Wikipedia:Help desk/Archive 77

Archive 70

←

Archive 75

Archive 76

Archive 77

Archive 78

Archive 79

Archive 80

Welcome template

 Courtesy link: User:Versions111/sandbox

Hello Wikipedians, I recently made a new welcome template for new users. Please review and improve if possible. TIA, Versions111 (talk • contribs) 12:51, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

What does this offer, above what is offered by existing welcome templates? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:28, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

It is intended as a more simpler version of the welcome templates. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 15:35, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

It is far more complicated than some of the existing templates; {{Welcome}} being one example. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:53, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

I unfortunately agree with Pigs below, your template is way too overwhelming for new users with far too many links. I don't think any new user would read it - and if they were faced with it it might even scare them off! qcne (talk) 16:00, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Also agreeing with pigs o-o it's kinda overwhelming... ///// JUMPINGISNOTACRIME 18:56, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Understood, thanks for the feedback. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 23:31, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Can someone revert the version of a non-free image I uploaded?

I uploaded File:Fionna and Cake S2 Title logo.png with rational size. But an user "Astubudustu" uploaded another version and got reverted, the bot resized it to smaller but a different size, making my version and that "bigger" one both become invisible. Is this image possible to revert again to the original one I uploaded? Also, I hate such thing happen, a file revised by someone but against the rule - why wouldn't such non-free images be unable to revised by anyone else, other than the uploader or bot, just like how Wikimedia Commons works? - George6VI (talk) 00:29, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

The bot resized the image to be smaller because non-free images need to be below a certain resolution in order for their use to be allowed. Athanelar (talk) 00:51, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

I know, but the question is, can my version (595 × 167) be restored again, and hide the other two versions (3,837 × 1,073 and 597 × 167)? The original resolution I uploaded already followed the rule here. Now that the older versions are hidden, I can't restore it. - George6VI (talk) 01:10, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

How to turn off Wikipedia Books popup?

(I am accessing Wikipedia on a mobile device)
I was looking through the list of special pages when I stumbled across Special:Book. According to WP:Books, this is a (now-deprecated) tool for making books from Wikipedia pages (?). I clicked around a little bit—I think I pressed "create chapter" and then didn't enter any title—before I went back to my usual Wikipedia business. But, whenever I clicked on any link, a few seconds before it would load it would show a link inviting me to "Add the linked wiki page to your book". I imagine that if I were on a desktop environment, it would appear when I hover on links. I researched this a bit and found the aforementioned WP:Books. My first thought was that if I made a "book" and then didn't make a new one, this would go away, so I created User:Crow Basket/Books/? by adding a random page and then saving that as a book. It still will not go away, and I can find no information on how to turn off or delete a book. It's not exactly life-ruining, but it is very mildly annoying to have a popup every time I click a link, which I of course do often. Crow Basket (talk) 06:12, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

As is so often the case, I cleared my cookies and the case resolved itself. Crow Basket (talk) 06:54, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Page update

Wikipedia should update Warren Fairley's page. Mr. Fairley has been indicted on numerous federal charges for numerous reasons, totaling upwards of 20 million dollars in an embezzlement scheme.

https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/two-former-presidents-boilermakers-international-union-among-seven-indicted-20m-embezzlement ~2025-43943-21 (talk) 20:59, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

@~2025-43943-21: Not until he's been convicted or non-gov't sources have reported on it. We don't cite government documents as those are primary sources for all intents and purposes. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 21:03, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

I see that the Warren Fairley article gives no date of birth. I don't know if it would be acceptable to supply one, citing that document. Maproom (talk) 07:29, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

importing a draft

Is is possible/advisable to import a draft from Microsoft word into either of the wiki editing tools? Concordhistorian (talk) 13:15, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

There's no reason why you couldn't. Athanelar (talk) 18:19, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

@Concordhistorian Yes and no. The answer is complicated. You're welcome to write your draft content in an external text editor like Microsoft Word, but if you copy and paste that into the Wikipedia Visual Editor none of your formatting or references will properly copy over - you might end up with strange broken formatting, missing tags, errors on your references etc. This is because the Wikipedia text editor is based off Wikitext which isn't compatible with Microsoft Word. The easiest solution might be to write up your plain text prose in Word, copy it over to Wikipedia, then do all the referencing and formatting in the Visual Editor. qcne (talk) 18:28, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

super helpful--will do just that Concordhistorian (talk) 18:33, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Alternatively (which is what I thought you meant) you could make sure you type up your draft in wikitext in Word in the first place -- it's not all that hard to learn, and probably a good idea to do so anyway, the source editor is a lot faster for most things. Athanelar (talk) 18:38, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

In Word, choosing to save it as .txt instead of as a normal file can simplify this. TooManyFingers (talk) 19:50, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

"The easiest solution might be to write up your plain text prose in Word". I don't know; I haven't tried (indeed, it's years since I made even token use of Word for any purpose). But is it really easier than using a text editor? -- Hoary (talk) 08:27, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

There's even guidance and recommendations for Wikipedia/wikitext support in specific text editors at Help:Text editor support § How to set up specific editors for Wikipedia editing. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 02:28, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

It depends on who you are. If your definition of "easy" is "easy", then no. But if your definition of "easy" is "familiar", then it's possible. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 07:36, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Laguna del Maule (volcano) citations

Can someone go into Laguna del Maule (volcano) and clean the citations up? I am not sure why they aren't working. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:56, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Several of the long-form references have |ref=none. When you do that, short-form references have nothing to link to. You might start there.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:04, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, that did it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:14, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

How do i create an article

idk how to create one Jermilatio's Gameshow (talk) 04:40, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Given your user name (which almost certainly violates the Wikipedia:Username policy) I'd say you don't. Wikipedia isn't a platform for promoting YouTube channels. Not even ones that actually attract more than a couple of dozen views. AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:49, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Jermilatio's Gameshow

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.

But if your purpose is promotion - i.e., telling the world about something - please don't. You'd be wasting your own time and that of any volunteers who interact with you. ColinFine (talk) 11:43, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Could someone help me to revert my move please.?

Chiquita (film)

Hi,

I mistakenly draftified this article by mistake and I realised it’s over 90 days. Apologies! Could someone help ? AlphaCore talk 11:32, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

I have moved the page. I've not done any cleanup, but there's quite a bit that should be handled. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:55, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Republika Srpska presidential elections

Early presidential elections were held in Republika Srpska on 23 November 2025. However, due to irregularities and accusations of voter fraud, repeated elections are due to take place at 136 polling stations on 8 February 2026. Is there now a need for a new article titled 2026 Republika Srpska presidential election? Keep in mind that the February 2026 elections will be partial ones; only a part of the entity has the right to vote again, not everyone. It's also important to know that the scheduled 2026 Republika Srpska general election, to elect the president and the National Assembly, will take place on 4 October as part of the Bosnian general election (don't confuse the February presidential and October general election). Is it enough to only update the 2025 Republika Srpska presidential election article in February 2026, and not make a new one? Bakir123 (talk) 14:06, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

The first situation may be similar to 2020–21 United States Senate election in Georgia; the follow-on election might not need a separate article, but the article may need a new title("2025-26 Republica Srpska presidential election") 331dot (talk) 14:36, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Using a picture that I took but no longer have access to the original file

i took pictures of landmarks of the town I'm working on and uploaded them on Google Maps. I think the town's page can benefit from having pictures of its landmarks. But I no longer have access to the original files nor the Google account I used to upload,I can only get the pictures from Google Maps. They're technically mine, so can I just grab the pictures from Google and use them for the town's wiki page? Jazgothere (talk) 09:55, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

You could do that, if you released the images to Google with a copyright that allows for their use on Wikipedia; I'd suggest asking about this at Commons. 331dot (talk) 10:27, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

