Wikipedia:Help desk

Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)

• For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
• Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
• If your question is about a Wikipedia article, draft article, or other page on Wikipedia, tell us what it is!
• If you are having an issue while editing, which editor are you using?
• Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
• For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
• New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners (but please don't ask in both places).

Ask a question

Can't edit this page? ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

There are two Wikipedians looking for help. (refresh)

Serif font for headings

Can one of you fine folks please set me up with a custom css that returns the section headings to use a serif font, in articles and Talk pages?

I have read the discussions on this. I don't want to turn all of the "improvements" off -- the horizontal line is OK above the heading, and the "latest comment 5 minutes ago" line is also OK. But I really hate the sans serif font on the section headings.

I would appreciate it if someone would make me a CSS file to "fix" this. And install it in my "profile".  :-)

Thank you! David10244 (talk) 05:36, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Typeface_in_discussion_headings  AxG / ✉  15:47, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

@AxG Yes, I had already read all of that... It's a somewhat complex discussion among several participants, with mentions of bugs, patches, recommended css that apparently produces errors, and another post that says "I did XYZ and it didn't work".

Hence my request here, because I am expecting some of the helpful and seasoned hosts to know css..

I know basically what css stylesheets are, but I have not created any for my account.

I was (and I still) am hopeful that someone will be kind enough to implement some css for me, based on a comment that I had read just before posting this request. ESanders of WMF said "I think user CSS is the best place for customisations like this".

Here's hoping! Thanks. David10244 (talk) 01:16, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

@David10244

Please try this:

1. Copy all the following as a single block, making sure to include the dot at the beginning and include the lonely curly bracket at the end:

.ext-discussiontools-visualenhancements-enabled
.ext-discussiontools-init-section.mw-heading2,
.ext-discussiontools-visualenhancements-enabled
.ext-discussiontools-init-section {
  font-family: serif;
}

2. Go to your own user CSS page at User:David10244/common.css and click the edit button. (You may see notices and so on on the page, put there by Wikipedia - just leave them as they are, and click the edit button as you ordinarily would.)

If you receive a notice that your action will create a new page, that's fine, agree to it. Then paste in the blob you copied, and click the save button.

You're done. Except that just this time, you may need to do a special reload of the Wikipedia page if you don't see your results right away. Do this by holding the Shift key while you use your browser's Reload function. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:44, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

@TooManyFingers Thank you, that's exactly the kind of help I need. And thanks for the pointer to (my not yet present) CSS. I will try it when I am at my computer instead of my tablet. Cool! David10244 (talk) 03:20, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

I have since discovered that this good and correct solution only covers one of the trickiest parts, namely getting serif text in the new feature on discussion pages that was being discussed on the thread we had a link to further up this topic. If you want that, you will need to add this to your file; however, it omits the easier, more basic places where you also might want serif text, and to get that you'll need to add a few more lines of a similar sort, into the same file using the same method. I've never seen exactly which lines those are, but since they're the ones with the more obvious and well-known names, I'll find them without much trouble. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 03:49, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

@TooManyFingers Ah, thanks for that. I haven't been to my desktop computer yet.

But you see why I was saying "I know it's complicated", and the previous answer was not complete (or really very helpful).

Your answer was way more helpful, and I appreciate your help.

I hate to ask the developers for more "options", but different people like different things. I like the other discussion changes but certainly not the sans serif font.

It's not the end of the world, but if others feel the same way then an option OR an easy set of CSS would be good.

It might be that a lot of editors don't have any CSS and don't know how to set it up. David10244 (talk) 05:51, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Obtaining acceptance of non-promotional editorial content.

Hello. I am writing about Alternate Concepts. I am a paid communications consultant who ranks Alternate Concepts, aka ACI, among my longstanding clients, with a relationship dating back to 2006. By way of background, I am a former print journalist (1987-1999) with several awards earned, including investigative reporting recognition in two states. I am leading an effort to provide Wiki users with a fact-based record of ACI's work at the intersection of public transit and private sector. It strikes me that more transparency regarding a private operator of public transit is important, and that is the spirit that was used in revising the text that was previously in place until last week. Please note that I aggregated and inserted citations for the content with full intent of adhering to Wiki policies. Last week, an editor named TonySt - User:TonySt - deleted all of the content after publication, claiming it was promotional. Via the 'Talk' function, I was able to communicate with TonySt to better understand the requirements, including disclosure on my page of conflict of interest about my work with ACI. Also, i spent a week carefully line editing the text to remove any adjectives or words that could not be supported by citations in the public record. Because ACI manages public services and/or provides support for a variety of public entities, I was exceptionally careful to cite records that are verifiable and linked to cites. The text sets forth the scope of contracts that ACI holds or held in the service of public transit. The claim that such content is 'promotional' defies credulity. It is not presented for the purpose of obtaining contracts, a process that is strictly managed by way of state ad federal bid regulations (under the shroud of secrecy, it should be mentioned.) It's sole purpose is to educate users about the nature of the services that ACI provides to the public via government entities. With respect, TonySt undid all of the additional edits yesterday without comment under the claim of promotional with a conflict of interest. This is frustrating because there has been no communication as to the offense committed, i.e., what text is considered promotional at this point? Is disclosure of a COI not enough, i.e. is more verbiage needed? I set forth these issues in the best spirit possible - transparency. Considering the importance of public transit to humankind, it would seem self-evident that private operators of transit systems would be encouraged to set forth their background, experience, current and former contracts, etc. Of course, the text is editable by all Wiki editors, which would allow for more edits as needed. However, to delete all of the content seems directly in contrast to the stated mission of the Wikimedia Foundation to to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license. The edited Alternate Concepts page is strictly educational and factual. I respectfully submit it merits to be available to people of the world. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 18:07, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

It's sole purpose is to educate users about the nature of the services that ACI provides Wikipedia considers this to be "promotion" within our scope of that word. Promotion is anything designed to bring attention to a subject. A Wikipedia article should generally be a completely neutral and detached summary of the information available in reliable, independent sources completely unaffiliated with and uninfluenced by the subject of the article.

I would suggest you read WP:YESPROMO and WP:PAIDADVICE. Athanelar (talk) 19:45, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

This is a standard that's incredibly difficult to understand in 21st century vernacular. How does sharing information bring attention to it? This content will not be publicized. It will not be distributed. It is as neutral and detached as humanly possible within the framework of an expert (me) who has tracked the company's work for 20+ years. With respect, I can provide reliable independent sources to verify all content and remove ACI website content - but lordy, this is upside down thinking. ACI will not profit from the publication of a Wiki page. It will not benefit from publication other than to have accurate, verifiable info in the public domain. Much different than the tens of thousands of public figures who are featured on the site, etc. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 20:12, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

ACI will not profit from the publication of a Wiki page. It will not benefit from publication other than to have accurate, verifiable info in the public domain And if that wasn't a benefit to them, why would they be paying you to do it as part of their marketing/PR strategy? The Wikipedia article about them is the second google search result after their own website; that's a pretty major SEO boon. Athanelar (talk) 04:43, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

The 'stub' page that's been in place for years is inaccurate, and the company's leadership asked me to lead an effort to have content that on point, verifiable, etc. They don't benefit from SEO because they don't sell a product. Their credibility with public transportation authorities is gained or lost on the basis of highly technical documents that are submitted via publicly advertised Request for Qualifications (RFQ) and Request for Proposals (RFP) legal advertisements for rail and transit operations and maintenance services. Read more here to learn general information about the RFQ process and here for the RFP process. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 13:46, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

@ScottDFarmelant, I will reply here as well as on your talk page. I have not edited Alternate Concepts in more than one week. Your edits were undone by another editor yesterday because they felt they were promotional edits, as you can see in the page history of the article. My name is included in the edit summary because they changed it back to how it was after I edited it on July 7. TonySt 20:27, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you TonySt. It remains confusing as to why this is considered promotional as COI has been published, all adjectives removed, all cites inserted from 3rd party verifiable and trustworthy resources. ACI is an unusual entity because it provides the public with a service yet doesn't own the underlying assets that serve the public. Key point is there's nothing to be gained by accurate content other than public education and understanding of the services they use an rely upon to access work, school, healthcare, R&R, etc. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 20:31, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Promotional means what audience it's for, not what style it's in. If you make it so that customers and investors come away stymied because they found none of what they wanted to know, that's non-promotional.

Another way to put this: Only write what will be required learning for a history class in the year 2365. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 21:12, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

A whole different way of putting it: Wanting to make the public aware that these services are available is the very definition of promotion. The attempted fixes you described above are merely the difference between nice promotion and not-nice promotion. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 22:01, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Neither the current version of the article, nor ScottDFarmelant's much longer promotional versions, answers two obvious questions:

1. What does the company actually do? Own trains? Run trains on behalf of their owner, employing train drivers etc.? Do the timetabling for trains? Something else?
2. Why does it have such a silly name?

Maproom (talk) 07:11, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

This is the second sentence of the page, and clearly states exactly what ACI does for public transit authorities:

ACI provides transportation operations, coordination, consulting and maintenance services to multi-modal public authorities that own light rail, subway, streetcar, rapid transit, commuter rail, and bus networks across the United States.

Great question on the name, and there is an answer but there's no citation available! It reflects the company's origin to help secure financing for public transit authorities from private sources to fund infrastructure growth. That model obviously changed over time to a focus on operations and maintenance contracts. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 13:40, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

@ScottDFarmelant Please clearly define the following terms: "transport operations", "coordination", "consulting" TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 19:13, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

For example, delivering biscuits is a transport operation, improving guitar technique is coordination, and dress-code advice is consulting, but I'm pretty sure those aren't what you meant. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 05:01, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

See also WP:SOLUTIONS. Athanelar (talk) 05:07, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Transport operations (for passenger rail and public transit): Moving people via public transit, buses, or trains. For ACI, transport operations means working under contract for public transportation authorities or agencies to manage the transportation of passengers by rail or bus.

Transport coordination: Assisting public transportation authorities or agencies with the management of transportation of passengers by rail or bus.

Transport consulting: Advising public transportation authorities or agencies about the management of transportation of passengers by rail or bus. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 13:01, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

I think the answer is along the lines of owning and maintaining the rolling stock for a number of relatively small rail lines, hopefully making it more economical for those lines to operate than if they each bought their own. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 19:11, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

Operations and Maintenance companies like ACI do not own assets typically, and when they do, they lease assets to public owner entities. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 12:51, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

@ScottDFarmelant Again, which you didn't grasp in any of the discussion, is that notability depends on what has been published about this company in independent media, by non-press-release-prompted, disinterested authors. Not whether transportation, or this company's place in the industry, is important, but what has been published about the company. Nothing else matters. David10244 (talk) 03:56, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

@ScottDFarmelant Why should users be educated "about the nature of the services that ACI provides to the public via government entities"? If it's all done in secrecy, then we don't need to know about it. Right? David10244 (talk) 01:21, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Notability of Alternate Concepts

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The best place to continue this discussion is at the AFD for the article because that where a consensus on the subject's Wikipedia notability is going to be established. Trying to hold what is essentially the same discussion simulatenously on two different pages will only lead to fragmentation, repetition, or both, which in turn will just confuse matters. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:51, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

---

@ScottDFarmelant:, in case you have not noticed, the article has been nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternate Concepts. The criteria for notability (suitability for a Wikipedia article) of a company are explained at WP:NCORP and a key section is WP:SIRS, which says that several sources about the company need to

1. "Contain significant coverage addressing the subject of the article directly and in depth."
2. "Be completely independent of the article subject."
3. "Meet the standard for being a reliable source."
4. "Be a secondary source; primary and tertiary sources do not count towards establishing notability."

