Wikipedia:Help desk/Archive 70

Archive 65

←

Archive 68

Archive 69

Archive 70

Archive 71

Archive 72

→

Archive 75

Automated way to nominate multiple of something at XfD

Hi, is there any automated process (like a script, gadget, etc.) that can nominate multiple of something at XfD? Or can I only do that manually? Thanks, 1isall (talk/contribs) 00:04, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/massXFD works for CfD and RfD. For others I think you need manual work. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:16, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Alright, thanks! Perfect for RfD. Thanks, 1isall (talk/contribs) 18:21, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Also worth mentioning is that the second sentence on the script page says, "Let me know if you want me to add any other XfD venues." So I can suggest to the creator (Qwerfjkl) the next XfD venue they should add to the script. Thanks, 1isall (talk/contribs) 19:01, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Weather templates redundancy?

Hi, I was wondering if there's a specific guideline regarding for when to use a Climate chart versus a Weather box, since they seem to be similar. For example, if the available data only includes Mean daily maximum, Mean daily minimum and Average precipitation data, like in this case, would it be better to change it to use a Climate chart instead? Thanks for any help! JustEMV (talk) 17:11, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

You could ask at WT:WikiProject Weather. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:00, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

"Populated places" and its consequences related to categories

The term populated places when used incorrectly related to categories listing various populated places for any number of reasons, can either add too many settlements to a category page, or leave out the small, populated places that should have been listed within the category.

For instance, should a small unincorporated community like Riverview, Belmont County, Ohio be included within the Category:Ohio populated places on the Ohio River. For one, it is designated a populated place by the USGS. Second, it is located along the Ohio River. However, it is not extensively built-up, and the population is small. This question is also valid for Dilles Bottom, Ohio. Ultimately the heart of the issue is: If the USGS designates it a populated place then it should be included within the category. If not, then what is the designated something as a populated place?

What should I move forward with including or even possibly removing from the category to meet standards? TheQuietTrail (talk) 20:00, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

You can never add too many entries to a category. If it becomes crowded, it can always be split up into subcategories. But to my Mark I eyeballs, both Riverview and Dilles Bottom look like they're near the Ohio River, not on it. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:21, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Interesting, I will proceed forward disregarding a population number then. That being said, you brought up an interesting point about the distance between the river and the town. For instance, does a community like Costonia, Ohio fit into the list? For all intents in purposes the village looks like it was established as a river town. It based in a flat hollow along the river, yet slightly above and beyond the riverbed. It even a has bridge that directly connects to an island where work is completed. Yet, there is a highway cutting through the space between the community and river. So, it makes it an interesting discussion.

I would say a majority of these towns that are slightly beyond the riverbed are that way for two reasons: The flood plain makes it unrealistic to settle right beside the river, or farmland is owned along the river which would technically be a part of the community; thus, making the community along the river?

Some entries to the category that were already apart of the list before I started adding to it, that could be put into question would be: Rayland, Ohio, Coal Grove, Ohio, even Wheelersburg, Ohio has only several building directly settled along the river, as the main settlement is much deeper inland than something like Dilles Bottom, Ohio. TheQuietTrail (talk) 23:05, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

I'll leave it to others to determine what "on" means exactly. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:10, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Reliable source

Can this Brazilian LGBTQIA+ website be considered a reliable source? Questionadora ávida (talk) 18:32, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Based on what I see at , this appears to be WP:SPS. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:24, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

If that's indeed the case, I think it's a real shame. The site has very comprehensive information on topics that few people bother to discuss. Questionadora ávida (talk) 19:33, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

It does make sense since it sounds like it comes from the people that own the website, which is why it is not sourced. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 22:48, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

You need to tell us what it is you are proposing to cite the website for. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:52, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Even better, move this question to WP:RSN and there do as AndyTheGrump says. -- Hoary (talk) 02:12, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Easier way to verify cites?

Hello is SIDE or similar available for me to run on individual articles please? https://www.nature.com/articles/s42256-023-00726-1 ? Chidgk1 (talk) 09:12, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Apparently there is a link to the code used at the bottom of the article. It may well not be usable by individuals without specialist knowledge. TSventon (talk) 09:31, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Forgot password

I forgot my password but my IP address is banned for 2 years. I'm trying to log in to a different browser. BadEditor93 (talk) 06:41, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

@BadEditor93: Users who forget their password and haven't set an email address usually have to create a new account (note Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry). But since you are still logged in, you can try to keep it. Use {{Committed identity}} while logged in. Then try mailing ca@wikimedia.org and ask them to set an email address for your account so you can use Special:PasswordReset. Remain logged in if possible. They may ask for more, or they may say no. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:53, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

I can't switch to the source editor.

I tried to switch to the source editor after editing an article, and I got a message telling me the edit has expired and I need to copy my work and refresh the page. how do I do that? I couldn't find any information whatsoever on the editing guides. גירית דבש שחורה (talk) 22:38, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Assuming you're using Windows, make sure your cursor is somewhere in the text, not somewhere else on the screen. Then ctrl-A should highlight the text, followed by ctrl-C to copy it. Exit the page, reopen it, make sure the cursor is in the right place, and type ctr-A, then ctrl-V to paste it back. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:00, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

(Missed a couple of steps there. Should be good now.) Clarityfiend (talk) 00:12, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Ctrl-A that first time, Clarityfiend, yes; but I think not also needed just before Ctrl-V. (On the other digit, I rarely use Windows, so I dunno.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:09, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

@גירית דבש שחורה and Hoary: The second Ctrl-A marks everything and causes the following Ctrl-V to replace the existing content. It's possible to omit Ctrl-A. That will insert the copied content into the existing content. In VisualEditor, you may be in a position where inserting it gives a poor result or fails. If I was copying from the source editor (which is not possible in the described scenario), I would omit the second Ctrl-A to avoid possible accidents. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:12, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

WP: LOGOUT

I found that there was an editor who always edited the article soon after I edited it. Some of their editions were so meaningless that I had to undo it. They seem to be obsessed with "making sure the last edit is made by themselves." What's worse is that they actually has an account but in the past 10 days they made all editions without logged in (I can identify their account). I would like to ask, does their behavior violate Wikipedia policies? How should I respond? Thanks. 特磨 (talk) 23:49, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

特磨 logging out before editing an article certainly does not violate Wikipedia policies. But "hounding" an article might, if it becomes harmful. You should probably respond by starting a conversation on their user talk page before escalating it to something like dispute resolution. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 01:57, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Academia.edu is not dead

I have recently updated several articles (example) wherein a cite to Academia.edu was marked as a {{dead link}} or similar, when the link was still accessible provided the reader has an account (free registration) with Academia. My solution was to remove the dead link flag, and add (chapter-)url-access=registration as appropriate. (Actually, the example given should have used chapter-url.) With a view to identifying and fixing such cases quickly:

1. Do all Academia articles require free registration, or do they allow open access to some? or require paid access to others?
2. Is it possible for a bot to identify (and count, and list) cites where url=academia.edu is marked as a dead or permanently dead link?
3. If there are more than a handful (as I suspect) could a bot fix such cases?

-- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 10:47, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

I don't think that I've ever seen anything at academia.edu that required registration to read. I am able to read your Hartley example without registering. Sure, I can't read the pdf version, but do I need to? I was able to read all academia.edu sources from a random sampling of articles listed in this search result.

Answers:

1. 'open access' has a specific definition that allows reuse of a source; that reuse must be agreed between the reuser and the source's publisher (which publisher is not academia.edu). If you mean 'free-to-read' then my experience is that documents at academia.edu are free-to-read; if there are exceptions, I've not encountered them.
2. yes; if such a bot exists, I don't know of it; a relatively simple awb script should be able to create such a list
3. yes; if such a bot exists, I don't know of it

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:34, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

I can see now how I have misunderstood the interface. When not logged in, I see the summary of the paper (Title - Abstract - Figures), followed by a long list of related paper abstracts. Below that is the body of the paper. I had not looked far enough down. When I am logged in, the body of the paper appears at the start. What does need registration, I still think, is downloading the PDF.

I acknowledge that I used Open access carelessly, when I should have said 'free-to-read'.

I will now correct my edits that say Academia.edu requires registration; though I am still curious as to why so many were inaccurately labelled 'dead'. Perhaps other people had similar problems understanding the interface. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 20:37, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

OK, the problem is a little more convoluted. Example: our article Architecture in Middle-earth cites a chapter from a book that is held on Academia.edu. The chapter can be linked as https://www.academia.edu/29679706/From_Middle_Earth_to_Westeros_Medievalism_Proliferation_and_Paratextuality_2016_, and, as observed above, is accessible to all-comers.

However, the link actually used in the article is directly to the PDF, https://www.academia.edu/download/64215972/Ken%20Gelder,%20ed.%20New%20Directions%20in%20Popular%20Fiction%20Genre,%20Distribution,%20Reproduction%202016.pdf#page=207, and if I use that link when I am not logged in, it goes to Academia's 404 page, with no obvious route to search for the entry or otherwise resolve the problem. It was probably this result that led to the 'dead link' flag.

The solution is to convert the (restricted to registered users) PDF link to the (free-to-read) web page. There is no obvious relation between the two that would allow a bot to do this, so it will be a manual task to search for the alternative link in each case. (Articles that link to the free-to-read page will presumably not get flagged as dead links - I hope). -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 21:23, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

If we are to believe this search, there are about 465 articles with a cs1|2 template linking to academia.edu followed directly by {{dead link}}.

According to this search, there are about 590 articles that have a https://www.academia.edu/download/... url. Of those, this search suggests that about 265 of those are marked as dead.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 22:11, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

I have gone through, manually checked, and corrected, all my recent updates. And I have discovered a further twist: in the majority of cases I examined, where the link to the /download/ address is used, eg https://www.academia.edu/download/66170878/Honegger_2004_Bag_End.pdf, it will automatically redirect to the free-to-read alternative, ie https://www.academia.edu/45669412/From_Bag_End_to_L%C3%B3rien_the_Creation_of_a_Literary_World. This happens whether or not I am logged in to Academia.

However, in the case mentioned above (Middle Earth to Westeros) this does not happen, so there may be similar cases. Possibly this is due to the PDF in the /download/ link being of the whole book, not just the individual chapter that the free-to-read link shows.

@Trappist the monk: thank you especially for those search links; I will be checking through them for further actions (but only for articles in my areas of interest, I admit). -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 12:11, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

WP:BOTREQ is the place to request assistance from a bot operator. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:34, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Aide pour la création d’un article sur une plateforme (Appwinners)

The following discussion 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.

---

Bonjour,

Je suis nouveau sur Wikipédia et je découvre peu à peu son fonctionnement. J’ai récemment tenté de créer un article à propos d’une plateforme appelée Appwinners, que j’ai moi-même développée pour un ami. Mon intention était simplement de décrire de façon neutre cette plateforme, en présentant ses fonctionnalités et objectifs.

En tant que débutant, notamment en SEO, j’ai souvent lu que Wikipédia joue un rôle important dans la visibilité en ligne, notamment pour les jeunes entreprises ou projets. Mon objectif n’est pas de faire de la publicité, mais simplement de proposer une fiche descriptive claire et informative sur la plateforme, qui pourrait apparaître dans les résultats de recherche Google pour ceux qui la recherchent.

Lors de la création de la page, un message m’a indiqué que le contenu pouvait être perçu comme promotionnel. Je comprends que Wikipédia a des règles très strictes à ce sujet, et je m’excuse si mon texte ne respectait pas toutes les consignes.

Je souhaiterais donc obtenir un peu d’aide ou des conseils pour reformuler mon article de manière conforme aux standards de Wikipédia. Je suis ouvert à toute suggestion ou à toute correction pour que la page puisse être acceptable et utile à la communauté.

Merci d’avance pour votre compréhension et votre accompagnement.

Bien cordialement,

voici mon article en anglais

[deleted copy of User:Sayhiislam96/sandbox ]

-- Sayhiislam96 (talk) 16:28, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Please see the messages on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:46, 29 July 2025 (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.

IP Adress Blocked

Why are so many IP Adresses blocked on Wikipedia? For example, 2607:fb91:340d:5509:8661:cc72:ba90:63 and 205.175.106.122. Why do I have to use alternate Wi-Fi to make an account? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SummerSizzling (talk • contribs) 20:23, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

In general, see WP:BLOCK. In these specific cases, vandalism and abuse. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:50, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

And SummerSizzling is blocked too. Oh well. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:04, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Probably because you called that person an idiot. See WP:NPA. Polygnotus (talk) 03:11, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

South Asia Institute of Advanced Christian Studies: review

Please note that this article has been edited multiple times without sources. Kindly review the changes thoroughly, verify them, and correct them as per Wikipedia policy. South Asia Institute of Advanced Christian Studies Gvihar 18:55, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Gvihar. You appear to be the one with an interest in the article. Why do you not do the work?

Note that there are other options beside the one you have suggested. You could tag them with {{citation needed}}. You could revert them, with an edit summary "Adding unsourced information". You could open a discussion on the article's talk page, pinging the editor who added them, asking them to add their sources.

But asking random people on the help desk may not be the most effective way to fix a problem that you have noticed. ColinFine (talk) 19:58, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Alright, thank you. I will be careful from now on. Gvihar 20:09, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Drafts Tianwen-5 and Tianwen-6

• Draft:Tianwen-5
• Draft:Tianwen-6

How to propose deletion of this pages? I think that these drafts must be deleted because there is no planning of this CNSA missions, there are not much sources about these missions and these missions will not be launched soon. Егор Затяжкин (talk) 14:13, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Drafts are usually not deleted for notability reasons, which applies to both of these. After 6 months, if no edits are made to the pages, they will be deleted with the criteria WP:G13. Otherwise, they can remain as drafts, and if news about them is published in time, editors can continue working on them. -- Reconrabbit 14:38, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

BRIJ MOHAN

Professor BRIJ MOHAN is Dean Emeritus at LSU, USA. His name has been either ignored or mispalced as a film Maker. 2600:8802:5305:1D00:D59D:17D7:7F9C:A87B (talk) 21:48, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Where are you seeing that? This is the encyclopedia Wikipedia. According to Brij Mohan we don't have an article about the man you mention. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:32, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Paty Cantú

When I click on the "V" at the top left of the navbox at Paty Cantú, it leads me to Template:Navbox musical artist instead of Template:Paty Cantú. Does anyone know why this is the case? --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:55, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

@Jax 0677: There were non-breaking spaces in the attempt to set a name parameter for making V T E links. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:06, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Content based on misinterpreted citiation

If a citation is given for content but the citation is misinterpreted and, therefore, the content provided based on that citation is untrue, may I remove the incorrect content and citation.

Specifically, in the page on The Rest of the Story radio program the content stated that "After the elder Harvey's death on February 28, 2009, ABC radio host Doug Limerick was chosen as the show's new host. The Rest of the Story was canceled after three weeks with Limerick as host."

However, the cited news story from Radio Ink Magazine says "Limerick takes on the "Rest of the Story" afternoon slot. ABCRN said his features "will focus on the day's news mixed with folksy, positive stories."

The misinterpretation is that Limerick took on hosting duties of "The Rest of the Story". That is not what the citation says (and nor is it true.) Limerick, as the citation says, took over the time slot with his own content.

May I therefore remove that content, and any other part of the page with the misinformation? Woolworth Warrior (talk) 18:29, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Woolworth Warrior.

You don't need anybody's permission to make an edit that you believe is an improvement.

If you make the edit, the worst that can happen is that somebody disagrees with you, and reverts your edit. In that case, following WP:BRD, you can open a discussion with that editor and any other interested editors on the article's talk page, and try and reach consensus.

Alternatively, if you are not confident, or if you think your edit might be controversial, it is a good idea to start the discussion on the talk page first, and wait until there is consensus before editing the article. ColinFine (talk) 19:50, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks so much. 98.13.218.240 (talk) 19:59, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Using Bengali Sources (Or any) in English Wikipedia Articles: Is It Allowed?

Suppose the subject of an article is quite famous in Bangladesh. There are several newspaper articles and other sources available online in the Bengali language, but not enough reliable information in English. If I want to write an article on English Wikipedia using those Bengali sources, can I cite them?

There’s a chance that other contributors reviewing the references may not understand Bengali, except by using tools like Google Translate. Is this allowed? What does Wikipedia say about using non-English sources in English articles? Rafi (talk) 19:49, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Rafi Bin Tofa, non-English sources can be used, there is guidance at Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English sources. TSventon (talk) 20:03, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Rafi (talk) 20:09, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Page Back

How to apply for removed page back? 103.99.250.216 (talk) 03:12, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

What page are you looking for? See WP:REFUND and WP:DRV. Ahri Boy (talk) 03:56, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Hide and Show table

 Courtesy link: BK VEF Rīga

Is it possible to hide the existing table and leave only the title? Mc krams (talk) 07:20, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

@Mc krams: MOS:DONTHIDE says that's not a good idea. Bazza 7 (talk) 08:12, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

I'll explain why:

I want to hide the 2024 basketball team roster and create a new 2025 roster. It would be nice if the historical rosters remained hidden. Mc krams (talk) 08:23, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

@Mc krams: So create the new roster above the 2024 one. You could place both in a section titled "Rosters", with subsections "2025 roster" and "2024 roster" inside it. There seems to be a lack of reliable sources for the information you are describing; please remember to supply some for any new information you add. Bazza 7 (talk) 13:12, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Good idea, thank you! Done. Mc krams (talk) 13:57, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Urgent Request to Address Misinformation on "Gaza Genocide" Wikipedia Page

AI-generated question responded to. Since IPs aren't allowed to discuss this further (starting this section might be a valid edit request) we're done here. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:51, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Gaza genocide (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Dear Wikipedia Team,

I am writing to formally raise concern about the misinformation and one-sided propaganda currently presented on the Wikipedia page titled "Gaza genocide."

The page falsely states:

"According to a United Nations Special Committee, Amnesty International, Médecins Sans Frontières, B'Tselem, and other experts, Israel is committing genocide in Gaza against the Palestinians during its ongoing blockade, invasion and bombing of the Gaza Strip."

This is a misleading and inaccurate claim. While some individuals and advocacy groups have made accusations of genocide, this is a contested and unresolved legal matter. Even the case brought by South Africa to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) resulted in no determination that genocide is occurring. Instead, the ICJ found that the allegations are plausible enough to warrant further review, not that genocide has been proven.

To portray these claims as fact, especially from organizations that have not officially declared genocide under the legal definition, is a distortion of truth and a violation of Wikipedia’s commitment to neutrality and verifiability. The current phrasing promotes a deeply biased narrative that fuels division, hate, and misinformation. Furthermore, the editing lock placed on the page makes it impossible for users to correct these distortions, enabling the spread of dangerous falsehoods under the guise of fact.

If Wikipedia allows such misinformation to remain unchallenged, especially under protected pages, it risks becoming complicit in spreading not only false narratives but also modern forms of blood libel.

I urge you to immediately review the page for neutrality and factual integrity and to revise it in accordance with Wikipedia’s own standards of reliable sourcing, balance, and editorial objectivity. 2600:1700:590:BB00:68A2:132:53A9:5DFD (talk) 16:35, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

The article states that "According to a United Nations Special Committee, Amnesty International" etc, Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. Which is verifiably true: we cite the sources where those listed express that opinion. Stating that someone has expressed an opinion ("According to...") is not an assertion that the opinion is correct. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:44, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Incorrect alphabetical order in a catgegory

In this category Category:Cumann na mBan members a name appears under "B" instead of "O"? The person in question is "Bridie O'Mullane" - Bridie_O'Mullane - and in her article the default sort is listed correctly as {{DEFAULTSORT:OMullane, Bridie}}. I've deleted my cache and reloaded both pages but the error is still there. Thank you Billsmith60 (talk) 20:53, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

@Billsmith60: The category is added with [[Category:Cumann na mBan members|Bridie O'Mullane]]. This overrides DEFAULTSORT for that category. If there is no reason for the sortkey then just remove it. It was added in with no explanation. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:02, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Got it, thank you! Error fixed Billsmith60 (talk) 21:07, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Today's feature article has an error in the wording.

See above 219.89.24.171 (talk) 00:27, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

The place to report main pages errors is Wikipedia:Main_Page/Errors, but you need to explain the problem. An error has already been reported in the Today's FA section. TSventon (talk) 00:38, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, it's been fixed. 219.89.24.171 (talk) 01:05, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Page not listing on Google

The Wiki page Talk:Fred Bendheim is not showing up on Google.

Can you tell me why and how to fix?

thanks! Bodhitree3 (talk) 18:12, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Talk pages are not generally indexed by google. If you mean the article Fred Bendheim itself rather than its talk page, then pages remain unindexed for up to 90 days until WP:New page patrol approves them, so all you can do is wait. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:15, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

thank you Bodhitree3 (talk) 18:23, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Sourcing for coordinates

I'm working on adding references to a lot of articles about meridians, mainly using books as sources. However, I looked at the featured list about India's extreme points and saw Google Maps as a source. I also came across the Google Maps listing on WP:RSPS, which states that Google Maps is a reliable source for coordinates and that references are not usually required for geographic coordinates.

Can Google Maps alone be used as a source for such articles (ex. 176th meridian west, 123rd meridian west, etc.)? Or, do these articles need sources at all? OfTheUsername (talk) 22:51, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

They would need other sources to demonstrate notability, because Google Maps does not provide the significant coverage required by our "golden rule". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:25, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

So, effectively, almost all the articles about meridians would fail notability? They are countlessly included in maps and reference books, but they are never the main subject of those works. OfTheUsername (talk) 15:23, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

"Significant coverage" does not require a topic to be "the main subject" of a work. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:28, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Probably mistaken

Yesterday, I got a talk page message saying that I might be engaged in paid editing, even though I am not. On the same day, I got another message saying that I rejected an article for being short. I don't reject articles, and I don't really talk on AFD discussions. I only really tried two proposed deletions. I think these 2 messages belong to someone else. I also don't want to accuse them of it to assume good faith :) ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 20:12, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat: the two messages you mention are from admins. If you don't know what articles they are talking about, I would suggest you ask them. Helpers here might be able to do some research and guess, but we might guess wrong. TSventon (talk) 20:55, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Well, I messaged both of them. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 21:34, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

I suspect the message about you commenting on an article being short was not a mistake, but was in relation to this comment. I do not participate in AfD enough myself to know if your comment was unhelpful. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 23:02, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat sorry, I forgot to @ you in my original reply. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 23:03, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot that. I also wrote that as a minor. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 00:03, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Rafaelthegreat, My guess is that the "paid editing concerns" may relate to articles that you created, which had been deleted before and were deleted again, i.e. Seez (company) (2 previous deletions) and SiGMA Group (3 previous deletions). TSventon (talk) 00:11, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Andrew de Burgh

 Courtesy link: Andrew de Burgh

There's recently been a "close connection" template added to this page I made edits to. As mentioned to the editor who added it, I don't have an external relationship with any of the people, places or things I've written about on the page. I first learned about the subject when I watched one of his films at a film festival and being a film researcher, I began doing research on his career and his projects. I made sure to write a balanced article, only stating facts (never opinions) for example including a negative review about his most recent film "The Seductress from Hell". Everything written is backed up by the references which is why I believe there's been no maintenance templates on the page until now. It would be great if this issue could be resolved. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Jeffreygerald5550 (talk) 15:27, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

The template was applied (and re-applied) improperly. I would have removed it anyway, but your explanation is an additional reason to do so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:49, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your assistance. Jeffreygerald5550 (talk) 17:26, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Fix article

Edward J Crawford has a lot of cite errors. Can you fix it? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 19:39, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Fixed in seconds, using WP:ReFill. You can use that, too. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:10, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

About service award progress

The edits on my service award progress template do not increase. Why? Jako96 (talk) 11:35, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jako96 Those templates don't update themselves – you have to change the numbers manually. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 11:45, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Jako96 (talk) 11:58, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Is Yosefa Barak good to translate into English Wikipedia?

simple:Yosefa Barak

I want to translate an article from the simple english wikipedia onto the English wikipedia. It has a lot of sources and has significant coverage. But it has been deleted twice. Does it follow the criteria so I can make it? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 20:10, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat: I think the straightforward answer is don't. Yosefa Barak was draftified in July, then moved to Simple Wikipedia. I would assume that the editor who draftified the article was correct and the article is not currently suitable for en Wikipedia.

More generally, I would suspect that an article which is on Simple Wikipedia, but not en Wikipedia, is probably not suitable for en Wikipedia. TSventon (talk) 21:38, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat That article makes extensive use of primary court records, which is not allowed in en:Wikipedia by policy. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:57, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh. That is probably why it got deleted. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 21:59, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Possibly. And the same policy is supposed to be followed on simple: see simple:Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. I have alerted the admins at simple. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:07, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying us. I deleted the article. -Barras ^talk 22:19, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Making a Wikipedia page for my recently deceased husband

Hello, I have had a Wikipedia page for many decades..I didn't set it up and actually I don't know who did but it seems to be automatically added to by 'someone'! My husband, Julian Spear, recently tragically killed, is a well known PR guy in the music industry and I would like to make a page for him, or have someone else help me to do it as I'm not great at this kind of thing - can you advice me please? Carol Royle (talk) 10:40, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I am sorry to hear about the loss of your husband. I intend the following comments to be as gentle as possible and in no way want to diminish his loss.

The presence of a Wikipedia article(not a "page") isn't intended to memorialize someone, but to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the topic, showing how it is notable as Wikipedia uses the word- such as a notable person or a notable creative professional more narrowly. As you have already surmised, that is difficult for someone with a conflict of interest to do- as it requires that they set aside everything they know about the topic and only summarize what others say about it. Our articles are typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the topic(this is why you were unaware about the article about you being created- the subject cannot grant or deny permission).

The presence of an article is not necessarily a good thing- there are good reasons to not want one for your husband. Any article about him would need to include publicly reported details of his death, which- if it were me- I would find upsetting to read over and over.

My gentle advice is that you not worry about this right now and allow an article to organically develop the usual way- when an independent editor takes note of coverage of your husband and chooses on their own to write about them. There is a place to ask that an article be created- but it is backlogged to the point of uselessness and no one will likely even see your request, much less act on it. If you still wish to see this done, you would need to do it yourself via the Article Wizard, which will still be challenging.

I will lastly advise you that now that you have publicly stated you want to see an article created, you may be approached by scammers- please see WP:SCAM. 331dot (talk) 10:50, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Adding an image

I want to add a new image to a post made by someone else. How can I do that?

Having difficulties adding anew picture. Erikmausratz (talk) 16:16, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Are you asking about uploading an image you (or someone else) took, or about adding an image that is already on Wikimedia Commons to the article?

Help:Images has the basics, but we can't advise further without knowing what you mean. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:49, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Cani delete a userpage

A userpage has only 42 edits with only 15 mainspace edits. Can it be deleted under WP:U5 criteria ? Parker (talk) 07:48, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

15 main space edits would not prevent a U5 deletion, assuming that the user page really is unrelated to Wikipedia. Meters (talk) 07:55, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Please be more upfront about the circumstances, when asking questions here.

This relates to User:Wiki881 which, according to your edit summary when you blanked that page, was your old account, whose password you have lost.

You were told by @Pppery: who declined your speedy request "None of the content of this page (even before the blanking) was U5-eligible. U1 doesn't apply either since we have no proof you're you other than simple forgable say-so. Blanking will have to suffice then" This page is not an appeal court for overturning that decision.

Also, User:Wiki881 last edited in May 2024, but your account was created in 2018. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:34, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Contentious topic draft

Hello all! I am currently writing a draft on a library in the Gaza Strip, which is related to the Arab-Israeli conflict as it discusses the library's destruction after Israeli airstrikes and subsequent rebuilding. While I've written articles before, I have never written one on a contentious topic. Most of the advice I can find is about editing existing articles, so I am unsure - do I have to use the Articles for Creation process here even though I am extended-confirmed? Is it best to do it that way even if I do not have to? Thank you so much for any help. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 12:36, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

I don't know whether or not you are required to, but if you do so, ping me and I will publish it for you - it looks fine. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:31, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Nahuatl Wikipedia

Why is the Nahuatl Wikipedia so empty? Articles on basic information are missing, and new articles are rarely reviewed. Questionadora ávida (talk) 12:05, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

According to the Wikipedia article Nahuatl, the language has around 1.7 million native speakers. This places it at the low end of the scale compared to English, Spanish, Portuguese etc. The Nahuatl Wikipedia is here and it has 4,274 articles, which is obviously on the low side.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 12:50, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

I hope we can improve this soon. Questionadora ávida (talk) 13:02, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

You might find help at the Celtic Knot Conference, held online, which is especially for Wikimedians working in smaller languages. It is on 23 September, this year. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:35, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Template:Family tree scrollable left to right?