I am the copyright holder, but I'm taking a copy of my own image that I've provided to someone else is a legal issue that I have no idea if it's kosher or not. Commons will know. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:52, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Is it possible for Google to require people to hand over their copyright to Google, as a condition of uploading? I think they might do that. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Google's t&C only require that uploaders license their content to Google. The uploader retains the IP rights. This isn't much different to a CC license of the sort that Wikipedia uses. Since we will assume good faith, @Jazgothere can download the pictures back from Google and re-upload them to Commons, declaring them as "own work" and giving the original date taken, which may well still be in the metadata of the files if these are .jpg with .exif information. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:13, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

That's good to know. Thanks. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 19:37, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

@Jazgothere: There is no copyright concern as that belongs to you, per Mike Turnbull. However, it is going to look very suspicious to take a photo from Google Maps and upload it as your own work. Wikipedia:Images from social media, or elsewhere talks about placing a license acknowledgment with the photo on the external source (twitter, facebook etc) so we can be sure the photo is yours. I understand you can't do that. I tried downloading a photo from Google Maps, it is quite an ordeal and there is minimal metadata from what I can see. If you are going to take a screenshot using your browser it is going to look even worse. If you do upload these files, be sure to explain their origin and this story on the file description page, I just know that Commons can be very... particular about the source of photos. c:Commons:Assume good faith says "material may be deleted if the documentation is incorrect or inadequate." Perhaps ask at c:Commons:Help desk. Alternatively, you could try Wikipedia:Requested pictures to ask for new photos - there may be some interest in capturing great photos of landmarks in a town, and the Google Maps photos are low resolution anyhow. Commander Keane (talk) 14:51, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Referencing errors on David Sheiner

Special:Diff/1330458511

Reference help requested

Exactly what is the error?

Thanks, PB57 (talk) 15:05, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

@PumpkinButter: your edit moved a reference title from one reference to another, leaving the first reference without a title and causing an error message. I reverted your edit and redid it without the changes to references. TSventon (talk) 15:37, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

No, that was not me. I added the film "Skyway to Death" and did not refer to anything else on the page.

PB57 (talk) 15:48, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

@PumpkinButter: I looked at your edit and it did move text from one reference to another. I thought it was an error, and you obviously did not notice at the time. TSventon (talk) 15:59, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Frankly, I don't even know how to do that.

To me, it looks like 2 totally different edits somehow were consolidated into one... I regret to admit I have seen "The Odd Couple" at least a dozen times and did not recognize that David Sheiner was in it. But that was not my edit.

My edit record ("contributions") shows that my edit to Sheiner's page was only 75 bites, and that edit is much longer.

In any event, sorry to be a bother (as we say in the Southern US)--and a very happy New Year to you! PB57 (talk) 16:07, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

so, TSventon left a link to the edit in question above. If you click on the link, the change is moving some reference information (specifically the last name and title parameters) from one reference to the other. The reason why this was no good, was simply because one reference now didn't have these parameters and the next one had two. It is an easy enough fix and looks like it's been handled. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:20, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Pywikibot help

I am in the process of writing a PyWikiBot, and I am curious how the scripts are run. Do you install pywikibot and run it on the command line in Python? If so, how do you log into your account? And lastly, is it possible to use PyWikiBot in read-only mode without a bot flag? (My script is here). Somepinkdude (talk) 17:33, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Try WP:VPT, any techno-wizards who can answer your question will be there. Athanelar (talk) 17:46, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

unwarranted reference notification

I created a page for primate anthropologist Shirley C. Strum that was flagged for over-reliance on primary sources. I revisited the article and exchanged a number of primary references for secondary references. The notification is still there. I'd like to know if further elimination of primary references will fix the problem, or if can it be fixed internally by Wikipedia. Thank you! Cassandra Phillips aka cassaph Cassaph (talk) 20:00, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

The flag was placed manually by Snowman304 on 30 August 20205, and will not disappear automatically, only when an editor chooses to remove it.

If you are entirely confident that you have fully addressed the problem, you could be 'Bold' and remove it yourself – the worse that can happen is that someone else checks, disagrees, and 'Reverts' your removal, and you can then civilly 'Discuss' the issue with them (on the article's Talk page, or yours, or theirs) to achieve a consensus; this is perfectly okay, and part of the standard editing procedure detailed at Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle.

You may however prefer to seek, and abide by, the opinion of the editor who tagged the article in the first place.

Incidentally, you say you 'created' the article, but that appears to have been done by JohnMcCu on 24 March 2025; your current account became active on 10 April 2025 and did not edit the article until 29 August 2025, and JohnMcCu was still actively editing this and other articles up to 14 September 2025. Are you operating two separate accounts? If so, why? and if not, what is the explanation for this apparent anomaly? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2025-31359-08 (talk) 21:47, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the info! The question of authorship has to do w a person, John Mc, hired by Strum to start writing her article. His contribution was more or less a stub, which I fleshed out. You say he's edited it since? That's news to me. We're not affiliated.

I'll try to remove the notification myself and see what happens.

Glad to have your guidance.

Cassandra Cassaph (talk) 23:33, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

@Cassaph The article about Shirley Strum is also on your user page, which is not allowed. ~2025-31242-74 (talk) 02:52, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Oh jeez. My user page? Where's that? Sorry, clearly I'm not a regular here. Cassaph (talk) 04:15, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Your user page is User:Cassaph. See WP:USERPAGEDRAFT. The person icon at the top right has a "Sandbox" link you can use for drafts or tests. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:57, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

So I need to manually delete the text on my user page? And it won't affect the Strum article on Wikipedia, yes? Cassaph (talk) 06:04, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

@Cassaph Yes, that's right, it won't affect the article. ~2025-31242-74 (talk) 06:20, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi!

I have no idea what you mean when you say that I was "hired by Strum." I most certainly was not. I am interested in primatology and noticed there was no article about Dr Strum, so I created one. I tried to use the best sources I could find, but tbh they were rather scarce. JohnMcCu (talk) 09:26, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry, John. I stand corrected. I understood Shirley got a quote from an editor to write her article and assumed it was you. The appearance of your article while I was working on mine came as a surprise. Thanks for clarifying. Cassaph (talk) 18:42, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Searching for a substring portion of a url in a citation

If I search for "collegepollarchive.com" I get no results.

However, pages like 1994 NCAA Division I-A football rankings contain citations like the below that do contain the term:

|cite web|url=http://collegepollarchive.com/football/ap/seasons.cfm?appollid=738#.WLJH43-502w|title=1994 AP Week 1 Poll|work=AP Poll Archive|access-date=2017-02-25

How can I search for "collegepollarchive.com" and see all of the results like the citation above? PK-WIKI (talk) 18:37, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

This search?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 18:45, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

insource:"collegepollarchive.com"

Great. Thank you. PK-WIKI (talk) 18:49, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

@PK-WIKI: You may also be interested in Special:LinkSearch/collegepollarchive.com. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:24, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

William Somerset Maugham

William Somerset Maugham died on 16 December 1965 at his villa, La Mauresque, in Saint‑Jean‑Cap‑Ferrat on the French Riviera ( ;  ; ). The Wikipedia article should be updated to reflect the correct place of death. ~2025-44140-08 (talk) 16:56, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

@~2025-44140-08, hello! Be bold and do it yourself or post it on the article's talk page. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 17:07, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Well done for including the citations! If you are going to "be bold" then you'll need to format the citations as proper references. If you are worried about formatting the references, then instead leave a note on the article's "talk" page, just as you have done here; hopefully an interested editor will pick it up in the days ahead. Feline Hymnic (talk) 17:41, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

This is not helpful. The poster has failed to read the article carefully, particularly footnote 13. Tim riley talk 19:06, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

@~2025-44140-08 - hoping you see this. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:20, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Editing new user talk pages