TSventon (talk) 13:36, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

With respect, ACI exists at the intersection of public transit and private commerce, which creates a lack of transparency that ACI would prefer to eliminate to the degree possible. This is the challenge - who will share content about a company that exists in the public sector and behind the scenes other than somebody connected directly to the organization? Considering the many aspects of Wikipedia that are leveraged to publicize and promote commercial interests - entertainment/Hollywood, tech giants, pharma - it's fascinating that a transport management company is treated so harshly in its pursuit of sharing verifiable, non-commercial, non-promotional information in a transparent manner via Wikipedia - content that would seemingly benefit the public that uses and relies on bus, rail and similar transit services. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 14:05, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

@ScottDFarmelant We are treating this company as we would any other topic which clearly does not meet our criteria for inclusion. The fact is Wikipedia has, unfortunately, millions of bad articles that do not meet our criteria for inclusion but no volunteer editor has improved or marked them for deletion yet. qcne (talk) 14:18, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

I don't dispute this, but I respectfully suggest the "any other topic" does not apply here because the services in question are central to the daily lives of millions of people across the world. Knowledge is power. ACI believes people should know about the contracts they hold and the services they provide to public transportation authorities across the USA. It's my hope that editors would be interested in helping solve the problem rather than dismiss it as a 'bad article.' ScottDFarmelant (talk) 14:27, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Being "central to the daily lives of millions of people across the world" isn't one of our criteria for inclusion. Our criteria for inclusion is clearly stated at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). You have not demonstrated in any way the company meets any of the criteria for inclusion. qcne (talk) 14:31, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Fine, but why then is there a "stub" article that is out-of-date and inaccurate? ScottDFarmelant (talk) 14:48, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Because it was created in 2021 by a volunteer editor. It is common for editors to create stubs that might not meet our criteria for inclusion. The outcome is either improvement of the content to meet our criteria, or deletion. There is currently a deletion discussion going on at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Alternate_Concepts. qcne (talk) 14:53, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I'm aware of the conversation. Public transportation appears to obviously and clearly meet the notability standard. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 14:54, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Which, specific, Primary criteria for inclusion do you believe it meets? qcne (talk) 14:56, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

From Wikipedia "Notability" page...

"When evaluating the notability of organizations or products, please consider whether they have had any significant or demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education..."

Public transportation has a profound effect, or if you will, significant and demonstrable, on society and economies. There is readily available verifiable information from reliable sources that provide evidence of notability of public transportation and by extension, the entities that operate and maintain the services. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 14:53, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

I like how you purposely didn't include the sentence directly above No matter how important editors personally believe an organization to be, it should not have a stand-alone article in Wikipedia unless reliable sources independent of the organization have given significant coverage to it.

Your sources do not evidence that this company has had any significant or demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education etc. qcne (talk) 14:55, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Apologies for not including that, but as has been stated in every thread, the article is extensively researched with citations for all statements of fact. This includes government websites, academic research sites, public transit organizations, main stream news media, and trade media. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 14:58, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

And you've completely avoided the point which is: there is not proof of notability via significant coverage in multiple, reliable, independent sources.

I get it: this is your job and this is your client. But this is exactly why we don't like editors with a conflict of interest editing articles. Imagine this argument, repeated for every company on earth, by every PR professional. It would destroy Wikipedia. qcne (talk) 15:01, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

The article that is nominated for deletion had proposed content edits with citations from websites maintained by public agencies in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, San Juan, Washington, DC, as well as the federal government (Federal Railroad Administration, Federal Transit Administration.) It included citations from media outlets like the Boston Globe, Hartford Courant, NBC 4 News/Washington DC, and American City Business Journals are referenced. It linked to citations from the non-governmental research bodies like the Transit Research Institute and World Transit Research. It also included links to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Trade publications like Railway Technology, and Railway Track and Structures are cited. Other citations include the American Passenger Transportation Association (APTA), the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and technical publications like Movement Engineering, Transportation Review and Transit Lab. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 15:19, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Namedropping your sources tells us nothing. It's not merely about who says something, but what they say. The sources need to provide significant coverage of this specific company and must not simply cover the routine business activities of the company. Athanelar (talk) 15:52, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

That means you need to demonstrate that this specific company has had that kind of significant impact; with the sources to back it up. Not that the company is part of an industry that has had such an impact. Athanelar (talk) 14:55, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

See last reply. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 15:20, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

There are no special considerations when it comes to article inclusion; public good does not provide any exception to the typical requirements. Athanelar (talk) 14:31, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Public good is not the point. It's public education and awareness that's the point. Specifically, public transportation has a profound effect, or if you will, significant and demonstrable, on society and economies. There is readily available verifiable information from reliable sources that provide evidence of notability of public transportation and by extension, the entities that operate and maintain the services. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 14:51, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

No, there is no "by extension." Notability is not inherited, public transport companies aren't automatically notable just because the concept of public transport is notable.

I'm not sure why you're so intent to argue the point here. We have very clear guidelines on how the notability of organisations and companies are determined at WP:NCORP. Either you demonstrate the company meets those guidelines or there's no basis for an article; no two ways about it. Athanelar (talk) 14:54, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Right, but they are notable by virtue of actively operating four passenger rail systems in Arizona, Connecticut, Maryland, and New Jersey as well as San Juan? There seems to be a clear basis for an article... ScottDFarmelant (talk) 14:56, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

No, they are not notable by virtue of actively operating four passenger rail systems in Arizona, Connecticut, Maryland, and New Jersey as well as San Juan. Running four passenger rail systems is not a criteria for notability. Why are you not understanding this? qcne (talk) 14:58, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

A criteria for notability "significant or demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies," [emphasis added in bold.] The passenger rail systems in questions meet all of this basic criteria for notability and directly impact hundreds of thousands of people. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 15:01, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

No, that isn't a criteria for notability. You have misread the policy page. qcne (talk) 15:02, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

We're not talking about whether "passenger rail systems" in general are notable; they obviously are, hence why we have an article about them at Passenger train. You need to demonstrate that this specific company is notable. And no, it does not inherit notability merely by being involved in the passenger rail industry. Athanelar (talk) 15:03, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

No? Where does it say anything of the sort in WP:NCORP?

What makes a company notable, as is plainly stated there, is that it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. The scope of the company's operations, its subjective importance to public life, and whatever else you might argue, is totally irrelevant as far as our requirements are concerned. What you need is the presence of multiple sources meeting the golden rule, nothing else. Athanelar (talk) 15:00, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Here is the citation: Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) The text you question is set forth in the first subsection of the first major subject header ("Decisions based on verifiable evidence" entitled "No Inherent Notability." ScottDFarmelant (talk) 15:03, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure how that supports your argument. Athanelar (talk) 15:04, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

For a communication professional, it's really interesting that you don't seem to be able to read headings. The Decisions based on verifiable evidence is very obviously an informative heading to help readers assess notability based on sources. The actual criteria is then, very obviously, directly below named Primary criteria. qcne (talk) 15:05, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

You men this, ys?

Primary criteria

See also: Wikipedia:No original research § Primary, secondary and tertiary sources; and Wikipedia:Notability § General notability guideline

Shortcuts

• WP:ORGCRITE
• WP:ORGCRIT

A company, corporation, organization, group, product, or service is presumed notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.

The article that is nominated for deletion had proposed content edits with citations on the basis of significant multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of ACI, including websites maintained by public agencies in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, San Juan, Washington, DC, as well as the federal government (Federal Railroad Administration, Federal Transit Administration.) It included citations from media outlets like the Boston Globe, Hartford Courant, NBC 4 News/Washington DC, and American City Business Journals are referenced. It linked to citations from the non-governmental research bodies like the Transit Research Institute and World Transit Research. It also included links to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Trade publications like Railway Technology, and Railway Track and Structures are cited. Other citations include the American Passenger Transportation Association (APTA), the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and technical publications like Movement Engineering, Transportation Review and Transit Lab.

It would be wonderful to cite more resources, which would surely happen if the content in question is approved for publication. Thank you. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 15:23, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Where are all those sources you say you cited??? qcne (talk) 15:24, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Deleted by editors who objected to content on basis of me posting as paid consultant, which I disclosed in keeping with COI policy. Here's the text that was proposed then deleted via the Edit History section.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alternate_Concepts&oldid=1364521381 ScottDFarmelant (talk) 15:28, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

It would be wonderful if a non-paid editor cared enough to work on the proposed content so it could pass muster. Key point on this end is ACI wants more information in public domain about the 'boring business' of public transit, not less. As their rep, my role is to do what's possible within the confines of every internet platform's requirements and that's what i'm doing here. Thank you. ScottDFarmelant (talk) 15:30, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, no, it was reverted because it was heavily promotional in tone; full of synthesized material; full of unencyclopedic and undue detail; an excessive reliance on primary sources; and still didn't prove notability.

You wrote a company tender document, not a Wikipedia article. It was wholly inappropriate for Wikipedia which is why it was reverted.

This is exactly why we hate CoI editors editing on Wikipedia. qcne (talk) 15:33, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm doing my best and have asked for guidance. I removed all adjectives for example to avoid any possible 'promotion.' Regardless of who write it (multiple parties), it's not tender document, aka a bid response submittal, which is a highly technical legal document that includes hundreds of forms, financial documents, technical filings, etc. so that phrase simply not accurate. What's been challenging personally is the many statements about claimed issues without follow up as to what's acceptable. How else would a transportation operations and maintenance entity set forth the services it's contracted for without listing said services, outcomes, impacts, etc.? ScottDFarmelant (talk) 15:38, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

How else would a transportation operations and maintenance entity set forth the services it's contracted for... It shouldn't. That's the point. As we've tried to communicate to you many times, a Wikipedia article about a company should primarily consist of a summary of things written by people completely unrelated to the company. Wikipedia is not a place for companies to "set forth" their service offerings. Athanelar (talk) 15:56, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

@ScottDFarmelant It sounds like your company can operate just fine, even if the public doesn't know about it. David10244 (talk) 01:31, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

How to show sidebar

how to add sidebar in settings ~2026-40500-17 (talk) 22:56, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-40500-17: To show the main menu, click the hamburger icon (three lines) on the top left and click “move to sidebar”. To show the tools menu, click the three dots on the top right and click “move to sidebar”. To show the appearance menu, click the glasses icon on the top right and click “move to sidebar”. If you are on mobile, there is no sidebar.

Wikipedian ^{Talk to me!} _{or not…} 00:42, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Ship colors

I tried to download a great article about ship colors, but the only thing that wouldn't print was the color samples. Why?

