Jump to content

Wikipedia:External links/Noticeboard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Welcome to the external links noticeboard
    This page is for reporting possible breaches of the external links guideline.
    • Post questions here regarding whether particular external links are appropriate or compliant with Wikipedia's guidelines for external links.
    • Provide links to the relevant article(s), talk page(s), and external links(s) that are being discussed.
    • Questions about prominent websites like YouTube, IMDb, Twitter, or Find a Grave might be addressed with information from this guide.
    Sections older than 10 days archived by MiszaBot.
    If you mention specific editors, you must notify them. You may use {{subst:ELN-notice}} to do so.

    Search this noticeboard & archives

    Additional notes:

    To start a new request, enter a report title (section header) below:

    Indicators
    Defer discussion:
     Defer to WPSPAM
     Defer to XLinkBot
     Defer to Local blacklist
     Defer to Abuse filter

    External link[edit]

    How to get external link Alimohmed23 (talk) 13:56, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Welcome to Wikipedia. I do not understand what you want to do. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Does the info at WP:EL help? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:18, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    CSRF Token error for whitelist request edit[edit]

    I was trying to submit the text below at the spam: whitelist page. But no matter what, a small coloured error message popped up saying csrf token error. That's why I can't submit that new thread. It's very frustrating. How do I fix it? Would you be able to help with unblocking this specific WebLink into the whitelist for attaching a ref-link to a company on a page?

    Here was my planned text entry in the spam whitelist request page.

    Resolved
     – The relevant editor helped add a relevant text in another page for me. ObiKKa (talk) 22:55, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    www.xyz.com.sg[edit]

    @ObiKKa, I think you're on the wrong page. Try posting this at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:16, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    <polite cough> Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 22:19, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Hey. That is the exact page I tried submitting the text on with various edits many times today. It just doesn't work.

    This error always popped up at top of page during publishing stage: "Error, edit not published. Invalid CSRF token.". ObiKKa (talk) 22:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I've moved it there for you. No idea if you'll be able to reply with the Android app; it is, as you've discovered, buggy. Try using a browser if possible. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 22:40, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Ooh, thank you. I have checked that new addition over there. I am surprised that it would only work in a desktop/laptop browser (or in difficult circumstances inside a mobile phone browser). Much pleasure. I'll try to add the resolved tag above this section. ObiKKa (talk) 22:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I suppose it's WP:ITSTHURSDAY. JTanner (WMF), are you seeing problems with Android app edits? WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:28, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi JTanner. I checked that bug report and feature request page link. Looks interesting. Should I ask over there for why the CSRF Token error keeps preventing me from posting text over in the spam whitelist request page in the Android app? I also tried to make another reply today after my request was accepted and I made the edit with the whitelisted reflink. But that CSRF Token error popped up again there in the app. So I logged into Wikipedia in a mobile browser (Brave) in the same phone and added the reply there.
    I have one feature request too. I would like a finder tool during the preview stage of edits in the Android app, not only in the first edit stage. It's coz the huge pages would take a long time to scroll down on the thin portrait-style phone screen. ObiKKa (talk) 16:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello @ObiKKa,
    This is Amal Ramadan, I am a Sr.Movment Communications Specialist supporting the mobile apps team in the foundation. Can I ask you to send a screen recording video that shows how you det this error to our support email android-support@wikimedia.org and I will make sure to include our software engineers and update you on how this can be solved? Thanks. ARamadan-WMF (talk) 08:16, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Advice request[edit]

    In this edit a SPA account replaced the correct external link – www.balboaacademy.edu.pa – with a gambling spamlink that is almost identical (in fact it looks at first glance to be more likely to be the real site).

    To go to the trouble (and expense) of setting up a .org to hijack links to this one minor school in Panama seems excessive on the part of the spammer… unless they'll be back to add it again and again until it sticks. Would we blacklist for that risk, or is it too small a risk? Is there an edit filter it could be added to perhaps? 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:74C9:F21C:7D37:E976 (talk) 14:09, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    You can report this at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist, where admins like User:Ohnoitsjamie can take a look. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:23, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There's only been one attempt to spam it so far. We'd end up with a pretty massive blacklist if we blacklisted every site that was spammed at least once. Though I'm not a big baseball fan, I do subscribe to the "three strikes yer out" rule, though if the spammed link is connected to other blacklisted links or spam rings, I will blacklist on sight. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:06, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Human mitochondrial genetics[edit]

