User talk:Marchjuly/Archives/2022/April

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Dodgy date

I assume the access date on the Palisades reference should be 2022? (Not 2020, which is before the publication date.) --Verbarson talkedits 13:01, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that was a mistake. Thank you for catching it Verbarson. — Marchjuly (talk) 20:26, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Question from Paul sandworm on Laal Singh Chaddha (10:39, 6 April 2022)

? --Paul sandworm (talk) 10:39, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't no how to respond to "?". Do you have a question about an edit you made to the article
Laal Singh Chadda? -- Marchjuly (talk
) 12:03, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Teahouse Discussion - Kind of Veering Away from the Issue

I didn't reply to your response, not because I don't respect your answer, but that thread was getting long and it was veering away from the original focus. As you replied, I didn't entirely agree with what you said, but the basic premise that you presented, that freedom of speech is limited to the context in which that speech is issued, it does make lots of sense, and anyone with common sense will see the merit of what you say when you write:

Extended content

Nobody’s right to speak freely has been taken away; there are plenty of ways someone can speak their mind that don’t involve Wikipedia. If someone enters your house or place of business, you can let them say or do whatever they want if you like. Perhaps even at some point (even after only 40 minutes) you may decide enough is enough and start imposing restrictions or maybe even ask them to leave. They have no inalienable right to be in your house if you don’t want them there. For sure, they can continue to speak their mind and exercise their right to free speech somewhere else if they want; they can even complain about you asking them to leave and how you’ve violated their rights if they want. You don’t, however, need to let them back in your house to do any of those things if you don’t want to. — Marchjuly (talk) 00:16, 9 April 2022 (UTC)§

I agree that the right to speak freely does not actually disappear when a person enters a home, or business, or Wikipedia. I agree that the context matters, and effectively I agree with the pragmatic effects of your position, I do not agree that rights can "evaporate" in certain circumstances. I would say that there are rights of individuals that can sometimes conflict with each other, and that the weight of those rights can be ascertained as to which rights overrule each other. Is the right to life more prevalent than the right to liberty, for example? Or the first person's right to speak more prevalent than another, second person's right to speak? Can a person's right to the pursuit of happiness, prevail over a second person's right to freedom of expression? All those can go one way or the other, in terms of how they are contextualised; in what context are we focusing on here?

In Wikipedia, we're in the context of an online website. In your example, we're in the context of a private domain, a person's house. Do the rights of Wikipedia prevail over a user's right to express himself? Do the rights of the homeowner prevail over a guest's right to express himself? Those rights don't disappear. There are simply rights that can prevail over other rights.

That would have been my response. But, again, I didn't see much profit in extending that Teahouse thread any longer than it had already gotten. You had a very good reply, and I thought I should give you the respect of my take on that reply. I basically agree with you. Please forgive me, if it seemed that I didn't pay attention to your position! 69.112.128.218 (talk) 16:19, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I don’t feel disrespected when others don’t respond to a post I made on a Wikipedia because
we can find someone else’s “house” to visit. That is the extent of my interest in what was posted at the Teahouse and what was posted above. If you want to have a broader discussion/debate about individual rights and the Internet (including a website’s right to restrict content) or individual rights vs. group rights, then that’s cool. I’m sure there are plenty of other places for you to do so and plenty of other people to do so with. If you really want to seriously do such things on Wikipedia, try Wikipedia talk:Free speech or one of the Wikipedia:Village pumps and perhaps you'll have better luck and find others to be more receptive. PBWY. — Marchjuly (talk
) 21:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
That hadn't occurred to me, before. I'm glad I decided to put this extra remark on this talk page. Thanks so very much for shedding light on this. It's insight like this that I am appreciative of. 69.112.128.218 (talk) 13:05, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Your help desk response

Regarding the longer of two responses to this question, you seem to have left out a word. I didn't see the question until after it was archived, but to help anyone reading your response, it would be helpful if you went ahead and edited. I don't believe a "copyright" is a person, but maybe you meant "copyright expert"? — Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:13, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank for catching that. The missing word was "lawyer". -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:15, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

New message from Stifle

Hello, Marchjuly. You have new messages at Stifle's talk page.
Message added 11:34, 14 April 2022 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Stifle (talk) 11:34, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Deleted file improvement

Hello sir/mam, I recently come to know that you are going to delete my one file which I had uploaded a while ago, stating that it is invalid.

But is there any way to stop the deletion progress/process as I want this image to use on Wikipedia.

Please, any advice. Thank you.