I wanted a pdf of an article titled 'World War II ship camouflage measures of the United States Navy', which of couese includes color samples. The article printed fine, except for all the color samples, which are empty (white). Is there a workaround for this? Threedeewiz (talk) 02:48, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Did the blue links come out really blue on the print? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 03:26, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Looking at the source of World War II ship camouflage measures of the United States Navy, the colour samples aren't images, they are hexadecimal RGB values in tables. That may be the issue, though I'm not sure what the fix is. If you don't get an answer here, try asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing. Bear in mind though that accurate colour reproduction will depend in part on the abilities of your printer and/or your computer screen: don't expect colours to necessarily look the same on different media. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:04, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Interesting. I tried downloading the article as a PDF, and then viewing the resulting PDF on screen. Whether I did so using Firefox, Chromium, Document Viewer (Evince), or qpdfview (all on the same computer), the photographs appeared as they should, but the color (as well as the not-colored) samples were white/blank. My computer isn't connected to a printer, but I imagine that for me (i) the color samples wouldn't print, and (ii) this would have nothing to do with the printer or printer driver. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 06:36, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

The colors in the article are set as table cell background colors, but Wikipedia style sheet overwrites them with white backgrounds when printed:

@media print { .wikitable > tr > th, .wikitable > tr > td, .wikitable > * > tr > th, .wikitable > * > tr > td { background: #fff !important; color: #000 !important; border: 1pt solid #aaa; padding: 0.4em 0.6em; } } MKFI (talk) 09:14, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

@Threedeewiz: I have replaced the cell backgrounds with {{Color strip}}s. MKFI (talk) 10:27, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

THANK YOU!!! This makes the article truly useful as a guide in a complicated subject. Yes, colors are a tricky thing to deal with in computers and printing, but a guide like this is a real aid in pointing ome in the right direction. Well dome. Threedeewiz (talk) 08:52, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

"Guaranteeing" a Wikipedia page

Hi,

How wary should one be if, say, a digital marketing agency promises an attorney that they can promise/guarantee that they will get them a standalone page? How likely is that agency scamming and/or using black hat methods to secure a page on Wikipedia? Could you share how a black hat method could guarantee a page for someone? How strict are Wikipedia's guidelines when approving a page submitted under "notable person" and how susceptible to those black hat methods are they? Any insight into how credible a "promise to get a Wikipedia page" is? Thanks so much. Itsmeblondie90 (talk) 07:52, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Itsmeblondie90 You should be extremely wary. No one can make you any promises related to Wikipedia. Please read the scam warning carefully.

Note that Wikipedia's Terms of Use requires the disclosure of paid editing; anyone coming up with some excuse to not do this is trying to scam you. Never give anyone money to edit Wikipedia for you. 331dot (talk) 07:55, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Most people on Earth do not meet the definition of notability for people. Wikipedia is not a place to merely document someone's activities or accomplishments, it is a place to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage- meaning critical analysis and commentary- say about a person. Also know that an article is not necessarily something to desire. 331dot (talk) 07:58, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very, very much. The easier one could communicate that high threshold, the better. I appreciate you help. Itsmeblondie90 (talk) 09:14, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

What 331dot says. But aside from that, you ask Could you share how a black hat method could guarantee a page for someone? This question surprises me. Would you ask a restaurateur "Could you share how a 'dine-and-dash' couple could enjoy a slap-up dinner at your place, not pay, and be guaranteed to elude video cameras, security staff, and the police?"? -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 08:13, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

That is exactly how it sounds, doesn't it? That's a hilariously apt observation. I guess I'm trying to get an idea of how it could slip through the cracks. I want to be able to know if someone's strategy involves scummy, sneaky tactics if they pitch it to someone who wouldn't know any better. Itsmeblondie90 (talk) 09:12, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Some people actually could promise you an article will be created if they break the rules. However, the article would probably be crap, be deleted within a day, and leave a deletion log which makes it harder to get an article later. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:41, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

@Itsmeblondie90 Since it hasn't been said already, please forward any such offers you may have received to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org so they can be dealt with appropriately. These people are two-bit scammers banking on the fact laypeople have no idea how the Wikipedia article creation process works. Athanelar (talk) 07:17, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

I will certainly do so. Much appreciated. ~2026-40912-74 (talk) 10:42, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Articles created like this invariably stink like a three day old fish, due to the use of puffery, spin and LLM (among others). See also WP:BOSS. Nobody should create an article that they are involved with, as it won't last very long when experienced Wikipedians read it.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 11:58, 21 July 2026 (UTC).

@Itsmeblondie90: Someone can guarantee an article about you by making you genuinely notable, with multiple stories about you in major mainstream news outlets. This happens e.g. to murder victims and kidnap victims if the crime is hideous enough. -Arch dude (talk) 13:26, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

What do you consider "heinous enough?" Rather, what does Wikipedia consider "heinous enough?" Again, I've read the guidelines, I just want a fuller picture, if that makes sense. Itsmeblondie90 (talk) 13:31, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

@Itsmeblondie90 See WP:CRIME for that. ⠀⠀.nhals8⠀⠀ 14:11, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Appreciate it. Itsmeblondie90 (talk) 15:50, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

It's not a question of what Wikipedia considers 'heinous enough', it's what the newspapers (etc.) consider 'heinous enough' to prompt them to publish stories about it. Anything (or -body) that gets multiple independent pieces written about it (them) in Reliable sources likely meets the criteria (see WP:Golden rule) for having an article about it/them.

Anything/body that/who doesn't, probably doesn't. (There are exceptions: People who have achieved certain elected positions or appointed posts; named human settlements, and biological species recognised by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, ICN International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, or International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses are a priori assumed to be notable.) For more details (many, many details) see WP:Notability. ~2026-36805-68 (talk) 14:12, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. This is helpful. Itsmeblondie90 (talk) 15:49, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Appreciate you. Itsmeblondie90 (talk) 13:31, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Drafting articles at enwp in a different language; is this permitted?

While having a browse through here, I have come across a user who is drafting an article here at enwp, but not in English. The user, DarioFFP, is drafting an article on the site in Spanish. The user has contested an attempted deletion on the draft's talk page, stating that he's drafting the article here first, and then intends to translate it into English.

With the greatest of respect to him, surely he should be drafting the article on the Spanish Wikipedia, for publication there first, and then translating it to English, presuming that the subject of the work passes GNG. Any ideas on what should be happening with this?

The article he's drafting is Draft:Fernando_Ferrari_Pérez_(ES).

Thanks for any input, Dane|Geld 16:26, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

I don't know what the policy is, but I would suggest that user space would be better than draft space. Also references formatted for en Wikipedia would be preferable. TSventon (talk) 16:39, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

I've just checked through the policy on drafts, and it can't be deleted, because from what I understand, drafts aren't subject to the normal policy for CSD, so "not in English" is out. I don't know how to request a draft to be moved to user space, but I agree that this might be the best option while the user is working on it. Dane|Geld 16:52, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

@DaneGeld In this talk page response, DarioFFP says Fernando was his great-grandfather. (And as can be seen in that talk exchange, DarioFFP has some photo licensing to straighten out, including among other things an "own work" photo taken in 1895. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 21:20, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Creating an article for en.Wikipedia first might actually be shrewd. It's generally considered that en.Wikipedia has the most stringent standards for referencing, etc., so anything accepted as an article here is likely to face few if any hurdles when translated for another Wikipedia, whereas something first accepted elsewhere might encounter further difficulties here. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-36805-68 (talk) 22:11, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Also en Wikipedia has had an article on Fernando Ferrari-Pérez since 2006, DarioFFP intends to improve it. TSventon (talk) 22:25, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Request: non-admin help with backlog at Wikipedia:Closure requests

At Wikipedia:Closure requests#Other types of closing requests multiple requests have been open for over 100 days, and one request has been open for 264 days. These can be closed by any experienced editor. Could someone please lend a hand?

I would do it myself but my online time is limited by a health issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:50, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

editor threatening me and then saying that i should leave them alone?

hi! in an ANI thread, the user kaspar-trout said here you used an inappropriate language towards me, multiple times, and now you are clearly harassing me for no reason. I'll give you another shot before reporting. Bye and before that wrote Meanwhile someone could teach the user with a serial number as a name how to engage with people in a constructive and civilized way, because nobody is exempt from a block.. i replied to them saying that they're sending a second threat after the first one

was this a correct reply? should i not reply instead? ~2026-38678-64 (talk) 23:47, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

The person you're talking about has put themselves into big trouble by what they've done, and they know that this is a bad situation. They're trying to fight their way out of it. Don't risk getting yourself into trouble over an adversary who is already defeating themselves so badly anyway; all you need to do is be quiet and let them keep digging. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:34, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Your responses are fine, just do not send any angry ones. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:35, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

I think some of your responses could have benefited from being less aggressive:

- When asked for clarification on the accusation, you responded with "instead of asking these questions, maybe say what you want to say"

- Next your responded with "maybe, but you've been badgering us all for 2 months at AINB, repeatedly bludgeoning, sealioning, civil point of view pushing so your LLM edits can continue to spill, like someone dumping chemical waste into a river, ..."

At this stage of the conversation, the user was being relatively polite (regardless of whether the LLM usage). I think a less aggressive tone at this stage could have kept the conversation on the rails. abandeali (talk) 00:56, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

yeah, i was pretty angry at them and i would've benefitted from stepping back and disengaging for a few hours before replying ~2026-38678-64 (talk) 01:16, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Custom article templates?

Hi! I was wondering if it is okay and acceptable to make custom maintenance tags using {{Ambox}}. Just something I wondered. Robloxguest3 (talk) 02:07, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

@Robloxguest3 Go ahead ⠀⠀.nhals8⠀⠀ 06:02, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

thank you! Robloxguest3 (talk) 01:13, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Bulk link edit across multiple pages

Hi there, Every one of the subpages found on this article reference a link to an app that has since been superseded. Is there anyway someone can bulk update all of these links? I have a feeling they will appear in more than just these pages too. List of statistical areas in New Zealand ~2026-40810-66 (talk) 02:19, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

~2026-40810-66 See WP:URLREQ, you can make a request to update the links there. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 02:41, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

why is the radiance from hollow knight not reference in the silkworm moth page

the title is the whole thing tho seriously why ~2026-41138-67 (talk) 07:54, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~2026-41138-67.

I have no idea what that is about. But if you can find a reliable independent source that discusses whatever that is, then you are welcome to edit the article to insert it. But don't do so if you haven't got a reliable published source for the information. ColinFine (talk) 09:57, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

I bet this has something to do with Hollow Knight: Silksong, but exactly what I cannot fathom. —Wasell^(T) 15:12, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

the radiance is the first game's main antagonist, final boss, and resident moth, except for when she's not, so this is just a case of "no need to mention this character here, it's not like silkworm moths are synonymous with the radiance" consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 21:01, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-41138-67: It mostly has to do with how wikinotable the Radiance is outside of the game. Something like this is also more appropriate on the Hollow Knight wikis that are on the Internet. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:31, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

I thought this was about moths, and I wondered if "Hollow Knight" was a kind of moth. Then I wondered how radiant (reflective?) some moths are. But the other responses helped me understand. If only the OP had given some context.

It's interesting how our frames of reference can leave out important details. I do that at work sometimes, even when I try not to. The mind is a fascinating thing... David10244 (talk) 04:04, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

How do you remove {{Information}} and replace with another template on an image that was uwploaded through the Upload Wizard?

I have been uploading tropical cyclone tracks lately and I found out that {{Information}} is ruining the supposed format on the file page. Let's (draw)!🖊 13:14, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @JasonHo1222.

I don't see anything obviously wrong with either c:File:Kiyapo 2026 path.png or c:File:Ketsana 2009 path.png, so you'll have to be more specific about what the problem is.

In any case, if it's something in Commons, you'd be better asking at C:Commons:Help desk. ColinFine (talk) 15:41, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

The other ones are fixed except for c:File:Nargis 2008 path Let's (draw)!🖊 08:39, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

@JasonHo1222: Does this Commons edit do what you want? PrimeHunter (talk) 15:50, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes! Thank you! Let's (draw)!🖊 01:38, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

copyright

I would like to reproduce a picture of the V2500 engine which appears in the Wikipedia article relating to this engine. How do I get copyright permission for use in a book about to be published by Cambridge University Press called Jet Propulsion? ~2026-40866-83 (talk) 13:50, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-40866-83 Can you show us what article is it exactly, and where is it ? ⠀⠀ .n 14:40, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~2026-40866-83.