Hello, what is the general guideline for creating a user talk page when it doesn't yet exist for the purpose of warning the user with uw-vandalism? I've seen multiple cases where a new section is created titled with the current month and year, like "December 2025", with the warning message posted under that. Is that done automatically by some sort of tool or is it just a general convention? Can I name the section something else, ie. "Possible vandalism warning"? fx (talk) 15:29, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Flexagoon. This is done via the Wikipedia:Twinkle tool, which automatically creates those Talk Page headers. You are also absolutely free to create Talk Pages yourself manually with an appropriate section heading. qcne (talk) 15:31, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

I use Twinkle to revert edits, but when the user talk page doesn't exist, it just opens a blank page editing screen with no header filled in. Could it be because I'm using my phone, maybe it only works on the desktop version? fx (talk) 15:33, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

I think when reverting with Twinkle it opens up the user page to allow you to add a Twinkle warning. The way to add warnings via Twinkle is to click the TW dropdown on a User page > Warn > Choose an appropriate warning > It will then create the user page and add the heading and warning. Perhaps you haven't used that feature? qcne (talk) 15:39, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

That's right, thank you! I didn't know about that feature, that is indeed pretty useful! fx (talk) 23:32, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Override file exists on Commons error

To minimize disruption of the pending deletion of a file on commons that is used in several wiki articles (File:Himmler_besichtigt_die_Gefangenenlager_in_Russland._Heinrich_Himmler_inspects_a_prisoner_of_war_camp_in_Russia,_circa..._-_NARA_-_540164.jpg) for reasons unrelated to enwiki policies and guidelines, I would like to upload a local copy under the same title, but the upload wizard won't let me override the error. (t · c) buIdhe 14:38, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Are you certain that "photo under copyright, author died in 2004" is unrelated to enwiki policies? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:57, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Yes, because its undisputedly PD in the US as indicated by the national archives source* and that's all enwp cares about, whereas Commons (despite being hosted in the US and having to follow US copyright law) often prefers to ignore it in favor of the copyright in the source country—in this case Germany. There are many files on enwp that were deleted from or not uploaded to Commons for this exact reason.

Pppery thanks for answering, you're an admin so would you be willing to upload the file? (t · c) buIdhe 01:55, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Done. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:22, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Only admins have the technical ability to upload local files that shadow Commons ones. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:58, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Delete account?

i just want to request deleting my account thanks Theyhatesme (talk) 21:29, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi! It's not possible to delete your account, you can, however, just abandon it. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:31, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Your account cannot be deleted, however you can request to be 'vanished' which essentially 'deactivates' your account and scrubs it of any identifying information.

See WP:VANISH for what this entails, and Special:GlobalVanishRequest if you want to request a vanish. Athanelar (talk) 21:55, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

The edit to which I'm now responding, Theyhatesme, is the only edit that you have ever made. Please don't "request a vanish". Instead, follow Lee Vilenski's excellent advice. -- Hoary (talk) 11:35, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Are you trying to achieve deletion of an otherwise unused account named "Theyhatesme" to make some sort of poetical gesture? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2025-31359-08 (talk) 19:59, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

William Hooper (American politician who dies in 1790)

The current biography of Hooper incorrectly has him buried in the Hillsborough Presbyterian church cemetery. This is incorrect, as the Presbyterian Church has no cemetery. Accurately, he is buried in the Old Town Cemetery, which is adjacent to the Presbyterian Church.

(Even most Hillsborough natives make this mistake.) ~2026-18294 (talk) 20:54, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~2026-18294.

If you have an improvement to offer to an article, the best place to discuss it is on that article's talk page (Talk:William Hooper). Alternatively, if you have a reliable published source for the information you want to add, you may edit the article to correct it yourself. ColinFine (talk) 22:27, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

User added pirated stream

Hello, I've never had this happen to me, but I hope someone can help me with this. On Draft:Puttinilla_Mettinilla, in the references section, an editor added a link to a YouTube pirate copy of an Indian movie. What's the best thing to do here? Remove it? If you reply here, please ping me. Thanks, thetechie@enwiki:~$ she/they | talk | contributions 01:30, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

@TheTechie I removed it already, for the same reason you said. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 03:45, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

@TheTechie @TooManyFingers It probably also needs to be revdelled because it's copyright violation. Athanelar (talk) 11:58, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Sorry that I jumped in without thinking of that; it might have been easier without my "help". TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 19:56, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, I tried revdelling it but apparently it doesn't qualify. Oh well. thetechie@enwiki:~$ she/they | talk | contributions 22:55, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

@TheTechie Why doesn't it qualify? I hope I didn't mess something up just by removing that line from the draft. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 01:08, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Oh sorry, forget my question - a link isn't the actual content, so revdel doesn't make sense. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 01:12, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Coding that knows if the text is being used in a navigation template

In July 2023, BrownHairedGirl (since blocked) created a useful series of templates that create automatic navigation templates showing the TDs for each Dáil constituency (parliamentary representatives). The primary template is Template:Constituency Teachtaí Dála navbox, which extracts the text under the section TDs from each constituency article. There are related templates, including Template:Is this a Dáil constituency article, which relies on each constituency article to have the suffix (Dáil constituency). There were also changes to the code at Template:Irish TD table begin, as "Some of those {{Irish TD table begin}} series of templates need to behave differently when they are transcluded into a navbox".

Following a global view discussion and consensus late last year at WT:TITLE (permalink) that the disambiguation in the titles of constituency articles should be dropped unless needed, Spleodrach and I started moving pages such as Athlone–Longford (Dáil constituency) and Wicklow–Wexford (Dáil constituency) to more concise titles, Athlone–Longford and Wicklow–Wexford. However, this broke the requirements of consistency in the new templates and changes to older templates referred to above. I think this could be fixed if the change in formatting was toggled not based on whether or not (Dáil constituency) was in the article title, but whether or not the text is being used within a navigation template. So for clarity, we want the table under the section TDs at Carlow–Kilkenny (Dáil constituency) to link to each election and Dáil article and provide the references, but when this appears in a box at the end of the article for Catherine Callaghan (politician), only other TDs are linked. This may mean rewriting the earlier code for these. I'm ok reading code, but not that skilled in writing it. Would any of you have an insight? Iveagh Gardens (talk) 07:56, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

@Iveagh Gardens: A template only knows the parameters it got and the page name it's being rendered on. You either have to pass around a parameter indicating what to display, or get it from the page name. You could add a list of all Dáil constituency pages not ending in "(Dáil constituency)" to the switch in Template:Is this a Dáil constituency article. If all moves just remove "(Dáil constituency)" then you could also test whether you are on a page called X where "X (Dáil constituency)" is a redirect to X: {{#ifeq:{{#invoke:redirect|main|{{PAGENAME}} (Dáil constituency)}}|{{PAGENAME}}|yes}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:25, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Move+

Which tool can I use to change links from e.g. [[John II]] to [[John II of France|John II]], for disambiguation purposes? Surtsicna (talk) 11:36, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

@Surtsicna: See Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links#Tools and reports. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:33, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Subst in visual editor

How to subst in visual editor like the way we do with wiki code? ~2026-34151 (talk) 15:58, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-34151: See Help:VisualEditor#Substituting templates. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:03, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

PROD question

Quick question: I've nominated Server Sundaram (unreleased film) for deletion but I haven't notified the page creator as they were blocked for UPE (most of the main contributors are also blocked for UPE).

The PROD template invites them to participate and dispute the deletion if they wish, which doesn't seem appropriate - should I notify them anyway but perhaps tailor the notice? I checked the PROD instructions but I'm not sure what to do in this case. Any advice? Blue Sonnet (talk) 18:37, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

I'd personally not notify them at all. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:06, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

That's what I thought, it seems counterproductive & there's been a lot of socking recently - if I notify one of the farm, that could prompt more socks to boot (ha!).

Thanks! Blue Sonnet (talk) 20:47, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Is there a tag for non sequiturs?