File name: File:Anubhav Sinha (Indian director).jpg File link: [1]

Bobe8q8661 (talk) 15:56, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi
here and asking for their consent, but you’ll need to first find out who the copyright holder really is. Many famous film directors like Sinha have their photos taken all the time by all kinds of people, but it’s the person taking the photo (not the subject of the photo) who is almost always considered to be the copyright holder of a photo, and it’s the consent of that person that Wikipedia typically needs to verify. — Marchjuly (talk
) 20:04, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
I'm just going to add that there might be another possibility of finding a "free" image that you can upload and use that has to do with the website Bollywood Hungama. There are many images uploaded to Wikimedia Commons taken by Bollywood Hungama photographers that are licensed as c:Template:BollywoodHungama. This is because the Bollywood Hungama has agreed to release certain images taken by its photographers under a free license that Commons accepts. So, if you can find a photo of Sinha taken by a Bollywood Hungama photographer which satisfies all of the condition of said license, then it should be OK to upload to Commons. I do suggest, though, that you ask about the image you want to upload at c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright first before uploading it to given some others a chance to assess whether it's OK to upload. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:21, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

American university of Malta

Hello my friend, I need your help to edit offensive information or delete a negative page and work on a new correct page. the topic is very important. Ahmad alajlani (talk) 16:47, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi
Wikipedia’s guidelines on conflict-of-interesting editing. This is particularly the case if you "work" for the university or otherwise have been asked by the university to change the article in some way. Finally, there actually does appear to have been some discussion in 2020 about issues the university had with the article on the article's talk page. If your concerns are the same, then you can start a new discussion to bring them to the attention of the editors who worked together to resolve things the last time. — Marchjuly (talk
) 20:59, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
@Ahmad alajlani: Why do you keep removing the section heading for this discussion? It doesn't seem offensive to me and it's the title heading you chose when you posted a random question on my user talk page seeking assistance. Your editing here is starting to become a little disruptive and if you continue to make such edits, an administrator will eventually be asked to step in and take action to prevent any further disruption. If there's some problem with the section heading, please clarify what it is and perhaps a different heading can be used instead? -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:39, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Reversion of one your edits on the Tianwen-1 page

Dear Marchjuly, I reverted one of your two recent edits on the Tianwen-1 Wiki page; specifically, your edit changed the image display option to "thumbnail" size. The affected images is that of an illustrative figure from a scientific journal; its presence is intended to show the parameters that the Tianwen-1 landing team calculated in order to distinguish between possible landing ellipses, and as such, it is meant to be read by the journal reader (or in this case, the Wiki article reader). The thumbnail version of the figure's image however, is so small that it is basically unredable and defeats the purpose of placing it on the Wiki page. For this reason, I reverted that particular edit. Playing with the sizing of the image on the page is OK so long as the text in the figure remains redable, and I may try to do this, but a thumbnail is just too small in my opinion. Let me know if you have any concerns. Spotty's Friend (talk) 04:48, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

@
WP:IMAGESIZE. You need to remember that Wikipedia reader's tend to use all kind of different devices and thus not everyone might not be seeing the images the same way as you do with whatever device your using; so, you need to size the images in way that will make them accessible for the average reader and not just in a manner that looks good to you. 660px images may look fine on a laptop or PC with a pretty large monitor, but maybe not so good on other types of devices. -- Marchjuly (talk
) 12:23, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip on the upright image parameter Marchjuly; learned something new. Cheers, Spotty's Friend (talk) 01:03, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
You're welcome. You still need to be aware of the impact using the |upright= parameter can have on other users though. Images should, as much as possible, be sized to provide the best clarity for the majority of readers using the most common types of devices. I understand the temptation to make images that contain lots of detail as big as possible, but this can really mess things up for readers using devices with small screens, which many may be using these days. The images in the Tianwen-1 article already seem a bitlarge for most computers with average-sized screens, but their large size is probably causing some real problems for hand-held devices with much smaller screens; so, what those users are likely seeing is a large image with bits and pieces of text surrounding it. This can make articles really hard to read for certain users, which is something we should be trying to avoid. If there's lots of detail in an image, it's often better to try and use other ways to provide readers with the detail such as is explained in
MOS:ACCESS issues for others. -- Marchjuly (talk
) 09:32, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Draft categories

I didn't know this was a thing. Template:Draft categories seems quite useful. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:19, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi
WP:COLON, but that might seem confusing if you’ve never seen it done before. — Marchjuly (talk
) 20:08, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
I've always done colon thing on categories (etc.), but it seems like a better option for drafts that get userfied (especially since most students wouldn't know how to fix one of those when they moved it back to mainspace. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:57, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
I guess it could depend on the edit summary you leave and whether you think it’s going to be understood or even read at all. You could try
WP:HIDDEN to explain things in the editing window, but that might be confusing. Perhaps in the case of newer editors (like student editors), using the template works best since it’s basically an in-article edit summary. It also might add the page to some category for maintenance purposes. On the other hand, the actual category itself probably won’t show up in the “What links here” section on its page. — Marchjuly (talk
) 21:53, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Marchjuly/Archives/2022/April&oldid=1086273609"