Most of the material in Wikipedia (including many images) may be freely reused as long as you comply with the licence, which is mostly about giving attribution.

Unfortunately, some images are non-free, in which case you will need to contact the copyright owner.

You need to look at the image page to see which applies to that particular image.

See reusing Wikipedia content. ColinFine (talk) 15:43, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Chakradhar Swami

I took out "Alive" from the death-date field of the infox (since there was no reliable source confirming he's 831 or 832 years old), but I got an error message for an "invalid year". What gives? Clarityfiend (talk) Clarityfiend (talk) 13:53, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

I believe Wikipedia:WikiProject Microformats/dates is probably the answer in this case. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 14:43, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

You forgot to put it in Template:Birth year, which I did.

Also, please make sure to add correspondingly the year he was born in the article's lede and body, alongside it's citation and source. ⠀⠀ .n 14:45, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Coming of Age (2008 TV series)

The correct disambiguation for Coming of Age (2008 TV series) is Coming of Age (2008 TV series) or Coming of Age (2007 TV series)? It says that the pilot episode first aired in 2007. ~2026-41202-57 (talk) 15:42, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Edits

Hi - I have a conflict of interest as I work at a company that is on Wikipedia, but I know the information is out of date and should be updated. How can I provide those edits? ~2026-41181-55 (talk) 17:41, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi IP editor. Please propose your suggested edits via the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard. Another editor will then asses the proposed edit for you. qcne (talk) 18:11, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Forced pinging in visual editor?

I asked another editor:

"This is the second time that I have asked you stop pinging me. Please stop this behavior now."

(Yes, I know I can block the pings in preferences, but I don't want to block all notifications from them.)

They replied

"When I use the reply function, with the visual editor, sometimes it includes you whether I like it or not. That's the behavior of these imperfect systems, not me. Do with that what you will."

Is this a known issue with Visual Editor? --Guy Macon (talk) 18:17, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

if referring to this anew thread, then no, the problem seems to be in the comments. if one has been poorly formatted above (for instance, the one your comment was a reply to seems to be missing its signature due to the attempt at indenting within that same comment), then all of its content will be treated as a single comment made by whoever happens to put a signature under it first

...that said, the visual editor doesn't force pings or anything of the sort (you may notice that this comment doesn't contain one), and there don't seem to be any gadgets that would force pings within replies like that, so for the other comment, it definitely seems to me like they put it there manually, deliberately or by accident consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 19:47, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

This post[1] claims "The Wikipedia mobile app (at least on Android) does that. It adds a ping by default when replying but isn't forced and can be removed simply by backspacing..."

If true, where would be the best place to request that the mobile app stop doing that? --Guy Macon (talk) 03:14, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Thinking about it, if an editor is using a mobile app that adds pings and for some reason can't use the backspace key, they would have pings on every comment. If its just on one, it is on purpose. --Guy Macon (talk) 06:51, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

i doubt even that. for starters, the mobile app (at least on android) doesn't even have a reply button with which to automatically add a ping, and certain visual editor tools (like writing an @ automatically bringing up a list of names in a discussion to convert into a ping when clicked) are unavailable entirely, so it would make no sense for that to happen

maybe a little obviously, this means this reply had to be edited manually. and maybe a little less obviously, i doubt they're even in the app, judging by the lack of app tags on their contribs consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 11:17, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

on niche-ish quotation cases

just three of them

• if an interview, article, or some other such publication is condensed for another format (for example, a video recapped for text format), should the one with more words be cited overall, or just for claims exclusive to it?
• if any such publication has certain words censored, the cowards, should they just be unceremoniously uncensored for wikipedia use?

...yes, that was three, shush. thanks to infowars for making them possible at the same time consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 19:31, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

If words are uncensored in one source but censored in the other, just use the uncensored one - unless the censorship is part of the point. If no uncensored reliable source exists, you have to quote the censored version as-is.

For your other question - which version(s) of the same basic material to use - as long as both are equally solidly reliable sources, then I don't think it should really matter. If everything you need appears in just one of those overlapping sources, I don't think you need to mention the other sources unless there's an obvious good reason to. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:46, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

for the first case, that means i unfortunately have to censor the shit word இ௰இ

for the second case, that just means citing a youtube video as opposed to its slightly edited and heavily compressed text equivalent

grazie consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 11:24, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia as a sources for songs and artists mentioned

I am doing research to write a Wikipedia page about Stephanie Spruill, an American singer, songwriter, well known session singer, vocal contractor and vocal coach who was the vocal trainer for the cast of the recent billion-dollar biopic MICHAEL. In addition to articles from publications like VARIETY, the Hollywood Reporter, digital publications and newspapers, can I use Wikipedia page links as well for songs by The Jacksons, or other famous people she has worked with, such as The Jackson, Michael Jackson, The Jackson 5? Linwoods96 (talk) 19:40, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

The main thing you'll need is articles that are really about Stephanie Spruill, in the reporter's words and not Spruill's words. (This means not about projects she's been involved with, not about people she's worked with, and not including her answers to questions.) There's an exception to that: if there's a big article about one of those topics, but it includes a section dedicated to Spruill that's several paragraphs long, that section may count. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:14, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

The answer to your main question is: you can't use Wikipedia as a reference, but you can look in those other articles to see where they got their sources, in case you can use the same source material yourself. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:17, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi there. I need help with a recently closed page

Hi Wiki team,

A colleague of mine, Lawrence Baxter, a scholar, was recently the victim of a Wikipedia scam. He had paid the supposed writer, and this person published the page for a while, then oops, it went down, so we figured it out. He is trying to resolve the issue with his bank and CC today. Anyway, It's very unfortunate because he deserved that page! Is there a way to salvage his page and rewrite it with proper links and info? he has a notable background. I have his link below:

Lawrence Baxter

Kind Regards,

K. Van Kramer

~~~~

Kvankramer (talk) 20:55, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Deserving, unfortunately, isn't part of the picture on Wikipedia. I don't think I ever saw the page in question, but I seriously wonder how valuable the scam page could have been - and therefore why anybody would hope to retrieve it. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 21:02, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

I mean that waiting for an honest person who has no business or personal connection with Lawrence Baxter to start an article from scratch later on is probably better. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 21:08, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Kvankramer, you say that the article Lawrence Baxter had been paid for. It was created by "Indiclock". So we infer that "Indiclock" did it for payment. Wikipedia requires that people paid to edit (i) declare this, and (ii) do not create articles but instead create and submit drafts. Indiclock's list of "contributions" (and, though you won't be able to view this, list of subsequently deleted "contributions") show violations of Wikipedia's terms of service. ("Indiclock" was anyway just one of many IDs used by a "spam farm".) As for the deleted article, I don't notice within it summaries of substantial discussion of Baxter (his work or self) by reliable sources independent of him. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 22:05, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Kvankramer, as Hoary has just implied above, most of the sources are written by him, or are other closely associated with him. Find independent third-party sources first, and work from them Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:47, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

This information helps. As far as I know, there is a way to start fresh by posting a disclosure stating (with a "real" writer (not Indiclock!) has a COI regarding the article's subject, not creating the article directly in mainspace, and submitting it through Articles for Creation (AfC) — a draft space where a volunteer, uninvolved editor reviews it before it goes live. And then, stress-testing notability before submitting. An AfC reviewer's first question will be: does this person meet Wikipedia's notability bar? That generally means at least three independent, reliable secondary sources that cover him in substantial detail — not passing mentions, not his own institutional bio pages. Understood, everyone, thanks. Kvankramer (talk) 19:08, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Kvankramer.

Unfortunately, Wikipedia scammers rely on their victims not knowing some important things about Wikipedia. Specifically:

• A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what the majority of people who are wholly unconnected with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, (see Golden rule) and not much else. What you know (or anybody else knows) about the subject is not relevant except where it can be verified from a reliable published source.
• An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing
• Most people on the planet do not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Unless you have first found the reliable, independent, substantial, sources necessary for establishing notability, trying to create an article about somebody is a waste of everybody's time.

Unless the scammer looked for and found suitable sources (and why would they have bothered?) the article they created is going to have been worthless. ColinFine (talk) 14:46, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

J. J. McCarthy

Hi, the page J. J. McCarthy contains three hatnotes linking to James Joseph McCarthy, John Joseph McCarthy, and Joseph J. McCarthy. Wouldn't it be more appropriate to create a disambiguation page instead? ~2026-41240-37 (talk) 21:03, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes, and intitle:McCarthy intitle:/J.* J.* McCarthy/ finds more possibilities. I haven't examined whether they are sometimes called J. J. McCarthy but it's a common way to write a name. Maybe tomorrow if nobody else does it. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:15, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Should the disambiguation page be created at J. J. McCarthy (disambiguation)? ~2026-41240-37 (talk) 21:18, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

If there is a primary topic for that form of the name (either the current J. J. McCarthy or one of the others) then yes. I haven't examined it. Otherwise the existing article should be moved and the disambiguation page placed there. Temporary accounts cannot create mainspace pages directly but can use Wikipedia:Articles for creation to make a submission. The hatnotes were added by Pigsonthewing on a request at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archive 81#J. J. McCarthy. Nobody can be assigned to work but we could try to declare that this is his task. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:31, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter I believe the American football player is the primary topic. Could you please create J. J. McCarthy (disambiguation)? ~2026-41279-92 (talk) 11:05, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Sunflower / sunflowers

Why do the redirects Sunflower and Sunflowers point to different articles (Common sunflower and Helianthus)? Shouldn't they both redirect to the same article? ~2026-41240-37 (talk) 21:15, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

I think it's already good. The plural one redirects to the article on all of them (which includes the singular one). But it's certainly not the only way it could have been done. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 21:21, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

It seems reasonable. WP:DIFFPLURAL allows different targets. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:39, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Mentorship

How to request to be a mentee? The page said to click the mentorship module, but I can’t find it on my Special:Homepage. Wikipedian ^{Talk to me!} _{or not…} 00:19, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

@Star walker: The module should be underneath the "Your Impact" module on the right-hand side. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:50, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

@Star walker: {{#mentor:Star walker}} produces Organhaver, currently indicating you are already a mentee of User:Fieryninja. The mentorship module can both be to the right of impact and below it. Does the right side of Special:Homepage#growthexperiments-homepage-module-mentorship have a box saying something about a mentor? PrimeHunter (talk) 01:00, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

@Tenryuu and PrimeHunter: Where?

Wikipedian ^{Talk to me!} _{or not…} 02:44, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

@Star walker: For me it's below my "Your Impact" module. What do you see on your Special:Homepage? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:35, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

(I'm seeing their screenshot, just above your message) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:50, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

@Star walker: File:Screenshot of newcomer homepage variant D 2020-10-23.png shows the mentorship module. I don't know why it's missing in your screenshot. When it works it's possible to remove the mentor but then there is still a smaller box with a "Get a mentor" button. It doesn't have a url so I cannot post a link to it. Does https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Homepage?safemode=1 show the module? Try to disable "Display newcomer homepage" near the bottom of Special:Preferences, click "Save", enable it again and save again. If it still fails then try if it works at the German Wikipedia. Select English (it's only the interface language) at https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Einstellungen?uselang=en#mw-prefsection-personal-i18n, enable "Display newcomer homepage", Save, and then check de:Special:Homepage. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:46, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: No, still don’t see it. I do however see it on the German Wikipedia, meaning this is very much an English Wikipedia only problem.

Wikipedian ^{Talk to me!} _{or not…} 10:36, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

@Star walker As an experiment, I've just clamed you as my mentee using a feature in my Mentor's dashboard. Whether or not that changes your Special:Homepage, you are welcome to ask me questions via my Talk Page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:06, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

@Mike Turnbull: Oh, thanks, it works now.

Wikipedian ^{Talk to me!} _{or not…} 20:52, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

@Star walker: If you know how to run a JavaScript command in your browser (maybe using something called the console) then run this while here at en.wikipedia.org:

new mw.Api().saveOptions({ 'growthexperiments-homepage-mentorship-enabled': '1' }).done(function() { location.reload(); });

Otherwise you can save it in your common JavaScript and remove it if the mentorship module appears. Don't keep it there forever. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:30, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

It may not work in your common JavaScript. If you don't know how to run it in your browser then which browser is it? PrimeHunter (talk) 13:25, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

How do I upload pictures on pages I've created using a mobile phone

Slime Dawg (talk) 02:23, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

@Slime Dawg You can upload them at Wikimedia Commons, which is the main media repository for Wikimedia projects. Cheers ! ⠀⠀ .n 03:07, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

@Slime Dawg Note that Commons has an app if your want to use that. See c:Commons:Mobile app. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:02, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

from a Cairo Benson requesting me to change a few issues on

Dear Wiki I got an email from a Cairo Benson requesting me to change a few issues on my wiki page, I might be at the wrong place here but does anyone know of an administrator called Cairo benson? At Wikipedia ~2026-41264-78 (talk) 09:53, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Was money involved between you and them in any way? This sounds like a scam. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 10:17, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia (whether this one or that of any other language) has no editor (whether an administrator or not) using the name "Cairo Benson". Or so we learn from m:Special:CentralAuth/Cairo_Benson. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 11:34, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

And a genuine editor is more likely to contact you on your user talk page than by email Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:51, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

I assume that the OP is the subject of a Wikipedia article and not (identifiable as) a Wikipedia editor. In that case a good faith editor might contact them by email, but wouldn't claim to be a non-existent admin. TSventon (talk) 14:12, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

There are very few circumstances where it might be considered appropriate for a contributor to contact a biography subject by email, unless they have previously made it clear that they wish to be contacted that way. Depending on circumstances, uninvited communications may even be regarded as harassment. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:08, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Agreed. TSventon (talk) 10:45, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Clearly a scam, harassment of phishing attempt. I'd advise the OP not to reply at all as it might generate risks by itself. Stansfield (talk) 11:08, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Please see our Scam warning for advice and where to report scams. —ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email) 03:29, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Image upload sizing

Dear Sir/Madam

I have uploaded an image at the following URL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fastener However, the image seems to be quite large. How can I edit it so that it is smaller in size Eyby.com (talk) 14:13, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Eyby.com, I added some code from Wikipedia:Image use policy#Displayed image size, is it better now? TSventon (talk) 14:35, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Eyby.com, note that TSventon fixed it in the article, not by modifying the file in commons. This is ideal. The commons image is still the same full size and is available for others to use at that size (and thank you for the image!), while the article uses the appropriate smaller size. If you create images in the future, please use the largest reasonable size for the file itself, so the article editor can chooses the proper size for the article. -Arch dude (talk) 14:51, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Reference errors at Link-N

There are a bunch of bold red error messages in the references section of Link-N, but I can't seem to find the errors that are causing them. Can someone else have a look? Marbletan (talk) 14:37, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

<ref = "Noorwali_2018"> should be <ref name="Noorwali_2018"> etc.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:43, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

I see now, thanks. I've made the corrections to the article. Marbletan (talk) 14:47, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Jon Rappoport

Jon Rappoport has passed away on July 8th and Wikipedia has not updated this information. Also, the listing for him has misspelled his name. It's Rapp'o'port, not Rapp'a'port! I know it's a biased rag of a site, but usually they can record a death and spell a name correctly. ~2026-41292-41 (talk) 16:49, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: John Rappaport. If you can find a reliable source recording his death, feel free to add it to the article. Also, the reliable sources in the article so far say Rappaport, not Rappoport. In short, the problem here is the sources, not the "biased rag of a site". ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Talk • Contribs)} 17:00, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

The OP is probably talking about the reporter Jon Rappoport, not the legalist John Rappaport (or John Rappaport (screenwriter)).

OP, we do not have any article on Jon Rappoport, as the red link above indicates, so there is nowhere appropriate for Wikipedia to record his death.

Why do we not have one? Probably because either no-one has ever volunteered to create one, or someone looked into doing so but did not find sufficient material in Reliable sources to pass our Notability threshold. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-41275-62 (talk) 21:44, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I jumped straight to the legalist without thinking about other possibilities. Thanks for the info! ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Talk • Contribs)} 21:47, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

But why would someone ask about an update to a non-existing article? Even if it's on a "biased rag of a site" Stansfield (talk) 11:11, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

There are loads of Google hits showing that Jon Rappoport [sic] died on July 8th. The OP may have seen a Google knowledge panel and assumed that there was a Wikipedia article. All we have is a Wikidata item, not yet updated with the DOD. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:22, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Another Account

Hi admins. I'd like to know if I can set up another account on the domain, basically to wipe my history clean or leave it in the past. I was involved in some articles I'd rather not have been, and I want to create a more solid account dedicated to the area I actually enjoy writing and interacting in. I spoke about it over on wikipt, and they said it was absolutely fine. Am I alright to create a new account here and just edit normally? Cheers. 𒁂 C H A O S ࿐ 16:51, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

See WP:Clean start. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Talk • Contribs)} 16:55, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

AI generated edit requests

Is there a guideline for handling AI generated edit requests? - FlightTime (open channel) 16:52, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

That would presumably fall under WP:AITALK. Shantavira|^{feed me} 06:51, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

removing a page

i just discovered i have a wikipedia entry. i was never consulted on this and want it removed. ~2026-41341-15 (talk) 17:13, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

You would need to name the article so that we know what it is. It would not be practical for Tom Cruise to veto having a Wikipedia article, because he easily meets the General notability guideline. However, if you are less famous, you could request deletion, particularly if the article was thinly sourced. ♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:25, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Deletion of biographies and BLPs and Wikipedia:FAQ/Article subjects. Wikipedia is under no specific obligation to consult article subjects, or remove biographical content (or any other content compliant with our policies) under request, but we may sometimes take this into consideration. Without more detail though, it is hard to offer any more specific advice. AndyTheGrump (talk)

Requirements for creating a biography page

i, I'm looking to create a Wikipedia page for a music producer and media executive who has worked under two different professional names throughout his career. I'd like to know what sources and coverage are required for the page to be approved and remain up long term. I'd also like to understand how Wikipedia handles someone who has been known by two different names — would both names appear on one page? Thank you. ~2026-41278-79 (talk) 17:39, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