I would appreciate help with making Template:Family tree. I have a problem when I add too many people in the same generation. The names become squeezed into multiple lines, and so the tree as a whole becomes taller. See User:Surtsicna/Genealogy for an example. How can I make the tree scrollable left to right instead? Surtsicna (talk) 13:41, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

This is quite specialised. I suggest you ask at WT:WikiProject Genealogy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:29, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

I doubt they'll know any better than people here. It's not something particular to genealogy or even to Template:Family tree. I've seen images that are too wide for the screen with this horizontal scrolling option. Surtsicna (talk) 15:38, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Try WP:VPT then. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:40, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Transcripts

I need to obtain my transcript Holmestere39 (talk) 16:48, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

@Holmestere39: Even if we had any sort of context, this is not something anyone on Wikipedia can assist with. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:52, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

George Floyd

Why does the page not include any links to the autopsy report? It is a very misleading and biased page that would absolutely misinform anyone who reads it. 24.144.190.152 (talk) 17:30, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

The main purpose of a Wikipedia article is to summarize what independent reliable sources say about the topic, not primary source documents. Murder of George Floyd extensively discusses what independent sources say about the autopsy report. If you feel the sources provided are inaccurately summarized, please detail the errors on Talk:Murder of George Floyd. I would suggest that you review the talk page archives carefully as you aren't the first and won't be the last to ask this question. If the sources are accurately summarized, but you feel they are in error, you will have to take that up with the sources themselves. This is not the forum to relitigate Floyd's murder or engage in original research. You can certainly think that the jury got it wrong, but this isn't the forum to express your disagreement with the verdict or its reporting. 331dot (talk) 17:37, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Reading Talk pages on mobile device

I’m often reading Wikipedia pages using my mobile device. Occasionally I find a User Talk page with a long sequence of posts such that the most recent posts occupy a narrow strip down the right-hand side of the screen. Sometimes this strip is so narrow that each line holds only one or two words!

How do I adjust a Talk page to make it easily readable using my mobile device? Dolphin (t) 08:05, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

@Dolphin51 you mean because people keep infinitely indenting their replies instead of doing an outdent at some point ? There unfortunately isn't really a good way to deal with that. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:13, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

@Dolphin51 You can try the desktop view. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:37, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

@Dolphin51: You can reduce indentation of all posts in mobile with this in Special:MyPage/minerva.css:

dl dd {margin-left: 0.5em !important;}

You can also set it to 0em or another value. The default is 1em. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:06, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

When that happens to me, I'm usually holding my phone in portrait mode. If I flip it a half-turn to landscape, it usually makes it easier to read. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 18:46, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Putting text in columns?

Hi, is there a way to add columns to a page?

I'm working on this article: Proclamation_of_the_Constitution_Act,_1867, which has a long list of names towards the end.

Is there a way to put those names into two sets of columns, with the first set having the names for Ontario and Quebec in two columns, and followed by the names for Nova Scotia and New Brunswick in two columns?

I've tried different formatting codes, but haven't been successful.

Thanks. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 18:32, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

I think you can look at Help:Columns. Ruslik_Zero 19:05, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, that works. My search skills are obviously poor - I didn't find that page before. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 19:28, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Delete My Page?

 Courtesy link: Richard Bellis

Is there no way to delete my page merely because I don't want a wikipedia page. I would like to NOT be "notable" Richard Bellis 47.144.35.19 (talk) 17:34, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi IP editor. It's a common misconception that you own or can influence the article which is about you. Unfortunately, as an Emmy award winner, Richard Bellis meets our criteria for inclusion ("notability"). qcne (talk) 18:24, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

You might find Wikipedia:About you helpful.

Are there any particular issues with the article? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:11, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Report

report a child pornography 143.44.157.65 (talk) 08:45, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

See this page for information on how to report inappropriate images of children. 331dot (talk) 09:14, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Emerald, Victoria

Emerald, Victoria

I have added to the article above this new file: File:"An English House" in Emerald, Vic. Australia, (November 1932, Australian Home Beautiful Magazine).png

Could the new file (an old photo of a house) please be trimmed so that it doesn't include the pages (but please keep the date at the top of the magazine's page and the description below the actual photo) and can the house itself and file be made bigger? Please assist if you can, thank you. Brrowbottom (talk) 03:42, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes, Brrowbottom, one can crop an image. I can; you can. (I am however puzzled by your request for the file to "be made bigger".) I remember that under your previous username you asked the same question some years ago, and I explained how to use GIMP for this -- but you showed no interest. DIY with GIMP should be easier for you (let alone for others) than asking (better done here than at this help desk). Here we go: (1) download and install GIMP. Load the file in GIMP. (2) At the top left, click on "Rectangle Select Tool". (3) Using your cursor, select the area that you want to retain. (Err on the side of inclusiveness.) (4) From the menu system: "Image | Crop to selection"). (5) If you're not yet happy with the result, repeat (3) and (4). If at any point you mae a mistake, Ctrl-Z to revert. (6) From the menu system "File | Export as" (I suggest that you don't overwrite the original, and that you choose JPEG as the format, and 86% or so for the quality). (7) When you're happy, Ctrl-W to close. (GIMP will warn you that you haven't saved your work. Click on the option to "Discard".) If you're using a Mac, then not Ctrl-X but instead Command-X. Yes, there are also good alternatives to GIMP. Happy photo editing! -- Hoary (talk) 04:38, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

This is so very difficult to do, but thank you for offering directions.

This website; https://www.gimp.org/downloads/

offers two different platforms and I don't know which one to use . I also get confused - neither website state where to upload the file.

Please advise

Thanks 49.199.154.94 (talk) 06:17, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

I am still trying ( I managed to get onto the GIMP website) but I don't know how or where to download this file https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerald,_Victoria#/media/File:%22An_English_House%22_in_Emerald,_Vic._Australia,_(November_1932,_Australian_Home_Beautiful_Magazine).png

I am so embarresed - this is very hard to do 49.199.154.94 (talk) 06:37, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for asking. Is it for macOS? If so, then somebody here who knows about these matters will tell you how to tell if you need the version for ARM64 (Apple Silicon) or the version for x86_64. Then I recommend BitTorrent if your computer understands this -- but unless you've set it up to do so, it probably won't; so choose "directly". Just download it to wherever macOS suggests (I'd guess a directory/folder named "Downloads"). Instructions: "Just open the downloaded DMG and drag and drop GIMP into your 'Applications' folder." You open the DMG file by double-clicking on it. ¶ You should download the largest version of the file that you want to edit. Download it wherever you like -- just don't forget where. (But don't you already have it on your hard drive?) Once GIMP is installed, right-click the filename and choose GIMP as the "application" (i.e. software) you want to use on it. -- Hoary (talk) 07:27, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I have a copy of GIMP installed, and know how to use it to crop images. I could download the image, do the cropping, and then try uploading the cropped version to en:Wikipedia. But I'm concerned that the image is still covered by copyright, and only a low-resolution version would be accepted.

An alternative solution is to leave the image as it is, but to present a cropped version of it in the article. There are instructions for this at . If you also find this hard to do, you can ask me to do it - but please specify how closely you want it cropped. Maproom (talk) 07:39, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you - you are very patient with me! (I have a "MacBook Air") and I am not good at the more technical stuff and often cease editing for a while (having been reprimanded by clever editors)!

Here is the file which should I feel be larger on the Emerald, Victoria page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerald,_Victoria#/media/File:%22An_English_House%22_in_Emerald,_Vic._Australia,_(November_1932,_Australian_Home_Beautiful_Magazine).png

The image should be a fair bit bigger - nearly as big as the other photos on this page - so that the house stands out. Also, please crop the flicker of pages seen on the left hand side but leave in the writing at the TOP of the page and the description immediately below the image. It is out of copyright as it is an Australian image form 1932

Thank you again - if you can take over from here, that would be great! 49.199.154.94 (talk) 07:57, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

I've made the image (as diplayed in Emerald, Victoria) larger. That was easy. I just replaced "|thumb|" by "|300px|" in the source of the page. If you change 300 for 360, it will get bigger again.

I thought the use of Gimp would be for cropping the image, not enlarging it. That way, it could just show the house, without the black background, the cover of the book, etc. Would you want it to include the frame, and maybe the caption, as shown in the book? Maproom (talk) 09:56, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

I have done it now. All good Thank you so much for your help 49.199.154.94 (talk) 10:24, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Don't do that. "300px" (or any hard-coded value) can appear smaller, depending on the user's system. Use |upright=1.2 (or some other numeric value), which changes the size proportionally. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:43, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

I don't know why you are being told to use GIMP. Commons has its own, relatively easy to use, cropping tool: c:Commons:CropTool. I have now used this to make a cropped version of the image. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:02, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Raw CSS displaying when previewing a section of an article

Greetings. When I go to edit and preview this weekly charts section I get some raw CSS that shows up:

| class="col-break col-break-2" |

Any thoughts why this might be? Rockfang (talk) 03:26, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

@Rockfang: There is nothing wrong. When Will I Be Famous?#Charts opens a table with {{col-begin}}. The purpose is to display the two chart tables in two columns of a larger table without borders. The subsection When Will I Be Famous?#Weekly charts adds a table cell with {{col-2}} which produces what the preview shows. When it's processed without the table opening from an earlier section, the cell code (with an initial pipe to start the cell) is rendered instead. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:06, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Roger that. Thank you. Rockfang (talk) 12:04, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Embeding an infobox within an infobox

Hi I am looking for embeding a Infobox academic within an Infobox officeholder. I've tried embed = {{infobox academic}} but it doesn't render the latter. Xpander (talk) 12:49, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

@Xpander1: That's not how it works. See Template:Infobox officeholder#Embedding other templates, and come back with a link to your attempted code if you still have problems. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:40, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. It works pretty well. @PrimeHunter Xpander (talk) 12:08, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Ngerekebesang (village)

This probably shouldn’t be here, but can anyone create a Wikipedia article for Ngerekebesang (village) please? It is a village on Ngerekebesang Island, along with Meyuns and Echang. Can someone do this? Palauan Wikipedian (talk) 09:23, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Palauan Wikipedian.

The place to ask for an article to be created is Requested articles; but in all honesty, the chance of anybody picking up a request there is small.

It is possible that you will have more luck if you ask at WT:WikiProject Palau, or WT:WikiProject Micronesia; but I see that both those projects are said to be inactive, so I don't know whether anybody will see a request there.

Generally, the best way to get an article written is to write it yourself; but 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. ColinFine (talk) 15:02, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

@Palauan Wikipedian The current article on Echang is very limited in scope. Wikipedia allows it because the relevant advice about notability of settlements is is WP:GEOLAND, which is not very demanding. A recent essay on the notability of settlements, at WP:SETTLETHRESH, makes what I think is a good suggestion. Once you have built up some experience editing, you should find it fairly easy to create a draft for the village. The alternative would be to add information about it to the existing article Ngerekebesang, citing whatever reliable sources you have. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:47, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Apology

Dear Wikipedia Community,

Nice to meet you. Noam, 33 years old, from Israel.

I was born with a neurodevelopmental disorder called Asperger Syndrome(today known as High Functioning Autism). Because of this, I might appear harsh at times or become rude or easily angry. I'd like to say sorry for being rude to some Wikipedia members / users and I hope you accept the apology.

With that, I have a few questions,

1. I hve sources for the delirium article, but an error popped up, how do I contact technical support?
2. do you accept my apology
3. do you need something from me now, or I can just continue editing normally?
4. how do I add sources with "blank" error while trying to add it?

. Noamatadgy (talk) 19:19, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for apologising here, I would suggest that you also apologise at Talk:Delirium to the user you were talking to there and possibly reply on your talk page to say you have apologised. I recommend reading Wikipedia:Civility, to see what is expected here, but generally avoiding rudeness is a good starting point.

I am not sure what adding sources with "blank" error means, can you do the edit and revert it so we can see what the problem is? TSventon (talk) 19:52, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

the error sometimes appears and sometimes not, but i will try to take a screenshot. Noamatadgy (talk) 19:53, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

I have added title and website fields to your reference at The Rock of Tanios, I don't know whether that was the same problem? TSventon (talk) 21:00, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

the error appear at all articles i try to edit, but randomly..... now it stopped. Noamatadgy (talk) 21:03, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Moves

WP:RM/T

Am I allowed to perform moves requested there if I think they are not controversial, even though I am not an admin? Justjourney (talk | contribs) 21:18, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Justjourney Edits at WP:RM/T will mostly require Wikipedia:Page mover or admin permission, so you could look into becoming a page mover. That requires a minimum of 3,000 edits, so you are not yet eligible. TSventon (talk) 21:55, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

@TSventon How about the requests there that don't require such permissions, such as moving a page onto a redirect with no prior page history? Justjourney (talk | contribs) 22:05, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

(such as this one) Justjourney (talk | contribs) 22:09, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

That wasn't over a redirect, that was into an unoccupied title. Theoretically you could do that, though for redirects with history or pointing to a different page than the one you're moving will require page movers. — Tenshi! (Talk page) 23:22, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

@Justjourney - in your history on Wikipedia you have only commented on two move discussions so far, so I would be concerned with your understanding of what is truly a "non-controversial move" looks like. Until you've participated in a many more move disucssions and see the rational provided by the closer, it is difficult to really understand how controversial a given move might be. I think on average over 30% of all technical moves are rejected for controversial or other policy based reasons, and you should have more experience participating over at WP:RM in general. TiggerJay (talk) 05:47, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Help linking old account with new one

I lost access to my previous account which I've had for many years because the email that was associated with that account is so old that I no longer have accesss to it. When Wikipedia logged me out of my account and wanted me to verify my account they sent the verification to the old, "dead" email address which I can't get into anymore. I had to start a new account on Wikipedia. How do I get all of my previous edits and info linked back to my new account? FourLeos (talk) 21:29, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

There is no way to assign the edits under your old account to your new account. The only thing you can do is post on your current user page something to the effect of "i previously was User1234 but lost access", you can post on the user page of your old account a similar statement. 331dot (talk) 21:31, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks...I appreciate the help! FourLeos (talk) 21:55, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

@FourLeos: If you still know the password to the old account then you can probably get access again by mailing ca@wikimedia.org and ask to set a new mail address for the account. Don't reveal the password in the mail. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:53, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks...waiting to hear back from ca@wikimedia.org FourLeos (talk) 00:48, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

@FourLeos: I would like to hear how it ends out. I have given this advice several times in the last months after such verification requests became common. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:00, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

It worked. Trust & Safety helped me get back into my old account. I suggest people reach outreach to them if they encounter this same problem. Kedesk (talk) 21:05, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

@Kedesk: Thanks for the update. Until recently, the usual login problem was that users forgot their password. We told them they had to abandon the account if it didn't have a working mail address. I'm glad it worked out better for you. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:54, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

I want to correct misinformation but I am not yet a subscriber

What do I have to do 1. to join and then to log in 2. To edit incorrect information 94.228.11.121 (talk) 22:08, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Even though it's recommended, you don't need to log in to edit information (as evidenced by this comment, which counts as an edit, posted under an IP address). For how to edit: Help:Tutorial is a good place to start. There are, of course, hundreds of guidelines, policies, and how-to pages that detail the ways in which you should be editing, so feel free to ask if you have any other specific questions. The Five pillars are a general introduction of the overall goal of this project, and it links to many other important guidelines. TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 23:15, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. To add to what TheDowningStreetCat said: all information in a Wikipedia article should be verifiable from a reliable published source.

If the information you want to change is cited to what appears to be a reliable source (and that source does verify it), you should not remove or change it, even if you think it is wrong: rather, open a discussion on the article's talk page.

Any information that you wish to add, you should find a published source that verifies it: your own knowledge is not enough (whoever you are).

When you make an edit, it may happen that another editor disagrees in some way, and reverts your edit. This is a normal part of how Wikipedia works: it doesn't mean that you are wrong, or they are wrong, it just means that they disagree that your edit is an improvement. If you are new, this is often because there is some aspect of Wikipedia policies that you don't know yet.

At that point, you might decide that it doesn't matter, or that they are right, and choose to leave it. But if you want to pursue it, the next thing is to open a discussion with the other person, to try and reach consensus with them. See WP:BRD for how this works. ColinFine (talk) 10:35, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

My translation not showing in list

My new Macedonian translation of Esperance, Western Australia (here) isn’t showing up in the lost of languages the page is translated into. Why, and how to fix? HtialilwW (talk) 03:49, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

It looks like you're looking for help on a different language version of Wikipedia. This helpdesk can only assist you with problems you're having on the English Wikipedia. I suggest you find the appropriate help desk page on that other language variant. TiggerJay (talk) 05:49, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

@HtialilwW: There are instructions at Help:Interlanguage links#Adding a new link. TSventon (talk) 06:13, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

mk:Есперанс,_Западна_Австралија has now been deleted. TSventon (talk) 22:33, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Ministry of Agriculture (North Korea)

Draft:Ministry of Agriculture (North Korea)

Done. I add information and reliable sources. Check, please. СтасС (talk) 06:48, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Nice work, but there's still references remaining before it passes WP:GNG. Ahri Boy (talk) 07:39, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

I don't understand. What else do you want from me?--СтасС (talk) 12:32, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

None. Just keep it up, StasS. Ahri Boy (talk) 12:48, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Redirect from main namespace to a category?

Stephen J. Copland is a redirect to Category:Taxa named by Stephen J. Copland. Are such cases appropriate? --KnightMove (talk) 08:47, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes, until such time as there is an article about him. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:30, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Overkill?

Often in Wikipedia articles, I see words that I think are likely unfamiliar to many readers without an explanation of the meaning but there is a citation of the words linking to another Wiki article. If a writer or editor thinks readers would benefit from understanding the meaning right away, rather than leaving it up to them whether to follow the link — which of course they might not do — then it seems to me that the meaning should also be provided in the article where the words appear, along with the citation. That's what I'd like to find out.

Example: "... he swings a thurible." My guess is that around 95% of Wikipedia readers have no idea what a thurible is.

Is this okay to do, or is it considered overkill in Wikipedia: "... he swings a thurible, a small metal pot suspended by chains in which incense is burned during liturgical celebrations." Augnablik (talk) 12:08, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

I'd say you are correct, with regard to the above example. a Wikipedia article should not be relying on a wikilink to provide an explanation for an unfamiliar term a typical reader cannot be expected to know. I'd probably go for a briefer definition ("an incense burner on a chain"), and include the Wikilink too. To an extent this is a question of editorial judgement, but articles should generally be understandable by the expected readership without relying on them clicking through to other articles. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:21, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

More commonly known as the smoking handbag when I was growing up.

I think a short description for these words would help a reader, as Andy says, without having to switch between articles. Knitsey (talk) 12:29, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

This is the sort of thing explanatory footnotes are for. He swings a thurible. DuncanHill (talk) 12:30, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

So, then, @AndyTheGrump confirms what I was thinking (a short description plus perhaps a citation of another article); @Knitsey seems to go for just a short description without a citation of another article as well; and @DuncanHill recommends a citation placed in an explanatory footnote.

The plot thickens. 😗 Augnablik (talk) 13:04, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

No, a short description. I wouldn't remove the word link. Knitsey (talk) 13:06, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

I'd be kinder to readers and make it "he swings an incense burner". Make it a "small, metal" one if you wish; "on a chain" if it helps. Bazza 7 (talk) 13:11, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

My view is that "he swings a thurible" is fine. Anyone who doesn't know what a thurible can easily find out from the wikilink. Maproom (talk) 16:01, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

I agree. The wikilink provides an unobtrusive route for anyone who doesn't know and wants to, without compelling those who do know to read through unnecessary (to them) material. Superscript citations and footnotes are fine when appropriate, but unnecessary ones clutter the page and slow reading. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.253.201 (talk) 18:17, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, everyone who weighed in on this. The takeaways from this discussion for me are that Wikipedia has no specific guidance about my original question —- whether it’s overkill to provide both a citation and a short explanation —- and so it’s largely up to individual editors, keeping readership in mind. Wouldn’t it be nice if it were possible to easily create articles that would allow readers to choose either a leaner or a fuller version: citations and explanatory footnotes only OR citations and explanatory footnotes along with short explanations? Maybe some day! Augnablik (talk) 03:54, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Another option may work better for you if you use the Desktop interface; it's a kind of mashup of different options mentioned above. If you go to Preferences, Appearance, and scroll down to bolded section 'Reading preferences', and check the box for 'Enable page previews', and then hit Save, then when you mouse over a linked word, then a pop-up box will appear with the first 30 to 50 words of the article at the link, along with an image, if there is one. Try it now: go to Preferences > Appearance, tick the box and Save, and then refresh this page, and mouse over ⟶ thurible. Did it work? For me, they are faster and easier than following an explanatory note, which jumps me to the bottom of the page, from where I have to jump back after I am done.

Whether you use that option or not, my general take is that this is a general purpose online encyclopedia. If you are going to read about church topics, then you are going to run across terms like chasuble, psalter, cope, chalice, transept, and thurible, and there is no point to dumbing down the text. If you are not going to see the proper words used in context at the online encyclopedia, conveniently hyperlinked so you can look them up at your leisure (or not, as you please), then where and how are you ever going to learn them? Of course they should appear in an encyclopedic article about a topic where these are the terms generally used in reliable sources to talk about the topic. For those who want a simpler version, there is always Simple Wikipedia. I generally would not add long explanations inline; that's what hyperlinks are for (and the pop-up box helps).Mathglot (talk) 07:01, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Well, @Mathglot, I was thinking about other readers, not me, when I raised my question. But just to try out your recommendation, I tried to do what you suggested ... and couldn't. I got an error message saying, "You have to disable the Navigation popups gadget in your Gadgets preferences to enable page previews."

I don't recall, if I ever knew, what that gadget is. Is the benefit of what you suggested greater than the slight annoyance of having to follow the error message advice? Augnablik (talk) 08:37, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

For more experienced editors, WP:Navigation popups are probably more useful than WP:Page Previews since they give additional information about users when one hovers over an editor's name in a talk thread, for example. Both do similar things when one hovers over an article link. Readers who don't have an account get page previews automatically and these have slightly larger previews of any image on the linked article than navigation popups do. Hence I agree with Mathglot that we don't need to dumb down the use of the correct technical term, assuming it is wikilinked, and neither do we need explanatory footnotes in these cases. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:13, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Very helpful, Mike. I understand now that both features are avaiable and what each does. And from the error message that came when I tried to install Page Previews, as Mathglot suggested, apparently I already have the Navigation Pop-ups feature installed. I've often looked at the information the feature provides, but I don't think I've used it well.

I guess it's also helpful for me to be aware that some readers have Navigation Pop-ups, or to a lesser extent Page Previews, because that will perhaps lessen concern I always have for readers to have as much clarity as possible about what they're reading. That concern, of course, means in turn that I always have to watch out that I'm not guilty of overkill. (But, of course, not all readers will have Navigation Pop-ups or even Page Previews, though. And I'm sure that not all of those who do will understand how to use their feature well so they don't avoid checking linked citations, as I suspect is true of some.) Augnablik (talk) 17:10, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Chef Jason Dady

 Courtesy link: User talk:Pythoncoder § Draft: Chef Jason Dady

Hi there! My draft Draft:Chef Jason Dady has gotten denied four times after claims of using an LLM, even though it's completely false. I even messaged a recent reviewer on their talk page telling them that it was not written by LLM, and they refused to listen. I have continuously updated my draft to include more references and clearer, neutral language. Could someone help me understand why this draft is still getting denied? Thank you so much in advance. Srwinch (talk) 21:00, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

@Pythoncoder: Care to chip in? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:23, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Looking again, I still think at least some of the initial revision was AI-generated (and two other users flagged it as such at the time). If I had to guess, I’d say the lead and the Culinary Philosophy section were LLM-generated; the Media and Philanthropy sections look human, but the author seems to have picked up some common LLM stylistic mistakes. All of the very-likely-AI-generated sections are no longer in the revision I declined, so I’ve self-reverted and reopened the draft for review. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 21:50, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Citations

I wish to add a contribution to a Wikipedia page. The subject of the Wikipedia page is a building I had something to do with and without my contribution the current page is both misleading and deficient. My contribution does not originate from any previous academic or media source, because what I know is in my head.

I have been advised - "“curprev 10:42, 28 July 2025 Panamitsu talk contribs 12,228 bytes −1,432 Undid revision 1302944403 by EllisGN (talk) Nice work but this information is missing from the sources. On Wikipedia, all information must be referenced. I enocurage you to continue but you've got to cite your sources. undothank Tag: Undo"

I am not a geek so what is said here is gobbledygook. How can I get through this?

If it is easier, email me on [redacted]

Thanks

Geoff Ellis EllisGN (talk) 04:02, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi EllisGN, depending on how closely you are related to or "had something to do with" the building, you may have a conflict of interest which means you should probably avoid editing the page in the first place. -- œ^™ 04:17, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. If what you say is correct, my estimation of Wikipedia has gone down a few notches. Are you saying information on Wiki is what everyone else says rather than what the people involved have to say? 1.141.85.180 (talk) 04:49, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Basically, yes. The reason for that is because the people involved tend to be biased, which violates our policy of keeping a neutral point of view. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 04:51, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

OK thanks. I guess we will simply have to accept if Wikipedia precludes information from people who are the only people who know the truth then it is not a reliable source of information. Cheers 1.141.85.180 (talk) 04:54, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

No it's what reliable published sources have to say. -- œ^™ 04:51, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Catch 22! You know something is true but if that information is not known by anyone else and it cannot be verified then it remains a secret and the people at large are denied the truth. 1.141.85.180 (talk) 04:58, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

That is indeed correct. Aside from exceptions such as plot summaries, all statements have to be backed up by reliable sources that are published somewhere. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 05:01, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Everyone keeps on about 'reliable sources'. It seems to me hearsay is deemed a 'reliable source'. 1.141.85.180 (talk) 05:05, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, IP user.

The problem is that, because Wikipedia can be edited by anybody, even if what you put in is correct, somebody might change it later - by mistake, or because they think you're wrong, or because they're vandals.

So what happens when somebody reads the article next week in Baltimore, or next month in Brisbane, or next year in Bangalore? They have no way of checking whether the information in there is true. Even if they look at the article's history, and find that somebody changed it, they have no way of knowing whether the original version is correct, or the changed version, or neither.

So a Wikipedia article is only as useful as its cited sources: without sources it is simply not reliable, and so it is of little value.

You may say, well, I'll put it on my website, and cite that. But anybody can put anything on a website, whether it's true or not, so that doesn't help. So we rely on sources that are published by somebody (usually an organisation) with a reputation for fact-checking and editorial care: that's what we mean by "reliable sources".

Sometimes even reliable sources get things wrong, and that is a problem for Wikipedia. But our consensus is that that is the best we can do. ColinFine (talk) 08:15, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine. I have never attempted to edit Wikipedia before. I just happened upon a Wikipedia page about a building I had personal involvement in. I was disappointed to see obvious inaccuracies and omissions which materially altered the facts. I noted the citations pointed predominantly to a local newspaper and recent council press releases. To compound the problem the newspaper relied on those council releases. The fact is that the authors of all these citations never checked their information, never consulted me about a project I initiated and given the passing of time were never in a position to have firsthand knowledge.

The information I wished to insert was intended to correct the page and offer readers the truth. However this relates to events nearly forty years ago. Key witnesses are now dead and hard evidence long buried or shredded.

It is seriously disappointing for me to see Wikipedia information that is not credible remain. This is a disservice to genuine historic endeavour.

Thanks again but it seems there is little that can be done. EllisGN (talk) 22:23, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

It doesn't need to remain unverified. If you can get your information published in a reliable sourced it can be used. You should really read No original research for some clarification. -- œ^™ 05:05, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

I will find a 'friendly' journo, have my input published in a local rag, then use that as a citation. 1.141.85.180 (talk) 05:07, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

There you go ;) -- œ^™ 05:08, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Or write a piece / book using a pseudonym. 1.141.85.180 (talk) 05:10, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

We have a very diligent community and a Reliable sources/Noticeboard, just so you're aware. -- œ^™ 05:12, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

I am sure, but knowing what I have learnt today I now fully understand why the Wiki page I am interested in is so misleading and deficient. 1.141.85.180 (talk) 05:14, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

We have Talk pages where editors can discuss their edits. Have you tried engaging the other editor on the talk page? Civility and discussion is yet another important tenet of ours. -- œ^™ 05:18, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks but no, not as yet. How is that done? 1.141.85.180 (talk) 05:20, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

At the top of every page there is a Talk link that will take you there. Then you do it just like you are doing it here. -- œ^™ 05:23, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Also, we have a policy of No original research, Wikipedia does not publish original thought, so no it can't only be knowledge from your own head, it needs to be verifiable. -- œ^™ 04:55, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

A few things, @EllisGN:

-As the comment above says, you should refrain from editing articles that you have a connection to, and you would have to declare that conflict of interest.