As per subject. Is there an existing tag for non sequiturs? I couldn't see one but may be looking under the wrong name. As a general rule I'd rather fix an issue rather than tag it, but this has come about after reviewing candidate articles for ITN. I may not be expert in the subject matter or be able to determine the original authors intent but able to see that the effect does not follow from its notional cause. 3142 (talk) 18:14, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Like a non-inline one? There's the inline tag {{non sequitur}}. - Purplewowies (talk) 18:27, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

No, that'll be the one, cheers. 3142 (talk) 18:31, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

WP:Template index/Cleanup has tons of these. Very useful resource Athanelar (talk) 21:05, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

article on Uncle Tom's Cabin

I believe the article should include a "further reading" reference to "Uncle Tom: From Martyr to Traitor" by Adena Spingarn (2018, Stanford University Press), Foreword by Henry Louis Gates. As Gates writes in the foreword, the book draws on lots of new primary source research and is a very careful, nuanced and original analysis of modern distortions of the character Uncle Tom -- and of the faulty academic theories of why/how the character, who in Stowe's book is brave and highly moral, got turned into a byword for cowardice, selfishness and betrayal of Black people. The Article on "Uncle Tom" should also include Spingarn's book in "Further Reading." Thank you! Steve France ~2026-36107 (talk) 20:12, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-36107, hello! You can make an edit request on the article's talk page. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:27, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Steve. A quick Google search indicates that this book is well-researched, well-reviewed and influential in the field of study. Instead of just adding it to "Further reading", the conclusions of the book should be summarized in the body of the article, and a separate article about the book itself is probably warranted. Cullen328 (talk) 21:29, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

A review of the book by Douglas A. Jones is already included in the "Journals" subsection of the "Bibliography" section, and the book itself is used as a reference in the character article Uncle Tom. Cullen328 (talk) 21:38, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Interlanguage Link Help?

In 1947, the Allied Powers abolished the State of Prussia via Control Council Law No. 46 / Kontrollratsgesetz Nr. 46. English Wiki and many others have a page for Abolition of Prussia but not the law; German and Norse Wikis have a page for Kontrollratsgesetz Nr. 46, but not the abolition. French has a page for both. I'd like to link between the English and German pages, but because of the French, there are two different Wikidata identifiers, Q131905890 and Q131905890. Is there any way to resolve the issue? Thanks! ~2025-44204-89 (talk) 20:43, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

If the two articles are on different subjects, they shouldn't be linked. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:46, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

@~2025-44204-89: See WP:LOCALLINK. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:56, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

You can make such a link (to de:Kontrollratsgesetz Nr. 46 and/or no:Kontrollratsgesetz Nr. 46) using {{Interlanguage link}}, which exists explicitly for use in articles for such purposes. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:33, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

That template creates links in the article text; I think the TA is asking how to add things to the "in other languages" list, which would be {{interwiki extra}} instead. jlwoodwa (talk) 03:28, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2025-44204-89 in terms of getting wikidata items to link to same topic see d:Wikidata:Sitelinks to redirects ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:41, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Remedy for edit-count gaming?

In a case of blatant edit-count gaming (done by sending out a stream of innocuous but unconstructive messages), is there a simple relatively painless way for the person to lose credit for all the unconstructive edits, such that they don't gain whatever they were trying to gain by doing that? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:40, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Depends on what they do with it. If for example someone wants to make ten quick edits and wait four days because they want to make an otherwise unproblematic article, then it's not strictly against the rules. GMG^talk 18:44, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

This is 500 edits in 2 to 3 weeks, of which probably 5% were productive ones. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:49, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

And as far as I'm aware, the gaming in itself IS strictly against the rules, regardless of purpose or outcome; the page WP:GAMING presumably exists as a separate entity for a reason. If I'm misunderstanding the reason for having that page, then that's different. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 19:05, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Eh. Everything at GAMING is kindof predicated on the assumption that the behavior facilitates some kind of disruption. So you still have to make the case for what the disruption is. So, leaving a crazy amount of talk page messages could wind up just being a waste of community time depending on context. For example, lots of people send out mass messages for the holidays and the community seems generally fine with it within those limits. GMG^talk 19:45, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

OK, thanks, that makes sense. (Except, I guess, that GAMING is essentially toothless/meaningless/irrelevant in all cases, because disruption is already prohibited in other ways.) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 19:49, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

WP:GAME includes Example: An editor makes many unconstructive edits in a sandbox to become extended confirmed, and then makes controversial changes to extended confirmed protected articles. In that case I believe that extended confirmed permission could be revoked, so GAMING is not always irrelevant. TSventon (talk) 20:09, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

It's not entirely meaningless. It can be a good indicator that something is up and things need more closely examined.

So...compare it to editing across projects as a potential red flag. Most new accounts don't spring up knowing how to also edit Wikidata and Commons. It's not in-and-of-itself a bad thing, but it's fairly common if someone is operating a sock farm for promotion. GMG^talk 22:01, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

I think I know who you're talking about; the thing is that gaming requires intent. Sure, you can argue that someone gaining ECP without really being productive is contrary to the point of ECP, but unless they actively proceed to make bad edits to EC-restricted areas, it can't be argued that they 'gamed the system' since there's no intentionality. It could be grounds to get their EC revoked if they do start making bad edits in EC areas, but so far there's no signs of that. Athanelar (talk) 20:23, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

To answer your question directly, yes: an administrator can remove the extendedconfirmed permission, and the software won't automatically re-grant it once removed. I've made no investigation of whether that's merited in this case. —Cryptic 01:51, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Youtube views coming from wikipedia?

Hey, I saw some of my youtube traffic is coming from wikipedia (i have a new channel) and I was wondering how this is possible and how I can see where my video is linked? Its pretty darn cool! Thanks! My youtubechannel is : cheesetostiham ~2026-18106 (talk) 19:46, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

If your channel is being linked from Wikipedia, it almost certainly shouldn't be, and you don't say why you think the traffic is coming from here. I can't think of any reason why we'd ever link a random YouTube channel showing videos of a man riding a bike accompanied by a dog. It certainly wouldn't meet Wikipedia:Reliable sources criteria for anything. So good luck with your channel, but don't expect help from us. If I find any links, I will very likely delete them. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:54, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Youtube Analytics shows you where your viewers are coming from, that's likely where this user is getting that info. Athanelar (talk) 20:02, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-18106 It's possible someone wrote in a talkpage discussion "Hey look at this". I guess you could do searches like .

You can try asking over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject YouTube or perhaps Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:04, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Are you sure it's this (English language) Wikipedia and not one of the other 300 or so? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:28, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Like https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoofdpagina. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:35, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

If your analytics give the exact urls people are going to, or at least prefixes of them, you can find it very efficiently with Special:Linksearch. —Cryptic 01:54, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Why is the book guidebook to living on earth not in Wikipedia?

why is the #Guidebook to living in earth not on Wikipedia? ~2026-26788 (talk) 08:51, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Is it this book? A Wikipedia article about the book would require significant coverage in reliable secondary sources.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 09:04, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

See: WP:Criteria for inclusion (books) if you think it meets those criteria, you could try creating the article yourself with help from Help:Your first article Athanelar (talk) 13:32, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Self-published books such as this are very rarely notable and very rarely acceptable as reliable sources on Wikipedia. So, the question is "why should this particular self-published book be on Wikipedia?" and the answer needs to be policy-based and convincing. Cullen328 (talk) 02:36, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

George Mercer’s Photo of his portrait

How do I up load a copy of his portrait to his bio page on Wikipedia ~2026-43954 (talk) 07:00, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-43954 Which one? George Mercer (disambiguation). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:10, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

It's also worth bearing in mind that while the portrait may be out of copyright, the photograph may not be if it is modern and taken by somebody other than yourself.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:57, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

@Ianmacm There is Commons:2D copying though. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:30, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Gaza war no longer under the 'ongoing' part on the front page

Hi. I'm just wondering why it's disappeared from the front page. I swear I saw it there a few days ago. I'm aware the article is still up, and the war is still ongoing. Lafi90 (talk) 08:42, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

It was removed per Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates#(Removed) Remove Gaza war from ongoing. Greedycell (talk) 08:44, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Ah. Thank you. Lafi90 (talk) 10:49, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Guidance requested for verifying official documents via VRT (Meisam Amini)

Hello,

I am writing to request guidance on submitting official documents via the VRT (Volunteer Response Team) to verify my career for my Wikipedia article (Meisam Amini).