WP:GNG, WP:RS, and WP:COMMONNAME might be helpful to you. It depends on which name he's best known by and which name is covered more in reliable sources; no matter what the circumstances, you would not create a page for each name.^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Talk • Contribs)} 17:56, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~2026-41278-79.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia.

Some further responses:

• Most people on the planet are not notable in Wikipedia's sense, and no article can be written about them. The first thing to do when planning to write an article about somebody is to look for independent reliable sources about them - see WP:42; because if you can't find many such sources, there is probably no point in spending any more time on it.
• Music producers are one of the classes of people who are often not notable in this sense, because as workers 'behind the scenes', they tend not to get written about that much. You may strike lucky with this one, of course.
• While we informally talk about "X's article", I strongly advise you to banish the idea of "a page for X" from your thinking. What you are proposing is "an encyclopaedia article about" the person - it will not be "for" them (or against them" - it should be a neutral summary of what people have published about them, good and bad).
• If this is a person you know, you need to be aware of Wikipedia's policies on editing with a conflict of interest. If you are in any way employed by or on behalf of this person, you will be regarded as a paid editor, and must comply with the conditions. If that is the case, please read WP:BOSS.
• If the person is yourself, please be aware that writing about yourself on Wikipedia is so monumentally difficult that very few people have ever managed to do it successfully, and you are strongly advised not to try. See autobiography.

ColinFine (talk) 18:00, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-41278-79 For an answer about "two names", see how it's handled for Cat Stevens. -- Maresa63 ^Talk 16:00, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

How to compliment an article's author?

Some articles are so good that I want to post a brief compliment to the author and/or editors. Should I simply add that to the article's Talk page? Or is there a better way? Mermaid Smiled (talk) 20:26, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Most articles don't have a single author. If you notice someone made significant contributions to a page, you can thank them for their edit (using the the thank button in the edit history), leave a message on their user talk page, or use WikiLove. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Talk • Contribs)} 20:33, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Or award an editor a barnstar on his or her user talk page. Deor (talk) 22:27, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

I don't know if I'm alone in my dislike of barnstars, but you can always just post a pic of a barn on their talk page instead - this is one of my favourites (top),

Great Coxwell Barn

but this could turn passive-aggressive (left)... MinorProphet (talk) 10:33, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

         Derelict barn

WP:LLMPRVOBJ

WP:LLMPRVOBJ

I think this section is not very clear on the exact steps needed to prevent removal. I would like to take over the Gigazine article that is currently due to be removed. Where must I go to "achieve consensus for its inclusion"? TPI81AF (talk) 20:52, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

@TPI81AF I think that the simplest thing to do is to WP:Draftify the article (i.e. move it to draft space) and then, with no time pressure, you can re-write it by checking the existing sources and/or finding new ones. Remove the WP:PROD template once in draft. If you want expert eyes on your re-write, use the WP:Articles for creation process, which just means placing the correct template at the top of the draft and submitting it when it's ready. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:54, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

New article - where to start?

(heading added by TooManyFingers)

I would like to add a WIKI for someone who does not have one. WHERE DO I START???? Where do I add a new Topic? I apologize but your interface makes absolutely NO SENSE to me & I am a WRIET BY PROFESSION. Patriciacunliffe (talk) 22:20, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

If you're writing for a friend, an employer, as a freelance job, or writing about yourself, please be aware that any one of those things tends to be extremely frustrating for the writer, as well as being quite likely to result in a rejection. The way to avoid these problems is to not write anything at all until you're familiar with how writing is done here and what the requirements are. If you simply get started right away, the chance of "crash and burn" is far too high. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 23:07, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Probably the information you'll currently need the most is that information provided by the subject is not admissible as the basis of a Wikipedia article, though it can sometimes be used for minor details. The information at this link: WP:42 is very important. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 23:22, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

You may find more information at WP:YFA and WP:BLP. TPI81AF (talk) 23:23, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

If your sandbox is an indication of which article you are intending to write, it's worth noting that right now it's too promotional. - Purplewowies (talk) 23:39, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

No offense - but I wish someone would show me how it is promotional. I ask because I write press releases & I would NEVER write a press release with just a bunch of listings. Obviously I am writing about someone's accomplishments - otherwise WHY would I even bother with wiki? Interesting that you find it promotional... Is the wiki founder by any chance a scientist or academic scholar? I find most of your articles way too verbose & boring (NOT yours personally - I mean wiki in general). I would appreciate help accessing those 4 pages that wiki thought were appropriate for my content that I cannot locate any longer. Patriciacunliffe (talk) 16:12, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

@Patriciacunliffe Promotion, on here, is not just the use of promotional techniques or styles. Mainly, it means the writer's intended audience is not the same as the encyclopedia's intended audience. When the subject is a musician, an encyclopedia's audience is similar to that for a music history textbook; deciding to include information more suited to publication in a business directory or on the musician's own website is promotion. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:18, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

At the time it ended with something that sounded like it was praising the encyclopedia article's subject (I'm not going to go get the diff right now to direct quote, I think it's since been removed). - Purplewowies (talk) 21:51, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Patriciacunliffe.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia.

I will also add that if you are "trying to add a Wiki for" somebody, you have basically not understood what Wikipedia is (like most people). The operation you are contemplating is writing a well-sourced, neutral, encyclopaedia article about the person. Such an article will not belong to them (or you), will not be controlled by them or you, and should have very little input from them or their associates. Writing it should begin by determining whether or not the person meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability: most people in the world do not, even many who have a public presence of some sort. ColinFine (talk) 09:34, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Hate to break this to you but I am a writer by profession... Patriciacunliffe (talk) 16:13, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Artist, writer, documentary filmmaker & art filmmaker Patriciacunliffe (talk) 16:14, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes, @Patriciacunliffe, I saw that. I nevertheless gave you some of my standard advice because writing for Wikipedia is different from any other kind of writing I've ever encountered, in ways that are not obvious when you first meet it. Two of the salient points are:

1. Information coming from the subject or from the subject's associates, via whatever channel, is mostly discounted. Official certificates and the like are also not of significant importance. See secondary sources.
2. An article should never present an argument or a conclusion, except when summarising an argument or conclusion which is in its entirety presented in a single reliable source. See original research.

ColinFine (talk) 17:50, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yes, and all of those writing disciplines have different goals and employ different techniques than is the case for writing and editing on Wikipedia, [Disclosure: retired former non-fiction Editor at John Murray and elsewhere.] Even writers of scientific papers have great difficulties adjusting to Wikipedia's standards and practices. Wikipedia is peculiar to itself: if you dive in thinking you already know what to do you will fall flat. This is not a reflection on your existing writing skills, it is because you evidently do not yet understand what the rules here absolutely require.

(Consider as a parallel: even Formula One multiple World Champions are required to take "Rookie" training and pass "Rookie" tests before being allowed to compete in the Indianapolis 500.)

Colin Fine's advice is very pertinent. Additionally, to get an idea of Wikipedia's fundamental approach, I advise you to read Wikipedia:Five pillars and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-41275-62 (talk) 17:51, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

@Patriciacunliffe, as ColinFine noted, writing a Wikipedia article requires different practices than most other writing. Your draft, which has now been declined twice, has a number of issues. The most important is that the references are for the most part not what Wikipedia considers reliable sources; see WP:RS. IMDb is not a reliable source, since it contains user-generated content. AllMusic is marginal and can be used for some purposes, but not for biographical information; see WP:ALLMUSIC. eBay and Facebook are also WP:UGC and are not reliable. Even sources that may be acceptable as sources may not contribute to notability if they are WP:PRIMARY sources, such as interviews with the subject or their associates. From what I can see, very few, if any, of your current sources contribute to notability. See WP:GNG for a summary of what kind of sources are required: each should be reliable, independent of the subject and provide significant coverage of the subject.

As it stands, the article is mostly just a list of things that Alkes has done, and name drops of people that he has worked with. That's might make a good CV, but is not really what a biographical encyclopedia article should be. Also, although less importantly, your article is not formatted like an encyclopedia article: there are no section headings and no lead. If you want to see what well-written encyclopedia articles look like, you could look at some of the music biographies which are classified as "Featured Articles" here; Featured Articles are some of the best that we have. CodeTalker (talk) 19:43, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

tandard = standard

In the article Standard Marathon in references: "tandard Chartered Marathon Singapore: 29-year-old man dies after collapsing during..." ; cannot locate original placement to change.~2026-32542-29 (talk) 00:24, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

We have no article by that name. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:47, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

The article is Singapore Marathon. I fixed the ref in this edit. ~2026-41187-70 (talk) 00:51, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Dsitrict to District

In about 20 articles a supplied reference title appears as: "Dhanbad Dsitrict Map." as seen in article "Tetulmari". Can someone do what is done in edits of multiple articles edits of the same intent?~2026-32542-29 (talk) 01:27, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

I have fixed ten out of twenty. In this case the source is spelled correctly. TSventon (talk) 11:16, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

I fixed a few of that typo in other contexts. Current list of current articles that have it. DMacks (talk) 06:38, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

 Done. There are some file-descriptions on commons that someone should fix when they get a chance. DMacks (talk) 16:15, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors

I'm getting an error: inv_local_long when I try to use a reference from enwiki on cywiki, which normally works. I can't see anything wrong with the citation but I don't know where to look for the list of technical error messages. Deb (talk) 05:06, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

(Context appears to be cy:Deallusrwydd artiffisial cynhyrchiol. That would've been helpful.) This looks like cywiki's versions of cy:Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation and cy:Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration are out of sync with each other. The first is looking for cfg.date_names['inv_local_long'] (like enwiki does); the second defines cfg.date_names['inv_local_l'] (like enwiki used to, for example in this old version). It seems - bearing in mind that I have zero knowledge of this module - that it'd be fixed by copying the inv_local_l line there to inv_local_long, and inv_local_s to inv_local_short. —Cryptic 06:24, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! Deb (talk) 12:51, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Coming of Age (2)

Hi, I asked for an opinion yesterday about a disambiguation, but I didn't receive any replies, so I'll ask again. Should Coming of Age (2008 TV series) be disambiguated with 2008 or 2007? The pilot episode first aired in 2007. ~2026-41103-90 (talk) 10:36, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

If you don't get an answer here, you could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television. TSventon (talk) 13:16, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Edit for Categories as vedit?

I noticed that when I view an article I have an edit link in a box wrapped around the categories. That edit goes into vedit. Is there any way to change that to edit rather than vedit or to completely remove it. (I use hotcat also). Right now in general I show both edit and vedit buttons for each of the sections.Naraht (talk) 12:38, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

@Naraht: It cannot be changed to a source edit. It can be hidden with this in your CSS:

.ve-init-mw-desktopArticleTarget-categoryEdit {display:none;}

PrimeHunter (talk) 16:57, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Maplink template error that affects every single page using it

On the Maplink template page, which hasn't been edited since May 2018, there are multiple errors displayed on top of the page saying something like "mapframe: Title "[BLANK]" is not a valid map data page" in red text, which is funny because said .map links do exist and are fully accessible. This doesn't just happen on there, every article that use the maplink template has this error displayed instead, making it quite a significant issue. Quake1234 (talk) 14:18, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Any "STAR" rated articles using it?~2026-32542-29 (talk) 15:46, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

@Quake1234: It has been reported at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#"not a valid map data page" and phab:T433008. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:46, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Draft declined

While my piece was being rejected yesterday - I also got another message with 4 other music pages that invited me to submit the content there - but today when I am looking for them - I'm no longer able to find them. I thought I had just hit another tab, but apparently not. How do I find those 4 invites again? Patriciacunliffe (talk) 16:04, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

See the section above where you have already raised this. I can still find Draft:Joey Alkes, but it is unsuitable for Wikipedia, see Your first article. ♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:17, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Please note, Patriciacunliffe: your Draft has not been "Rejected", it has been "Declined": the distinction is important.

"Declined" means "Your draft has not reached all the required standards yet [likely with further explanations and comments of how it hasn't]. Please improve as suggested and submit again."

It is quite usual for drafts to go through several rounds of submissions, declines, improvements and resubmissions. So long as genuine improvements are evident each time, this is entirely acceptable.

"Rejected" means "This is not a suitable subject for a Wikipedia article at this time and no amount of effort can make it so. Please do not resubmit as this will waste your time and ours."

The usual reason for unsuitability is that the subject is not "Notable" in the sense that Wikipedia jargonises that word (or, at least, because the Draft has not demonstrated Notability with suitably cited sources). This may be because the subject has simply not been published about in suitable sources; because what has (if anything) been published about them is routine and unremarkable; or because they may potentially, one day, be published about sufficiently but as yet it is simply "Too soon".

The fact that your Draft has been Declined and not Rejected indicates that the reviewer(s) think that, with further work, it can be made acceptable.