-You cannot add information from 'your own head'. All contributions require verification through reliable and independent sources. If a reliable source cannot be found, then we can't include that information no matter how true it may be. This second point is essentially what User:Panamitsu said.

-Less of a problem, but in general it's not advisable nor necessary to include your email address. All communication will occur here. TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 04:24, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

I inserted my email address because it is easier for me. Cheers 1.141.85.180 (talk) 04:51, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

If you are User:EllisGN, please remember to sign in when continuing discussions started from that account. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:11, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Creating a disambiguation page

Hi all, although I consider myself quite an experienced editor, I have never created a disambiguation page before, and I don't want to mess it up. I believe that one is now needed for the name Grace Wang. The four articles should be: Grace Wang, Chinese-American academic administrator; Grace Wang (sustainability scholar), American sustainability scholar; Guiling Wang, computer scientist; and Wang Laichun, Chinese businesswoman. Is the first Grace Wang the PRIMARYTOPIC? I don't know how to use the tools or analyze the pageviews to determine this. Either way, a disambiguation page is needed, and I don't know how to set one up with the right categorization, order, and templates. Please advise; thank you! BhamBoi (talk) 06:19, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

BhamBoi, flip a coin. Heads, Grace Wang is first, Grace Wang (sustainability scholar) second. Tails, vice versa. The other pair can be third and fourth, or fourth and third. I cannot imagine that any balanced person would loudly object to any of the four possibilities. Somebody might, however, notice that this or that MoS or other page prescribes a different order from the one you landed on. They'd then be free to change the order. The sky wouldn't fall. -- Hoary (talk) 07:46, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

@BhamBoi and Hoary: WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is about whether one of the articles should get the base name "Grace Wang" without a disambiguation. Click "Page information" under "Tools" to see page views in the past 30 days: Grace Wang 470, Grace Wang (sustainability scholar) 44, Guiling Wang 37, Wang Laichun 1037. Click the number, or "Pageviews" at top of the page history, to see more details. It's relevant how often Wang Laichun is searched as "Grace Wang" but Wikipedia has no tool for that. A way to speculate is Google hits on related searches. Click "Tools" on a Google search results page to see an estimated count, but it's often poor and Google hid it under Tools for a reason. Wang Laichun is known for Luxshare. I get 4830 on "Wang Laichun" Luxshare and 2960 on "Grace Wang" Luxshare. So we might guess around 40% of Wikipedia searches for her will be on "Grace Wang". 40% of 1037 is 415. Then it appears there is no primary topic which dominates the total of all the others, and the disambiguation page should be at Grace Wang. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages for how to make the page. The order of four people is not important. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:22, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Since there is no primary topic, I moved the article on the materials scientist, then created a disambiguation page, then hatnoted all four articles to say "for other people named or called Grace Wang", since the question is not whether any of them is actually named "Grace" but rather whether in English they are called by that name. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:06, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Somebody help me figure out why I'm missing a space in the templated hatnote at the dab page? --Orange Mike | Talk 17:13, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

I have added a space to the dab page, but I don't know the reason for its being missed in the first place. TSventon (talk) 17:27, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Fraud due to unaccountable provided certificates

https://alliancessp.com/#/pages/schema/schema This page no longer is accessible and I was scammed out of money. Certificates are supposed to protect people from scammers. Are these individuals who at "alliancessp.com" kosher? Are they still operating the site? 2603:6080:CF00:770C:3013:861F:C63F:2F6E (talk) 17:36, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, this is the help desk for questions about editing the English Wikipedia. We can't help with anything else. I suggest you contact your local authorities. qcne (talk) 17:46, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

deletion of a page from my account

I created a page on my account that I cannot delete now. Any help? Charalambos Papaioannou (talk) 17:04, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Do you want an administrator to delete the page you created in your userspace? Acroterion (talk) 17:06, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

yes I would like somebody to delete this

User:Charalambos Papaioannou/Gerasimos Siasos

which appears on my user page by my mistake Charalambos Papaioannou (talk) 17:22, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

I deleted it. 331dot (talk) 17:25, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Charalambos Papaioannou (talk) 17:27, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

I cannot find a search box

I cannot find a search box on the home page. William Shoff (talk) 05:08, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Have you got the magnifying glass at the top left? Click that. ColinFine (talk) 08:17, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Default template

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 170#Default headers for association football tournament pages

We discussed it and I think a default setting for Cups can be added. Can this default template please be added to the Wikipedia guide so there's a consensus? Best regards, PeruvianCocaine (talk) 17:48, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes it can.

Perhaps that wasn't really your question? Can you be more clear? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:01, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Ok, can someone please do it? PeruvianCocaine (talk) 15:12, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Non-English music festival names

Hello. Could someone help me clarify whether non-English music festival names should be italicised? The title of the article, Rock am Ring and Rock im Park, is not italicised, but in the lead, "Rock am Ring" and "Rock im Park" are italicised, which left me confused. If I follow MOS:BADITALICS, the German music festival Heute die! Morgen Du! is the name of an organisation and is therefore not italicised. Is it correct to consider this an organisation? Thank you in advance. Oroborvs (talk) 17:52, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Oroborvs, I suggest that you ask this at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Text formatting. -- Hoary (talk) 21:39, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

@Hoary, Okay, I'll do that, thanks. Oroborvs (talk) 16:34, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

on referring to people

let's make up some individual. his name is uriel nathaniel owen. he has an article all about him, wowie

let's say, then, that the article refers to him by his last name as usual, but due to recent controversies (idk, his mom having it and being a neo nazi or something), he wants to separate himself from that name

if he then asks (as in "literally requests, in a non-legally-binding way, in or out of wikipedia, but directed to wikipedia") that it be changed to a first or middle name basis before or without having it changed, and said name or referral isn't itself at least kind of notable, could the request be treated as uncontroversial enough to abide by?

and on that note, regardless of what the answer to the first question is, if there end up being secondary sources about the request, could it generally be done? consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 18:56, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

I've redacted the quite mean-spirited editorialising. As for your question, this would be unlikely to be honoured, in part because he could always change his surname and we would simply use that instead, using the same rationale we would for transgender individuals. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 19:09, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

admittedly, i disagree with most of this redaction, as it also redacted the context of the question. the "editorializing" towards this thankfully fictional person is fair, but the rest is definitely overkill

as for the answer... yeah, fair, thanks consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 19:26, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Though I will note the easiest name-change would be to go from "given middle last" to "given middle", using their middle name as their surname, laws permitting (some locations do have naming laws). This would probably be the least messy way to do it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 19:29, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

CITEVAR and converting bare urls to Cite templates

We got WP:CITEVAR, which makes sense to me. You don't want people changing APA style to ASA style to MLA style en masse et cetera.

But does that also mean you shouldn't convert bare URLs into cite templates en masse?

Isn't there a bot that converts bare URLs to cite templates already? The bare URLs are very ugly. Polygnotus (talk) 03:09, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Please fix bare urls WP:CITEVARYES..... the above was a good edit. Moxy🍁 03:34, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

@Moxy Yeah in that example I am making the style consistent. But lets say we have an article with all bare URLs. Am I allowed to change em all to cite templates? And some? And am I allowed to do that tens of thousands of times with a bot? I think we should have a bot that changes bare URLs to cite templates. Polygnotus (talk) 03:38, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes there are people that devote their time to changing these..... must be aware that some articles are so large and have a template limit WP:Template limit thus some articles have been converted from templates to have no templates. We do have a bot running around fixing all these that you can use to do whole categories of articles or just one....see Citation bot we also have Refill for one article at a time. Moxy🍁 03:47, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

But WP:CITECONSENSUS says The use of citation templates is neither encouraged nor discouraged: an article should not be switched between templated and non-templated citations without good reason and consensus – see "Variation in citation methods", above. so it looks like currently you are only allowed to do this to make 'em consistent. Polygnotus (talk) 04:43, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Bare urls fall under fail to provide needed bibliographic data by virtue of not having any other information about the source. Non-templated citations with bibliographic information in any style (whether CS1 or something else) is acceptable, but if it is missing any field (like, for example, publisher or access date or whatever) it would also be acceptable to add that information because that's not really a change in style, any more than adding additional information to a CS1 template would be.

"Example". is also kind of a bare url citation, just using {{cite web}} instead of writing the code manually, I don't think anyone would complain about adding the other fields of a cite web in as a violation of CITEVAR, so they shouldn't complain about adding additional information in a non-templated citation either, as long as you try and keep the style used the same if there is one (e.g., keep APA as APA, MLA as MLA, Chicago as Chicago and whatever. If you don't recognise which style just try and keep stuff in the same order I guess.) and if there isn't, of course you'd be free to pick whatever. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:00, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

More at WP:BAREURLS. They're not considered a "style." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 04:44, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Old account that has personal information I don't want listed

Hello, I want to admit that I have 2 old accounts that have my personal information on, and I want my privacy protected and such accounts to be renamed. My old accounts are this and this. I made these two accounts when I was under the age of 13, and I was blocked a few times for copyright vio's and disrespectful actions, but my blocks were IP cleared on Christmas Eve of 2024. I am very sensitive about my personal information revealed by a simple google search, especially as one contains my home city and full name, and even more embarrassing as my previous actions online when I was a child and didn't really know the full extent of what I was doing. If an admin could just either change the users or remove the accounts all together? Also, you can verify my story is real by checking my IP. Thank you! Rexophile (talk) 04:31, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

@Rexophile See WP:OS. Polygnotus (talk) 04:35, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

@Rexophile I have blanked the user talkpages, perhaps that is a good start. Polygnotus (talk) 04:40, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Report of Error in Wikipedia Article - "Prasat Ta Muen Thom"

Dear Wikipedia Team,

I would like to report an error in the article titled "Prasat Ta Muen Thom." The article currently states that Prasat Ta Muen Thom is located in Cambodia, but this is incorrect. The temple is actually located in Thailand, specifically in Ban Nong Khanna, Samakkhi District, Village No. 8, Tamiang Subdistrict, Phanom Dong Rak District, Surin Province. The current description violates Thailand's sovereignty, as it inaccurately claims the location of the temple in Cambodia, while it is clearly within Thai territory. I recommend correcting the article to reflect the accurate location and ensuring that it adheres to factual information. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely, Sayamon Kruasai 49.237.168.223 (talk) 12:20, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello IP from Thailand. Our article Prasat Ta Muen Thom does not say it is Cambodia, it says it is located on the "Cambodia–Thailand border", that "tourists at the temple are not allowed to venture more than a few meters southward from the main entrance and armed Thai border police stand guard to mark the border" and that "Since 2010, the entrance of Ta Muen Thom temple on Cambodia side has become easier". It appear, therefore, to be divided between the two countries. Wikipedia does not take sides in border disputes. - Arjayay (talk) 12:32, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Wikimania

How does the Virtual Wikimania 2025 work? Is there a website to see it? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 15:54, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes: https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2025:Wikimania -- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:21, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Minor Contributor

I created CharlesPhillipsSpaceGuy to allow me to contribute some to pages about orbital analysis. Now I have created (by accident!!) a page for myself on Wikipedia. But I wanted to change to CharlesSpaceGuy and NOT have my last name (sadly) displayed. Help!! CharlesPhillipsSpaceGuy (talk) 22:29, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @CharlesPhillipsSpaceGuy. I'm not sure what you mean by "a page for myself". But if you are the only editor who has substantially edited a page, you may request its deletion by putting the template {{db-author}} at the top. ColinFine (talk) 22:37, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Are you wanting a change of user name? Would this be what you are looking for? Knitsey (talk) 22:39, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Changing username if you want to change your username. If the name is changed then your user page User:CharlesPhillipsSpaceGuy will automatically be moved to the new name but it leaves a log entry. It will also be possible to find your old username in some other places, e.g. old signed edits like above. Page histories like will change to the new name. If you request deletion of the user page with {{db-author}} then there will be one less way to find the name after a rename. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:55, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

The Viper of Milan

The Viper of Milan

Good morning - I added two reviews to this article, both of which I found behind paywalls (the first at newspaperarchive-com in WP library, the second at www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk). I don't know how to fix the first one. Is the second one OK? Many thanks in advance. Blackballnz (talk) 23:21, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm referring to references (not reviews). Blackballnz (talk) 01:54, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

FWIW, I have found a few reviews from Chronicling America website, which I have listed on the article talk page. Fabrickator (talk) 05:39, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

@Blackballnz I've removed the wikipedia Library link which gives a CS1 error. See Help:CS1_errors#Wikipedia_Library_link_in_<param>. It is not necessary to provide a link to an archive clipping if you have a full citation but if you want to do so you should use your access to the archive site to create a clipping and then provide a link to the URL of that clipping. I'm not sure whether the resulting URL would still require the reader to create an account at newspaperarchive.com. The britishnewspaperarchive link you used certainly can't be read without signing up for an account there. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:27, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you @Fabrickator & @Michael D. Turnbull. That's really helpful to know what to do with those references, and I didn't know about the Chronicling America archive. I will check it out. Blackballnz (talk) 23:50, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Thomas Ashton, 1st Baron Ashton of Hyde

Thomas Ashton, 1st Baron Ashton of Hyde

References 2, 3, 5 and 8 are all the same - please "Link up". Please leave in reference one as it is with its quote. Tank you for your assistance. 115.70.23.77 (talk) 23:54, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing it to our attention. The pleasant, and not too onerous, task was promptly performed by a regular contributor. Have you thought of becoming one? It costs nothing and improving the world's greatest encyclopedia has its own rewards. Doug butler (talk) 00:32, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Doug butler, the requester is a regular contributor. As well as a regular requester, and an instantly recognizable one. There's no suggestion that such near-identical requests will ever cease. -- Hoary (talk) 00:57, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

There is a tool for doing this, WP:ReFill, that will fix the issue in less time than it takes you to post here asking for someone else to do it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:59, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

And the user in question (who does have an account) has demonstrated over many years that she has no aptitude for mastering such things; it takes less time for someone who has to respond to her always polite requests and perform the (usually useful) edit or correction than to complain about her inabilities. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.8.29.43 (talk) 15:13, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Indeed. Who was complaining? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:15, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Delete account

how can I delete my account? Cheekpa (talk) 03:40, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Special:GlobalVanishRequest Ahri Boy (talk) 03:42, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Courtesy vanishing does not really "delete" your account, which is not possible as all contributions on Wikipedia need to be credited, but it does help you "hide" by changing your username and locking your account. It is also something that is requested and only approved in certain circumstances.

The best thing to do is just to abandon your account if you no longer want to use it. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 09:04, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

What to do if edits to an article will likely be undone due to ideologues on the page?

This pertains to the article "Patrol 36" - listed under "auto-antisemitism" in the See also section are anti/non-Zionist Jewish advocacy groups "IfNotNow" and "Jewish Voice for Peace". These are not auto-antisemitic groups and I believe that listing them under that category violates the neutrality rule. However, from seeing the previous revisions I think it would be very difficult to make permanent changes in this regard. What can I do about this issue? ThursdayOrbit (talk) 23:20, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

This is the nature of Wikipedia, and the response is "deal with it". Editors make their edits, while you can just revert, they can revert back. You make your cases and try to reach a consensus. The sad fact is that a suitably motivated and skilled group can manage the content to serve their purposes, but we have to pretend that this is the exception rather than the rule. (My apologies if I haven't properly elaborated on the details of the process.) Fabrickator (talk) 00:02, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Any new anti-Zionist events being added to articles must be backed by reliable sources. Since you are new to Wikipedia, please do not edit nor create articles that are under WP:CTOP/AI unless you are extended confirmed. Ahri Boy (talk) 00:48, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

I can't publish a translation

Hi:

I just translated an article (eu:Izaskun Gracia Quintana) into Spanish, but I can't publish it because it talks about me. If the information is true, why is that a problem? IzaskunGracia (talk) 11:24, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

This is the help desk for the English-language Wikipedia. You'll need to ask at the Spanish-language one, as each project has their own rules. AndyTheGrump (talk) 11:26, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Ooops, sorry! Thank you very much for your answer :) IzaskunGracia (talk) 11:28, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

That would be es:Wikipedia:Café/Archivo/Ayuda/Actual. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:58, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! :) IzaskunGracia (talk) 12:00, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Without presuming to speak for the Spanish-language Wikipedia, I will note that people are notoriously not reliable sources when talking or writing about ourselves, because we have a very natural tendency to see the best in ourselves and downplay or ignore the negative aspects. Autobiographies also have a tendency to include information the subject know or believes to be true, but without any reliable published sources for that information. (And no: "I remember, I was there, it happened to me!" does not meet our definition of "reliable source".) --Orange Mike | Talk 11:48, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

I understand that, but I only translated what was already published at the basque Wikipedia, which wasn't published originally by me and which already has reliable published sources, that's why I find it strange. IzaskunGracia (talk) 11:51, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Each Wikipedia is independent, and has its own standards and guidelines. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:57, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

A Wikipedia I found Has no significant sources for it’s claims and It’s a violation.

The following discussion 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.

---

The Dirac or Dir'a(درع) is a well documented clothing in arabic and English sources over a thousand years ago it was mentioned in islamic narrations and till this day is written about as a gown or loose dress/garment. The fact is the name of the dress is highly documented and indisputable and every arabic culture has their own version and spin also under different names yet recognized as a cross cultural dress which is shared by and distributed amongst East Africa and internationally. It is now a clothing attire for not only Arabs but also East Africans. This is correct, it is even mentioned in Hadith’s and historical dictionary from what I checked. So, the idea that Somalians claim this word isn’t Arabic seem a bit like they don’t want to accept the idea that their only (I only saw dirac as most important to them) cultural dress didn’t originate from them. But rather a dress inspired from multiple cultures that already had it. The problem here is The photo shown from the Wikipedia ‘Dirac (dress)’ from 1800s doesn’t actually match what’s now called the modern Somali Dirac. That modern ‘Somali Dirac’ shows a style that looks much more like the traditional Adani dress worn by southern Yemeni women especially with the light fabric and the way it’s worn with a belt, which makes sense given Aden’s hot climate. When you compare older photos of Somali women, the fabric and cuts are different from the modern Dirac that’s being popularized today. In fact, it looks nothing like the modern Dirac. What’s happening now is less about cultural appropriation and more about the Somali dirac slowly starting to look like the Adani one whether intentionally or not, the materials and style overlap more and more. Also, there was no significant evidence shown in this Wikipedia to prove the claims stated. Even on the top of the Wikipedia it shows the article needs more sources to verify the information said. I have also looked at evidence in arabic from yemenis, and they have lots of documentations in books (Not online, one stated that due to civil war we don’t focus on these. She said, lots of people try to steal yemeni heritage as theirs RIGHT NOW and never tried to do it before. Like UAE, Saudi and she said now even Somali since they started having relations with UAE. Mind you, UAE wants to take Soctra Island which belongs to yemen, and Somalians now claim it’s theirs with no proof?). Most evidence shown on this Wikipedia are early articles claimed by Somalian people. No article showing proof from early 1900 or 1800s like they claim. Most somalians show this Wikipedia and facebook pages as proof for dirac to be theirs. I thought diraac was a somalian word too, but I did more thorough research and found that its totally incorrect and it’s quiet disrespectful how their claiming so. In fact, most reason why the algorithm claims its Somalian is due to only this Wikipedia which isn’t even verified or has enough informational sources to back its claims. Im quiet disappointed and it’s quiet hilarious as I can clearly see the difference in clothing style shown in this Wikipedia image from the current dress. The Wikipedia also has said the same thing, said it changed for weddings and the likes. But, when did it change? Who inspired the change? This is an issue and this Wikipedia needs to do more thorough research and analysis. 2601:40D:783:AA90:F884:8EE5:A0FE:AB73 (talk) 20:54, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

This is impenetrable ranting. Could you maybe condense it down into a good two or three sentences, please? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 20:57, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

In the midst of the OP is "The problem here is The photo shown from the Wikipedia ‘Dirac (dress)’ from 1800s doesn’t actually match what’s now called the modern Somali Dirac." Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:26, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Courtesy link: the user appears to be referring to the article Dirac (dress), not to the theoretical physicist. Bishonen | tålk 21:00, 2 August 2025 (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.

Logging in with Firefox

I've noticed that logging in has changed. When I log in on Wikipedia or Wikisource on my computer with Firefox, I'm only logged in to Wikipedia or Wikisource. Before when I logged in, as recently as April, I was logged in to all wiki projects when I logged in with Firefox on my computer (Wikipedia, Wikisource, Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, etc). But when I log in with Microsoft Edge, I'm logged in on all wiki projects at the same time. Do you understand what I mean and what has happened and why and how to solve it? Has this been brought up already on this or another language edition? I've already asked about it on Swedish Wikipedia, but maybe I'll get more helpful results here. I don't know where else to ask to get a solution. Grey ghost (talk) 14:00, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

It might be better, as this is a technical matter, to ask at WP:VPT. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:19, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Surely, Habib and TR's beliefs are currently mainstream. The silent majority are not far right, are they ?

Wikipedia specify them as being Far Right. That is not really a fact. It is shown as such. It is merely an opinion, (of some people) that is a fact. It is therefore not a correct description. 2A00:23C6:C20D:2701:4877:135E:9E8A:CDF6 (talk) 11:12, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Please see WP:Verifiability, not truth. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:24, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. You did not specify the article(s) you're talking about, and I don't care to go looking for it.

But Wikipedia articles should summarise what the reliable sources they are based on say. If the sources cited for that article describe them as "far right", then that's what the article should say - it's not Wikipedia's judgment, it's that of the sources.

If the sources do not in fact say this, or if there are other reliable sources which give a different view, then the article should possible be changed.

The best place to discuss this is on the talk page of the article in question. ColinFine (talk) 11:25, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Correcting A Page Title

Can we clear up some confusion? There is a page:

Highly elliptical orbit

Which actually SHOULD explain the concept of a highly eccentric or highly elongated orbit. The page title could be "HEO and Highly Eccentric Orbits" or something. It could explain that the acronym HEO has been incorrectly expanded to High Earth Orbit and also Highly Elliptical Orbit. In the "two body" case, all orbits are elliptical and the term "highly elliptical" does not make sense. Are there "highly straight" lines? Or "highly round" circles? A High Earth Orbit is very unclear as well, is that the same as a geosynchronous or geostationary or even cisLunar orbit?

Can I edit the title of the page? CharlesSpaceGuy (talk) 04:22, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Proposed changes to an article title are best discussed on the talk page of the article involved. You can start a requested move discussion to ensure that any change would have consensus.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:17, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, CharlesSpaceGuy. Wikipedia articles use the common name for the topic, not a pedantically correct name. I went to Google Scholar and that quickly confirmed my suspicion that many peer reviewed scientific papers use "highly elliptical orbit" both in titles and in the content of the papers. So, a title change is likely to be contentious. Cullen328 (talk) 06:32, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

"Highly eccentric orbit" would be a more rational term; and was indeed more widely used until 1962, according to . But WP's rule recommends using the term in common current usage. Maproom (talk) 07:18, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

The other terms can be used as aliases (or Redirects) to the existing article; and can be explained in the opening paragraphs (or lede). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:05, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

I have created redirects at Highly eccentric orbit and Highly elongated orbit. HEO is a disambiguation page with an entry for Highly elliptical orbit. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:05, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Editing -

I need help completing the article. i'm always getting error and i don' know what i am doing Chimenax (talk) 23:44, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi, @. Are you referring to the message on your talk page about a "CS1 error on Timothy Menakaya"?

For help on how to format citations, see Help:Referencing for beginners and Help:Citation Style 1, although there's some more technical material in that last one. Looking at the source for other articles with citations can also help you understand how they are formatted. TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 00:48, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

I think fixed your error: Rockfang (talk) 03:36, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Chimenax, your article tells the reader that its subject founded Menax Hospital. Your username rather resembles this. Are you perhaps related? -- Hoary (talk) 04:48, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Genyk Lyubov Yaroslavivna

I am Genyk Lyubov Yaroslavivna, PhD in Ukraine. Todei work in Europe. I want neu artice to download it to the English wersion of Wikipedia. 2A00:1028:8398:49F6:10A1:B6A5:734:790A (talk) 14:49, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

It's not clear what you are asking for. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:06, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Genyk Lyubov Yaroslavivna did have an article on the Ukrainian language Wikipedia but it was deleted today. As for having an article here on the English Wikipedia, see Your first article.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:26, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Genyk.

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.

Writing an article about yourself is even harder, and is strongly discouraged: see autobiography.

Most people (even with PhDs) do not meet English Wikipedia's criteria for notability and so unless you can find the necessary independent, reliable sources it is a total waste of everybody's time to try and write an article. ColinFine (talk) 17:01, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Article reprinted in book -- different dates, different translators

I'm trying to wikify the following citation (from this article):

Freire, P. (1969) Extension y Comunicacion, translated by Louise Bigwood & Margaret Marshall and re-printed in 'Education: The Practice of Freedom' (1976), Writers and Readers Publishing Cooperative.

So far I have this:

{{Citation  |last=Freire  |first=P.  |orig-year=1969
|chapter=Extension y Comunicacion
|translator-last1=Bigwood  |translator-first1=Louise
|translator-last2=Marshall  |translator-first2=Margaret
|title=Education: The Practice of Freedom  |date=1976
|publisher=Writers and Readers Publishing Cooperative  |publication-place=London, UK }}

which renders as "Freire, P. (1976) [1969], "Extension y Comunicacion", Education: The Practice of Freedom, translated by Bigwood, Louise; Marshall, Margaret, London, UK: Writers and Readers Publishing Cooperative". That's almost correct, but for two problems:

1. It implies that Bigwood and Marshall translated the whole book, not just the article.
2. It makes it look like the entire book was printed in 1969 and reprinted in 1976, when in fact the article was printed in 1969 (I'm not sure where -- haven't been able to track down the source) and reprinted in the book when it was first published in 1976.

Any idea how to fix those? {{Cite book}} and {{Citation}} won't accept the |book-title parameter from {{Cite journal}}, but the latter demands a journal-title parameter that I don't have.
-- Photosynthetic430 ❧ 16:59, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

|book-title= is only supported by {{cite conference}}. Where did you see anywhere that |book-title= is supported by {{cite journal}}? That mention needs to be fixed.

If the original article was translated by someone other than Bigwood & Marshall, how can the article be called a reprint? The different translators make it a different article. WP:SAYWHEREYOUREADIT applies; cite the source that you consulted.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:40, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

James N. Moore

Contributing an article for Distinguished Professor James N. Moore, Horticulture Dept., University of Arkansas

i have an autobiography to contribute regarding my father, who was a Distinguished Professor at the University of Arkansas Horticulture Department. He created the small fruits program there in 1964 and created the first primacane blackberry. In additioin, his grape cultivar helped create the Cotton Candy grape. How may I contriute this article to Wikipedia? IM2ADHD (talk) 00:10, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

The notability of your father must be demonstrated through significant coverage in reliable and independent sources (see WP:42). It is strongly discouraged to write about someone connected to you, and you must disclose it. In general, if the subject is notable an article will develop naturally over time. If you still think you can create this article, read Help:Your first article and use the article wizard, though I wouldn't recommend beginning this article right away, as per my previous comments. TheDowningStreetCat (talk) 01:21, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

How to search...

... for pages that contain a certain template but not a certain other one? - Erik Baas (talk) 00:46, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

@Erik Baas: hastemplate:"certain template" -hastemplate:"certain other one" in the search box. See Help:Searching#hastemplate:. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:29, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Must have overlooked the hyphen. - Erik Baas (talk) 08:02, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Transfering/Connecting user pages in different lenguages

Hello! I'm mainly a user in the Italian wiki, although I've also done a couple edits here in the English one, I was wondering if I could port my Italian user page here without having to remake it from scratch, thank you in advance. LiquidLenin (talk) 18:23, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Make a user page at meta:User:LiquidLenin and it will appear here, and on every other project where you don't already have one.