I hold original FILA/UWW rankings and coaching credentials. Since the article is currently a "Stub," it is essential to expand it to accurately reflect my 23 years of dedication to this sport.

For context, my Persian Wikipedia profile (fa:میثم امینی) lists my World, Asian, and International rankings. However, the lead section and coaching info there are outdated, and I have already requested updates for consistency.

If any editor is willing to help, I propose this lead: "Meisam Amini is an Iranian freestyle wrestling champion and an international medalist in the World and Asian Championships. Currently, he is a professional international coach, serving as the coach of Lyon and a technical instructor for the Ivory Coast Wrestling Federation."

Note: Reliable news links for these titles are available on the Article's Talk Page.

UWW Verification (Note: My name is spelled "Meysam" in the database, but as per my passport, the correct spelling is "Meisam Amini"): 1. Go to: https://uww.org/database 2. Select Year: 2003 | Event: Junior World Championships (LL) (Istanbul) | Category: 74kg 3. Click on "Meysam Amini" to view the profile.

Thank you for your assistance. ~2025-44145-58 (talk) 23:14, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

The VRT has nothing to do with what you're asking.

You need to follow the procedure outlined at WP:EDITREQ if you want to request a change to an article. Athanelar (talk) 00:54, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

There is already a request at Talk:Meisam Amini, which is the correct venue for this. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:56, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

@Mike Turnbull,

Happy New Year! I wish you all the best for 2026.

Thank you for your guidance. Following your advice, I have officially emailed my documents to the VRT team. I have been dedicated to the sport of wrestling since 1991, working tirelessly as both a competitor and a coach over the decades.

I have several other official documents and certificates that further verify my professional background and achievements. For your convenience, I have organized these along with the relevant news links in a shared folder for your direct review. I also want to highlight my collaboration with the United World Wrestling (UWW) during the Paris 2024 Olympic Games, which confirms my active status in the international wrestling community.

I kindly request the hardworking editors of Wikipedia to accurately reflect my career and records in my article based on these verified sources.

### Proposed Lead Update:

> "Meisam Amini is an Iranian freestyle wrestling champion and an international coach. He is a medalist in the World and Asian Championships (World Silver 2003, Asian Gold 2002, Asian Silver 2000). He currently serves as a professional coach in Lyon, France, a technical instructor for the Ivory Coast National Wrestling Federation, and collaborated with the United World Wrestling (UWW) during the Paris 2024 Olympic Games."

---

### Supporting Evidence & Citations:

1. International Medals & UWW Records:
   • Verification: My records are active in the UWW Database (Search: "Meysam Amini", 2003, Istanbul Junior (LL)).
   • Certificates: Official FILA/UWW certificates are available in my Google Drive folder.
2. Coaching Career in France (French Media):
   • Le Progrès: Full Career Profile
   • Lyon Mag: Interview on life and coaching in Lyon
   • Lyon Capitale: Report on professional wrestling activities
3. Official News Reports (National Media):
   • IRNA: Report confirms medals and coaching status. Note: The main photo shows me with UWW President Nenad Lalović at the Paris 2024 Olympics, wearing the official UWW uniform.
   • Borna News: Verification of international coaching and UWW collaboration
   • ISNA: Official Invitation from the Ivory Coast Federation
   • Tasnim News: Details on the coaching partnership and role
4. Visual Verification & Official Meetings:
   • Photo 1: Meisam Amini with UWW President Nenad Lalović (Paris 2024 Olympics) in official UWW uniform.
   • Photo 2: Strategic meeting on Wrestling Development in Ivory Coast: Meisam Amini with the President of the National Federation and the Director General of RTI.
   • Google Drive: All certificates and high-resolution photos are organized in my shared folder for your review.
   • Wikimedia Commons: These official photos are also uploaded to Commons.

Thank you for your time and for the hard work you do as editors.

Best regards,

~2026-55429 (talk) 15:38, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

"There is already a request at Talk:Meisam Amini, which is the correct venue for this. "

Please stop repeating the request, here or elsewhere. It won't be dealt with any quicker as a result. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:10, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

VRT will indeed accept "submitting official documents" from article subjects; details are at WP:VRT. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:51, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Account issues

I would like to know who I may reach out to in regards to an issue with logging into my account. I'm not getting the 2FA email even though my user and password are correct. ~2026-40921 (talk) 23:47, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-40921 this is a question better for Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) but one question is if you have an email address linked to your account. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:35, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

waiting ~2026-42839 (talk) 05:22, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

But, thank you for pointing me in the right direction! ~2026-40921 (talk) 17:05, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

There is one but I can't see what it is, and may not have that account any longer. ~2026-40921 (talk) 17:04, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Episode lists

Hallo. Why do episode lists or at least the overviews use colors? ~2025-40048-69 (talk) 18:21, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2025-40048-69: Each season usually has its own color, often a dominant color from the cover of a DVD release of the season. See e.g. List of Game of Thrones episodes#Series overview and the season articles like Game of Thrones season 5 which also uses the color in the infobox. I don't know how many readers benefit from this way to distinguish the seasons but it seems harmless. In List of Game of Thrones episodes#Ratings it makes it easier to separate the seasons. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:43, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Middle branch, Ohio

The map provided on this listing is completely wrong. Someone should correct it. It's by Canton. not Lake Erie. ~2026-60102 (talk) 23:53, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

There is no space between middle & branch. ~2026-60102 (talk) 23:54, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-60102: The map in Middlebranch, Ohio looks right to me. Middlebranch is the red dot. It's in Stark County, Ohio (black-bordered region around the dot) and so is Canton, Ohio, so Middlebranch is indeed much closer to Canton than to Lake Erie (blue area at top). PrimeHunter (talk) 00:19, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Why is Pan-carnivora redirected to Fera, but not with Pholidotamorpha?

As I click Pan-carnivora, it redirects to Ferae, then explaining that, why does Pholidotamorpha get to have its own article? ~2026-61035 (talk) 02:31, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

There used to be a separate article called Pan-Carnivora but it was created by a sockpuppet account of a blocked long term abuser, and so the term was redirected for that reason. Pholidotamorpha exists because a volunteer editor in good standing did the work to write it. Cullen328 (talk) 02:39, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Finding editors to help with draft

I started a draft article on Draft:Federation of Korean Music Performers and haven't had time to edit it since November, but I think the article could benefit from one or two additional editors helping expand it to mainspace quality.

Are there some recommended ways of finding editors who have the capacity and interest to help with drafts? I was thinking about pinging the subpage Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Korea/Popular culture or individual editors who've recently posted there, but I couldn't find any indications that the page is very active. Qzekrom (she/her • talk) 23:27, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

The draft you linked to does not have any good sources. (It does have two sources, but they're just little announcements.) This means "expanding to mainspace quality" is only a very distant dream. First, you need to check whether this article is even worth trying, by searching for sources that already tell the whole story.