Please take on board that it is insufficient merely to list a subject's activities and published works. A Wikipedia article needs to show, by citing sources, that those activities and works have been recognised as significant, and written about reasonably extensively (winning significant awards also helps): see in particular Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Creative professionals. Unfortunately, some professions, though valuable, are less often written about because their activities are somewhat "backroom" (most record label executives certainly fall into this category), and it is not at all unusual for, for example, a particular book to be 'Notable' (and be the subject of a Wikipedia article) but its author not (and not be).

Hope this helps; keep trying! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-41275-62 (talk) 18:29, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

@Patriciacunliffe Phrases like "Before immersing himself completely into the music industry, ..." are not "encyclopedic". David10244 (talk) 04:59, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

... and the reason is that these show-off-style words are editorial choices, not quoted from a reliable third-party source. Any words that might help make the subject (or their products, their experiences, etc) seem special, interesting, unique, elevated, or any other good thing, must come from reliable and specifically-identified third parties. Please see MOS:PUFFERY. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 15:09, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Article classification not showing in TP

I nominated Dutch Boats in a Gale to Good Article. A reviewer classified it as B-Class according to the history and this code was added: {{WikiProject banner shell|class=B| {{WikiProject Visual arts}} }}

But my GA nomination banner dissappeared from the TP, as well as the B-Class rating, so I manually added this code (which was shown in the history), trying to force the display, but with no success:

{{GA nominee|21:00, 20 July 2026 (UTC)|nominator=[[User:Jp1008|Jp1008]] ([[User talk:Jp1008|talk]])|page=1|subtopic=Art and architecture|status=|note=|shortdesc=Painting by J. M. W. Turner}} {{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|collapsed=no| {{WikiProject Visual arts}} }}

Thanks in advance for your help.
JP User:Jp1008 17:19, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

@Jp1008:, the talk page looks fine to me. The version with a B class rating was 21:43, 20 July 2026 and the current version is the same with |collapsed=no added. TSventon (talk) 19:34, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

I had cleared the (iOS)Chrome cache and still blank. But it looks fine in Safari. Thanks! Jp1008 (talk) 21:17, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

BLP to BDP

I've been asked by a COI editor to update Richard J. Estes as he's recently died; the text is obviously straightforward, but I'm not sure what else needs to be changed so the article is not tagged as a BLP any more. Help, please? Meadowlark (talk) 04:36, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

@Meadowlark I have removed the Category:Living people. Please note that BLP still applies to recently deceased people. ⠀⠀ .n 04:43, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

@Meadowlark The WP:BLP criteria do apply to recently deceased people. (Not sure if "recently" is explicitly defined.) David10244 (talk) 05:02, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

@David10244: To an extent; particularly controversial BDPs retain BLP protection for two years maximum post-mortem. Something less controversial could get away with a few months. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Look out it's Jimothy!} 05:34, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

@David10244, @.nhals8, of course, I understand that, and if it were a news event for some reason I'd have added a recent death maintenance tag - but this seems like a quiet biography that doesn't need it. Is it really as simple as removing the category? (thanks nhals8 for doing that!) That I can definitely manage next time. Meadowlark (talk) 05:57, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

ANI about an LLM-generated mass messaging script

I remember an ANI where a user sent out over 900 notifications for an AfD, including to nonexistent users, using an LLM-generated script that blanked existing content on the user talk pages. I was unable to locate it with search, despite trying numerous keywords. Can you find it? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:53, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

I found it because I participated in it: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1211#TattooedLeprechaun. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:58, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

@LaundryPizza03 Sort by user talk in the advanced search settings; [2] ⠀⠀ .n 08:06, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Updating File's rationale

File:Emorytatejr1984.png states for example "Copyright owned by the relevant author." and "Original publication: Not sure" however the "immediate source" provided states it's via the US Chess Federation. From what I can tell the author should be set to the federation and the immediate source left as just the intermediary. Unless we want to just directly link to the federation since I easily found their page with the image. https://new.uschess.org/news/armed-forces-champ-brilliant-tactician-emory-tate-1958-2015

I'm not sure how to properly update the rationale as |Portion= and |Low resolution= are both missing with the "optional" |Replaceability_text= also missing. Meanwhile, |Replaceability=, |Minimality=, and |Commercial= are all just ".". It feels wrong to just CSD it and let someone else replace it, but as not the creator I don't know how to answer those. Jerod Lycett (talk) 11:33, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Draft:Louisiana Federation of Teachers

Please can you improve this draft by replacing source and expanding it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Louisiana_Federation_of_Teachers Ashantsey (talk) 11:33, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Ashantsey.

Please note that Wikipedia is edited by volunteer editors (like you and me) who work on whatever they choose.

While it's possible that your appeal will strike some editor reading this page as what they want to work on, it's not very likely.

Where you might be able to find somebody willing to help you find sources at appropriate WikiProjects such as WT:WikiProject Louisiana or WT:WikiProject Education; but again, there's no guarantee.

Generally, if you want something done to an article (or draft) most times the most effective way to do so is to do it yourself.

Unfortunately, you appear to have done something which many new editors do, and plunged straight into the most challenging task there is for a new editor: creating an article.

My suggestion is that you leave this draft alone for some weeks or months while you make yourself more familiar with Wikipedia's standards and policies by making improvements to existing articles: once you have understood reliable sources and WP:42, you may have a better chance of finding suitable sources.

Even if your draft is declined again, it will not get deleted unless it is untouched for six months; so you can safely leave it for a while until you have a better understanding of what is needed. ColinFine (talk) 13:35, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Apparently blocked user - who isn't blocked

Looking at the page history of Periyar, the editor of the last entry is crossed through, as if the user is blocked. Looking at their block log, they were blocked for 24 hours over 2 years ago, but are not currently blocked. What is going wrong? - Arjayay (talk) 12:20, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

They're globally blocked (and whitelisted here). —Cryptic 13:28, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

The global block was dated 24 May 2026, and they are still editing, presumably because the Whitewashing states "exempt global block on homewiki". The fact that their edits are struck though led me to waste time investigating a perfectly good edit; can the striking-through be turned off, to avoid other editors wasting their time? - Arjayay (talk) 13:50, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

I do not see any strike through of edits in the page history. Might you have some optional gadget or CSS modification enabled that does this? older ≠ wiser 13:56, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

When I toggle

User preferences -> Gadgets -> ("Appearance" section) -> Strike out usernames that have been blocked

... this problem toggles on and off along with it. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 14:59, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks TooManyFingers, but that is not a solution to my specific problem. I would like usernames who are blocked on en.wikipedia, to be struck, but usernames who are not blocked on en.wikipedia, not to be struck, even if they are blocked elsewhere. Looks like I may have to accept the current confusion. Thanks all. - Arjayay (talk) 15:14, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

I want the same as you, and I only intended to pinpoint the (apparent) source of the problem, not suggest that you should turn off this useful feature. They can't fix it unless they know where it is. :) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 15:20, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

@Arjayay: You can post the case to MediaWiki talk:Gadget-markblocked.js#Edit JS adding check for global blocks. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:43, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Is it true that some usernames who are not blocked on en.wikipedia are struck? Because users who are blocked globally are blocked on en.wikipedia. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:47, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

This person has a global block with a whitelisted exception added. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 19:46, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

I believe that I've seen that expired TAs are struck through, even if they've never been blocked. I guess the rationale is that the TA is no longer usable, but I find it rather confusing. CodeTalker (talk) 19:27, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

How to reach extended confirmed

Don't waste time with socks The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

How do I reach extended confirmed? Schohei (talk) 16:44, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

You just need to work hard and edit a lot! You get there when you have 500 edits and 30 days of activity, if I remember correctly. Help out where you can! Edit! Get to a point where not only Wikipedia can trust you to edit about contentious topics, but where you are able to trust yourself. Sincerely, WikipediholicRat (talk) 16:47, 25 July 2026 (UTC).

See WP:ECREXPLAIN. It requires at least 500 edits to the English Wikipedia and after 30 days have passed since the account's first edit. This is quite steep, but it is needed on some high profile articles where disruptive users have bypassed WP:SILVERLOCK which is semi-protection. ♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:50, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Minor edits not hidden from watchlist

I've ticked "Hide minor edits from the watchlist" under Preferences, Watchlist, but am still seeing a lot of minor edits, clearly labelled with their m. Have I misunderstood this, is there a different definition of "minor edit", or what is happening here? Can someone please shed some light. I enquired first at WP:VP(T) but my post has just been archived unanswered after 6 days. PamD 17:08, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

@PamD I normally don't hide minor edits but as an experiment I have just gone to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-watchlist and ticked the relevant box, then "saved". Sure enough, the minor edits were then gone when I returned to Special:Watchlist. Can you check that your preferences are set up correctly and report back, please. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:17, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull I've not hidden them in the past but have recently got bored of seeing so many watchlist entries for tweaking deprecated infobox parameters or making refinements to categories so decided that probably very few babies would be thrown out with the bathwater if I suppressed the minor edits. But I can't get it to work. I've just checked, again, that there's a tick beside "Hide minor edits from the watchlist", but still edits such as this, labelled as minor, are showing on the watchlist. I experimented with unticking it, reloaded watchlist, no difference, so then re-ticked it, still no difference.

(Why's that pond on my watchlist? Because I stub-sorted it many years ago, and created a talk page with project banners, before we had the chance to watchlist for a fixed term: it got added to my watchlist forever by default because I created the talk page. I might remove it, but not right now as I've used it as this example.) Here's another example from my watchlist. PamD 20:18, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

@PamD Well, that is strange. I watchlisted Ellis Pond and immediately saw that minor edit on my watchlist. Then I ticked "Hide minor edits from the watchlist", saved, and returned to my watchlist and that edit was, correctly, no longer visible. So the issue seems to be specific to your account, which I can't explain! Your best hope is WP:VPT, linking this thread for context. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:31, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Resolved at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#2nd request: Minor edits showing up on watchlist though I've ticked "Hide minor edits". There was a saved watchlist filter. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:03, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Thanks. I've followed this up with a note at Wikipedia talk:Customizing watchlists#Information on watchlist filters?, as I don't see where there is any information about watchlist filters! PamD 10:59, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Sam Kerr

I have just created Sam Kerr (disambiguation). Could someone please update and fix the hatnote at Sam Kerr? I can't do it myself because the page is protected. Thanks in advance. ~2026-41495-42 (talk) 19:17, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for creating that. Editors might be interested in the related Talk:Sam Kerr#Requested move 25 July 2026 discussion. DMacks (talk) 19:44, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Site not found

I can't access my page. can you tell me what has happened to it please...https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Frypan13/sandbox Frypan13 (talk) 19:18, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Frypan13 - As it clearly states on that page "Abandoned user subpage of non-contributor – to retrieve it, see WP:REFUND/U6" - Arjayay (talk) 19:23, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Keep TA contributions on new acct?

I created an account because I got sick of losing the ability to easily track what edits I've made, and was hoping to start with the current history of my last TA. Am I out of luck as far as preserving those contributions go? FineIllDoIt (talk) 21:25, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Unfortunately yes. Edits are not transferrable, neither TA to TA nor TA to account. DMacks (talk) 21:27, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

alright, thanks FineIllDoIt (talk) 21:28, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

One option would be to list those TA on your account's userpage. You can easily find what you've done if you want to revisit pre-account edits or pages of interest and others can appreciate your edit history as a person even if it is not attributed within the software itself. However, that opens the door to many more people being able to know your IP address, which is a major concern for many people and negates one of the advantages of having an actual account. DMacks (talk) 21:31, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Problem / problems

Is it correct for problem to redirect to problem solving and problems to problem (disambiguation)? Shouldn't they both point to the same article? ~2026-41609-22 (talk) 22:06, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Oh, but it's worse than that. Problem (disambiguation) starts "A problem is a difficulty which may be resolved by problem solving." (If my bike has a puncture, this is more or less of a problem, but calling it "a difficulty which may be resolved by problem solving" is ... odd.) -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 08:11, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

"Resolved by solving" also needs a look by the Committee Against Tautologically Redundant Phrasing in Saying the Same Thing Over Again By Repeating It After the First Time Prevention Committee. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 09:27, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Why don't we go even further? A problem is an issue which presents a difficulty, and it may be resolved by a solution determined through problem solving. Athanelar (talk) 05:39, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

"If you're not part of the solution, maybe it's already saturated." TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:04, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Is The Weather Channel website reliable?

I was reading the page on Tropical cyclones in 2026 and saw a section was empty. While I was about to add something to it, I looked for references to back up my info. Is the Weather Channel a good source for these sorts of things? I asked since it may fall under the primary sources rule, being a Weather related company. TheNerdy Parakeet (talk) 01:38, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, TheNerdyParakeet. There is no problem with the fact that the Weather Channel focuses on weather. After all, the Wall Street Journal focuses on business and is an excellent source for business coverage. When the Weather Channel is reporting in real time about today's weather, it is a primary source. When they run a long form documentary about some past severe hurricane, tornado or flood, then that is a secondary source, which is preferable. Primary sources can be used for basic facts but secondary sources are best for analysis and drawing conclusions. Cullen328 (talk) 07:11, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Make a donation