If you wish, you can then delete your user page on it.Wikipedia, and it will appear there, too. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:14, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry I did not explain myself well, I want to port the content of the page, as my main problem is being unable to copypaste the source code as the formatting is in a different lenguage LiquidLenin (talk) 21:13, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Nvm, it's not as tedious as it seemed LiquidLenin (talk) 22:39, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

You should copy parts of your userpage to Meta. Ahri Boy (talk) 03:49, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Lieutenant General Sir Charles Dobell

In doing research on generals in WW1 I found little on this person. Then I came across a SPINKS Auction catalogue (DEC 2020) which contained an amazing biog of Sir Charles.

Can some add to what is already available, please?

(Copyright violation removed)

82.30.193.172 (talk) 11:36, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I've removed what is presumably copyrighted text from an auction house. We can certainly cite reliable secondary sources (I don't know if an auction catalogue would count) but we absolutely do not copy material on which another organisation holds copyright. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 11:53, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

I've left a note with a link to that source, on the article's talk page and at WT:MILHIST. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:42, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Donate

I would never donate to Wikipedia. I once inquired about the possibility of having my resume published there, and the person who responded called me a "rat." What a disappointment! JRoberto1960 (talk) 17:55, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Have you edited under other accounts before? Because this is the only edit I see under this one. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 17:59, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @JRoberto1960. I'm sorry you had that experience. I don't know why it happened, seeing that one of Wikipedia's core principles is Be civil. But we are all human and sometimes we have bad days.

Whether you donate or not is your own decision: it is not required of anybody, and nobody involved in editing has any idea whether or not you donate, unless you choose to tell them.

What I will say is that "having your resume published here" is not one of the functions of Wikipedia.

Unless you are one of the tiny minority of people who have been independently written about, enough to meet the Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then there should not and will not be an article about you. If you do meet those criteria, then an article about you should be based on what those independent commentators have published about you, not on what you or your associates say or want to say; and such an article will not belong to you or be controlled by you, and it might very well end up saying something that you do not want it to. See an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. ColinFine (talk) 18:10, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

@JRoberto1960: That doesn't sound like one of our regular editors but if you posted to a page here at wikipedia.org then anyone can see the post and reply. Do you have a link to the disussion, or information we can use to search for it? I wonder what happened. Maybe there was a misunderstanding. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:25, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Two pages about the same event

I don't know if this was intentional or not, but I found two pages that cover the same incident in Los Angeles. They are 2025 East Los Angeles explosion and 2025 Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department training facility explosion.

If possible, it would make sense to meld them, as the second one (2025 Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department training facility explosion) has a more accurate article name of what happened, and the first has some information that is not found in the other.

Villaida (talk) 14:01, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

You can tag them with {{Merge}} (or would you like someone to do that for you?) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:35, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

I'll do it. Thanks!

Villaida (talk) 20:59, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

phone number

The following discussion 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.

---

i just need the phone number cuz my wife was talking about this place in tulsa n she as went missing just need to know if she is there at the tulsa center thank u 162.208.44.200 (talk) 22:32, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry, this is not a general help desk for any issue. If your wife is missing, you should contact the authorities. 331dot (talk) 22:36, 4 August 2025 (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.

About sandboxes/subpages

Think about it: I created a subpage for an uncreated article. I writed a very long article with cited reliable sources. Can some other guy copy all of this hardwork and create the real article? Jako96 (talk) 15:08, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Your question is not clear. It could be:

• "Can someone take my work and use it?"—Yes, that's what you agree to, every time you edit. But you should be credited ("given attribution" in the jargon)
• "Please can someone make my work into an article for me?"—You can do that. Submit it for review, via the process described at WP:AFC. If the reviewer deems it ready, they will publish it to "mainspace". If not, they will give you further advice.

If you mean something else, please clarify. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:34, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

For example, I created a stub subpage for an article that does not exist for now. Can someone copy and paste that to mainspace? Jako96 (talk) 16:19, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

"Can someone copy and paste that to mainspace? " is is no less ambiguous than "Can some other guy copy all of this hardwork and create the real article?".

Please see the two alternative answers I gave above. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:25, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Jako96. Copying and pasting is not usually recommended in Wikipedia, because it loses the history. The way to get a draft moved to mainspace is either to move it (which newish users do not have permission to do, or to submit it for review using the articles for creation mechanism (which is strongly recommended for editors who are not experienced article creators, even when they do have the technical permission to move it). ColinFine (talk) 16:41, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jako96 Please provide a link to that subpage. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:44, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jako96, It is officially not prohibited but discouraged to create subpage of any redlink pages. However, usernames are treated different. If you haven't created any userpage yet you can create a subpage and edit. So no point in creating subpage of uncreated redlink article. Start your work on user subpages such as sandbox, after finishing your work, publish via AFC. No fear of losing credit.––KEmel49(📝,📤) 18:30, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Can't someone just copy it and create the actual Wikipedia article? My question was that. Jako96 (talk) 19:52, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Hell again, @Jako96. So far, you haven't told us which subpage you are talking about, so it is hard to answer your question directly.

If you have done the necessary work of finding and citing suitable sources, and writing a neutral summary of those sources, so that what you have created is a viable article, then certainly somebody could move it (not copy and paste it) to mainspace. If you haven't, then it is not suitable for mainspace, and nobody's going to move it for you.

But, as I said, the normal mechanism for requesting that is using WP:AFC. ColinFine (talk) 20:02, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

I did not create such a subpage. I was just wondering if someone without my permission could move such a subpage to mainspace. Jako96 (talk) 20:09, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

And I answered that in response to your first post. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:15, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Well, uh I gues I didn't notice. Thank you. Jako96 (talk) 20:25, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, here: Can someone take my work and use it?"—Yes, that's what you agree to, every time you edit. This applies in your userspace as well. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 20:52, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Jako96 There is some guidance at Wikipedia:User pages, you could read it and see whether it answers your question. TSventon (talk) 20:30, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Ah, right. I'm afraid I repeatedly misunderstood what you were asking, @Jako96. Andy started off by saying your question was ambiguous, but I thought it was more likely you were asking about whether somebody would help you achieve something you wanted than about whether somebody might take and use your work for their own purposes. ColinFine (talk) 08:51, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

hi, can ask for a review

Hi! I’m a new editor and I’ve written a draft article in my sandbox. I would really appreciate it if someone could help review the draft before I move it to the article space. Here is the link: User:Linvn100/sandbox Linvn100 (talk) 09:24, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

I've placed the draft in draft space at Draft:Vietcombank Fund Management Company Limited and put the information needed to submit it, but you shouldn't do that until the draft is in your own words, not written by AI. See WP:LLM as to why using AI is problematic.

If you are associated with this company, that must be disclosed, see WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 09:30, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I took a while to edit and rewrite the draft, and I’ve republished it. Could you please have a look and let me know your thoughts? Thanks for your feeback. Linvn100 (talk) 07:05, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Submit the article for review, via the process described at WP:AFC. If the reviewer deems it ready, they will publish it to "mainspace". If not, they will give you further advice. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:39, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Changes Denied

Hello, im trying to share important information with Wiki regarding Whitecap Mountains. I'm wondering how to share the information that the resort is now in foreclosure and is likely to not be operational for the 2025-26 season?

This section pertains to a 2025 civil case filed in Iron County, Wisconsin (Redacted)47.49.12.35 (talk) 17:35, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

We can't cite government documents, and this includes court cases. You'd need a news story that covers this for it to be included. I've also redacted what appears to be the text of the court judgment as a possible copyright violation. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:52, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

I certainly agree with the revert of your edit by MakaylaHippo1998, and with the reason they gave in the edit summary. Primary sources may be used to verify basic facts (bullet #3 at WP:PRIMARY) but you cannot draw any inference at all from the primary source. For example, you could say that a case was filed in CountyName, State, by PlaintiffName on dd MONTH YYYY seeking $AMOUNT damages against DefendantName, and cite that to an official Wisconsin government web page containing the case details, because those are basic facts and not an interpretation of the record.

You most certainly can always cite government documents. (I have to assume Jesse meant copy here, and not cite.) In many cases, government documents are also in the public domain, meaning you could not only cite, but also copy the actual document content word-for-word, although that doesn't mean that would be a good idea per Wikipedia's guidelines, and in this case, it certainly would be a bad idea. (In the very rare situation where the entire content of a court document or major portions of it would be worthwhile to have available to Wikipedia readers, you would *still* not copy it into a Wikipedia article (per WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE) but rather into Wikisource, and then simply copy brief quotations from it to the Wikipedia article, and link it to the Wikisource document.)

But unless protected by a motion to seal, or related to certain protected cases like juveniles, Wisconsin's Public Records Law assures that Wisconsin court records are available to the public for inspection, copying, and republishing. The Public Records Law lays out in detail what this applies to, and imho this applies to both the filing and the court judgment as well. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and cannot give legal advice about copyright violations according to Wisconsin state law. If you have doubts, consult a clerk of the relevant court about any copyright or other concerns you may have about the use of Wisconsin government documents. Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 19:57, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

"seeking $AMOUNT damages against DefendantName" would be against WP:BLPPRIMARY if the defendant is a living person. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:55, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

My saying "cite" there was precisely for the reason GGS points out. Given the case is from this year, the likelihood of the parties being living people is practically certain, and the case is about defaulting on a loan for the property. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 06:41, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Editing the raw watchlist doesn't seem to work any more.

Trying to edit my raw watchlist doesn't seem to work anymore. A text box pops up, but then gets replaced with some toolbars and search boxes, but you can't add or remove pages on it? Has this functionality been broken or is there some weirdness if you have your profile setup a certain way? GimliDotNet (talk) 19:51, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

@GimliDotNet: Have you enabled wikEd at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets? If so, disable it temporarily on a pencil icon at the top right when you edit the raw watchlist. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:06, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

That’s done the trick, thank you. GimliDotNet (talk) 20:42, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Anchors and transcluded pages

Page B is transcluded on Page A, an article talk page. Discussion on Page A needs to wikilink to anchors on Page B. If the transclusion effectively makes B part of A, [[A#anchor]] should work. I need the anchors to be #1, #2, #3, etc, making that e.g. [[A##1]]. I have tried using {{anchor|#1}} and {{subst:anchor|#1}}.

Can't seem to make this work, so I suspect the transclusion is the problem. Any solution, or fact of life? ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 13:45, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

@Mandruss: It should work fine unless page A ends up with multiple headings with the same name. I guess your unstated example is Talk:Donald Trump##1 with transclusion from Talk:Donald Trump/Current consensus##1. Both link works for me in Firefox. The first page has collapsible content above the anchor. This may cause some browsers to first go to the right place and then it becomes wrong after collapsing without adjusting how far down the page you have to be. Do you think that's your problem? If your browser doesn't go to the top of the page then it probably is. Clicking in the address bar after page load and pressing enter may go to the right place. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:19, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I thought I tried a link identical to your first one above, and it put me in an edit session of Talk:Donald Trump. I can't prove it since I didn't "publish" the test. Now I've tried again, "publishing" it this time. It works. Mea mega culpa. Thanks. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 14:39, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

@Mandruss: If you were previewing then it tries to link to the edit page itself so the link can be tried in context without reloading the page. If you tried to open the link in a new tab or window then you forced a load of an edit url so I guess that's what happened. In a section edit you couldn't test the link by just clicking it because the target anchor was outside the section. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:24, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I knew I came to the right place. I'm so smart. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 15:29, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: These links would be easier to code if I used anchors 1, 2, 3, etc, instead of #1, #2, #3, etc. Do you think that might result in a future collision with other anchors we can't control? I want it as simple as possible, but also as future-proof as (reasonably) possible. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 16:21, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

@Mandruss: An anchor starting with # is confusing because of the double ## in links to it. A pure number sounds acceptable to me when it's only for use on one talk page but I suggest C1, C2, ... with C for Consensus. I have created phab:T401226: "If a previewed link to the page itself is opened in a new tab then it shouldn't give an edit page". PrimeHunter (talk) 16:46, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Done. No easier to code, but less confusing. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 16:58, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

"Contribute" Disabled

Hello, I am attempting to contribute articles on some prolific painters, however my "Contribute" has been disabled (probably for lack of contributions in the past few years). Can you reactivate? PWUser (talk) 12:30, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

PWUser I see no restrictions on your ability to contribute. You may draft new articles via the Article Wizard. 331dot (talk) 12:32, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. In my Sandbox, all of the links are operational except "Contribute". It is in grey and...for lack of a better term....unclickable. I'll try Article Wizard then. PWUser (talk) 12:39, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

PWUser Are you referring to the fact that your sandbox is currently a redirect to Ralph Hayes (author)? I'm not familiar with a clickable "contribute" link, but your sandbox may simply be edited to remove the redirect. I can do this for you if you would like. 331dot (talk) 12:57, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

@PWUser: I guess you refer to the text "Contribute" above "Help" in the sidebar menu. It's not supposed to be clickable. There is a line under it, and it's a heading for the following links. It's admittedly hard to guess in our current default skin Vector 2022. It was more clear in the former default Vector, now called Vector legacy, which has several such headings and more space above them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?useskin=vector. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:51, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Yes, if you don't mind. PWUser (talk) 19:58, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

@PWUser: I have removed the redirect. See Help:Redirect#Creating and editing redirects for how I did it. I'm considering a request to make it more clear that "Contribute" in the sidebar is a heading and not a disabled link. Was that indeed what you thought? PrimeHunter (talk) 22:32, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Yes, it certainly seems to be a dead link upon first inspection. 2601:346:87F:B6F0:285C:85D4:CD53:8382 (talk) 22:38, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Stephen Curry

Stephen Curry (comedian)

Please check recent edits. Thanks 115.70.23.77 (talk) 04:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

They all seem to be yours. A quick glance suggests that you're citing IMDb, whose quality is poor. -- Hoary (talk) 05:17, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your help - why is it that IMBd is considered "poor" as a citation? - should I remove these references?

Also, as I removed the reference to Marcellan College in the biography section of this page - shouldn't the Category section at the bottom of the page also remove the following : People educated at Marcellin College, Bulleen

Thank you as always 115.70.23.77 (talk) 05:27, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

You can read more about why IMDB is considered a poor source over at WP:IMDB-EL. TiggerJay (talk) 05:37, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm confused. Did he or did he no go to Marcellin? HiLo48 (talk) 07:13, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

please remove the incorrect Marcellin College reference in the category section, thanks 49.199.154.94 (talk) 07:15, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

There were no citations which stated that Curry went to Marcellin , so I removed that reference. Please remove the reference to Marcellin in the “ category” section at the bottom the page concerned, thank you 08:46, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I was wrong - I actually DID find a citation that stated that Curry attended Marcellin College so we can leave that reference in the category section. My apologies 49.199.154.94 (talk) 09:15, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I had made a mess with the editing on this page and I am sorry, good news, but I have fixed it all up. Only one problem - references number 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23 and 24 are all the same references. Can you link them all up - I cannot do this and I and the other editors here at the college will stuff it right up again. Sorry - please fix up. Thank you 49.199.154.94 (talk) 10:23, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

What you want are what are called "named references". Within Help:Referencing_for_beginners, search for "Often, you will want to use". (Even if you can't do this, surely one of the other editors at your college will be able to.) -- Hoary (talk) 10:44, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

They are clever but only 15-17 years old! 49.199.154.94 (talk) 10:59, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

BUT one last problem - reference 6 - I cant get the quote to stay in the reference. Please help. Thanks 49.199.154.94 (talk) 10:54, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Please repair reference number 6, thank you 49.199.154.94 (talk) 12:40, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

The best place to ask for help with a particular article is on its talk page, in this case Talk:Stephen Curry (comedian). You can format such a request as a formal edit request(or use the edit request wizard) so that other editors see it. 331dot (talk) 12:42, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I went ahead and fixed the error. MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 12:44, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Chimeraism in humans

Two entries—Lydia Townsend & Karen Keegan, have identical descriptions of their family life. I was reading about human chimeras. 107.115.33.44 (talk) 20:57, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Neither of them is the subject of a Wikipedia article. Karen Keegan is a redirect to Human_chimera#Natural_chimerism.   Maproom (talk) 21:35, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Episode lists

Why do episode lists usually have a colloquial tone? 2001:8003:540F:6001:88E:9854:D180:D0C1 (talk) 08:34, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

You haven't given an example, so I can't be clear what you mean. But the asnwer is probably, "Because that's how people wrote them, and nobody has come along to change the tone". I'm pretty sure there is not any policy or consensus that they should be that way.

If you think it is inappropriate, then feel free to copy-edit the articles. ColinFine (talk) 09:46, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Archive

I keep forgetting where the automated citation archive widget thingy is. Can you remind me?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:27, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

TonyTheTiger, do you mean User:InternetArchiveBot? TSventon (talk) 02:55, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

User:TSventon, Thx. I have now saved it so I wont have to keep asking.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:34, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Resolved

Georg Stanford Brown

Georg Stanford Brown

Am I the only one who doesn’t think the math is mathing, ie it says he was married for 24 years to Tyne Daly 1966–1990. Her page gives the same years but no total. I don’t know how to fix it, have no login blah blah. 2001:5A8:6181:A200:F537:E9F:CB6B:5547 (talk) 21:48, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Is 1966-1990 not 24 years? -- NotCharizard ^🗨 22:23, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, you probably are the only one. The total is unnecessary anyway. If any reader wants that information they can work it out for themselves. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:51, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

The claim needs better sourcing. A 1990 news item that says his wife has "filed suit" does not mean that a divorce was granted in that year, or indeed at all. Same issue at her article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:47, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Help for saved edits

I was checking on my contributions page the edits going back to my first ever. Then I realized that edits dating 22 and 23 September 2024 were gone... I mean, the contributions page says that I actually did edit, but when I click on the pages, I don't see my edit anywhere, like vanished away. Not only on these two dates though, but I saw something kind of strange. If somebody noticed on pages about songs, in particular in the section of the weekly or year-end charts, you see "Italy Airplay" either (Earone) or (Music & Media) and I am the guy that did it for every song possible. I realized that pages about songs released in 1993 and 1994 that I edited by adding the "Italy Airplay" chart positioning are gone. Like I said in the beginning, the contributions page shows me the edit, but when I go in the article it doesn't show me anything. Is there a way to recover my "lost" edits? Or do I have to do everything all over again? AntoV7 (talk) 19:58, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

To take one example, on Keep Talking (Pink Floyd song) your edit was undone on 21 July 2025 by User:Wherelovelives in this edit, with the edit summary "Not Italian chart (chart for Italy, Ticino/Switzerland and Malta)". If you disagree with this, or any such edit, please follow the process described at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:10, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Similarly another removal by User:ResolutionsPerMinute. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:19, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

So you're telling me that this guy deleted MY edits? Because that would mean that I wasted a whole year of editing and this guy is canceling everything he wants.... AntoV7 (talk) 20:26, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

No, I'm telling you that more than once person did, and giving you examples. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:51, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

@AntoV7: Wherelovelives and I reverted your edits because the chart you added (Regional EHR Airplay: South) is not Italian. They are a combination of data from Italy, Ticino, and Malta, which does not make it Italian. By labeling this chart as Italian, you are introducing factual errors. It basically says so right in the chart's name, and bringing up a random M&M issue, you can see in the footnote on page 27 that the magazine makes this information very clear. Perhaps if you go back and use the correct terminology, we won't remove these charts anymore. ResPM (T🔈🎵C) 20:30, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

The thing that I'm upset the most is that these edits date back to last year and you guys doing it on 20 and 21 July of this year without me knowing is just a bad move on your part. You could have sent me a text or something right in that moment and I would have modified everything on the spot... You know, it feels like I wasted a whole year, but basically doing nothing. It was better at this point if you modified it by yourself instead of just deleting and leaving it. I'm frustrated about this!! AntoV7 (talk) 20:42, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @AntoV7. I'm sorry you are upset by this, but if you look at the histories of articles, many have thousands of edits by hundreds of editors. It is really not the responsibility of an editor to go back over previous versions and find out whose previous edits were affected by their changes, and let them know. You probably have that article on your Watchlist, and it is up to you to watch changes if you wish.

Note that, according to the Wikipedia policy of Bold, Revert, Discuss, it is quite common for people to have their edits reversed - usually sooner than in this case, admittedly. ColinFine (talk) 20:47, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

This is how Wikipedia works; edits get changed and reverted all the time. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:53, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

I wonder why you (both) removed them, rather than correcting them? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:52, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: I removed them because I don't believe all these M&M airplay charts are "official", so if I can find a valid reason to remove them, I do it. Otherwise, the chart tables eventually become cluttered, and I don't want to see tables looking like this on a regular basis. However, if AntoV7 adds them back in with the correct terminology, I won't remove them, because there isn't any hard rule against it. ResPM (T🔈🎵C) 21:17, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Special:RandomInCategory

I've been playing with Special:RandomInCategory, and find that if I put "disambiguation" in the search box I always get taken to one of just three disambiguation articles. Why is that? [edit] A similar thing happens with other cats, such as "surnames". The number of suggested articles is larger, but still very limited and I get offered the same articles repeatedly. Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:26, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

@Shantavira: Category:Disambiguation isn't suppsoed to have members but it currently has four so you will get one of those. Category:All article disambiguation pages should give varied results. Category:Surnames has many articles and I didn't get repeats in around ten tests. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:50, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks but there are definitely several surnames that come up time and time again. e.g. Abagnale (surname) has just come up for me three times in about twenty attempts at a random surname, but he always was a clever guy. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:36, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

@Shantavira: I found some discussion in phab:T200703: "Special:RandomInCategory does not return all pages with equal probability". A link like Special:RandomInCategory/Numbers may be faster if you want to make tests. I did 25 and got two Burghardt plus one each of the similar spellings Burgard, Burkhardt (surname) and Burchardt. That does look rather non-random for a category with 110,000 pages. Many of those pages are redirects but I hit four redirects so that doesn't reduce the pool. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:10, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Bob Lazar Wikipedia page is SLANDER!

THIS RESULT IS INFURIATING! why are you allowing SLANDER on your Wikipedia to be your top result on Bob Lazar? This is not okay. The Wikipedia page calls him a conspiracy theorist which is untrue and does not inform on his actual credentials. He is a physicist who worked for the US government and a Whistleblower, who shares his experience working with non-human technology at top secret government facilities. I am sure he doesn’t appreciate this being the information page on who he is. And I as a US citizen don’t appreciate you participating and contributing in the misinformation campaign to slander whistleblowers. Your page on David Grusch describes him accurately as a government whistleblower. Please either take down the Bob Lazar Page or fix the Slanderous information you are peddling. 98.97.44.119 (talk) 17:23, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Bob Lazar   Maproom (talk) 18:22, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Comment: If you think things are wrong in the article, please bring up specifics on the article talk page Talk:Bob Lazar, preferably with references showing better information. Thanks! (Note, I am personally unfamiliar with the topic, just giving info on how to improve problematic Wikipedia pages.) Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 18:27, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure what your being a US citizen has to do with this. That gives you no special rights here. If reliable sources describe Mr. Lazar as a conspiracy theorist, then Wikipedia will as well. If the provided sources are not being accurately summarized, please civilly detail those errors on the article talk page. If the sources are accurately summarized, but they are in error or you disagree with what they say, you will need to take that up with the sources, not us, or offer more current sources with more accurate information. 331dot (talk) 18:49, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

It's either amusing or disturbing to notice that this IP post comes from within the SpaceX-Starlink organisation.

(And incidentally, David Grusch UFO whistleblower claims does not mention Lazar at all, except as a link in the 'Conspiracy theories' section of the UFOs template.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.194.92.162 (talk) 19:16, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

A footnote in the article lists no fewer than ten sources which describe Lazar as a conspiracy theorist. I suggest you take up your grievance with each of them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:34, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Am I the only one who worries that we are responding to an IP who doesn't know the difference between slander and libel? Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:09, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

How is that a worry? This is an encyclopaedia, and as such can be used to impart knowledge to the uninformed. I don't think that them not knowing something is sufficient grounds to ignore someone. AndyTheGrump (talk)

continuous roll of paper

there is no article yet it is mentioned 1700 times on Wikipedia.

Piñanana (talk) 22:27, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

@Piñanana: No it isn't. "continuous roll of paper" has 15 hits. continuous roll of paper without quotatin marks has 1772 but most of them use the words separately in different parts of the article. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:28, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

We have Paper roll, which disambiguates several types. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:47, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Conceptual similarities and See also sections

I'm not sure if the Help desk is the right place to ask this question, but if it isn't, I'd like to know where I could ask similar questions in the future.

On Talk:Cult, I'm having a discussion with another editor who doesn't believe that there are any connections between cults and safe spaces. I think the similarities between the two concepts are obvious, but maybe they're not. What do other people think about this? Is it warranted to include links between the two articles in their See also sections? Zero Contradictions (talk) 13:40, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Zero Contradictions, you say on that talk page "There are multiple obvious similarities between cults and safe spaces", but you don't reveal what you think they are. It's far from obvious to me. Maproom (talk) 07:27, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Zero Contradictions

1. Please sign your talk page posts.
2. This is a good page for asking for help with editing, or about how to deal with a dispute; but it is not a court of arbitration. If others disagree with you, follow the process outlined at WP:DR.

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:29, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

1. Okay, sorry. I usually do that. I believe this is actually the first time I've forgotten to sign my talk page posts.
2. Thank you for directing me to the right page. I haven't seen it before, but I'll read through it.

-- Zero Contradictions (talk) 13:35, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

How long does it normally take for an article to be published?

Looking for basic information on typical turnaround for an article being published. Shawn7474 (talk) 12:12, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

User:Shawn7474 does not comply with the user page guidelines. If you would like to create a draft article, see Your first article. Draft articles need to be reviewed, and this can take a while.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 12:17, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Shawn7474. There is no typical turnaround, because the pile of drafts waiting for a review is just that - a pile, not a queue. Reviewers take them in whatever order they feel like.

What I will say is that obviously bad drafts (unsourced, sourced only to primary sources, promotional content, or obviously LLM-generated) are often picked up and declined relatively quickly; while drafts which look as if they are going to be time-consuming to review (large numbers of citations which need to be sifted through; bare URLs for citations; citations in other languages) may get left lying there longer before a reviewer feels up to looking at them.

A draft which is most likely to be picked up quickly and accepted is one which has only as many citations as are required to verify the information in it, with all those citations properly formatted, so the reviewer can see the title, author, date, and publication easily, and the majority of the citations independent, secondary, reliable, and containing significant coverage of the subject; and the text neutral (as opposed to what the subject wants to say).

It is rare for a new editor to have the skills to create that sort of draft, so 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. ColinFine (talk) 14:35, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Why my wikipedia page was deleted?

Hello - I have received reach outs from several of your readers informing my my page has been deleted. Can you tell me why it was deleted and what I can do to have it reinstated?

Please advise, Thank you! Anita Vogel - Television Reporter/host Anitajvogel (talk) 20:14, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Anitajvogel, your page was deleted per the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anita Vogel for lack of significant coverage. Unless you can find sources that demonstrate you meet WP:GNG missed by the participants in that discussion, I advise against trying to have it reinstated/recreating it. GoldRomean (talk) 20:29, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

I need to log in to my long time account

Help me log into my long time account please help me

Please help me log into my long time account Modernist Latertime (talk) 20:18, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

@Latertime What errors are you getting when you try to log in/why can't you log in? GoldRomean (talk) 20:25, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

I am trying to log into my longtime account User:Modernist; and it doesn't work. So yesterday I created this account Latertime in hopes of figuring out how to get back as Modernist....Everytime I try to log in as modernist it tells me it sent a verification code to an old hotmail email account of mine that I can no longer access... Latertime (talk) 20:31, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

@Latertime: If you know the password then mail meta:Trust and Safety at cawikimedia.org. Don't reveal the password in the mail. You can try asking them to set a new email address for the account. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:48, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Regaining access to old account

I'm pretty sure the username CyanideDreams is one of my accounts but I haven't been able to access it because the email address that was attached to it was deactivated by yahoo or maybe I neglected to add an email address. Is there someone with the authority/ability to confirm this is my account if I give them the email address and where the login locations were? Even if I can't access it again, it would be nice to confirm it was mine. The creation date in 2006 lines up with when I made another account for school, but the registration date is in 2013. I'm not sure what the 2013 date means. Cyanide Dreams Ni (talk) 20:06, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

@Cyanide Dreams Ni: Special:EmailUser/CyanideDreams says "This user has not specified a valid email address". Special:Log/CyanideDreams says the account was created at the English Wikipedia 4 December 2006. That's the only information we have. Special:CentralAuth/CyanideDreams says the global account was registered in 2013 but that's just the time the old English account was automatically converted to a new system with global accounts which can be used in all Wikipedia languages and many other wikis run by the Wikimedia Foundation. It doesn't imply the user did anything in 2013. You cannot regain access to the account if you don't know the password. Passwords never expire so you can try your luck. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:54, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

CyanideDreams, created on 4 December 2006, has made no edits to en:Wikipedia, not even edits subsequently deleted. (If you're wondering, none of "Cyanide Dreams", "Cyanide dreams" and "Cyanidedreams" has been registered on en:Wikipedia.) -- Hoary (talk) 21:57, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

"CyanideDreams is one of my accounts" For interest, how many accounts do you have, and why? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.253.201 (talk) 22:27, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Page to be translated and published in english

In order to make it available in english, I have created the translation of the page fr:Valentin Dommanget

But it seems that im not an experienced user enough to publish this page. how could i proceed please ?