Sources are not support for what you write. You are only a background support; the sources are what really makes the article. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:06, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

@Qzekrom I already suggested this to someone else and it seemed to help them, so see if it helps you too:

Find only three sources to be your best ones, and make sure every one of the three fits both of these requirements: (a) they are independent of the subject, meaning that no one who works for the Federation provided any help or information to the reporter - no interviews, no announcements, no information from a press release; and (b) Wikipedia recognizes them as reliable sources according to Wikipedia's rules. OK, now take those three special sources, and look at them together. Can you honestly say "These three sources are enough to be my whole article, I'm satisfied with them already, I don't need to add one word"? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:25, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

For what it's worth, the Korean Wikipedia article for FKMP (ko:한국음악실연자연합회) exists, although it currently doesn't cite any sources. FKMP is the neighboring-rights collective for recording artists in South Korea, so I suspect that it may have a high enough profile there to satisfy WP:ORG. Concretely, there might be enough Korean-language sources to establish notability, but I can't understand them without translations. Qzekrom (she/her • talk) 08:52, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Closing account

How can close this account, someone else's using my account without knowledge and permission for over 2 years now, this is me email and identity, Please help me not to let them use this account, It’s against the law keep using my identity for so long already, Never used online services, like shopping or any transactions online in my entire life at all. Thanks JGSekell ~2026-64663 (talk) 03:53, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

There is no User:JGSekell account registered. Accounts cannot be closed but they can be abandoned. If an account is impersonating you, please mention the precise account name and provide evidence. Similarity of a name is not enough. Cullen328 (talk) 04:01, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-64663: This is the encyclopedia Wikipedia. I wonder whether your post is about another website. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:21, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Urgent BLP Correction & Article Expansion: Meisam Amini

Hello. I am requesting an experienced editor to help update the article Meisam Amini. The page is currently a Stub-class and contains a 'Retired' label that is factually incorrect and professionally damaging under BLP policy.

1. Verified International Records: The following achievements are verified by [FILA Cert](File:Meisam_Amini_FILA_International_Championship_and_Coaching_Certification.jpg):

• Silver Medalist: 2003 World Championships (74kg FS).
• Gold Medalist: 2002 Asian Championships (69kg FS).
• Silver Medalist: 2000 Asian Championships (69kg FS).
• Gold Medalist: 2002 Freidenfelds Cup (Latvia) - Verified by [2002 Diploma](File:Meisam_Amini_-_1st_place_Diploma_-_Freidenfelds_International_FILA_Tournament_2002_-_Riga.jpg) and [Results Table](File:Meisam_Amini_-_2002_Latvia_Cup_Results_Table.jpg).

2. Career Continuity (France):

• **Rhône-Alpes Title:** [Regional Title](File:Meisam_Amini_-_French_Champion_Certificate_-_Rhone_Alpes.jpg) - Verified by **Le Progrès** ([Source](https://www.leprogres.fr/sports/2010/12/05/trois-titres-pour-l-ain)).

3. Current Coaching Status (2025): Verified as an international coach by [FILA Cert](File:Meisam_Amini_FILA_International_Championship_and_Coaching_Certification.jpg), I am currently active in Lyon and for the Ivory Coast National Team:

• [2025 Invitation](File:Meisam_Amini_Ivory_Coast_National_Team_Invitation_2025.pdf): Official 2025 appointment.
• Media (2025): [Lyon Mag](https://www.lyonmag.com/article/147816/), [Le Progrès](https://www.leprogres.fr/sport/2025/06/12/), [IRNA](https://www.irna.ir/news/85831100/), and [Borna](https://www.borna.news/fa/tiny/news-1681200).

4. Name Correction: My legal name is **Meisam Amini**. The spellings "Misam" (FILA) and "Meysam" (UWW) in databases are common transliteration errors. Passport and current contracts confirm the correct spelling as **Meisam Amini**.

5. Proposed Lead Update: "Meisam Amini is an Iranian freestyle wrestling champion and international coach. He is a medalist in the World and Asian Championships. He currently serves as a coach in Lyon, France, and a technical instructor for the Ivory Coast national team."

Note: This is an urgent BLP correction regarding my professional status. Thank you. ~2025-43800-74 (talk) 21:49, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello @~2025-43800-74. The "stub" class is simply a categorisation of how short or long an article on Wikipedia is. It does not have any bearing on quality or your professional reputation. You have made an edit request on the Talk page, which is the correct venue - a volunteer editor will come along in due course and action it. Please be patient. qcne (talk) 21:52, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the guidance. I have already submitted the official documents and identity verification via email to the Volunteer Response Team and received Ticket#2025123010005146. Additionally, I have provided news links and official databases in my initial request to verify my professional career and the correct spelling of my name (Meisam Amini). I will wait for the verification process to be completed. ~2025-43930-38 (talk) 14:42, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

I've updated the article with the citations I can verify, but I do not speak Farsi so cannot research any further citations unless you provide them. Please see Talk:Meisam_Amini for further information. gilgongo (talk) 09:44, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Standardised user warning template

Is there a "Standardised user warning template" for the comment at Talk:List of mass shootings in the United States in 2026 which does not talk about how to improve the page? --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:48, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

I'd be inclined to revert the comment and add the Template:Uw-bes1 warning to the TA. qcne (talk) 15:53, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Displaytitle

Hi there, I am working on Draft:Am-progressive. The display title of this article needs to be --> am-progressive <--

• am needs to be lowercase because it is referencing its use in lowercase
• am needs to be in italics because it is a metaword and a foreign word.

The displaytitle I have used seems to not work and adds it to the category "Pages with disallowed DISPLAYTITLE modifications". Please could someone assist me with the correct display title wikicode. Thanks, JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 16:19, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

{{DISPLAYTITLE:draft:{{lang|de|am|nocat=yes}}-progressive}}

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:29, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks – JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 16:48, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

What happened to the sidebar menu?

When reading an article in Wikipedia, there was usually a sidebar to the left of the screen, showing the article's table of contents, that is, its section and sub-section headings. You could click on one of those headings to go straight to the relevant part of the article. The sidebar was always visible, and could be scrolled independently of the main article text.

Today, that sidebar seems to have disappeared. Instead, there is a button in the top-left of the screen. Clicking on the button makes the table of contents visible. But it now takes up nearly half the width of the screen, and obscures the text behind it. And when you click anywhere outside the table of contents, it disappears and you have to go to the top of the screen and click the button again.

The same change seems to have occurred with the main menu. This was the menu that previously appeared just above the ToC in the same sidebar, showing things like "Main page", "Random article", "About Wikipedia". Again, this has been replaced by a menu button that behaves in the same way as the ToC button.

This is all very irritating. It means that you now have at least three clicks to navigate an article, whereas it was previously only one.

Is there any way of getting back to the previous system? Or is to something we are stuck with?

Thanks in advance for you help.Mike Marchmont (talk) 16:52, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Just to add: I am seeing this behaviour when viewing Wikipedia on the desktop, that is in a web browser under Windows. As far as I can see, there is no change to the Android app. Mike Marchmont (talk) 17:30, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Mike Marchmont.

The default skin of Wikipedia changed a while ago, and for a while we got a lot of people asking this.

I don't know why you have just had the problem, but please see WP:Skin. ColinFine (talk) 17:46, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

@Mike Marchmont: When you click the icons to display the main menu and the table of contents, there should be a button saying "move to sidebar". PrimeHunter (talk) 18:26, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

@Mike Marchmont you might have accidentally switched to mobile mode. Scroll to the bottom and check if it has “Desktop” listed and then click that if it is present —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:50, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you all for your prompt replies. Unfortunately, I am no further forward.

@TheDJ:. No, I was not in mobile mode. But thanks for the suggeston

@PrimeHunter:. I can't see the "move to sidebar" button anywhere. Is it in the menu itself, or somewhere else on the page?

@ColinFine: I have now tried all the skins showing in my Preferences page. MinervaNeue and Timeless both behave the same as the new default skin (as far as this issue is concerned). Legacy and Monobook do indeed show the sidebar, but this does not show the ToC; the Toc is present in the body of the article which means it is not visible when you scroll down.

I must be missing something here. Any further suggestions would be gratefully receive.