i was trying to make a donation Kathiawoola (talk) 04:06, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Kathiawoola. The Wikimedia Foundation handles all financial donations. Please read this page for complete details. Cullen328 (talk) 07:14, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Coding correctness on

Is this correct? Lifted from the article 12th Illinois Infantry Regiment: "*Lieutenant Colonel Henry Van Sellars – mustered out with the regiment. "~2026-32542-29 (talk) 04:49, 26 July 2026 (UTC) ~2026-32542-29 (talk) 04:49, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

References

For some reason I can't access this link , but as a general rule genealogy websites are not suitable as sources. This needs some reliable secondary sourcing.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:19, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

That information may or may not be correct. It is referenced to RootsWeb, which consists of user generated content. Such websites do not meet Wikipedia's Reliable source standards. That does not mean that the specific content is incorrect. It just needs a better source. Cullen328 (talk) 07:22, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

That discussion still does not address the quality of the reference presentation. Anyways Gen site use is original research rather than secondary affirmation from authorities generally recognized as acceptable.~2026-32542-29 (talk) 16:39, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

infobox optional parameter

How can I make some parameter of infobox to be optional? Igor Kercsa (talk) 07:21, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

You need to provide some kind of default value in case the value is absent. You can do that using syntax like this: {{{parameter-name|default-value}}}, replacing both those with the actual things you want.
So for example, if you want your name parameter to default to the page title, you could do {{{name|{{PAGENAME}}}}}, or if you wanted your age parameter to just not appear if it is absent, you could do {{{age|}}}, which just replaces it with nothing if it is missing. {{GearsDatapacks|talk|contribs|in solidarity}} 08:02, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Minor Edits

Is changing tone to be more objective considered a minor edit? DarkSoulCat (talk) 08:11, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Please see WP:MINOR; changing tone would not be a minor edit, as tone can be disputed. A minor edit is something that cannot possibly be disputed, like fixing spelling or grammar. 331dot (talk) 08:19, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

A rule of thumb is, if you aren't sure if it's minor, it's not. Much better to leave something unmarked than mark a controversial edit as minor. (Even one word can be highly controversial: saw a badly labeled one-word edit a while back where the word was "not"!) M kuhner (talk) 21:01, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

I see you already have replies, but I'm going to drop one more note in here. From WP:MINOR:

A minor edit requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute.

So if it could be of dispute, it's not minor. Tone is included there. However, if you're changing a comma splice to a semicolon, for example, then it likely is minor. If you want to err on the side of caution, don't mark it as minor. Hope this helps. --ABx11 (she/they) 04:14, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

It should be said that essentially the only thing marking your edit as "minor" does is allow people to easily filter it out when searching through edit history, other than that it serves no particular crucial function. I can't remember the last time I marked an edit as minor; don't worry too much about it. Athanelar (talk) 05:38, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Wiki page for myself a sports related

How can I submit something about myself MYW6 (talk) 09:55, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

@MYW6 Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Please see our guide on autobiographies (articles about yourself) at WP:AUTOBIO. ⠀⠀ .n 10:06, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

The very short answer is- you shouldn't, it's strongly discouraged.

The longer answer is described at the autobiography policy. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves- or what they want the world to know about themselves. A Wikipedia article should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. "Significant coverage" means critical analysis and commentary, not just the mere description of the person's activities. This is usually very, very difficult for someone to do about themselves, as it requires setting aside what one knows about themselves and only writing based on what others have said. Most people cannot do this, and few succeed. Are you the rare person who can? Possibly, but the odds are against it.

Please also see how an article is not necessarily desirable.

Nevertheless, if you wish to proceed anyway, you may submit a draft via the Article Wizard. 331dot (talk) 10:08, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Elastix

I asked for input at Talk:Elastix about which disambiguator should be used for the article, but I haven't received any replies. Does anyone have any suggestions? ~2026-41619-62 (talk) 15:34, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-41619-62 Are you talking about Talk:Elastix#Requested_move_24_July_2026? If so, please let the discussion finish. --ABx11 (she/they) 04:12, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

I think there was no discussion at all, until they came here and mentioned it. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:08, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Ah understood, thanks! --ABx11 (she/they) 06:50, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Accidentally uploaded the same photo twice

On the page I'm working on (C.E. Poverman), I somehow uploaded the same author photo twice by accident. How do I eliminate one of them or does an editor have to do that? Thanks. Hedman1 (talk) 16:21, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Your question makes sense, but it means "... or does an administrator have to do that?" - because "editor" is what you are! :) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 19:21, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Hedman1.

You only seem to have uploaded one photo ever, c:File:C.E. Poverman color head shot.jpg, so I'm not sure what you mean.

I wonder if you are looking at your contributions in Commons c:Special:Contributions/Hedman1, and noticing two lines with that filename? One was you uploading it, and the second was you adding an English label. ColinFine (talk) 20:31, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. What I'm referring to is that there is a box in the lower right hand corner of the photo frame (white area below the photo). If you click on that, two of the same photo appear. I minimized one of the photos as for some reason it appeared in the middle of the text of the article as well as in the photo box. Hedman1 (talk) 21:13, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong, @Hedman1. When I click on the icon in the frame, I see the File page File:C.E. Poverman - Cropped Street Shot.jpg: it has a large copy of the photo, as expected. There's a small copy further down in the "File History" section, recording what you uploaded. ColinFine (talk) 22:07, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Okay. I'll leave it alone then. Just looked strange to me. Thanks for your input. Hedman1 (talk) 04:53, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

why is "restore this version" less dangerous than rollback?

Can anyone point to a discussion that explains why rollback is a user right that must be applied for, but "restore this version," which is potentially even more destructive--and does not allow preview either, as I've found to my cost several times--is available for everyone? I feel there must be something here that I don't understand, and better learn about before applying for rollback.

(I work on LLM text removal, so I end up doing things like this a lot. Have borked more than a few infoboxes, and gotten my ears pinned back for it. Because of the lack of preview, "restore this version" is a really good way to introduce errors you won't see in a quick scan of the actual text; you have to make a mock edit and use preview. Learned the hard way.) M kuhner (talk) 20:48, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Rollback is a one-click function, restore this version is two clicks, one to start the process and one to complete it. It is essentially a normal edit, unlike rollback. 331dot (talk) 21:38, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

'Restore this version' also prompts for an edit-summary, for you to explain what you're doing and why. WP:ROLLBACK is designed for edits that really don't need an edit-summary, so it requires a bit more trust that the editor is doing the right thing. DMacks (talk) 22:12, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Also, @M kuhner, you technically can preview "Restore this version" by first clicking the timestamp of the version in question, which will take you to view the revision of the page as of that time. Granted this doesn't give you a full diff view compared to the current version, but it's not nothing. Athanelar (talk) 05:35, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Payment

I paid $20 on my visa card. You don't acknowledge ~2026-41619-84 (talk) 21:25, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

If you are referring to a donation you have made to the Wikimedia Foundation, you will need to make an inquiry with them directly; we editors have nothing to do with the donation process. Please email donate(at)wikimedia.org. 331dot (talk) 21:37, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-41619-84: If it's not about a donation then I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 7.2 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:52, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

cancle my account not interested your @~2026-41619-84 ~2026-41902-61 (talk) 15:30, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-41902-61: If you refer to a Wikipedia user account then they cannot be deleted or cancelled. See more at Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing. If you refer to donations to the Wikimedia Foundation which runs Wikipedia then donations are not tied to user accounts. https://wikimediafoundation.org/give/donor-frequently-asked-questions/ may have information you want. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:56, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Taysom Hill

Reference help requested. Can you help me? I tried to add a reference to Taysom Hill but the citation button somehow didn't add it correctly. I got a notice from a bot about it and would like to fix the error.

Thanks, In solidarity Dafootballguy Want to talk? 00:14, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

@Dafootballguy I'd ask at WP:VPT if you want more technical help. I don't know how it works, but it is powered by Zotero, which can be finicky like this at times as it tries to "guess" stuff like the title, source, etc. of the article based on webpage info. --ABx11 (she/they) 04:10, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

There is nothing to do with Zotero or any other metadata detail here. It's just a syntax error in the call to the Wikipedia citation-formatter template. Fixed. DMacks (talk) 11:15, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Image copyright help

Hi, I want to know if I can use the images on this page: [3] They have diagrams that I'd like to use in articles. The problem is that they claim copyright of the images in their ToU. IANAL, but aren't images produced by government organizations automatically public domain? --ABx11 (she/they) 04:06, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

It's true of the US Federal Government, but for others (whether sub-national, as here, or of course foreign) it may or may not be, and I gather has to be determined on a case-by-case basis. I think the fact that copyright is here explicitly claimed is a strong indicator: commercial companies (such as Picture Libraries, in my personal experience) may overstate their copyright claims, but an organisation such as TriMet seems unlikely to.

Wikipedia:Public domain status of official US government works is apparently inactive, but may be of some help. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-41275-62 (talk) 05:03, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks; another question. How do I see if images are already in Commons? TriMet released these hundreds of images under CC-BY SA 4.0: https://trimet.org/photos/ --ABx11 (she/they) 05:21, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Commons has a robust category tree. If you know what the subject is, you can start somewhere and then drill down/up/sideways depending how general the topic is and how many variations of files exist for it. Every image has a title and (ideally) a description, among which is usually at least one keyword that can be found by searching. DMacks (talk) 12:20, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

30K links pointing to same domain?

I simply cannot understand how Wikipedia allows this level of spam on its website. A few links to the same domain might be understandable, but over 30,000 links pointing to a single domain is beyond belief. It's not as if the website is genuine or contains real content. If you check it, nearly every post is fake and redirects users to the same page. I can provide further details upon request. MackJohnson79 (talk) 10:07, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

@MackJohnson79: Many websites have more links. Just post the domain if you actully want us to look at it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:41, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Here is domain findarticles(dot)com, pointing out from several top pages like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil Most of them having 1-5 links from such specific page. MackJohnson79 (talk) 12:19, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

@MackJohnson79: The links worked when they were added. FindArticles was once a good resource. Wikipedia:Bot requests has discussed what to do some times.[4] Wikipedia:Link rot is a big problem affecting thousands of websites. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:39, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Until we know what domain is involved (and I am intrigued to find out), it's difficult to say much, but bear in mind that we have 7.2+ million Articles (and links can also be in Article Talk pages and I suppose User pages and their Talk pages), so 30,000 links is equivalent to a good deal less than than one link per 200 articles or 400 pages. Link rot could be involved. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-41275-62 (talk) 12:15, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Yah, but certain others are intrigued to find out whether your browser is working. Or not. MinorProphet (talk) 13:37, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

All the useful-looking links I tried redirect to the generic /news page: a list of irrelevant feature articles. We should probably mark the citations with |url-status=usurped, adding a link to an archive site where available and not already present. This looks like a job for WP:URLREQ. Certes (talk) 13:06, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

How to put a pin or arrow in a map

Aucanquilcha uses File:Txu-oclc-224571178-sf19-07.jpg as a map; is there a way to put a pin or arrow in the file so that it shows where the volcano actually is, other than by modifying the image? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:04, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

You could use {{location map}} but that would require creating a new map definition. On the bright side, that would make the map usable in similar articles. Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps shows the template in use, with an example which is simpler than the template's own documentation. Certes (talk) 16:37, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Andrey Rublev

The Russian icon painter Andrei Rublev is sometimes spelled Andrey Rublev in some sources. Given that this alternative spelling is identical to the title of the tennis player's article, do you think a simple hatnote is sufficient, or would it be preferable to move the tennis player's article to Andrey Rublev (tennis player) to avoid potential confusion? ~2026-41904-71 (talk) 16:25, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

The tennis player gets ten times more page views than the painter, so it's probably safe to leave him as the primary topic for the Y spelling and just keep the hatnote. Certes (talk) 16:40, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Given the extensive ignorance of most English speakers about written Russian and other Slavic languages, why not go for Andrei Rublyov (tennis player), since it approximately accords with the pronunciation of the existing articles about the iconist Andrei Rublyov and the soldier Semyon Budyonny? I hope that the ghost of Semen Budenny doesn't take offence. If only written 'ë 'was transliterated as yo, rather than imagining that Cyrillic 'ë = English 'e' = 'є', which it doesn't: but hey, the unmusical and uninterested speakers of the so-callled English language. MinorProphet (talk) 17:06, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Florida congressional district error needs to be addressed

Hello! I do not have any clue as to where I should tell you all about this, so I decided to post here because it is going to be read faster. Anyways, I have noticed that every Florida congressional district has an error involving the map files. It seems there is supposed to be an interactive map file for each one but the files which are being referenced by the page do not (or possibly no longer) exist. I would like help relating to this situation by either creating the files or removing all instances to contact them. Thanks! Γ+2 (talk) 19:08, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

watchlist

hi is it possible for me to keep a list of my favourite wikipedia pages other than the watchlist? Joe0472 (talk) 19:38, 27 July 2026 (UTC)