Many thanks Valentindommanget (talk) 08:44, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

You need to use the Article Wizard to create and submit the translation as a draft. The English Wikipedia has different policies than other Wikipedias, you should make sure that the subject meets our notability guidelines and other policies before submitting. 331dot (talk) 08:49, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Also see Help:Translation. Lectonar (talk) 08:51, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Also please declare COI that you are the subject of the article you are drafting, Valentin. Ahri Boy (talk) 10:47, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Valentindommanget, fr:Valentin Dommanget has a long list of Expositions. This unhelpfully fails to distinguish between solo and group exhibitions. Just one of the listed exhibitions appears (at first sight) to be referenced. It's a 2024 exhibition, and its "reference" is about a 2018 exhibition, and therefore of course the "reference" doesn't verify the 2024 exhibition at all. Is such material worth translating? -- Hoary (talk) 10:51, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Edit deleted?

on the wiki page for the Agora in Columbus OH I added Too Much Joy’s 1992 appearance that doubled as a wedding reception. Why was it deleted? Ckboldies1121 (talk) 03:19, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

@Ckboldies1121: I'm not seeing any edit in your history that resembles your descrption nor any edit by you except for the edit here at the help desk. Perhaps you forgot to press the publish button. Fabrickator (talk) 04:06, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

It sounds like this IP edit to Newport Music Hall. @Ckboldies1121: Please always give a link or the actual title of pages you refer to. It was an odd unsourced description, "not kidding" is not something an encyclopedia writes, a wedding reception may have been closed to the general public, and based on page views the band appears less notable than the others. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:18, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

@Ckboldies1121: The key word above is "Unsourced". It may be possible to mention the event, if you can cite coverage in a reliable source, such as a newspaper. See WP:V and WP:RS. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:55, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Assignment

i need assignment work Amr khani (talk) 11:09, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Amr khani. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? qcne (talk) 11:12, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Cluebot 3 not working

I archive my talk page using cluebot 3 but when it does, they get organized into 1 archive page, not getting split into multiple. Can someone fix this? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 22:01, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat: The wikitext of User talk:Rafaelthegreat says maxarchsize=75000. This asks the archive bot to collect sections in pages up to 75000 bytes. That is a common archive size but you are allowed to reduce it. We don't archive each section in a separate page. You could maybe achieve it by setting it to something tiny but I'm not sure the bot would continue archiving. 18 tiny archive pages for the 18 small sections in User talk:Rafaelthegreat/Archive 1 would be very impractical. The setting only applies to future archiving and doesn't change past archives. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:28, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh I understand. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 16:39, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Template space usage

If a template is needed only on a particular article talk page, with zero potential for use anywhere else, can it reside in template space? User space wouldn't work since the purpose of the template would be to shorten and simplify the coding of a certain type of wikilink used only on that page. The syntax for transcluding user-space templates would defeat that purpose, if I'm not mistaken. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 22:45, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

@Mandruss: It would be possible but unusual. I guess it's for Talk:Donald Trump#New feature: Consensus item direct link. I see potential for use on other pages at if they add anchors. It can use {{ROOTPAGENAME}} to automatically link the main talk page when it's used in subpages like archives. If the goal is shortness then maybe {{TPC}} ({{CC}} is taken) for talk page consensus with code like [[{{NAMESPACE}}:{{ROOTPAGENAME}}#C{{{1|}}}|#{{{1|}}}]] and a call like {{TPC|4}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:00, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Wow. I'm salivating. My question was somewhat hypothetical; we haven't found an editor who could and would create said template, and experience tells me we're not likely to. If we do find one, I'll refer them to this in your archive. Thanks again.

By the way, I heard there is an entire Wikipedia devoted to a certain pastry. "Danish Wikipedia", I think they call it. Boiled danish, Sauteed danish, Danish kebab, Danish creole, Danish gumbo, Stir-fry danish, Pineapple danish, Coconut danish, Pepper danish, Danish and potatoes, Danish salad, Danish burger ... ad infinitum. It's a veritable gold mine of information about the Danish! ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 00:54, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Jeanette Rowley related question

Hi,

My draft of Dr Jeanette Rowley (Draft:Jeanette Rowley) appears on Wikipedia to still be in Drafts for Creation awaiting review stage. However, I just received an email from a Maulika Taragi (maulika[at]asteriaamedia.com), who apparently is a Marketing Executive, offering me their services to get my draft approved as they say it has been rejected. Can please somebody explain to me how this person knows that my draft has been rejected when in the actual Wikipedia site my draft shows that it is still under review? I am getting rather suspicious that this person may be an actual Wikipedia reviewer who is about to reject my draft and is contacting me in advance in order to get money off me. Can Wikipedia reassure me that this is not happening and that my draft is not keep being rejected because scammers who got themselves in Wikipedia as reviewers are rejecting it on purpose in order to get money out of me?

This has happened many times up to now and it is the second time that somebody contacts me saying that my draft has been rejected while it is still under review. The first time, they told me it was rejected 24 hours before it actually got rejected (meaning it showed as rejected in Wikipedia site).

This is all very suspicious, sheds a shadow of doubt to and lack of credibility of the Wikipedia reviewers, process and impartiality, especially given that I have incorporated all comments, feedback and suggestions of previous reviewers to my draft.

Is there somebody that is a Wikipedia senior member, who is also a verified, credible reviewer, with integrity and transparency, who can get in touch with me please to discuss this matter?

Thank you ML 76 GR (talk) 11:26, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Please see WP:SCAM. There are many people who monitor declined drafts and other pages and then offer their "services" to supposedly fix the issues. Do not give anyone money. They can make no promises, despite what they may claim; most of them are scams. You were likely sent a prewritten message(which is one more indication that the person is not on the up and up) 331dot (talk) 11:33, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, however, I still wonder how they know my draft is going to be rejected (they wrote "it got rejected") when actually it is still showing that it is up for review? I would appreciate it if you or somebody else from Wikipedia can enlighten about this please. It makes me wonder whether there is any point writing for Wikipedia if the process is corrupt and scammers are in control of the review outcome, because as I have written in my first post, I have done everything previous reviewers have asked for and recommended in order to get my draft approved ML 76 GR (talk) 11:37, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

As I said, you were likely sent a prewritten message, and whomever sent it didn't actually conduct a thorough review of your draft.

As with any public activity, we cannot absolutely guarantee that the process is free of scammers. It's up to editors to be vigilant. We do our best to educate editors and detect scammers, but they are often clever.

I do believe that your reviewers were legitimate; you can examine their edit histories yourself. Note that each reviewer is a different person who may be looking for different things; that you think you have resolved one person's concerns does not mean others won't see something. 331dot (talk) 11:49, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@ML 76 GR It’s important to note that these scammers do not actually know whether your draft will be accepted or declined. They cannot see the outcome in advance, and they have no access to the review process.

When they say “your draft got rejected” while it’s still pending, they are simply guessing often they assume that many drafts are declined (which is true) and send the same message to many editors. If your draft later happens to be declined, it creates the illusion that they “knew” in advance.

Wikipedia’s review process is entirely separate from these individuals, and no paid promoter or marketing executive has control over it. The only reliable status for your draft is what is shown on the Wikipedia page itself.

You can ignore such emails and continue working on your draft, If you have addressed all the review comments and the draft meets Wikipedia’s notability and sourcing standards it can be approved regardless of what scammers claim. 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 11:54, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your reassurance, time and explanation @Thilio, much appreciated. I will wait and see what happens with my draft ML 76 GR (talk) 11:58, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Jason Vorherr

Reference number 9 is in the red, please repair - sorry - and thank you. 115.70.23.77 (talk) 02:07, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

 Done, you put "publisher:Mediaville" instead of "publisher=Mediaville", as noted in the error message. Cmr08 (talk) 02:19, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Image of a scientist

I am writing an article about the Russian crystallographer Lev Aleksandrovich Shuvalov who has article on the Russian Wikipedia . I would like to include the photo in the Russian article () in the infobox of the English article, but unfortunately it is not available on Commons. Am I allowed to use the image in the Russian article?

Their justification is: use of a proprietary file for an article Shuvalov, Lev Alexandrovich; Purpose of the illustration of the main object of the article; Substitutability: This is a non-free photograph of a deceased person. No new photograph can be taken, which may justify the fair use of a photograph to illustrate an article about this person in the absence of alternative photographs under a free license and without reasonable grounds for believing that alternative photographs exist.

If I am allowed to use the image, how can I best do this? Thanks. GreatStellatedDodecahedron (talk) 22:20, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@GreatStellatedDodecahedron:, this a helpdesk for English Wikipedia. Russian Wikipedia has its own policies, so you could ask this (in Russian) at ru:Википедия:Форум/Вопросы. TSventon (talk) 22:33, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@TSventon: Perhaps I didn't phrase my question very well. What I'm asking is can I use an image I have found in use on a ru.wp article on a new en.wp article using a fair use rationale similar to the rationale used for the image in the Russian article? The image is sourced from a historical biography of Shuvalov at the Shubnikov Institute of Crystallography of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Thanks. GreatStellatedDodecahedron (talk) 23:04, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@GreatStellatedDodecahedron:, apologies I had misunderstood, it is possible to use fair use images on en Wikipedia. The detailed policy is Wikipedia:Non-free content. If you read that and need further advice, you could ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. TSventon (talk) 23:21, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@GreatStellatedDodecahedron Specifically, WP:NFCI #10 mentions that non-free images of deceased people, at low resolution, are OK in articles about them. The upload Wizard will require that you link to the ultimate source of the image, as you have done here and a bot will automatically lower the resolution of the image you copy from the source. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:09, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the exact answer to my question. GreatStellatedDodecahedron (talk) 12:11, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

can't locate what I started

I've begun to create a wikipedia page re: Stanley L. Robbins, MD but I can't find what I've written so far. Where should I be looking? Jeffers1750 (talk) 14:10, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Your account contribution history has no edits(other than this post). Did you possibly create it while logged out? 331dot (talk) 14:33, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

My searches of that title could not find it, though I'm not a search expert. 331dot (talk) 14:33, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

User:SWJeff1750/sandbox? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:36, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

User:SWJeff1750/sandbox and a longer version at User:SWJeff1750 TSventon (talk) 14:50, 1 August 2025 (UTC).

I have moved the latter to Draft:Stanley L. Robbins. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:12, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

And the former is at Draft:Stanley L. Robbins/sandbox. TSventon (talk) 15:19, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jeffers1750: Now you have found your draft, the most important thing to do is to add citations; please see WP:referencing for beginners. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:45, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jeffers1750:, a pretty randomly chosen sample: "Robbins took the bold move of re-structuring and re-writing what had become a wildly successful text". Which reliable source, independent of Robbins, says that the move was bold or that the success was wild? -- Hoary (talk) 22:28, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Regarding Draft: Jeanette Rowley

Hi,

I had a conversation here at the help desk page today with regard to some scammers saying that my draft has been rejected and asking for money to get it approved, while at the same time my draft is actually still under review. The post here was titled "Draft: Jeanette Rowley question". However, it appears that it has been deleted. Can somebody confirm if it has indeed been deleted and, if that's the case, why the conversation has been deleted?

Thanks ML 76 GR (talk) 13:32, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@Thilio @331dot any thoughts please? Tagging you as I had the conversation with you two. Many thanks.

PS One of you (apologies, as the conversation appears to have been deleted, I cannot access it to see who it was) wrote "most of them are scammers" in their reply. Can I please ask for clarification, what did you mean by "most"?

Thanks ML 76 GR (talk) 13:39, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

The discussion mentioned was archived here, which was a bit hasty for a thread less than 24 hours old. Draft: Jeanette Rowley still exists, but it has been turned down for various reasons.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 13:40, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you @Ianmacm, my question was about the discussion, not the draft. Can my discussion be restored from archive? I can't understand why such a heist for the conversation to be archived while others are simply closed instead of archived? ML 76 GR (talk) 13:44, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing I can see you were the one who archived the discussion. Would you care to explain why please? ML 76 GR (talk) 13:48, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Jeanette Rowley related question

Hi,

My draft of Dr Jeanette Rowley (Draft:Jeanette Rowley) appears on Wikipedia to still be in Drafts for Creation awaiting review stage. However, I just received an email from a Maulika Taragi (maulika[at]asteriaamedia.com), who apparently is a Marketing Executive, offering me their services to get my draft approved as they say it has been rejected. Can please somebody explain to me how this person knows that my draft has been rejected when in the actual Wikipedia site my draft shows that it is still under review? I am getting rather suspicious that this person may be an actual Wikipedia reviewer who is about to reject my draft and is contacting me in advance in order to get money off me. Can Wikipedia reassure me that this is not happening and that my draft is not keep being rejected because scammers who got themselves in Wikipedia as reviewers are rejecting it on purpose in order to get money out of me?

This has happened many times up to now and it is the second time that somebody contacts me saying that my draft has been rejected while it is still under review. The first time, they told me it was rejected 24 hours before it actually got rejected (meaning it showed as rejected in Wikipedia site).

This is all very suspicious, sheds a shadow of doubt to and lack of credibility of the Wikipedia reviewers, process and impartiality, especially given that I have incorporated all comments, feedback and suggestions of previous reviewers to my draft.

Is there somebody that is a Wikipedia senior member, who is also a verified, credible reviewer, with integrity and transparency, who can get in touch with me please to discuss this matter?

Thank you ML 76 GR (talk) 11:26, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Please see WP:SCAM. There are many people who monitor declined drafts and other pages and then offer their "services" to supposedly fix the issues. Do not give anyone money. They can make no promises, despite what they may claim; most of them are scams. You were likely sent a prewritten message(which is one more indication that the person is not on the up and up) 331dot (talk) 11:33, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, however, I still wonder how they know my draft is going to be rejected (they wrote "it got rejected") when actually it is still showing that it is up for review? I would appreciate it if you or somebody else from Wikipedia can enlighten about this please. It makes me wonder whether there is any point writing for Wikipedia if the process is corrupt and scammers are in control of the review outcome, because as I have written in my first post, I have done everything previous reviewers have asked for and recommended in order to get my draft approved ML 76 GR (talk) 11:37, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

As I said, you were likely sent a prewritten message, and whomever sent it didn't actually conduct a thorough review of your draft.

As with any public activity, we cannot absolutely guarantee that the process is free of scammers. It's up to editors to be vigilant. We do our best to educate editors and detect scammers, but they are often clever.

I do believe that your reviewers were legitimate; you can examine their edit histories yourself. Note that each reviewer is a different person who may be looking for different things; that you think you have resolved one person's concerns does not mean others won't see something. 331dot (talk) 11:49, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@ML 76 GR It’s important to note that these scammers do not actually know whether your draft will be accepted or declined. They cannot see the outcome in advance, and they have no access to the review process.

When they say “your draft got rejected” while it’s still pending, they are simply guessing often they assume that many drafts are declined (which is true) and send the same message to many editors. If your draft later happens to be declined, it creates the illusion that they “knew” in advance.

Wikipedia’s review process is entirely separate from these individuals, and no paid promoter or marketing executive has control over it. The only reliable status for your draft is what is shown on the Wikipedia page itself.

You can ignore such emails and continue working on your draft, If you have addressed all the review comments and the draft meets Wikipedia’s notability and sourcing standards it can be approved regardless of what scammers claim. 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 11:54, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your reassurance, time and explanation @Thilio, much appreciated. I will wait and see what happens with my draft ML 76 GR (talk) 11:58, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Because the discussion (which you have now, misleadingly, cut&pasted in its entirety above) ended with you saying "Thank you for your reassurance, time and explanation Thilio, much appreciated. I will wait and see what happens with my draft". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:52, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing can you explain what you mean by saying "misleadingly" please? I copied and pasted the actual conversation which was archived. Can you please explain?

Thanks ML 76 GR (talk) 13:57, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I mean that you have posted, contrary to our guidelines, comments by other people, with their signatures and timestamps, where they did not make them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:02, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Sorry @Pigsonthewing but I do not understand what you mean. I haven't posted anything more than what was already there (but archived in heist, as it was written above). How does that contravene guidelines and how did they "not make" the comments since they are there in the discussion? I am sorry if I misread your message and don't understand it as a result, but perhaps you can clarify?

Thanks ML 76 GR (talk) 14:08, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I did not say that they did not make them; I said they did not make them where you have pasted them.

You have inserted them into the middle of conversation on a different topic. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:15, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

In any case, thank you for clarifying ML 76 GR (talk) 14:35, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I copied and pasting the archived conversation below ML 76 GR (talk) 14:32, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@ML 76 GR, the discussion was archived as part of routine page maintenance, not deleted and your Draft:Jeanette Rowley still exists. It has been flagged with maintenance tags please follow the instructions in those tags to address the issues.

🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 14:10, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank youn @Thilio, I have seen the comment and addressed it the way I understood it. Awaiting for further feedback from the reviewer to advise whether my edit satisfied their requirements ML 76 GR (talk) 14:34, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

mail

how to use the old yahoo mail?? 2603:8080:3500:AD16:4CF5:1E56:D4A4:2F13 (talk) 17:20, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

This is not a general internet help desk, sorry. 331dot (talk) 18:02, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Anne's Song and Silverchair

I'm not sure what's a good place to ask for this, but me and @SpaceHelmetX1 have been in discussions on the talk pages of the music articles Anne's Song and Silverchair for a day or so. Outside of two comments from @Binksternet on Anne's Song, we've been the only users involved in these discussions, and we've yet to find a conclusion that satisfies any party. I'm wondering if there's anyway to get a third party involved to help settle this. CleoCat16 (talk) 16:52, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

There are instructions on how to request a third opinion at WP:3O, which sounds like what you want. WelpThatWorked (talk) 17:12, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll be putting in a request for a dispute resolution on both articles. CleoCat16 (talk) 17:14, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Ministry of Agriculture (North Korea)

Draft:Ministry of Agriculture (North Korea)

Hello, please, delete this draft, no one will help anyway. СтасС (talk) 09:07, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello СтасС,

I’ve added a speedy deletion tag (CSD G7) to the draft as requested. An administrator will review it and if eligible, delete it shortly.

🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 09:21, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

County Employees editing

I can see where it's allowable for Federal Employees are allowed to edit, however, I see nothing about State and Local employees making changes. We are currently in the process of updating our Communication Procedures and this one item keeps popping up because we can't get a clear answer by reading through all of the documentation. Thank you for your assistance. BlueSmurfette (talk) 14:57, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Employees have a paid conflict of interest. The WMF's terms of use require that they declare their COI which, on the English Wikipedia can be done according to the WP:PAID process. Once that is done, they should not directly edit the articles with which they have a COI - they should use the edit request wizard to ask uninvolved editors to make the changes on their behalf.

Their username should represent the user, not the employer. Cabayi (talk) 15:04, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

State employee (WI, formerly TN), AFSCME local president and Wikipedia admin Orange Mike here, Smurfette. From Wikipedia's point of view, the "Communications Office" of a governmental agency is just as likely to make unsuitable efforts here as a press agency of a major corporation. Neutral point of view is not optional, but at the very core of what we do. This means that conflicts of interest must be fully disclosed. Likewise, edits to an article should not be made by people employed by the entity which is the subject of the article. Instead, such people (whose usernames should not purport to represent the entity; BlueSmurfette is a very smurfy name in this case) should make suggestions on the talk pages of the article, disclosing their COI and suggesting improvements to said article. Any suspected taint of spin-doctoring, image polishing or 'crisis management' will immediately arouse suspicions on the part of other editors working on the article. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:22, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Not just other editors, but our readers as well. They're usually quick to complain when they notice an article is slanted. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 15:33, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

At least, if the slant is contrary to their preferred slant. —Tamfang (talk) 22:14, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia

I am retired and had a sub-career as a fact checker. I thought I might be able to help Wikipedia, but I cannot understand all the ins and outs and wheres of the website to help. I am not a techno dummy, but I find Wikipedia far more difficult to master than ArcGIS, my next most difficult example. For an organization that prides itself on openness and participation, I am suprised there is no simple, plain language introduction to the website and how to get involved readily available. Jkonovsky (talk) 21:12, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

There are a number; I have left links to some on your talk page. Please stick at it, and ask here again, as often as you need to. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:17, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

I know this is a bit basic, but WP:ADVENTURE might be a place to start? When I started, I had the added disadvantage of not being very tech savvy. I spent time reading some of the noticeboards, where a lot of editors use policy in discussions. I made small corrections, copy editing etc. You do soon get a feel for editing. Knitsey (talk) 21:18, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jkonovsky: I want to empathize with your observation that editing Wikipedia is difficult. Aside from the technical issues of formatting text (whether using wikitext or visual editor), aside from the notability requirements (i.e. when creating a new article), there are plenty of opportunities for confict and it's easy to feel that people are pushing an unreasonble point of view. If you don't abide by the policy (e.g. fail to be properly respectful of other editors), you can find your editing privileges temporarily suspended, and all you get for this is to be allowed to present your explanation of why you think your position is the right one. Have fun! Fabrickator (talk) 01:26, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jkonovsky: As a fact checker you may be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Reliability or Wikipedia:Reference desk. In the latter you can answer questions without knowing much about Wikipedia editing. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:39, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

I am a visual learner. Is there some sort of schematic diagram that lists all the parts of wikipedia and how they relate to each other? Jkonovsky (talk) 21:35, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

None that I know of (Wikipedia is probably too big and organic for that), but I have copied your question here, from my talk page, in case anyone else knows of one. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:28, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jkonovsky It is even worse than describing "parts of Wikipedia" because the whole of that is part of Wikimedia. There is a recent series of articles in our in-house magazine WP:Signpost that attempts to describe this. The first of the series is at this link. See also Wikipedia and Featured visualizations of Wikipedia Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:59, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jkonovsky I wonder if starting at Wikipedia:Task Center would help? It breaks down some common tasks editors can do, ranging from basic to advanced. qcne (talk) 21:26, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

"Save"

How to Edit, Maintain and Organize: Entries already Saved. (in the "Save" function, lower left key) DaYton.68 (talk) 14:30, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

@DaYton.68 As a new editor, you may find Help:Introduction useful. It has extensive help on editing. The usual key that saves changes to the Wikipedia servers is labelled "Publish changes". Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:44, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

I suspect that this relates to saving (like bookmarking) pages in the mobile app, not editing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:27, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Help with submission that keeps getting pushed back for lack of citations

Hello,

I have tried a few times now to create a Wiki for the literary magazine/indie press, Conduit Books & Ephemera (website here: https://www.conduit.org/). My submissions keep getting rejected for lack of citations. Conduit is a legit magazine/press that has been around for around 30 years, but due to its status as "indie," there aren't a ton of articles written about it. There are some, and many of its publications have won book prizes, etc. I tried citing these but Wikipedia still said it wasn't enough. Is this a lost cause or is there something I can do that will make my submission go through? 63.231.197.105 (talk) 21:26, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

A "wiki" is a type of entire website of which Wikipedia is one example. Its individual parts are called articles. You were trying to create a Wikipedia article.

If a source does not have coverage in independent reliable sources that show how it is notable, it cannot have an article on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 22:02, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Despite the definitions you've provided for the terms "reliable sources" and "notable," I still find them to be semi-subjective parameters (at least from the POV of someone who has not created an article on Wikipedia before). Is there a way for me to determine once and for all whether or not this literary mag. is eligible for an article, or do I just need to re-submit and hope it works out? 192.226.98.130 (talk) 16:54, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

As to the matters of notability and reliability of sources, different editors have different thresholds - when there is disagreement, we have a discussion and make a decision based on the consensus of that discussion. If there are no sources that are independent of the subject, reliable, secondary, and which give the subject significant depth of coverage, it is likely that an article cannot exist. If you can find a couple of sources that tick all of those boxes, you'll be fine. However, you haven't provided a link to the draft article. Your IP address appears to change regularly - neither of the addresses you've used above to comment in this section has ever edited an article about that magazine. Draft:Conduit Books & Ephemera does not exist. So, it's rather difficult for us to look at what you've done so far and give you advice. Girth Summit _(blether) 17:05, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

want to open Wikipedia

Hello concern, I want to open my Wikipedia profile. Can you assist me and tell me the process. 115.127.210.125 (talk) 07:17, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Not quite sure what this means. If you want to have a user page and tell people about yourself, you will need to register an account. An IP address can show a list of contributions, but that is all that it can do.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:33, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

If you want to contribute to Wikipedia's articles on other people, on things, on events, on places etc, you'd be most welcome to do so. As a contributor (I mean, of text, not of money), you'd be welcome to create a user page and tell people about yourself as a contributor to Wikipedia (and not as a businessperson, philanthropist, etc). But you will need to register an account and edit using that account. If on the other hand you'd like to create an article about yourself, please, no. (It's not utterly prohibited, but it's very likely to waste a lot of your time and to end in frustration.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:08, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. It sounds as if you are confusing Wikipedia with social media, as many people do. Wikipedia does not host "profiles", as people usually understand the word.

As others said, if you create an account, you can then create your user page, which is a profile of a sort, but it is for you to tell about yourself as a Wikipedia editor, and it will not be indexed by search engines.

If you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then there could be an article about you (most of us do not meet these criteria) - but it would not belong to you, or be controlled by you, and it would be based on what people who are unconnected about you have published about you, not on what you want to say - that's why I saw it would not be a profile.

If you want to tell the world about yourself, please find some other outlet - LinkedIn, maybe, or Facebook. That's not what Wikipedia is for. ColinFine (talk) 09:44, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Created login without email and now can’t reset

Hi, I created a login and can edit with difficulty in the phone Wikipedia app. I would prefer to edit on a desktop but have forgotten my password. I have been trying to reset and have now worked out the emails never come because there is no address. How do I reset my password and put my email address in? Lucy Margaret (talk) 02:11, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

@Lucy Margaret Help:Reset password may be of help. MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 04:35, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Since you have a relatively new account AND you did not enter an email address, unfortunately you are stuck -- unless you can guess your own password. I would simply create a new account, ensuring you either save your password in a safe place or you include a recovery email address -- there is really no other practical option in your situation. For long term users there are sometimes other options, but those do not apply in your situation. TiggerJay (talk) 04:54, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help, I've created a new userid. LucyMargaretSA (talk) 03:15, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

If you wish, you can edit your old user page to link or redirect to the new one; and mention the old one on your new user page.

Shout if you need help. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:53, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

María de la O Lejárraga

I was wondering if anyone could help me with filing a request or manage in anyway to change the name of the article of María de La O Lejárraga from its current name, which is María Martínez Sierra.

"Martínez Sierra" are the two last names of her husband Gregorio, and are in no way part of her legal name. In addition to this, María's writing has been for decades attributed to the authorship of her husband, only discovered after her death that much of the work signed under the name of Gregorio was actually María's.