Mike Marchmont (talk) 17:38, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

@Mike Marchmont: After clicking the icon to display the main menu or table of contents, I get a popup box with "move to sidebar" on grey background at the top right of the menu, to the right of the bold heading "Main menu" or "Contents". Does something different happen when you click the icons? What is your browser? PrimeHunter (talk) 18:47, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: That worked perfectly. Many thanks. I think the reason I couldn't see the "Move to sidebar" button was that my browser window was zoomed down to about 90%, and so the flyout panel was not quite wide enough to show it. After I reset the zoom level, I could see the button. So now the menus and ToC work again the same as before, which is relief. Mike Marchmont (talk) 09:40, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Article was erased and redirected without a formal conclusion

Hello. 3 days ago, the user OutlawRun unilaterally deleted all text in the article 2025 Georgia State House District 121 special election and redirected it, without any consensus. I am not sure what to do. Delcoan (talk) 02:57, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Delcoan.

According to WP:BRD, if you disagree with the change you could simply revert it. (In order to do that, go to the link, and it will take you to the destination, but with a line "(Redirected from 2025 Georgia State House District 121 special election)" at the top. Pick that link, and it will take you to the redirection page. Then you can pick "View History", and simply undo the edit.

However, I see that there is relevant discussion from a few weeks ago at Talk:2025 Georgia State House District 121 special election#This needs to be merged. The last comment there was from @OutlawRun, and my guess is that since nobody has replied, they felt that there was nobody opposing the change, and made it.

I suggest you join the discussion at that talk page. ColinFine (talk) 10:59, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Template:Infobox university -- map problem

In the article Episcopal Divinity School, there is a map in the infobox showing the school's former location in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The school sold its campus in Cambridge eight years ago and moved to New York City, as explained in the article. I can't find anything in Template:Infobox university as included in the article which calls for a map of Cambridge to be shown. (The infobox template does provide for a map, but none of the fields used in this article's infobox call for the map.) Elsewhere in the article, I updated the school's coordinates for its New York location, but that didn't affect the infobox. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 10:43, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

@Metropolitan90, from a quick glance {{infobox university}} is generating a mapframe from the Wikidata coordinates.

Template:Infobox_university#Mapframe_maps - mapframe – Specify yes or no to show or hide the map... Internal onByDefault parameter: yes.

Episcopal Divinity School at Union (Q5383462) has the coordinates ending in 2017. Commander Keane (talk) 10:57, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The coordinates are pulled from Wikidata. Click "Wikidata item" under "Tools" (in Vector 2022) to see Episcopal Divinity School at Union (Q5383462). PrimeHunter (talk) 10:58, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! I tried editing the Wikidata and now the map for the correct New York location is showing up. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 11:10, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Suggest a Person of interest

How do you suggest a person of interest ~2026-62052 (talk) 02:58, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Suggest for what purpose? If you are referring to writing a biography, the person must be truly notable as Wikipedia defines that term. Wikipedia biographies are written by volunteer editors like you. Please read Your first article for a detailed description of the process. Cullen328 (talk) 03:56, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~2026-62052.

There is a place where you can suggest articles - it's called requested articles - but in honesty, suggestion tend to stay there forever.

The fact is that Wikipedia is created and maintained by volunteers, who work on what they choose - and people will usually pick up your suggestion (or anybody else's) if they happen to be interested in the subject.

So it's possible that if you suggest a subject, somebody will go, Oh yes, they're interesting, I'll have a look at that. Possible, but not very likely. You can perhaps improve the odds a little if you can find a WikiProject that is relevant to the person - if you post there, then people reading it may already have some interest in the subject.

But generally, if you want Wikipedia to have an article on a subject, the most effective way of doing that is to write it yourself. Unfortunately, writing an article is much much more difficult than people imagine who are not familiar with editing Wikipedia. So if you are going to take that route, I would suggest spending 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) 13:45, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

You can tell us their name, and provide links to two or three pages about them, here; then we can advise you further. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:05, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

If you have information about a Person of interest, please contact the police. However, if you are asking about creating a Wikipedia article about a notable person, please read WP:NPERSON. -Arch dude (talk) 14:09, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

New Template ChartDirect

Hello, I am not really familiar with the wikipedia pages here in enwiki. I want to inform that I have created a new Template:ChartDirect that allows again to do simple plots directly from wikipedia. The interface is similar to the Template:Chart and the legacy Template:Graph:Chart. Note, that it would be possible to also directly plot from wikidata using the same commons module as this new template. I have also posted this earlier in Wikipedia:Requested templates, but apparently it didn't get any attention there. Let me know, if I should inform somewhere else as well. Regards--McBayne (talk) 16:06, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia donation

I can not in good conscience donate to Wikipedia any long. The far left political thoughts drive me away ~2025-44010-89 (talk) 05:10, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Nobody is obliged to donate to Wikipedia (or more accurately, the WMF, since it is them that is responsible for collecting donations). Or to read Wikipedia for that matter. Given that plenty of people seem happy enough to do both, I'm sure we'll manage without you. AndyTheGrump (talk) 05:17, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

We don't care. Nobody here has any involvement with the WMF's money. Athanelar (talk) 12:38, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Yes, if you only want to read what you want to hear and what fits your views, this isn't the place for you. 331dot (talk) 12:39, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

This sums it up too: Wikipedia:Not gonna donate. ---Sluzzelin talk 13:55, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that you are having those thoughts and that they are driving you away. --Jameboy (talk) 03:46, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Everyone is welcome to read and edit without donating. I have given much of my time to Wikipedia but do not assist financially. As others have pointed out, donations are taken by the WMF, and only a fraction is spent on improving Wikipedia. I too am disappointed that much of the income is passed on to other organisations, many of which have a political position. It is also true that beneficiaries are almost exclusively left-wing, though I would be equally upset to see money passed on to the far right. Certes (talk) 19:39, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

And why do you think that this is worth mentioning? GrinningIodize (talk) 21:49, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Author George S. Drew

[Material copied from this page redacted.]

Elemental Wall: Spirit Binds

published June 27, 2024

Elemental Wall: Water Surges

published September 25, 2025

Elemental Wall: Earth Rumbles

published tbd 2026

Elemental Wall Series. Author.g.s.Drew (talk) 07:54, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Are you asking for help with Wikipedia, Author.g.s.Drew? -- Hoary (talk) 08:18, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

We have no article on that author. Please see WP:NAUTHOR.

If you are he, please see WP:Autobiography. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:03, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

FWIW, that external link (to Pegasus Publishers) triggers my security app (Malwarebytes Browser Guard) to give warning of a possible malicious trojan. It may of course be a false alarm.

My initial web search finds insufficient independent Reliable sources about George S. Drew on which to base a Wikipedia article. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.185} ~2025-31359-08 (talk) 23:09, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Find out when I viewed a Wikipedia article first

Hi, I'm using the Wikipedia app on Android. The history tab let's me see when I viewed/read an article, however it only shows the most recent date. I'd like to find out when I viewed a specific article for the *first* time though. Is there a way to find that out? --~2026-10054-1 (talk) 18:45, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Your browser history is the only way, as far as I know. (In other words, for the app, no.) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:22, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Bible summary - can it be done?

Summary from Adam to Christ ~2026-92580 (talk) 13:12, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi @~2026-92580. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? qcne (talk) 13:14, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Hey @~2026-92580! This is the help desk, which is meant for questions related or pertaining to editing Wikipedia. This looks more like a question fit for the reference desk, specifically the Humanities section which includes religion as one of its topics. I recommend asking this there, though if I had to give an answer, the Genealogy of Jesus article covers the two distinct genealogies of Jesus as described in both the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke. Hope this helped! _{S.G. (They/Them) (Talk) (Edits)} 14:18, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-92580 If you just do a web search for "bible summary" you will find plenty of attempts at this. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:20, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

The following summary is not my own:

____

There once was a man who said "All

men are predestined to fall

(as Eve did, when tempted),

but will be redempted."

[with footnotes provided by Paul].

____

I hope that helps. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:32, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Should "Ujjal" link only to "Ujjal Dosanjh"?