    Hello. There is currently a dispute between myself and Hipal regarding the inclusion of certain links on the Human mitochondrial genetics page. The links in question are to scientific resources for visualising and analysing mtDNA. Ivan (talk) 04:19, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm inclined to think that at least one of these should be included under WP:ELYES #3 (neutral and accurate information, but too much to put it directly in the article – my go-to example of this an online BMI calculator for Body mass index). Someone interested in Human mitochondrial genetics might also be interested in knowing what the gene sequences are. I'm not sure what the different capabilities are for each of these four websites. If they all have basically the same contents, then a smaller number would be appropriate. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Иованъ came here directly without explaining why the links belong.
    Thank you, WhatamIdoing, for giving us an argument for inclusion.
    The links are:
    1. ISOGG YBrowse: A genome browser.
    2. mitoWheel: A mitogenome browser.
    3. mtDNAprofiler: An mtDNA sequence analysis tool.
    4. mtDNAtool: Tom Glad's mtDNA analysis tool.
    The subject matter seems far more complicated than BMI. I'm concerned that we're adding links that would be helpful to few at best. I suspect that people familiar enough with the topic to use such tools wouldn't be coming to the Wikipedia page at all, but instead would be working from far better materials. --Hipal (talk) 16:59, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I will do my best to provide objective information for your assessment.
    • ISOGG YBrowse is the only online resource of its kind. It is a linear mitogenome browser, which among other things breaks the mitogenome into individual genes. There is a learning curve, but it is rather mild for most applications and the resource is aimed at laypeople. Everyone who has been interested in mitochondrial genes themselves has used this tool at one point.
    • mitoWheel is a simpler, graphically more intuitive, but far less capable mitogenome visualiser. No learning curve, but limited functionality.
    • mtDNAprofiler and mtDNAtool are two resources that can take "raw" sequences and determine an mtDNA clade (and more) from it, each compatible with different formats. I suspect that people familiar enough with the topic to use such tools wouldn't be coming to the Wikipedia page at all, but instead would be working from far better materials. Genetic genealogy is a large branch of citizen science. None of these tools are geared towards professionals (any more). Excluding these links on the grounds that they would be too complicated to use is like excluding a link to eBird from a birdwatching page just because there is a learning curve to reporting a sighting reliably. Ivan (talk) 18:06, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for the descriptions. Based upon them, I'd lean toward #2 as the sole link to add of the four, if we add any. --Hipal (talk) 01:51, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Whereas I would lean towards deleting #3 and #4, if we delete any. Unless you write a separate article on YBrowse, an article on human mitochondrial DNA without an external link to it is like an article on free software without a link to Github. Ivan (talk) 02:02, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It sounds like having both of the last two would be a little redundant. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:38, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Would you agree on the inclusion of the first two, then? Ivan (talk) 15:41, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think all four are permissible per the guideline, but that all four aren't necessary. I could agree to have all four, but I think that three or fewer would be sufficient to meet the goal (i.e., to provide readers with more information/resources than we can put directly into the Wikipedia article itself).
    If we decided to have three, I'd exclude one of the last two. If we decided to have two, I'm not sure whether it makes more sense to have one of the first pair plus one of the more complex ones, or just the two first/simpler ones. If we decided to have only one, I'd suggest one of the first two. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:07, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Alright, I will delete the link to mtDNAprofiler and reinsert the remaining three. Thank you. Ivan (talk) 16:10, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In this edit, Hipal just removed both ISOGG YBrowse and mtDNAtool from the External Links section with the summary if we have any consensus, it's only for one. Since your wording included I think all four are permissible per the guideline but also if we decided to have three, I'd exclude one of the last two, I combined that with my own support for all but mtDNAprofiler (in retrospect not a good external link), for a 2:1 majority opinion. Would you prefer Hipal's reduction to 1 source or my reduction to 3 sources? Ivan (talk) 17:32, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Hang on please. Do the last two do anything without the user providing data? --Hipal (talk) 16:47, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    No, it does not. Though to be clear, the data provided does not need to be the user's own. There are public databases that share samples. Ivan (talk) 16:54, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. My apologies, but I should have been more specific with my question: The last two require data from outside sources, correct? --Hipal (talk) 17:11, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That is correct. Ivan (talk) 17:22, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. I wanted to make sure I wasn't overlooking something.
    The fourth seems far too technical.
    As for the third, I'd expect that where ever a person is getting their date from would recommend some analysis tools appropriate for the knowledge level of the person. I don't see a case where a person who could use the tool would actually come to this article without already having awareness of appropriate tools. --Hipal (talk) 17:32, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see a case where a person who could use the tool would actually come to this article without already having awareness of appropriate tools Since Wikipedia does not support commercial external links, there are very few tools available for analysing so many aspects of one's own or another's mitogenome. Most of these are more haplogroup-focused than mutation-focused. This tool is noncommercial. I don't think that a reader who can get through the Electron transport chain, and humanin section would find copy-pasting data to find mutations daunting, and as an older tool on a website heavily disadvantaged by modern search algorithms, it is unlikely to be discovered by a simple search. It should probably be recaptioned from "An mtDNA analysis tool" to "Retreives mutations from mitochondrial data files". Ivan (talk) 17:49, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Now that I understand your opposition to mtDNAtool, why did you remove YBrowse? Ivan (talk) 17:52, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I removed it because it's restoration was premature.
    I thank you for taking the time discuss the links. I'd like to hear what others have to say. --Hipal (talk) 21:23, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I know you'd like to hear from others, but as of right now there is a 2:1 = 66% consensus for my last edit, so in light of the lack of either a closure process or a minimum participation requirement at ELN, I would appreciate it very much if you took that last revert back. And recaption from the last link from "An mtDNA analysis tool" to "Retreives mutations from mitochondrial data files". Ivan (talk) 00:17, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    For the benefit of the user providing a third opinion, the disputed link is "mtDNAtool: Retrieves mutations from mitochondrial data files." Ivan (talk) 23:34, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]