It is true that María signed some of her writings with the pseudonym "María Martínez Sierra", but it was only that, a pseudonym. I believe is not only a factual error to list her in Wikipedia under this name, but also a disservice to her work and the work of many researchers that have devoted their work to bring light to this issue. Can Lejarraga (talk) 09:11, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Can Lejarraga Please see WP:COMMONNAME; Wikipedia does not necessarily use legal names as titles- it uses the most commonly used name in English language sources- regardless of the reason a particular name is used in such sources. If you can show that her legal name is the most commonly used name, you may go to requested moves to request a move(I see you were already on the article talk page). It doesn't sound like that's the case, though. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

@Can Lejarraga Note that María de la O Lejárraga is already a WP:REDIRECT, so anyone searching by that name will find the article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:43, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

... in fact, User:Belagaile moved the article from what is now the redirect to its current title in 2020, so your proposal would mean reverting that change. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:48, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Pages on Pre-Colombian South America are in horrible state

Hello. Excuse me for my rather lacking English, it's not my mother language. I'm currently a univ. student and am absolutely shocked by the amount of outdated/weird sourcing on pages dealing with the Muisca of the Altiplano cundiboyacense, and on articles around the Isthmo-Colombian and Andean areas generally. I can't really help myself, as I'm having difficulty changing my writing style and, in my thesis, I might be accused of copying passages from Wikipedia that I wrote myself. I already asked a similar question on the Teahouse, where it was recommended to me that I post my message on several wikiprojects. On wikiproject:Colombia, a user accepted to use the sources I had provided (the 3 references only give a general image of current academic consensus anyway), but I don't know if he went along with it. Some months later, I still can't forget the horrible state of Wikipedia articles on this subject, as I regularly have to explain to friends and family that what they read on Wikipedia (out of interest for my studies) isn't the thing I'm studying. I would like to think that Wikipedia will get better on it's own if I ignore it long enough, but weirdly Wikipedia editors don't seem to be able to get into the scientific literature around the Muisca people. Wikipedia is based on volunteers, and my help may be necessary for it's pages related to pre-Hispanic history in the Altiplano cundiboyacense to advance (if no other student/professor comes along these pages one day. I don't have much time anyway, and many friends don't have time at all due to mini-jobs). The average Wikipedia editor seems to be content citing late 19th/early 20th century sources and/or (worse) colonial chroniclers as sources. There should be a debate on Wikipedia around the use of primary sources on subjects like pre-Columbian America (in my opinion, all sources predating 1920 should be forbidden for pages related to precolombian history, and a preference should be given to sources from the 1980s to today). I would like to have some advice on how to proceed (or if I even have to worry about this). While trying to keep it short, I'm going to give a specific example where Wikipedia and the academic community are not sharing the same postulates: socio-political organisation.

According to Wikipedia, which mainly uses 19th century sources (to the glory of the "Chibcha empire", "ancestor" of the Colombian nation-state and "4th civilisation of the Americas") and whatever "works" average Wikipedia editors can apparently find (news articles, militant indigenous sites, museum sites, and many internet blogs), the Muisca were a "confederation" separated into two "sub-confederations", the zipazgo and zaquazgo. However, the idea of a muisca confederation is no longer recognised in any way. There were four confederations of chiefdoms (Bogotá, Tunja, Duitama and Sogamoso), and while some scholars refer to Duitama and Sogamoso as vassals of Tunja (zaque), that remains debated. In addition, there were independent territories in the north. Sometimes, the Guanes and Laches are counted as "Muisca" too (making it 5 or 6 confederations). However, Bernal (2007) has argued against any supraregional entities existing (neither kingdoms nor "confederations"), and that most chiefdoms or cacicazgos only ruled over barely more than a valley. Jorge Gamboa Mendoza has also been increasingly sceptical of the word "cacicazgo" (chiefdom in English) to describe the great variety of political organisations in the Isthmo-Colombian or "intermediate" (as it was previously called) area. So far, Wikipedia might include a few of these informations on a couple of pages. But when describing the four basic levels of the muisca political hierarchy, Wikipedia has created it's own way of understanding: Indeed, for Wikipedia, all confederations are composed of chiefdoms (sybyn or zybin) and lineages/villages (uta) (which makes 3 levels of political hierarchy). This understanding stems from the beginnings of serious research on muisca groups by Sylvia Broadbent, Falchetti and Plazas in the 1960s and 1970s, which brought a completely new understand to Muisca scholarship (though Fernandez already had advanced the state of research with his materialist and evolutionist understanding in the 1940s). However, and for a fairly long period of time now, research has seen this political hierarchy as follows: At the top, there are the four main confederations, after that came the various chiefdoms, composed of "major" and "minor" units. These "major" (sybyn) and "minor" (uta) capitanías (as the Spaniards called them) are thought to be similar to matrilineal lineages whose members, ideally (not in reality), live in one village. Most times, sybyn are composed of various uta (hence the confusion on Wikipedia about sybyn supposedly being "chiefdoms"); however, Langebaek has first documented the fact that in other cases, sybyn existed independently of uta, and were simply "major" units visavis the "minor" units (this is part of the highly hierarchical thinking of peoples speaking Chibchan languages). In addition to this, Perez has argued in an article about dual thinking that the Muisca had a dual philosophy like in other parts of the Americas (which has somewhat been confirmed by the ethno-historical research of José Rozo Gauta), and that muisca political organisation was dual as well. According to Perez, there existed groups of 4 capitanías (two sybyn and two uta). Also, on the basis of colonial writer Freyle's claims, Perez argued that the Bogota confederation was diarchical, as was Tunja's organisation (Bogota and Guatavita would have been the two dominant chiefdoms. However, Freyle's writings are considered unreliable as his main informant was the very europeanised chief of Guatavita of the early 17th century). Henderson and Ostler argued that the concept of "gue" was primordial in muisca political organisation (house, by extension community as opposed to gueba (house + blood), a term designating foreigners and human sacrifice during the gavia ceremony). They argue chiefs were aggrandisers (charismatic leaders of political factions) and not kings, and established alliances, sometimes with the sybyn (village), sometimes with the uta (groups of houses), sometimes with the individual gue (houses/households). Wikipedia also claims the original name of Bacata was Muequeta, a claim I believe is either marginal or an invention by a Wikipedia editor on the Spanish version. Worse is Wikipedia's narrating of muisca "history" without any critical comment (I'm not for deleting the pages on muisca rulers and battles, but for showing the debates around the validity of the chroniclers, and especially of the late 17th century Piedrahíta). Wikipedia's writing on these historical events narrated by very late chroniclers seems to occasionally use marginal sources, I remember seeing a researcher in folklore and mythology being used for some reason. Do Wikipedians explicitly search for content like that? (And the fact this person has his own Wikipedia page, but so many other leading academics don't, is also very unusual).

As I have shown, Wikipedia was apparently not able to take into account the existence of current research on muisca political organisation. There are so many other problems on Wikipedia though (the existence of a "currency", which Langebaek refuted as a misunderstanding; Camilo Barrios even refuted Langebaek's theory of muisca "markets", as this wasn't part of prehispanic thinking). One page on muisca economy claims there was an annual market in Bogotá (using the folklorist I mentioned earlier as a source) even though Langebaek (Mercados, Poblamiento…, 1987) and Boada (Evolution of hierarchy in a muisca chiefdom) explicitly mention that the Bogotá confederation was the only muisca entity (and the largest as well) that did not have markets, but only the system of "micro-verticality", a reduced version of the vertical archipelago of the central Andes (here again, I'm leaving out much information. There were archeological surveys conducted in the valley of Tenza where communities of various co-existing chiefdoms have been theorised as a means to access different ressources. These surveys contradict the idea of these foreign communities existing, and put into question the presence of “micro-verticality”, originally a term used for Ecuador, among the muisca. Langebaek himself, who postulated it's existence, has called his postulate a hypothesis). Concerning the muisca language, Wikipedia fails to mention that "muysccubun" or "chibcha" was only the language of the savanna of Bogotà, recorded by colonial dictionaries because of it's proximity to the regional capital Santafé de Bogotá. There were dialects/languages in every valley, sometimes interpreters had to be brought to chiefs of different areas because of language barriers. And again, these are only a few examples to show that the current state of Wikipedia pages related to Muiscas, Incas etc. is (most times) absolutely disastrous. Some pages on Inca rulers or institutions are very well done, but others show the same problems muisca-related pages do (citing of colonial chroniclers by non-expert editors, excessive use of sources predating the 1980s, marginal scholars presented as "leading"). With this, I hope to better the state of pages related to prehispanic history and ethno-historical research on Wikipedia. If needed, I am absolutely ready to provide an (incomplete) list of sources for every subject (Agriculture, food consumption, religion, cosmovision, political organisation), as my previous list of 3 sources might not be completely representative of current academic consensus. I can assure that these problems are present on the English Wikipedia almost to the exact same degree they are present on the Spanish Wikipedia.

Dear regards, 2A01:599:A26:6052:3093:12:3D53:31B7 (talk) 21:29, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

We are all volunteers here. I suspect few will bother reading through those three huge paragraphs. Anyway, I suggest you express your criticisms, concisely, in the talk pages of the relevant articles. Maproom (talk) 21:41, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Quote: I don't have much time anyway, and many friends don't have time at all due to mini-jobs You and your friends sound like most people here and their friends. ¶ Quote: I hope to better the state of pages related to prehispanic history and ethno-historical research on Wikipedia. Excellent. Please do. Always cite your sources, which must of course be reliable but also must be published. (Not all unpublished doctoral dissertations fail to qualify, but the great majority do.) Start cautiously; as your edits are accepted and appreciated, become bolder. ¶ Quote: I am absolutely ready to provide an (incomplete) list of sources for every subject.... This would seem to say 'My time is too valuable for this; instead, I prefer to use your time'. Don't expect this to get a warm welcome, however constructive and amiable your intention. If there's some change that should be made, do it yourself. ¶ You would be under no obligation to acquire a user ID and edit as that user ID, but I strongly recommend that you do so. -- Hoary (talk) 05:08, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm grateful for your response and your taking the time to read my text (which I will post elsewhere in a more concise manner). Time is not my principal concern however. I already edited one (or two, I don't remember very well) Wikipedia pages and the result was rather satisfying. But, since I have difficulty changing my writing style and talked about this, I was advised not to continue editing Wikipedia before I finish and submit my thesis, to avoid potential accusations or false ideas. That is the reason I am hoping (not demanding) some motivated editor with the time and energy necessary might be able to dedicate himself to this subject's Wikipedia articles. It's a shame I can't contribute myself for now (but I will definitely at one point or another), and all I want to do is try to push Wikipedia as a hole closer to expectations on other subjects when it comes to Pre-Hispanic South America. Regards, 11:39, 5 August 2025 (UTC) 2A01:599:A26:6052:3093:12:3D53:31B7 (talk) 11:39, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Editors of the kind you're hoping to attract probably exist, and it's likely some would be tempted to help and would even have the time needed to do so. Create a user ID. Log in and edit under that user ID. On your new user page, explain concisely why you won't be able to do more than trivial editing yourself until [time]. Choose an article that's seriously flawed (or plain bad) and about an important subject. Avoid the temptation either to describe it as any worse than "flawed" or to describe any or all of its creators as gullible, undiscerning, ignorant, fools, unthinking parrots of colonialist ideology, or whatever. (In Wikipedia-language, you should "assume good faith".) On the talk page of that article, try posting a short and lightly annotated list of recommended reading. Minimize (or, better, avoid) material whose gist a fairly bright first-year undergraduate would not be likely to grasp. For papers, provide DOIs. Don't send readers to any repository of dubious legality; don't even link to papers at Researchgate or Academia unless it's clear that the uploader is the copyright-holder. Present your list in such a way that it invites reading, not so that it berates those who haven't read or won't read. Make all of this concise. Perhaps advertise your post on the talk page of one or two (but no more than two) WikiProjects; but if so, then do so very concisely indeed. (Relevant WikiProjects are normally linked to from the top of the article's talk page. NB most WikiProjects appear to be more or less moribund; if there are no recent messages, or if recent messages have attracted no responses, forget that WikiProject.) Oh -- and keep it all concise. Good luck! -- Hoary (talk) 00:41, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Thanks, @Hoary:, for your immensely helpful advice, which I have followed. I have selected a group of 4 pages (not more) that I'm working on or planning to work on. The first is Muisca rulers. If you see any issues with my changes, feel free let me know, and I will absolutely be ready to change whatever is in need of refinement. WikipedianN.48 (talk) 18:42, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

WikipedianN.48, I'm in a bit of a rush now, but I did look at one of these. It's pretty good, but I strongly recommend a couple of changes. You can make these as long as your thread hasn't got responses. First, change the title from "Page needs improvement" (because the huge majority need improvement, and because the current title suggests a mere complaint) to something like "Tips for improving the article", which not only sounds helpful but also raises the possibility that you're asking (and expressions of interest go down well). Secondly, add that you are now, and plan to remain, WikipedianN.48. (I do not recommend that you change the signature from an IP to "WikipedianN.48": doing so wouldn't be wrong but it would look distinctly fishy.) And, however unfortunately: be prepared to wait a long time for a response of any kind. If on the other hand there has already been a response, don't change your message or its title, but consider adding (as a new comment on your comment) that you are, and plan to remain, "WikipedianN.48". -- Hoary (talk) 22:48, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Don Tracy - Illinois Republican

His article says he was born in 1960/61. I’m a friend of Don’s and he was born in 1950 as I was just at his house for his 75th birthday. You can easily verify this on any past pages of his time as an Illinois politician. 2601:248:8501:15BC:25C7:B74F:90C1:B4CC (talk) 03:07, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Provide reliable sources please. Ahri Boy (talk) 03:50, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

The source cited for that says he was 54 years old in 2015, which would make 1960 or 1961 (depending on his exact date of birth) more realistic. Do you have any strong third-party sources that contradict this, other than "just trust me, bro, i'm friends with him"? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 03:53, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

In the unlikely event that we and the sources we cite really do have this wrong, you can advise your friend to send an email to info-en-qwikipedia.org — they will advise how your friend can then supply scanned documents to verify their identity, and the earlier DoB. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:57, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Some people don't want their age public and it doesn't appear to be widely reported so maybe you should check that with him first. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:37, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Feel free; I will not be doing so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:34, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

List of Tallest Statues

Hi - I'm wondering why Mother Armenia is not on this list as wiki claims it is 51m which is higher than some on the list. Thanks! 147.161.161.112 (talk) 11:26, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Mother Armenia#Mother Armenia statue in Yerevan says: "Mother Armenia" has a height of 22 metres (72 ft), thus making the overall height of the monument 51 metres (167 ft), including the pedestal.

The lead of List of tallest statues says: This list of tallest statues includes completed statues that are at least 50 m (160 ft) tall. The height values in this list are measured to the highest part of the human (or animal) figure, but exclude the height of any pedestal (plinth), or other base platform. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:38, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Info

how i add my Profession Date of birth name on Wikipedia account Adilali.adee (talk) 21:23, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

We strongly encourage you not to do so; we are not social media. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 21:25, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

If you refer to your user account and not a Wikipedia article about you then you can use {{Infobox Wikipedia user}} on your user page User:Adilali.adee, but it's mostly inteded for users who make edits to Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:User pages for what else you can have on your user page. It's limited since we are not social media. Some people worry about identity theft and don't want their full name and date of birth to be public. See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Privacy of personal information and using primary sources. If you have a profession then I guess Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors doesn't apply to you. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:27, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Writing birthdates in the lead when the year isn't certain

Hello, at Marty Norton, me and the GA reviewer weren't sure how to best write out his birthdate in the first sentence (which is currently Martin William Norton (né Muhvich; c. 1901–1907 – October 8, 1977)) -- he was born between 1901 and 1907, but it isn't certain which one of those years it was. I haven't found any clear guidance about how to write it in a situation like this. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:31, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Not the expert response you want, but while you're waiting for it:

That looks optimal to me. I can't imagine how else you could do it. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 22:56, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Well, upon second look, I'd remove the "c.". In this case, the "circa" is implicit in the en dash, making the "c." redundant and unnecessary. As you say, the birthdate is not around those years but known to be somewhere within that range. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 23:01, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

See MOS:CIRCA. I don't see your use case there. This is not a case for "fl." (Jacobus Flori), since "fl." is not for use with birthdates. Maybe you have better eyes. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 23:13, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Some info in an odd place... WP:BLPPRIVACY (third paragraph) - Joan Crawford was a GA when the current style was implemented. Moxy🍁 23:16, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Made a shortcut for ease of use in the future WP:DOBCONFLICT Moxy🍁 23:30, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

So, should it say "(190? – October 8, 1977)" in the lead? BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:34, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I guess ..the {{efn}} combined with {{Multiref2}} as seen at Joan Crawford#Notes prevents any real cluttering in the lead and note and helps with people always trying to change the date to some extent. That said sources aren't always preferred in the lead..... But in my view a note of this nature is very informative and leads our readers to more information. Moxy🍁 23:42, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

How can I ask someone for a review?

Hi, I'm a Wikipedia user, but I'm in wikibreak currently. Therefore, I'm finding someone who can help review something. How can I do so? Upset New Bird (talk) 04:00, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

You might be more likely to recruit somebody, Upset New Bird, if you were more specific about what you hope that they'll do. -- Hoary (talk) 06:11, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

@Hoary: Could you give me some examples? Upset New Bird (talk) 06:18, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

No, Upset New Bird, I cannot read your mind. I don't know what this "something" is; I don't know what "help" you want. -- Hoary (talk) 08:27, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

@Hoary: I'm finding someone who can help review my drafts. I hope that you can understand now. Upset New Bird (talk) 03:26, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Submit your drafts for review, via the process described at WP:AFC. If a reviewer deems one of them ready, they will publish it to "mainspace". If not, they will give you further advice. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:50, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: Thanks for answering, but my plan is not creating a new article, but improving an existing article. As I said, I'm in wikibreak currently, so I'm finding someone who can help review my improvement. Upset New Bird (talk) 22:10, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Then you need to be explicit about what you want. An improvement to an existing article is not a "draft".

You have also just submitted Draft:Mobile software content rating system for review. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:12, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

That's made sense?

In Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors, minors are discouraged to add your age like (any year old), name, IP addres, location like (Rua Alberto Braune). But in many Wikipedia, people are adding your ages, name and etc for example Wikipedia em portuguese with the boy with 13 year old. The same boy adds your age here. I will not add here for privacy reasons. That's made sense? What? Vitorperrut555 (talk) 22:02, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

@Vitorperrut555 - I'm not sure I completely understand your post, however what you referenced was guidance and not a policy, so editors are free to post personal identifying information, although it is discouraged. If your child is on here, and they have posted such personal information, you can contact an administrator who can not only remove the data, but also delete it from the historical records as well. TiggerJay (talk) 03:44, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@Tiggerjay I would note that requests for oversight is a better place for removing PII since they are specifically handled to cater that and such info would not be visible even to admins unless they also hold oversight rights (only ~50). Its not permitted to request oversight on any talk page due to the Streisand effect and must be done via email, following the 'requests for oversight' link above. JuniperChill (talk) 18:25, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Also, Wikipedias in the various different languages are all independent of each other, and have created their own policies and guidelines, which may or may not be the same as those on this English-language Wikipedia. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.194.92.162 (talk) 15:22, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

My edit is undone

Hello, dear colleagues! Firstly, I want to apologise that I do not know well the rules of the English section of Wikipedia (I am active sometimes in two other sections of Wikipedia, and I know somewhat their rules). There is one my edit; some anonymous user cancelled it. I am sure my edit is correct. But, as far as I understand, if I would cancel the cancelling of my edit, it would be a first step to an edit war. So, I hope some respected editor (possibly administrator) will restore my edit. Gamliel Fishkin 02:09, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, Gamliel, and thank you for not edit warring. When an edit is reverted in good faith, the next step is to discuss the matter with the reverting editor per WP:BRD, usually on the article talk page. Providing reliable source(s) that support your edit would be helpful when you begin the discussion. Perception312 (talk) 03:19, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Your edit looked good; and no reason for its undoing was given, so I have re-done it. Nonetheless, the advice given above is correct and should be followed in future cases. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:41, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Correction to article

•  Courtesy link: Hashima Hasan

There is an article on me (Hashima Hasan) on Wikipedia with some incorrect and outdated information that I would like corrected. How do I do it? I tried the "Talk" feature and provided a corrected first paragraph. I do not know if I succeeded. Please let me know so that I can correct subsequent paragraphs as well. HashimaHasan (talk) 18:42, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

You're mostly there. You'd also want to insert Template:Edit COI with your message, which will make your request more visible to reviewers. Being more specific about exactly what you want changed (e.g. "replace the lead with...") and limiting the text provided to just the text that has changed can help get it reviewed faster as well. Normally, you'd also want to provide a source for any added claims, but what you've put seems to align with a source already on the page, so I think that's fine.

You may also want to add a note on your user page disclosing you are the subject of an article. Further information can be found in WP:COI and WP:BLPSELF. WelpThatWorked (talk) 18:55, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

There are some instructions at Wikipedia:Simple conflict of interest edit request. It will help the editor who deals with your request if you tell them the source for the information, rather than letting them find it themselves. TSventon (talk) 19:03, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

The requested edit has been made. I've left some additional information on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:46, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Listing as a notable person

I am making an application to be listed as a notable person

I was born in Ararat Victoria in 1946 and become a member of the police force in 1966 and spent 26 years,before becoming a Member of Parliament for the seat of Ballarat East.I was awarded an OAM Medal of the Order of Australia on the King’s Birthday 9th June,2025 for services to police welfare and the parliament of Victoria Chuffatrain (talk) 01:20, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

We have an article about the Electoral district of Ballarat East, which was abolished in 1927, recreated in 1992 and re-abolished in 2014. It had only two members in this latter period, both of whom are already covered by articles (which means by definition that they are, in Wikipedia's terms, Notable people, specifically covered by the Project page Wikipedia:Notability (people)/Subnational politicians).

From your birth details above, you must be Barry Traynor. The facts you give above are already mentioned in the article, which has existed on Wikipedia since 2013 (with periodic edits and updates). Do you have any other questions? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.194.92.162 (talk) 01:36, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I am satisfied for your prompt attention and advice.My only issue is that my name appears as a notable person from Ararat as many others already appear such as footballers.I have a strong history and commitment to my home town Ararat.My grandfather was wounded twice at Gallipoli in World War 1, gun shot wound to the throat and neck and survived and my father served in World War 2 and he was secretary of the RSL in Ararat.Both my parents and grandparents are buried in Ararat. Chuffatrain (talk) 01:57, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Are you saying Category:People from Ararat, Victoria needs added to the article about you? ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 03:01, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

He's probably upset about this revert. —Cryptic 03:10, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps understandably so. The reverter's reason - "that shouldn't go at the top of the page" is a reason for moving it, not deleting it completely. HiLo48 (talk) 03:42, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I have added the naqme in the correct location. In future please request edits with the template {{edit COI}} on the article talk page Theroadislong (talk) 06:56, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Administrator harassing me on my talk page

The following discussion 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.

---

I have an administrator that is harassing me on my talk page. I did the best that I could do to WP:AGF and respond in a kind way, I even reverted my own edit, but thats not good enough for them. I placed a template asking for help from and admin and they removed it and told me they did so. I would like to find a place to report this admin. You can see it at the bottom of my talk page. I just edit typos and grammar. I cannot find any place that I can report this user. Dillard421♂♂ ^{(talk to me)} 07:41, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I see the discussion on your talk page and what I see is someone asking for clarifications from you and you are being defensive. When you placed the template asking for help from an admin, and an admin comes and evaluate the discussion, and then stated that the banner is not needed and ask you to cool it off, and you say it is harassment and you reinserted the banner? Wow.

So here is a third admin to objectively tell you that the banner is not needed. Caps or not, calling the initial clarifications as a tirade is borderline not being civil. You have stated your point in your initial replies and that would have suffice without calling the clarifications a tirade. I am going to take the banner off in good faith as the matter is a content dispute at best and do not need admin intervention. – robertsky (talk) 07:56, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Dillard421, make that four administrators. I agree with Robertsky. —  Salvio ^giuliano 08:16, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

+1....5 admins now. Lectonar (talk) 09:56, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

This appears to spring from a dispute over the appropriateness of use of the word it. Perhaps we find ourselves in the gherkin season. -- Hoary (talk) 09:46, 8 August 2025 (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.

I crapped up a page on accident and I don’t know how to fix it.

Hello, I was trying to make an edit to the Jetpack Joyride page by adding a reference to the games designer. Well what ended up happening is that I accidentally delete the Infobox and now there’s just random stuff in its place. I don’t know how to add it back, can someone help me? SupersaurYT (talk) 03:47, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

All good, SupersaurYT - I've undone your edit so you can try again. Let me know if you have any further questions and I'll do my best to help. Patient Zero^talk 03:50, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! Will Do. SupersaurYT (talk) 04:48, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

If this happens in future, look for the "History" tab on the article. Find your edit there, and select "undo". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:05, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Accidental shootings

Why is there an page for the movie "Rust" accidental shooting but not one on "The Crow" accidental shooting.

so I don't get it so in 1993 it's ok for someone to leave a loaded gun that kills someone on set and not hing happens then but in 2020 something Alec Baldwin can shoot someone on set and then get away with it and two people get to spend time in prison for it so how is anyone charged for a crime when they didn't know that the people in a car would pull out guns and open fire on whatever they choose and he is just as guilty for not having a gun not shooting any thing and just because he was in the car he gets the same charge but Alec Baldwin says he didn't know and isn't responsible should be a eye opener that if he doesn't have to be held responsible for it then neither should anyone who didn't know what other did and that shows us that the law only applies to those they need it to when the want it to and not to any good ole boys club. 2601:602:9601:24D0:738C:F945:1A9F:FDAE (talk) 14:24, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

The Crow (1994 film) mentions the shooting, so your premise is incorrect. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:52, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I'm not sure what your post has to do with Wikipedia. If you are suggesting that not having an article on the shooting in the Crow somehow says that Wikipedia says that was OK, you're wrong. Often there is no article on a subject simply because nobody has chosen to write one. Sometimes it is because there is not enough published material about the subject to base an article on.

In this case, it is perfectly possible, even likely, that the shooting in 2020 got a lot more attention than the one in 1993, simply because social media was barely a thing in 1993. (I don't know whether this is actually the case, but it is plausible). This means that a separate article about the 1993 shooting may not be possible, because of Wikipedia's rules about verifiability and sources. That still would not mean that Wikipedia is making any kind of statement by having the one article and not the other. ColinFine (talk) 16:43, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Change date of birth

I will like to correct the birth date of Aminu suleiman which is listed on your website as June 10, 1965( Age 60). His correct date of birth is June 29, 1970( Age 55). 2601:2C7:4082:2790:BFA9:7E29:9BA9:EC5B (talk) 13:04, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source which supports the change? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:13, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Google Books Link

At Draft:Bramley Baths, the Google Books link for Public Consultation and Community Involvement in Planning: A twenty-first century guide goes to a page saying "No Preview Avaliable for this Page", until I click "Clear Search" and the page I want right there. I tried removing &dq=bramley+baths from the URL but that didn't help. How can I format this link so that it goes straight to the page I'm referencing, without requiring an extra step for the reader? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 17:23, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

@DandelionAndBurdock

I checked the link myself and I’m seeing “No preview available for this page” with the “Buy this book” message. That usually means the publisher hasn’t given Google permission to display that page (or any pages, if it’s full no-preview mode). From what I know, there isn’t a formatting trick to get around this it’s a limitation on Google’s side, not something we can fix in the link. The best approach would be to cite the book normally using "cite book" with all the publication details title, author, year, ISBN, page number and if you want link to the Google Books entry for the book in general ...... just keep in mind that the specific page won’t be visible to readers.

🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 17:36, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm also seeing "No Preview Avaliable", until I click "Clear Search" and the preview appears, which seems to be almost the entire text including the part I'm referencing. It seems a shame that the reader would think, oh there's no preview avaliable, when there very much is one avaliable. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 17:43, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

If I click "clear search" and then click the share icon, I get this URL. You can compare them in this diff. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:53, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

By gosh, that seems to have fixed it. Thank you. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 17:59, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

@DandelionAndBurdock Be aware that access to books via Google books can change, so links may not work in future. Also, according to the book's index via Google books, the page numbers for Bramley Baths are 128-9. TSventon (talk) 18:11, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Duly noted. While I'm here, once the draft is finished - what would be the best way to move it over the existing redirect? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 18:47, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

You can ask at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests. TSventon (talk) 18:52, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Israeli–Palestinian Conflict

The following discussion 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.

---

Concern Regarding Bias in Wikipedia Articles on the Israeli–Palestinian Conflict

I am writing to formally raise concerns about bias and factual inconsistencies in Wikipedia’s coverage of the history of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Wikipedia’s stated mission is to provide neutral, verifiable, and balanced information. However, in reviewing several related articles, I have observed patterns that suggest a departure from neutrality, including:

1. Selective use of sources – Certain historical facts are presented from one perspective only, while equally credible, well-documented sources presenting alternative or opposing viewpoints are omitted.
2. Framing and language bias – Terminology used in describing events often aligns with one political narrative, creating implicit value judgments instead of maintaining a neutral tone.
3. Omission of key historical context – Certain events, timelines, or policies relevant to understanding the broader conflict are minimized or excluded entirely, which may mislead readers about cause and effect.
4. Unequal application of editorial scrutiny – Assertions supporting one position are often included with minimal challenge, while similar claims from the other side are heavily qualified or excluded.

Given Wikipedia’s global influence as a reference source, it is essential that the information provided on such sensitive and historically complex topics be free from political bias and grounded in balanced, verifiable scholarship. I respectfully request that these pages be reviewed by editors with demonstrated expertise in both Middle Eastern history and neutrality in conflict reporting.

