of one particular user who has been problematic on that article and was blocked as a result. The user periodically comes back in violation of our policy on multiple accounts to continue pushing the argument that got them blocked. In cases like that, it's common to archive such discussions sooner than normal in an effort to avoid feeding the trolls. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 19:31, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. I studied the history of the Talk page (also before submitting this) and didn't see the "closing statement" you refer to. Still don't see it.

This edit. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 22:57, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks.

???(?).

85.149.24.135 (talk) 19:31, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You'll have to give us some more information as to what exactly you are asking. 331dot (talk) 19:32, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, 85.149.24.135. Your recent efforts at "conversating" here have not been constructive. Please see WP:NOTHERE.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is false information on my page - Artis the Spoonman.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artis_the_Spoonman It is about my name. How can I change it? I clicked "Edit", changed a few things but did it wrong. I have trouble understanding complex issues - PTSD Actually.

My name is Artis71.212.132.107 (talk)

Please make an edit request(click for instructions) on Talk:Artis the Spoonman, detailing changes you feel are needed, preferably sourced to independent reliable sources. Note that Wikipedia will typically use the most common name for a subject. 331dot (talk) 21:49, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Artis! Your edit went through, here, but a volunteer undid it because it doesn't provide any reliable sources. Even if you obviously know what is and isn't true about yourself, Wikipedia only reports information that has been published in reliable sources—otherwise, we'd get a lot of people pretending to be other people and a lot of people deliberately adding wrong information as a joke. Because you're the subject of the article, we also prefer you to just make requests of edits, like 331dot tells you how to do above, because we want to stay editorially independent of our subjects. So please make a request but only to add information that is backed up by a news report or link to your personal website or something else which proves to someone with no familiarity with the topic that it is true. We also won't be able to change the article title to just Artis because there are many different things with this name and we need to distinguish between them. — Bilorv (talk) 07:50, 16 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is the positive word — Preceding unsigned comment added by EMIHLE MFEKETHO (talk • contribs) 23:14, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, EMIHLE MFEKETHO, do you have a question? — Bilorv (talk) 07:53, 16 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]