I believe the integrity of Wikipedia depends on strict adherence to its own standards of verifiability, neutrality, and avoidance of editorial bias.

Sincerely,

Peggy Mizrahi Peggy Mizrahi (talk) 13:21, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Peggy Mizrahi: Wikipedia talk pages are for discussing improvements to Wikipedia. Your comment does not belong here because it is meaningless: you have not made any claim, complaint, or allegation whatsoever about any specific content in any article you object to, or any specific content you want added. UrielAcosta (talk) 14:39, 10 August 2025 (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.

Converting Iranian currency (advanced)

How do I convert a 1938 Iranian rials cost to something meaningful?

I am looking at Kandovan Tunnel to convert the stated cost of 24,853,400 rials in 1938 (from this source I believe) to something more useful. Perhaps US dollars in 1938 converted for today's inflation. There is a manual US conversion in the article but it seems very low at US$30M. I haven't checked all three citations or their reliability.

My initial thought was to use try: {{inflation|IR|24,853,400|1938}} which generates:

I understand {{inflation}} uses Template:Inflation/IR/dataset (which in turn uses this Farsi source (archive link, actual one is dead). The template is working as expected as nothing later than 1398 can be accepted, but what what currency the IR parameter is using? Iranian rial says it was introduced in 1798.

I originally posted on Template talk:Inflation#Iranian rials does not go past 1398? but grew impatient and more confused. This may be an advanced/tricky question. Commander Keane (talk) 13:36, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

The template page says that data set is using the Solar Hijri Calendar, so the dates are offset by -621/622 years. Looks like the simplest way to do the conversion is probably {{#time:xiY|1938}} which gives 1317 WelpThatWorked (talk) 15:22, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Ahh I see, thanks!

It would be a good idea to add a note like the one found at Template:Inflation/IR/dataset to the IR row at {{inflation}}.

Using 1317 and a Google IRR to USD currency conversion I get the US$30M. At this stage I realise we are probably in the realm of meaningless original research and just source's figures count. Unless reported, a meaningful modern cost may be hard to determine. Commander Keane (talk) 18:14, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

How to create a direct link to DNP webpage

How to create a direct link to the Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation (DNP) website for "Thongphaphum national park" in the "Thong Pha Phum National Park" wiki article.
When someone searches for this DNP webpage via Google, all relevant pages appear on the screen.
The URL displayed is as follows:
https://portal.dnp.go.th/Content/nationalpark?contentid=35250
When I use the same URL in the wiki article, only the first DNP mainpage appears on the screen and nothing more follows.
My suggestion, as a computer illiterate, is: is it possible to split the whole URL into:
the first part connects to the DNP's main computer https://portal.dnp.go.th and
the second part connects to the relevant webpage Content/nationalpark?contentid=35250
Maybe someone has a solution for this problem.
SietsL (talk) 11:48, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @SietsL.

That link times out for me.

From your description, I would guess that that particular page (35250) is no longer available on the site, but that Google hasn't noticed that it has gone away, so still indexes it. So if you follow the link from Google, it goes to the site, which says "I can't find that particular page, so I'll just give you my top level".

I just tried asking the Wayback machine (archive.org) if it had it stored, but it says no - and tells me that it is on the web, so my guess above may not be correct. But I still can't access the page, or indeed the site portal.dnp.go.th.

I'm afraid your solutiona isn't one: that is indeed how the URL is structured, but you can't usefully take it apart that way. ColinFine (talk) 16:20, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@SietsL: The URL https://portal.dnp.go.th/Content/nationalpark?contentId=35250 (note the capital I in "contentId") is currently working for me, so if you want to add that as an external link or reference in the article, I'd say go ahead. Deor (talk) 23:15, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Is there a template that shows a counter of files in a Commons category on a Wikipedia page

Hi all

I'm writing some documentation for an outreach project with the UN and I'm trying to show the number of images they have shared. I know there's a template called PAGESINCATEGORY which works on Commons (its used by Wiki Loves Monuments etc) but I cannot get it to work on Wikipedia. Does anyone know if this is possible?

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 13:05, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, PAGESINCATEGORY works on Commons, but unfortunately it doesn't work on Wikipedia it's disabled there for performance reasons. If you want to show the number of images the best option is to use it on Commons and just link to that page from Wikipedia. 🐍 Thilio🤖 14:23, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Thilio thank you for confirming the feature has been disabled. John Cummings (talk) 12:20, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

This can be queried for, if what you're asking for is similar to what I think you're asking for - a list of all files in a Commons category or category tree that are used in at least one mainspace page on enwiki, or a simple count of them. quarry:query/76609, for example, shows counts for all wikis for the tree rooted at c:Category:Wormholes. What precisely are you looking for? Example output would be helpful. —Cryptic 00:36, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Cryptic, I just want to show a live number of files in a category, eg Category:Photographs produced by UNESCO, so that when they add more over time I don't have to update them manually (there are a lot of UN agencies sharing content now). Thanks John Cummings (talk) 12:20, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Then I'm afraid Thilio was correct and the answer is no. Commons categories are accessible only on Commons; the PAGESINCATEGORY magic word doesn't work here, not because it's disabled, but because the category doesn't exist here. A query on Quarry, besides being external, wouldn't be live - it updates only when the author of the query requests an update. If it's truly important that this number is displayed on a local page here, your best bet is to have a bot copy it over. —Cryptic 19:39, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

...for which you can ask at WP:BOTREQ. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:44, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Photo replacement

I would like the photo on my page replaeced can someone help me?

John Swab. 2600:8804:57E1:4000:82F:7270:9D02:D9F6 (talk) 14:22, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

If you are John Swab, then you should not be editing that article directly. However, I'm not surprised you didn't like the photo. The simplest solution is to upload a selfie you do like to Commons and ask via the Talk Page of the article that it be incorporated instead. More at WP:A photo of you and WP:ASFAQ. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:38, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, John. If you need assistance getting your photo changed out, feel free to contact me — either on my User Talk page here or by email at MutantPop@aol.com. We can work it through. Best regards, —Tim Davenport, Corvallis, Oregon ///// Carrite (talk) 03:41, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

I would like to add the following to the Roe article:

Roe

In Korean, the roe found inside the belly of a fish is called "goni" (鯤鮞). Whatback11 (talk) 09:47, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

References

That seems like a reasonable addition to Roe#Korea, so I suggest you be bold and add it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:44, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Untitled

I need to know why the page was taken down 102.89.68.93 (talk) 11:20, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Which page? This is the only edit by your IP address and we take down thousands of pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:35, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

"[no] idea what the hell is going on"

Why iam i blocked i have lost my text and my picture s they say my is full and they want 10.00 a month i have ni idea what the hell is going on and they say put in a pin number 72.72.202.2 (talk) 21:55, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

I very much doubt that this (which I've titled) is a question about English-language Wikipedia; but if it is, please explain more coherently. (Who are "they"? Your what "is full"? Etc.) If it isn't, we can't help you. -- Hoary (talk) 22:13, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Maybe you clicked a donation banner. Donations are unrelated to editing and blocking. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:39, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Censorship

Are editors allowed to delete sourced text just because they don't happen to like it? @User:BhagyaMani did so here. That just curdles my cheese. 65.88.88.56 (talk) 19:33, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

No, but they may do so if they think it is not a good contribution to the article—a subtle but important difference. See WP:BRD, with emphasis on the "D", and, if matters do not go well after that, WP:DR.

As for claims of "censorship", all editors are required to assume good faith. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:49, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

@Andy Mabbett: OK. Respectfully, do you support this revert? Do you think it shows due diligence? If not, maybe drop a note to @User:BhagyaMani so we can avoid DR and not have to go through all this again. Thanks, Yours. 65.88.88.56 (talk) 20:23, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

I have no view. Follow the processes I linked above. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:37, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

IP editor: Instead of edit warring, you need to discuss this on the article's talk page. See WP:BRD, as Andy said above.   Maproom (talk) 21:30, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Template

I think there is a template that produces a label at the top of an article to say it contains sufficient references but they do not include specific page numbers to allow verification. Can someone point me at it? Also, more generally, is there somewhere I can find all templates, and avoid having to ask again in future? Thanks. Masato.harada (talk) 12:31, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Masato.harada go to {{refimprove section}} or {{page needed}} for cases where sources are present but lack page numbers for verification, see WP:CITEFOOT... For a full list of templates, you can browse Category:Wikipedia templates or use WP:TEMPLATES as a starting point. 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 12:43, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Masato.harada: You may find Wikipedia:Template index/Cleanup useful if you're particularly interested in maintenance templates for articles. Deor (talk) 13:38, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

You may also find the WP:Twinkle gadget useful; if helps you to find and apply such templates, quickly an easily. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:47, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Thilio:@Deor:Thanks to you both for those pointers. FYI, the template I was looking for is {{Page numbers needed}}. Masato.harada (talk) 13:46, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Reading list on mobile vs desktop

Hi, on my app version of Wikipedia, I have the option to save articles and add them to reading lists. Is there any way to do that and view the lists on desktop? This is a very useful functionality and I don't think the watchlist really does the same thing. Qqars (talk) 14:49, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

@Qqars: This is unfortunately not possible. mw:Wikimedia Apps/Synced Reading Lists#Web browser extension mentions browser extensions (maybe not supported) to add pages to the app reading list from a browser, but not view the list in a browser. Your browser probably has a bookmark/favorites feature which can bookmark pages in named groups where you could make a "Wikipedia" group, but it's unrelated to the app. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:03, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Stub

Mark BioSpring as a stub. And also connect it with de:BioSpring Gesellschaft für Biotechnologie. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 17:38, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Why can't you do those things? Do you need advice on how to do so? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:04, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

yes ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 19:15, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat That article has been nominated for deletion, so I wouldn't waste time with it. If you wanted to do the language linking, then do it in BioSpring - Wikidata. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:22, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Can I use {{unblock}} directly to apply for (renew) IPBE permissions?

I am a user from mainland China and cannot edit the English Wikipedia without a proxy server. My WP:IPBE license has expired. checkuser-en-wp@wikipedia.org has not responded to my permission request email for over a week.

For some reason, the global proxy ban did not take effect on my proxy today. Can I use {{unblock}} directly to apply for (renew) WP:IPBE permissions? Ember Edison 12:23, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@Edisonabcd: It seems no-one here knows the answer to your question.

If the matter is still an issue, I suggest you ask for assistance at WP:AN. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:41, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Interpretation of LISTPEOPLE

Would I be right in thinking that 99% of the names at List_of_New_York_City_Ballet_dancers#Corps_de_ballet can be deleted per WP:LISTPEOPLE? Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:37, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes; doubly so as it's uncited. Just keep those with links. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:53, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Draft to article

If an draft becomes an article, will all draftspace edits be converted into mainspace edits? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 14:56, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat Yes....when a draft is moved into mainspace all of the draft’s edit history comes with it. Every edit you or anyone else made in Draft space will still be visible in the article’s View history tab.

The only change is the page’s namespace: the title will no longer begin with “Draft:”, but the underlying history remains intact for attribution and transparency. This is part of Wikipedia’s licensing requirements under CC BY-SA so nothing is lost or “converted”...., it’s simply the same revision history now attached to a mainspace page. 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 15:13, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

No, I mean will the draftspace edits become mainspace edits after moved to mainspace? Not how it is shown in the history. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 15:15, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm guessing you mean from the point of view of your edit count? I don't know, but I'm guessing that they will remain draftspace edits. ColinFine (talk) 15:22, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@ColinFine,.. "Yeah, I Think it makes sense.... 🐍 Thilio🤖 15:28, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Maybe, I hope not. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 15:43, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Cite book template

Evidently I made an error (year of publication=2003?) in stating the year when using the Cite book template and can't figure out how to fix it. Help would be appreciated, along with an explanation. -- Deborahjay (talk) 18:55, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Deborahjay ...In the {{Cite book}} template correct (update) the |year= parameter to the correct year (example |year=2005).And |date=2025-08-11 or correct one, make sure it matches the actual publication year in the source. AD for ES, add '“Corrected publication year in citation to match source.”'🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 19:19, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, still don't understand. |year=2003 is the edition from which I cited. |date=2025-08-11 is today when I added the citation, which I selected from the calendar provided by the template. The year format appears broken in the reference (27 at present). -- Deborahjay (talk) 19:59, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Deborahjay. I think you want access-date=2025-08-11. The date parameter is for specifying the date of publication as opposed to just the year, and cannot cooccur with 2026 ColinFine (talk) 20:17, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Deborahjay The problem is that the date parameter `|date=2025-08-11` is only valid if you’re citing something available online with a url Remove the date parameter and it will be fine. 🐍 Thilio🤖 20:17, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Thilio: That is not true: the date parameter can be used for anything with a publication date, whether online or offline. Also, you are using the {{tq}} template; what are you quoting from? jlwoodwa (talk) 21:18, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jlwoodwa... Thanks so much.... You are right that the |date= parameter can be used for any source with a full publication date including offline works as long as it matches the actual publication date of that edition. In this case because the book was published in 2003 and not on 2025-08-11 the |date= should match the 2003 publication date and there’s no need for an |access-date= unless citing an online version. My earlier note about |date= only being for online sources was incorrect. Good faith edit 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 21:34, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Reviewing articles

I have made an article but it has been reviewed and nominated for deletion by afd, and when this happens, it doesn't get shown online. But on the discussion, all people were saying "keep" so it probably won't get deleted. When the discussion is closed and the result was "keep", will the article be shown online? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 20:57, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat ... If the AfD discussion is closed as “keep,” the article will remain in Wikipedia’s mainspace and continue to be publicly viewable. AfD does not hide an article from readers during the discussion it stays online unless it is speedily deleted for another reason. The only thing that changes after a “keep” closure is that the deletion tag is removed.🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 21:04, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Thilio No, I mean on the internet. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 21:05, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

The {{afd}} template automatically de-indexes the page from search engines. If the article is kept, the template will be removed and the article will again be indexed by search engines. jlwoodwa (talk) 21:12, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok, thanks ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 13:43, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

on the internet like Google and other search engines may temporarily not index them or may take time to update their results. If the AfD is closed as '“keep,”'like I said "the deletion tag will be removed" and over time the article should appear in search results again. Search engine indexing is outside Wikipedia’s control, so it can take days or weeks for Google to re crawl the page.... cheers. 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 21:12, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Thilio Sorry, I read it incorrectly because you wrote it mostly about afd's closing. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 21:49, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat No problem, Happy to help... "Good faith edit" 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 21:56, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

I think you have changed it when I told you I was asking about something else though... ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 15:20, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Been trying to publish the biography of someone

The following discussion 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.

---

I have been trying to publish the biography of an artist and its constantly being rejected. I have provided more than enough references but its not working. Can someone help me with the editing and publishing of the article? Nobiluxe (talk) 23:08, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

It has now been deleted. A sample: "Michael Ayekoo Smith's multifaceted career and his dedication to both the gospel and secular music, along with his contributions to advertising and film, have left an indelible mark on Ghana's cultural landscape. His legacy continues to inspire upcoming artists and creatives in the industry." (With no reference.) Had I encountered that rather earlier, I'd have deleted the draft myself. Nobiluxe, articles are written not to impress but to inform, based on what's written in reliable sources. -- Hoary (talk) 23:36, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Please help restore this article before i can publish it again. I will send to you for verification before we can publish again. The article is not illegal. Nobiluxe (talk) 23:50, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Please i really want this article published. Nobiluxe (talk) 23:53, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Please see your user talk page for an important inquiry requiring a response. 331dot (talk) 00:11, 11 August 2025 (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.

Request to Move Article to Draft Namespace

Hi! I submitted my article User:Ewechtal/sandbox for review, but I’d like to move it to Draft:Ethan Wechtaluk to follow best practice. Could someone with the proper permissions move it for me? Thanks! ewechtaluk (talk) 18:59, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

ewechtaluk done. TSventon (talk) 19:07, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! ewechtaluk (talk) 19:08, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Ewechtal, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm afraid that I'm predicting that your draft will very quickly be declined, as it has no independent sources.

Writing about yourself on Wikipedia is very strongly discouraged, because it is so difficult that very few people have ever done it successfully. See autobiography./

The problem is that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost exclusively interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

This means that the very first step in writing an article is to find several sources which are not only reliable, but are completely indpendent of the subject (see WP:42). If you can find several such sources, the next step is to effectively forget everything you know about the subject (difficult when the subject is yourself!) and write a neutral summary of what those sources say. Do you see why this is discouraged? ColinFine (talk) 19:30, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback and I understand, I've gone through and added as many independent sources as I can. I've tried to write as neutral a summary as possible, almost everything is verifiable across the internet. ewechtaluk (talk) 20:29, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

The issue is that you do not meet the definition of a notable politician as you have not yet won election to public office. 331dot (talk) 21:50, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

@Ewechtal- a few bits of advice:

1. see WP:ABOUTME for why its not always a good idea to have a wikipedia article about yourself, and generally best if you let other people do it.
2. from a first read, while the facts look verifiable, there is nothing in there, so far, that ensures that you meet |notability guidelines for politicians or the more broad WP:GNG policy.

TiggerJay (talk) 22:10, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

I'll also point out that the details of your grandfathers don't belong in the article, unless possibly they were notable (in Wikipedia's sense) themselves. The article should be a summary of what independent sources have published about you specifically, and not much else. ColinFine (talk) 12:56, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Why does my page isnt showing on Google?

Hi, i created this page on Ilan Manor and even to this day I cannot see it on a simple google search, it's as if it's not included or wasn't scan. Can someone help? Jewels (talk) 09:34, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

We have no control over Google's algorithms, but typically Google indexes an article once it has been marked as reviewed by a New Pages Patroller or after a period of time(90 days I think but I'm unsure).

Do you have a particular need for it to appear in Google quickly? I see that you took a picture of Mr. Manor; do you have a connection to him? 331dot (talk) 09:45, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jewels: It was reviewed 27 July but hasn't been edited since then. The review allows search engine indexing. Google may detect the new status sooner if the article is edited after the review. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:09, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

List of Bomb Live Units

User:Significa liberdade moved List of Bomb Live Units to Draft:List of Bomb Live Units

the article is a list of articles, for example Lists of weapons has no sources.

User:Significa liberdade wrote: "Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while."

So I think Draft:List of Bomb Live Units should be moved back to List of Bomb Live Units

Piñanana (talk) 00:44, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing your question here! I'm happy to let someone else respond, but I'd like to provide quick clarification. Standalone lists, such as what you have provided at Draft:List of Bomb Live Units, must meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for lists. Oftentimes, this means that the items in the list have been discussed as a category in reliable, independent sources.

While Lists of weapons is named as a "list," it falls under a separate category on Wikipedia because it is a list of lists. These serve a different function on Wikipedia than other standalone lists (see the "Lists of Lists" essay).

I hope this makes sense! I'm happy to answer any further questions, as well as to let someone else add to conversation. :) Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:53, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

The draft doesn't explain what a bomb live unit is. I've learned by clicking on some of the links that it's a bomb. But I don't know what makes them "live" or "units". Maproom (talk) 06:50, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Army Nomenclature System :

a bomb live unit is :

"Standard nomenclature in accordance with MIL-STD 875 for bombs"

is a bomb so named and is manufactured containing explosives and does not require explosives to be added

Piñanana (talk) 09:55, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Somehow that made it even less clear. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 19:36, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

According to BLU-82, the designation "BLU" stands for Bomb Live Unit, as opposed to "BDU" (Bomb Dummy Units) used for practice, which makes some kind of sense. The "unit" element may be part of a US military naming scheme. TSventon (talk) 19:47, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

So from what I can tell, it's reference numbers for what you'd expect to see in say, a List of bombs. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 11:06, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Edits reverted with reasoning "consensus is needed"... again

I had a issue on Joey (Concrete Blonde song)'s article in the past where my sourced genres were reverted by @FlightTime. You can read that over on Wikipedia:Help desk/Archive 69#Edits reverted with the reasoning "consensus is needed". This is the same situation as that, but now for Every Rose Has Its Thorn. I add sourced genres, removed one that doesn't pass WP:EXPLICITGENRE, and it gets reverted for having no consensus, but again, no reason is brought up for why they disagree with it. I was able to restore my edits on Joey when all was said and done (FlightTime even thanked me for my edit). @Pigsonthewing stated on my previous post that WP:DNRNC, while only an essay "pretty much aligns with expected custom and practice here."

Also, yes this is my second post here today. This is not how I want to spend my time on Wikipedia either, and I'll try to keep a lower profile on less controversial articles to avoid disputes going forward CleoCat16 (talk) 22:48, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

All of this needs to be discussed on the article in question, not here. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:03, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I'd be more than happy too, but you'd have to contribute since you're the only one opposing my edits, and for an invalid reason. If you give a valid reason, I'm more than happy to talk it over. Also, your comment "NO, the help desk has no idea how musical articles work" is uncalled for. People here just try to help. CleoCat16 (talk) 23:07, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

How do you know if I'm the only one ? Hence, (for the third time) the need for discussion, jez. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:12, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

You don't have to discuss every edit per WP:DNRNC. You've still given no valid reason why my edits need to be discussed first. I recommmend we wait to hear from a third party instead of running in circles arguing. CleoCat16 (talk) 23:16, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I didn't say Every edit, just ones concerning genres. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:39, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm done. Good luck on your tenure here. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:37, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

@FlightTime do you not think it is a bit unfair to say things need to be discussed first, but then when CleoCat16 tries to discuss it, you end up saying you do not want to do so (both here and your talk page)? -- NotCharizard ^🗨 06:12, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

@FlightTime: There is no requirement for every edit concerning genres to be discussed before being made.

The comment on your talk page, "the help desk has no idea how musical articles work", is false. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:18, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Well, it's been that way since I've been here, (some 17 years) from most musical article page watchers, ex, @Binksternet, Rodericksilly, Ritchie333, and Bowling is life: and others, however it's just not worth the energy anymore, I am removing those type of articles from my watch, good luck with musical articles in the furture. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 13:10, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Does this template exist?

Is there a template substitute for the combination of <code>...</code> and <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags? If not, why not? Those tags are very cumbersome to use. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 06:20, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

How about {{code}} and {{nowiki}}? Mathglot (talk) 06:38, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

With {{nowiki}} nested within {{code}}? Can't make that work as desired. If I could, that would better than the tags, but I'd prefer a single template. How hard would it be for a template to emit both tags? Is the problem that the system resolves the template parameter value before the template sees it? ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 06:51, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Mandruss there’s no single template that replaces <code> and <nowiki> together. They each do different jobs .... <code> is for marking up code and <nowiki> stops wikitext from being parsed. If you need both effects you’ll have to use both tags.🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 06:39, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. That answers my question 1 and doesn't address #2. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 06:59, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Mandruss because both of them are meant to solve two different problems in MediaWiki’s parsing system. 🐍 Thilio🤖 07:09, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

{{nowiki2|tag=code|whatever}} comes close. It doesn't play nicely with braces, but then, {{nowiki}} doesn't either. —Cryptic 07:30, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Mandruss: Do you have a box above the edit summary where you can select "Wiki markup" in a drowdown menu? Then you can mark the text, click nowiki, mark it again and click code. You can also place something like this in your common JavaScript:

// Add custom CharInsert entries per [[Help:CharInsert#Customization]]
window.charinsertCustom = {
 "Wiki markup": ' Custom: {\{Draft.categories|1=\n+}}\n <syntaxhighlight.lang=\"\">\n+\n</syntaxhighlight>\n <code>+</code> {\{ping|+}}',
};

I use the above to add a combined code-nowiki button and a few other things to the menu. I once suggested at MediaWiki talk:Edittools/Archive 8#code and nowiki in one step to include the button by default but it got no replies. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:51, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

I don't have said dropdown menu, but I have buttons at the top for "computer code" and "no wiki formatting". I adapted your technique, but using the code button first, then the nowiki button (the reverse of what you said). That's acceptable to me, if not optimal. At least no typing is required. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 09:01, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

{{Syntaxhighlight}} can be used to that effect.

Another alternative is to use a macro tool so that you can type a short code; for example I use /nw to type <code><nowiki></nowiki></code>, or /si to type ~~~~, using AutoHotKey. I can "type" entire blank infoboxes using just there keystrokes. I describe how this works in a blog post Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:49, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

I have now written more about this at User:Pigsonthewing/AutoHotKey. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:48, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Asia-Pacific Broadcasting Union

President of the Asia Pacific Broadcasting Union.

President Mehmet Zahid Sobacı

Content: Prof. Mehmet Zahid Sobacı reappointed as Director General.

Website: https://www.abu.org.my/2025/07/16/prof-mehmet-zahid-sobaci-reappointed-as-director-general-of-t 2402:800:6171:68B5:BCC6:6D53:8EEE:BB4F (talk) 08:31, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

You (it seems) have posted similar material before. Nothing will happen as a result of doing so. Do you have a question about Wikipedia? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:50, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Different opinions

Sorry for asking a question that would be hard to understand, but why does different people get different opinions? I made a draft called Arganak and decided to submit it for review, but User:AlphaBetaGamma declined it. I asked why on the help desk at Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archive_69#Confusion but User:Ianmacm says it is too short, so it got declined. Later, I decided to participate in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suzan Mutesi saying it was too short, but later User:Liz sent me a message on my talk page saying it doesn't matter one single bit that articles are short, many important articles can be two or three lines long. So I decided to make Arganak again but without submitting it for review, instead just move it to mainspace. Why? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 15:04, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat

Since you moved Arganak into mainspace without first addressing the sourcing and notability issues flagged in your draft, it’s very likely it will be nominated for deletion under WP:AFD. Mainspace articles must meet Wikipedia’s WP:V (verifiability) and WP:GNG (general notability guideline) right away. Please review the proper process at WP:DRAFT and WP:AFCP so you understand why articles go through review before being moved.

🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 15:22, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

There are some sourcing problems, apart from it's length.

• The first source, worldfood.guide, has one sentence about Arganak which appears to credit it as coming from Wikipedia.
• This is a section of a book about nouns in Armenian and the pages don't talk about the soup; the content is simply talking about the characteristics of the nominal suffix -ak.
• This is another book about word construction and it lists arganak as a formerly used word for a soup "seasoned with herbs or made with herbs" and on another page (229), defines arganak as simply "bouillon."

CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 16:23, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok, got it. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 13:48, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Since asked, I still think that there are problems with WP:STUB here.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 15:32, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat

Liz gave you some advice here saying (correctly) that contributions to WP:AFD should be based on Wikipedia policies, and that article length is not a reason for deletion.

A reviewer advised you that Draft:Arganak was too short as part of WP:AFC, which is a different process than AFD. You asked for deletion of Draft:Arganak on 12 July 2025 and created Arganak on 10 August 2025 14 July 2025. That is unhelpful as it hides the earlier history of the article and the AFC feedback. Other editors' comments suggest that the reviewer was right to ask you to improve the draft. TSventon (talk) 17:03, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

At the time, I did not know how to move a page. That's why I deleted it and mad it again. Just because you thought I did it unhelpfully, doesn't mean it is true. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 21:15, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Change password

How do I change my password 2603:6081:5700:23A:840D:E28A:60EB:FDD8 (talk) 18:51, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Please see Help:Reset password. ColinFine (talk) 19:00, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

I also recommend you write a strong password. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 21:19, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

How long

How long does it take for AFD noms to be closed? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 22:18, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Usually one week. If a nomination receives little or no comment, however, it may be relisted (normally no more than twice) until a consensus can be determined. If a nomination receives little or no comment even after being relisted, it may be closed as a "soft delete"—the article may be deleted but restored upon request, like an expired proposed deletion. Deor (talk) 22:43, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 22:46, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Facing a Issues in forget password

Facing a Issues with forgetting the password or reset password

our username is : Hritacharya

Email Id: (Redacted) 103.36.121.27 (talk) 05:37, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Can you explain more clearly what the "issues" are? If the problem is that you have forgotten the password, see the advice given here. I have removed your email address from your message to protect your privacy. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:40, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

And if "our username" means that several people are sharing it, then stop doing that and read WP:NOSHARE. Bazza 7 (talk) 11:05, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Submit Completed Page in Sandbox

Hi , I am finished editing my Wiki Page in sandbox, but do not see the 'Submit' Link.  Please help! MinDolmaTenpa1 (talk) 21:33, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @MinDolmaTenpa1. I have added a header which allows you to submit your sandbox for review; but another editor has tagged it for speedy deletion as promotional.

A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what several people wholly unconnected with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, and very little else.

Two things which an article should not be are 1) what you know (or I know, or any random person on the internet knows) about the subject; and 2) what the subject or people close to the subject wish the world to know about the subject.

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. ColinFine (talk) 21:49, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@MinDolmaTenpa1 There should be a submit link now, but I nominated the page for deletion because it is too promotional and would require a complete rewrite to fix. All Wikipedia articles must follow the neutral point of view policy, which means they must not attempt to promote the subject. The article is full of phrases like She is the embodiment of wisdom and compassion, a benevolent guide and presence. Within Her practices she represents this potentiality latent within every sentient being. which is of little encyclopedic value and violates our neutral point of view policy. If you need any help with rewriting the article in a non-promotional manner, feel free to ask and I'll help. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 21:50, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

OK I understand, I will rewrite it. Thank you for the information! MinDolmaTenpa1 (talk) 22:36, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

I will make the changes. Do I contact you directly once changed? How do I do that? MinDolmaTenpa1 (talk) 22:38, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your offer to help, I can use your help. what should I do? MinDolmaTenpa1 (talk) 22:42, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

What is your relationship with the person you wrote about? You took this picture of her. 331dot (talk) 22:58, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Prema Dasara is my teacher. I have been studying with her for about 5 years. MinDolmaTenpa1 (talk) 23:06, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello again, @MinDolmaTenpa1. I think that, as ChildrenWillListen said, you need to start again. What you wrote is of very little value for trying again.

First find sources which meet all the criteria in WP:42.

Then put aside everything that you know about the subject, and write a neutral summary of what those sources say.

But, to reiterate what I said, above, absolutely your best way to write this article is to forget about it for a few weeks or months while you work diligently on learning about Wikipedia by making more and more significant edits to existing articles. That way you will be contributing much more to Wikipedia, and when you do decide you are ready to go back to your chosen subject, you will have a much more satisfying experience, produce a higher quality article, and not use up so much reviewers' time. ColinFine (talk) 23:07, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice, I definitely will do that.. but I need all of the links and references etc. and do not have a copy of the page and will have lost all of the time I put into it. MinDolmaTenpa1 (talk) 23:11, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Here's an archived version of the article. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 23:17, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, the sandbox has been deleted. Can I get it back? I am happy to make all of the changes needed, but would like to use the original a template. There is a lot of information on the page I would like to use MinDolmaTenpa1 (talk) 23:01, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

User:331dot is the admin who deleted it; you can ask them to restore it (though my saying this should suffice as a request). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:46, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

I have emailed the text to you; the draft was wholly promotional and shouldn't even be used as a starting point. 331dot (talk) 10:51, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Requesting a submission, how to procede?

Hi,

I’ve written an article in my sandbox about the Spanish company Cosentino Group. The draft follows an encyclopedic tone and is supported by numerous references from reliable sources, which I understand are acceptable on Wikipedia.

I’ve also made sure to follow the style guidelines carefully, avoiding promotional language, editorializing, and vague time references, for example.

I initially submitted the article for review to assess its readiness for publication. A moderator suggested I revise the sources, which I did. However, while I was waiting for the updated review, another moderator declined the article again. Unfortunately, the first is “semi-retired” as it says on his/her talk page.

I’m asking here (apologies if this isn’t the right place): would someone be willing to review my sandbox to see if the article is ready for publication? Would it be better to request a new review, or should I ask this in another place?

Thank you very much! Rahoman (talk) 13:07, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

@Rahoman I've added the standard template to your sandbox to allow you to submit the draft for review. Note that if you are in any way connected with the company, you should read and act on our conflict of interest guidance. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:30, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

After doing this I note that your previous Draft:Cosentino Group has already been reviewed multiple times and rejected. As it says on your Talk Page, this means that you may not continue but must work on it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:33, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: Are you sure about that? When did AfC reviewers gain the authority to unilaterally prohibit someone from working on creating an article?

That's not what is said at WP:AFCREVIEW. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:51, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing Yes, there seems to be a contradiction between that guidance and the "stop" template which says Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:40, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

This is exactly the same as the draft that was rejected on 23 July. That rejection happened after you re-submitted the article for re3view, having made no changes to it since it's earlier decline - the only changes were the removal of inappropriately-sourced material by another editor.

What makes you think the article might be deemed "ready for publication", having been reviewed twice already, when no improvements have been made? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:05, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi, first of all, thank you so much @Michael D. Turnbull and @Pigsonthewing for your participation and responses. Sorry I haven’t had time to enter in earlier.

Let me break it down. What you said about repeatedly resubmitting the article for review without making changes is what I was trying to explain earlier. Let me go into a bit more detail:

I submitted it for review and was told to make changes. So I got to work on that, read through the style guide carefully to avoid using the wrong kind of terms—basically to make it more encyclopedic. I also tried to swap out the sources I had found (I couldn’t find many in English—maybe I should’ve added some in Spanish, not sure). Then I requested a new review, and it got rejected immediately.

So I reached out to the moderator and said, “Hey, look, I made the changes. Please take another look—it might seem the same, but it’s not. I followed the style guide, added sources, etc.” And the moderator replied: “Okay, but you didn’t request the review again. Do that and I’ll check it.”

So I thought, alright, I’ll request the review again. Then another moderator comes in and rejects it saying there are no changes XD

So I go again to the first moderator and say, “Hey, it got rejected before you could take a look,” and now on the page there’s a big blue banner that says PARTIALLY RETIRED, XD!!

That’s what explains the whole thing about requesting a review without making changes.

That’s when I started looking for a solution and ended up here asking you all for advice.

Anyway, thank you so much for the help. If I can, I’ll take another look and improve it again in my sandbox and resubmit. But about the question “what makes me think the article is ready?”—well, the same thing I told the moderator who’s now “semi-retired.” This is a very well-known company in Spain and in many other parts of the world (not sure if you’ve got anything of theirs in your kitchen, I do for example). So I thought it might be interesting for English Wikipedia. Like I said, I’ve followed all the guidelines on terminology, tone, focusing on facts, no promotional language, no opinions, etc. The references I found are from solid, well-known sources and in English. If I can add some in Spanish, I’m sure it’ll enrich the page even more.

Whatever you say—if I need to work on it more, no problem. If someone does a proper review and says it’s good to publish, great.

Again, thank you so much for your help because honestly, I had no idea who else to turn to. Thank you very much! Rahoman (talk) 12:21, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

It's had proper reviews; it's not ready to publish. There are entire paragraphs without citations. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:46, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

I have a conflict of interest since I have owned a business that has been active in the countertop industry since 1993 and I am very familiar with Cosentino and its products. I believe that Cosentino is clearly a notable company and encourage uninvolved editors to give Rahoman more specific advice to help them improve the draft, so that this article can be accepted. I recommend removing the registered trademark emblems since they are contrary the the Manual of Style and can be perceived as promotionalistic. The coverage of silicosis is weak and comes across as whitewashing. This industrial disease is a major crisis for the quartz countertop fabrication industry. The content about a future US plant is overly speculative. Report only on what has happened not on guesses about the future. Every single substantive assertion needs a reference to a reliable source. References to Spanish language sources are perfectly acceptable for a company that operates worldwide and is headquartered in Spain. Cullen328 (talk) 15:35, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, thanks again for your input @Cullen328, @Pigsonthewing and @Michael D. Turnbull, it really helped me review the article and (I think) get it ready for publication.

• I’ve added new sources to content that didn’t have any, both in the places where a user kindly pointed out they were needed and also in other parts I thought made sense. The sources are in Spanish, and I’ve indicated that clearly.
• One user mentioned that including brand logos wasn’t appropriate. I’ve removed those in the latest versions and yes, it might actually be better without them.
• About the plant that’s going to be built in the US, I’ve kept that info in, because what the reference says is that the land was purchased for that purpose. It’s all in the source, nothing speculative. It’s not possible to give more specific dates yet, because that depends on permits and how the construction progresses.
• And finally, about silicosis. What I wrote is that the company has had several silicosis-related lawsuits and was cleared some time ago. I didn’t go into detail about what silicosis is, because I don’t think this is the place for that, silicosis already has its own Wikipedia page where it’s all explained really clearly and in depth.

If I may ask for your help again, I’ve got a couple of questions:

Do you think it’s better to leave out those last two things from the article?

And if it's still viable, how do I request a review now? I can't do it from the Draft anymore.

Just in case, I’ve made the changes in both the Draft and in my Sandbox.

Thanks again, really, without your help I’d be completely stuck.

Cheers! Rahoman (talk) 11:20, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Help with moving an article

Hi, I wanted to move an article into the mainspace but I forgot to omit the 'User:' part of the article and now the Wiki considers it a Wikipedia user: User:Rustam Mirza

Can anyone please help me? Amir Ghandi (talk) 11:19, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Wait, solved it myself. Cheers. Amir Ghandi (talk) 11:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

We have already an article at Rustam Mirza...about a different person. Lectonar (talk) 11:22, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

But yes, you did :). Lectonar (talk) 11:22, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Leeds Girls' High School

Leeds Girls' High School

Please fix the latest citation (reference 2) on this page.115.70.23.77 (talk) 05:31, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

 Done. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 05:34, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Where to suggest additions for “On this day”

Hi, I’d appreciate some guidance on where to make suggestions for additions to the “On this day” section, especially notable births or deaths. I’ve previously posted proposals on the talk pages of individual Selected anniversaries (e.g. Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/August 14), but they don’t seem to be getting noticed or reviewed. Thank you ItsShandog (talk) 13:40, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@ItsShandog A full description of the process is given at WP:OTD. That explains where to post ideas. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:47, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi ItsShandog. First of all, you're welcome to edit the Selected anniversaries pages directly. You seem to know your way around the inclusion criteria! If you're not feeling ready to do that, you may want to check the revision history of the page to see if the current year's "refresh", selecting the items that will run on the front page this year, has happened yet or not. For August 14, Ikhouvanjou14, had already done the refresh, so it's likely no one will make major changes to the page until next calendar year. In cases like this, you might want to ping the person that did the refresh. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:48, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I have tried to make an edit but it says admins only. ItsShandog (talk) 14:10, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I was unclear. I saw you made your suggestion back on August 11. The pages are only protected for three days, centering on the day they run on the main page, so you could have edited directly back then. There are more specifics like this at the link Mike posted. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:12, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh okay thank you for your reply, that makes sense. I suppose since its the day before the admins probably wouldnt add a new suggestion now? ItsShandog (talk) 14:18, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm ok with making the change, but I'd love to hear from Ikhouvanjou14 first. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:25, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

No problem, I have posted on their talk page. ItsShandog (talk) 14:35, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Princess Anne was born on 15 August, for which I have already added her name for this year. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 15:45, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake. Thank you ItsShandog (talk) 16:06, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

How can I edit without using my sandbox

Chemistry Sindi Diamond (talk) 08:16, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

You only have 7 edits, you need to have 10, and your account is not yet four full days old. Until then, you may make a formal edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page, Talk:Chemistry. You may also use the edit request wizard. 331dot (talk) 08:28, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks you have really helped me a lot Sindi Diamond (talk) 08:30, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Lady Margaret School

Lady Margaret School

Reference number 8 is in the red - I cannot work this out, please fix. I now only have my phone so find it impossible to try to fix up. Thank you 115.70.23.77 (talk) 02:03, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

 Done, there was an extra zero in access date. Cmr08 (talk) 04:32, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Vandalism Warnings

Say I saw an act of vandalism and wanted to warn the user on their talk page, I would want to warn them with the correct template (uw-vandal2 if there was already a uw-vandal1 and so on), right? But couldn't the offender simply remove the warnings from their talk page so people always give them only a uw-vandal1 (because there is no evidence of them having one before), stopping action from being taken? Thanks, CoroneC0rnix-64 (talk) 13:43, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi CoroneC0rnix-64. I usually check the user talk page history to see if there have been prior warnings. Note that you don't always need to start with vandal1, depending on the severity of the vandalism and how obviously the edit was made in bad faith. See WP:WARNVAND for more info. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:52, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, Firefangledfeathers. Checking the edit history hadn't occurred to me. Thanks again, CoroneC0rnix-64 (talk) 13:59, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Help with template editing

Hello, I'm not super savvy with template editing when it comes to the software logic behind it. Can someone help provide an override to the template {{Daytona 24 Races}}? There were a few iterations at shorter distances before the current 24-hour format (e.g. 1962: 3-hr, 1964: 200 km) established in 1966 and another 6-hr exception in 1972. A simple option to add |name= [Text string] I think a test I put in the sandbox works at {{Template sandbox}} (Special:PermaLink/1305593893 in case it gets cleared) according to a test at Special:PermaLink/1305594058, but could someone please give a sanity check that my edit of the title line ( | title = {{If empty |{{{name|}}} |{{{Current}}} [[24 Hours of Daytona]] }} doesn't have other weird circumstances, etc.? Thank you! -2pou (talk) 00:51, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Seems fine. Other than that explicitly passing name as an empty parameter ({{Daytona 24 Races|name=}}) will use the fallback rather than an empty title, which may or may not be what you want. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:41, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look, @Pppery! That is great; most uses will simply omit the name parameter and use the fallback. There are only five exceptions to the fallback over sixty-some-odd instances. -2pou (talk) 16:55, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

References

Subject: Urgent BLP Removal Request – Libelous/Defamatory Content

I am the subject of the following Wikipedia article: [wikipedia.com/keiththomasproducer].

The article contains a statement alleging [references articles that are unfounded and not proven to be valid], which is false, defamatory, and misleading.

The content refers to a lawsuit that was dismissed with prejudice in my favor . The current text omits this outcome, leaving a false and damaging impression. Every time I receive press, someone anonymously posts these links from years ago, which we consider defamation. The same thing happened two years ago when I was on the Red Carpet at the Whitney Houston Premiere. I was able to get it removed via my attorney at the time.

The cited sources are either outdated (published prior to the dismissal) or unreliable per Wikipedia’s sourcing guidelines (WP:RS).

This violates Wikipedia’s Biographies of Living Persons policy (WP:BLP), which states: “Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion.”

I request that this material be removed immediately from both the live article and the page history.

I am happy to provide official court documentation if required.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this urgent matter. I also cannot login to my account. It's been years since I've loggin and do not have the user and password. I just tried to unsuccessfully change the password.

50.206.180.67 (talk) 21:50, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Keith Thomas (record producer) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:55, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Chatbot-written requests will not be entertained. Especially when they misidentify the URL and misrepresent the content of the article (there's no reference to any lawsuit in the article at present). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 21:57, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

nevermind, found it. Said content the user's complaining about seems to be reliably sourced, but where it is is certainly not due. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 22:00, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Maybe we need a don't overlook LLM written complaints about BLP issues essay. There are sources about the lawsuit, but nothing about the resolution and the lead currently displays the allegations prominently. That's an issue. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:03, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm looking more into the history to see if this is a repeated thing; if so I may file a request at WP:ARE under GS (as the MeToo movement was invoked) for a long-term semi. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 22:09, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Well, looks like the info was removed from the body but not from the lede. We should probably remove it from the lede too. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 22:00, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I removed it for now. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 22:01, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Looking into this (string: ["keith thomas" "jordan pruitt"]) all the responsive sources I'm seeing are solely about Pruitt filing the lawsuit; nothing about it being settled. I'm not seeing any sources about the lawsuit beyond that. I edit-conflicted with removing it as undue. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 22:07, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

However, see this message left by the subject a few years ago. @50.506.180.67: I would strongly recommend retracting that statement. Also see Cobalt Blue 2525, Jeanie044 and possibly other sockpuppets. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 22:05, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

The OP is clearly correct on the basic point of his complaint. THere was no conviction, and there's no reason to mention the lawsuit in the BLP. OK, he's used a LLM to write his request here, and he's come close to threatening legal action in a previous posting. Those are both reasonable things for someone unfamiliar with WP policy to do. He should be (and has been) informed about WP policy regarding those things, but they should not be held against him when we apply the BLP policy. Maproom (talk) 08:40, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Page move

Hello. This page was moved without a discussion in violation of WP:RM. I tried to revert it to original title but ended up having an error "The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid.". So I moved to a title with a space after the hyphen Armenia–Azerbaijan border crisis (2021– present). Can somebody restore the original title without the space, which was Armenia–Azerbaijan border crisis (2021–present)? Thanks. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 08:24, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

KhndzorUtogh, if you can't do an uncontroversial move, you can request it at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests. TSventon (talk) 08:33, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

This has been done.

However, WP:RM says: "Any autoconfirmed user can move a page using the "Move" option in the editing toolbar; see how to move a page for more information. If you have no reason to expect a dispute concerning a move, be bold and move the page." There was no "violation". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

It is probably safer "to expect a dispute concerning a move" for most Armenia–Azerbaijan pages. TSventon (talk) 20:17, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Adding material to my own Wikipedia page

Chuck Berry (politician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

What is the process for adding material to my own Wikipedia page: Charles E 'Chuck' Berry (Colorado)? I believe it was established by the Colorado Legislative Council. I want to add several of my photos, and I want to add my parents' names and perhaps more. I am age 75, and My grandchildren are really encouraging me to improve/enhance my Wikipedia page. PS. I just donated $50 to Wikipedia and I have also donated previously. Thank you in advance for your help! Charles E Berry (talk) 21:34, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@Charles E Berry - Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You have several questions in your post, and I will try to answer them.

1. What is the process for adding material to my own Wikipedia page? - Editing a page about yourself is highly discouraged under our conflict of interest policy. That said, if there are errors in the information on the page, or if you are aware of published material that can be used to garner information to improve the article, you should feel free to make a edit request on the article's talk page. Here is a simplified guide to how to do that.
2. I believe it was established by the Colorado Legislative Council - Probably not. If the Colorado Legislative Council created the page that would also be a conflict of interest. It looks like the first draft of the page was created by Connormah in June of 2021. People here write about whatever interests them. Connormah writes about many politicians from all over the world (as well as other topics).
3. I want to add several of my photos, - Photos of yourself would be welcome, however in most cases the rights to the photo must be released by the photographer under our Copyright license. So if you are donating a photo make sure it is one you have the rights to (so a selfie), or have the photographer upload it and release the rights. That said, if you have a suitable photo, there is a link to the file upload wizard in the left sidebar.
4. and I want to add my parents' names and perhaps more. - See point 1 where I talk about published sources and making edit requests.
5. I just donated $50 to Wikipedia and I have also donated previously. - While we appreciate you donating to help keep servers online, it's important to realize that the donations have no impact on the content of the site. The articles are all written by volunteers, who do not see any of the money that is donated. The money goes to keep the site operational, fund legal services, fund educational programs, etc.

Let us know if you have additional questions! ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 22:02, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh, and regarding providing a photo of yourself, This page can give you more information ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 22:07, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately, most of the time for a politician, the most common secondary published source for the names of parents is an obituary.Naraht (talk) 16:48, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello

Are there any Wikipedia pages where you can interview about yourself (your user) or write about yourself and share it? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 18:00, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

No, @Rafaelthegreat. Neither of those comes close to what Wikipedia is.

Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia: it consists of articles which are (or should be) almost entirely based on what independent reliable sources have published about a subject. Wikipedia has basically no interest in what the subject says or wants to say, or what their associates say. So we aren't interested in interviews, or in you writing about yourself. Only if there have been several published sources about you which meet all the criteria in WP:42 could there be an article about you; and you are very strongly discouraged from trying to write it youself: see WP:AUTO. ColinFine (talk) 19:18, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@ColinFine I didn't mean in mainspace. I was thinking of like in Wikipedia's namespace, or a userspace. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 19:20, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Rafaelthegreat That's basically what your user page is for: to tell editors about you as a Wikipedia editor. qcne (talk) 19:34, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Qcne Sure, but is there any like wikipedia's space list of userpages to find? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 19:36, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia user space maybe? qcne (talk) 19:38, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Qcne sure! ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 19:41, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, @Rafaelthegreat. Your user page is for information about you as a Wikipedia editor. A limited amount of more general biographical information is allowed, but WP:NOTWEBHOST.

I guess that an interview about your Wikipedia activity would be acceptable. ColinFine (talk) 20:24, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Ok :) ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 14:02, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

reformat

Is there a bot that can convert refs to {{sfn}} format at Campbell's Soup Cans?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:46, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@TonyTheTiger....Well,... there isn’t a bot that will automatically convert all the references to {{sfn}} format. Per WP:CITEVAR changes to citation style should have consensus. There are semi automated tools such as WP:AWB or off wiki scripts that can assist with the conversion but each edit would still need to be reviewed manually. 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 14:56, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Overcite

Can someone help with WP:OVERCITE for ?

I.e. there is too much work, and maybe there is a script to convert all references to {{sfn}}. tgeorgescu (talk) 02:09, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Solved it quite easily with {{refn}}. tgeorgescu (talk) 05:58, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

wikipedia list of BC Cities by population is missing some major cities

Missing City of Surrey, Missing Langley Township, missing City of Langley. There are other cities missing two but those really stood out. 01lifepassenger (talk) 02:41, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

So what do you want to do with it? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 02:57, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

That's not a helpful reply. Please bear in mind the purpose of The help Desk, and show kindness to newcomers. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:21, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Please raise the matter on the list's talk page, Talk:List of cities in British Columbia. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:22, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@01lifepassenger: What are you talking about? Both Surrey and Langley are listed. As for Langley Township, it's not a city, I guess. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:46, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Images won't work

I hate when Wikipedia shows up literally every broken images... FIX IT TroyDoc (talk) 14:53, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

This might be because it is deleted. Also say which one is "Broken" ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 14:57, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@TroyDoc please write in a kinder way too. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 14:59, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh wait you said all images. ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 20:35, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

If literally every image is broken, then the issue is likely at your end, not Wikipedia's. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:00, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@TroyDoc: And is it really every image? If you see a Wikimedia logo and MediaWiki logo at the bottom right then it affects the likely cause but it's probably still at your end. I haven't noticed any broken images or seen other recent reports. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:38, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Nowiki being added around my formatting

Sorry for coming here but I can't figure it out. Whenever I try to add formatting via wikitext, nowiki (between <>) is being added. Here is an example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:PositivelyUncertain&diff=prev&oldid=1301063393

I primarily edit on mobile in visual editor. This only started happening a couple of weeks ago; before, I had no problems with using wikitext so I'm not sure what changed. Additionally, at the same time this started I could no longer see previews of my text. Anybody know what's going on or have advice? Also, let me know if this is the wrong place to ask. Thanks! PositivelyUncertain (talk) 00:01, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

You may be better served by asking at WP:VPT. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:01, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

PositivelyUncertain, in all likelihood, this is a known bug involving Visual Editor and the nowiki tag. Can you be more specific about exactly what you did/how it happened? Issues regarding Visual Editor and the nowiki tag are tracked in Wikipedia's bug tracking system called Phabricator. If you are comfortable with technical reports, you are welcome to browse these reports, and if what you saw is not one of those, I can help you create a new bug report (if this isn't something simple that just needs explanation). If you can describe step by step exactly what is happening, that would help. Lmk, Mathglot (talk) 08:29, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

UX/design professional

 Courtesy link: Draft:Thomas Girard (design scholar)

Guidance on creating a biography for a notable UX/design professional

Hello, I am seeking advice on how to create a Wikipedia biography that meets the notability and sourcing requirements for biographies of living persons. The subject is a UX and design professional with:

• Multiple published books with ISBNs, covered in independent reviews.
• Significant media coverage, including a profile in Business Insider and several in The BC Review.
• A TEDx talk featured on TED.com.
• Academic presentations at the Sorbonne, documented in public recordings.
• Awards, fellowships, and other recognitions covered in reliable sources.

I have previously submitted a draft that was declined and would like guidance on how best to structure, source, and format the article so it meets community standards. I want to ensure that the biography is written in a neutral tone and supported entirely by independent, verifiable references.

Could any experienced editor please provide direction, or suggest the best venue within Wikipedia to request assistance from editors familiar with biographies of living persons?

Thank you very much for your time and expertise. Onthomassubmission (talk) 03:04, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

It sounds like your subject may meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for biographies, the key is to use independent reliable sources that give in depth coverage ... write in a neutral tone and cite everything. Organizing the draft into sections like early life, career .. works and awards can help. You could also share the draft with WikiProject Biography for more specific feedback.

See also: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons and Wikipedia:Your first article for guidance on creating articles successfully.🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 04:37, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Onthomassubmission, I infer from your talk page that your subject is yourself. Please read and digest Wikipedia:Autobiography. -- Hoary (talk) 06:25, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

The subject is not notable. All the refs are primary and no book reviews. The rest is social media. Far from being notable. scope_creep^Talk 07:42, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I understand the importance of independent, in-depth sources for establishing notability. For reference, here are some independent sources with significant coverage:

• Vancouver Guardian
• BC BookLook
• The BC Review profile and essays:
  • Bringhurst essay
  • Typography Essay 4
  • Typography Essay 3

I will continue working on improving sourcing and structuring the draft per Wikipedia guidelines. Onthomassubmission (talk) 15:54, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

The first source is an interview, so not independent.

The second is a routine announcement of the launch of your self-published memoir, so not significant and likely not independent.

At least one of the essays (I stopped looking after that) was authored by you, so is not independent.

All this is covered by the advice you have already been given. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:19, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification, Andy. I appreciate the guidance and will continue seeking and adding independent secondary sources to improve the article’s coverage and meet Wikipedia’s standards.

— Onthomassubmission Onthomassubmission (talk) 17:54, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Onthomassubmission. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost exclusively interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

If there are few or no sources which meet those criteria, an article is not possible.

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. ColinFine (talk) 08:30, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your thoughtful guidance. I appreciate the advice and am committed to learning more about Wikipedia’s policies and editing process. I will continue working on improving the draft with reliable, independent sources and hope to contribute constructively in the future.

— Onthomassubmission Onthomassubmission (talk) 16:24, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello,

Thank you for the previous feedback regarding sourcing and notability. I understand the concerns raised about some sources being primary or insufficiently independent.

To supplement the existing coverage, I’d like to highlight these additional independent recognitions from reputable institutions, which may help strengthen the article’s sourcing:

• Simon Fraser University Emerging Scholar Award announcement (2021):

https://www.sfu.ca/gls/news-events/2021/thomas-girard-wins-emerging-scholar-award.html

• SFU announcement of international conference presentation (2021):

https://www.sfu.ca/gls/news-events/2021/girard-to-present-at-international-conf.html

• Similar coverage from Emily Carr University is available via the Wayback Machine and may provide further independent verification:

https://web.archive.org/web/20190406111333/https://www.ecuad.ca/news/2018/thomas-girard-awarded-2018-emerging-scholars-award

While I realize these may not alone establish full notability, combined with other independent coverage, they help demonstrate external recognition.

I continue to seek out and gather additional independent sources that provide in-depth coverage. I appreciate the community’s guidance and welcome any further suggestions.

— Onthomassubmission Onthomassubmission (talk) 18:37, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

It’s good to see you adding more sources to your draft take your time and don’t rush. Always focus on using high quality and verified sources from independent publications to establish notability. Cheers.🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 18:52, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello again,

To add to the independent sources I’m gathering, I’d like to highlight a notable podcast episode that features an in-depth interview with Thomas Girard:

UI Narrative Podcast: “Typography in Digital Interfaces” — Hosted by Tolu Garcia, a senior product designer, this podcast spotlights contributions from diverse designers and researchers. The episode includes a detailed discussion of Girard’s work on typography, accessibility, and UX design. It is widely available on major platforms like Apple Podcasts and SoundCloud.

This podcast is independently produced and hosted by a recognized professional, providing valuable third-party editorial content about Girard’s expertise. It complements other independent media coverage and academic recognitions and helps demonstrate a broader impact in the design community.

Thank you for your continued guidance and feedback. Onthomassubmission (talk) 05:26, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Please stop writing about yourself in the third person.

A podcast featuring you is not an independent source.

There is no point listing sources here and nothing will be done as a result of doing so. If you think they are relevant, then cite them in your draft and resubmit it when you think you have sufficient suitable sources (as defined in the linked pages provided to you) to demonstrate notability. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:16, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Onthomassubmission, I see that you have created two drafts on the same subject: Draft:Thomas Girard (design scholar) and Draft:Thomas Girard. This is likely to cause confusion. It can confuse anyone who is trying to help you, but doesn't realise there's a rival version of the draft; it can confuse a revieer, who rejects a submission because another version exists; and it can confuse yourself. I stronglyrecommens that you delete, or at least blank, one of them. Maproom (talk) 19:05, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

@Maproom: You posted the same link twice; I changed one. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:12, 14 August 2025 (UTC)