Should Ujjal link only to Ujjal Dosanjh with other items in "See also"? --Jax 0677 (talk) 21:54, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

@Jax 0677: The other current items seem to belong in "See also" but you could add other people in intitle:Ujjal. I don't know whether they (or Ujjal Dosanjh) are commonly referred to as just Ujjal. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:35, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter:, thanks, yet another obvious idea that I did not think of... --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:39, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

When Ujjal Dosanjh was frequently in English-language news, they never referred to him as just Ujjal. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:43, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Help writing article

Where can I get help with writing the article I've recently written -- history of Catholic theology? I tried in WP:Wikiproject Catholicism but they seem inactive (I believe a message sent 3 months ago has not been answered yet). Wikieditor662 (talk) 18:29, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Hopefully you will be lucky with Wikiproject Catholicism, it seems some questions get answered, probably depending on the interests of pagewatchers. TSventon (talk) 18:40, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Are there any other places I can ask? Wikieditor662 (talk) 19:32, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

@Wikieditor662: what kind of help are you ;looking for? If you want someone to take over writing the article for you, you would be lucky to find someone interested. If you want advice, that is more likely. And specific questions are more likely to get specific answers. I looked at WP:WikiProject Christianity, but that looks quiet as well. You could post a link to your original query. Have you seen history of Christian theology? It seems to have a lot of relevant content. TSventon (talk) 23:50, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

If you want someone to take over writing the article for you, you would be lucky to find someone interested. Well not taking over, but helping out... I thought Wikipedia articles each have multiple people working on it rather than one individual. Wikieditor662 (talk) 01:29, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Only if they're interested and choose to do it. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:24, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

@Wikieditor662, usually there are indeed many people working on articles, but the timespan is measured in months or years (unless the article is about a subject that has recently become popular, when the editor count will explode). More 'random' articles, like the one you're working on, attract fewer editors because there's nothing to really prompt the editing, if that makes sense? It means that someone has to find that article somehow (probably by searching for it), and that person has to be both interested in and capable of (as in technically capable and also able to find suitable sources) editing.

One example is an article I expanded, Kaz Hosaka - if you look at the history, you'll see it was created on June 27 2024; a few people tinkered with it after that, not making any major changes; it was moved back to draftspace, and then returned to mainspace, on July 4 2024; I saw Hosaka's final Westminster Show, and was thus prompted to search for him and then write about him, on November 24 2024; and pretty much nothing has happened since. This is a very normal sequence of events for an article! (Except perhaps for the brief adventure back to draftspace and then back to mainspace, anyway) Meadowlark (talk) 07:37, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

No access to email address

My account, this one, is logged in on mobile and I know the password. I have tried logging in other devices but it sends a verification code/email to the email I don’t have access to.

how can I change my email for this account? Hazara Birar ^(Talk) 08:33, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

In your account preferences. You should be able to do that from the device you are logged in to. 331dot (talk) 08:37, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

important for articles

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.

---

Hi i was wondering what would be put on Elizabeth Taylors article if any claims of her faking her passing were to come in to the studio and where it would be put at since i see that there is mention on hamza bin laden about unconfirmed reports on him being alive as well and i was wondering where information about her faking her passing would be put since i am really interested if there is info that comes in and that if they verify she is alive at 94 (february 2026) and 93 now in january let me know if you got the information by people if they claim to have seen her in many places and also can you let me know if you would be in need of changing or removing death from it thank you i really appreciate it ~2026-84967 (talk) 04:23, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles are based on published reliable sources, and not on vague claims from unnamed people. Accordingly, our article on Elizabeth Taylor will continue to state that she died in March 2011 until such time as the necessary sources are provided to suggest otherwise. If you waqnt to peddle silly conspiracy theories, you will have to find somewhere else to do so. AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:42, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Or find plenty of reliable sources that discuss the conspiracy theories in detail and then initiate an article along the same lines as Elvis Presley death conspiracy theories. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:54, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

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

Referencing errors on Tower of Botafuegos

Special:Diff/1331468459

I need to edit the date section. But I do not think that the article specifies a date other than 2001. Thanks, Theopedias (talk) 13:32, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

@Theopedias FIX  Done for guides please see How the templates work CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 14:23, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Doug LaMalfa

Looking up Doug LaMalfa, R congressman who died. Under death, it says he died for being a coward!!!! Shame on whoever added this comment. Please remove it. ~2026-11601-0 (talk) 15:16, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-11601-0 this is vandalism which has already been removed. qcne (talk) 15:17, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Phillip Ensler

Formal Request for Review of Repeated Disruptive Edits on Phillip Ensler Wikipedia

Dear Wikipedia Trust & Safety Team,

I am writing to formally request a review of repeated disruptive edits made by the user “Yoblyblob” on the Wikipedia page for Phillip Ensler. This is the second instance in which this user has substantially altered content that was neutrally written, well-sourced, and compliant with Wikipedia’s standards for biographies of living persons.

The edits in question characterize properly cited factual information as “promotional,” despite the content being written in a direct, encyclopedic tone and supported by reliable secondary sources. In addition, the revisions introduce wording that reframes events in a misleading or harmful context, which raises concerns regarding accuracy, neutrality, and potential bias.

I am particularly concerned that these repeated changes may constitute disruptive editing or vandalism, rather than good-faith content moderation. As Wikipedia emphasizes the importance of up-to-date, verifiable, and neutral information—especially on biographies of living persons—it is imperative that editorial decisions adhere strictly to policy and not personal interpretation or bias.

I respectfully request that this editing pattern be reviewed and that appropriate action be taken if it is determined that Wikipedia’s content or conduct policies have been violated. My goal is not to promote any individual, but to ensure that the article reflects accurate, balanced, and properly sourced information in line with Wikipedia’s mission.

Thank you for your time and for your continued work maintaining the integrity of Wikipedia.

Sincerely,

A concerned constituent ~2026-11367-4 (talk) 15:21, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-11367-4 Please do not use AI chatbots to write messages. This seems to be a content dispute and you should follow the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution process, but first you should discuss this on the talk page of the article. Do not call any editor a spammer or a spreader of hate, as you did in the edit summary. qcne (talk) 15:33, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Promotion is a goal, not a style. A Wikipedia article about a person is part of a history book - not part of a business directory, and not a way to honor them. Any content that alludes to what the person could make or do for me can be promotion, depending on the context. And adding or removing ANY content in a way that appears intended to improve the person's image is definitely promotion. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:12, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Please note that there is no 'Wikipedia Trust & Safety Team'. The WikiMedia Foundation has a Trust and Safety team, as a part of their legal department. They don't however answer Wikipedia help desk questions, or otherwise involve themselves in day-to-day matters, and are highly unlikely to involve themselves in what appears to be a routine content dispute. If you have serious concerns, discuss it (in your own words) on the article talk page. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:30, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Clarification on removing dead links

Hello,

WP:DEADREF states that "if the source material does not exist offline, and if there is no archived version of the web page (be sure to wait ~24 months), and if you cannot find another copy of the material, then the dead citation should be removed and the material it supports should be regarded as unverified if there is no other supporting citation."

However, WP:KDL states that "a dead, unarchived source URL may still be useful. Such a link indicates that information was (probably) verifiable in the past, and the link might provide another user with greater resources or expertise with enough information to find the reference." and to "not delete a citation just because it has been tagged with {{dead link}} for a long time."

If a link has been tagged as dead for 24 months or longer, and the link fails all other steps on WP:DEADREF, would the next correct step be to remove the dead link per DEADREF or keep it per WP:KDL?

Thanks, Ecourter (talk) 09:02, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

I would keep it, mark it as dead, and add a "better source needed" tag. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:53, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Probably needs a RfC, but personally I don't think we should be removing references just because they have died. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:24, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Why do you think they should not be removed? Ecourter (talk) 16:13, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Because that information was cited to that place. Having saying where we think the information came from is much more use than having no information on that, removing the citation details means that without looking through the history, theres zero attribution.

There is also a lot of usurption in news media nowadays. Websites will quite often overwrite their own news media. So, when something is cited, they can later change it. If that specific instance of the page isn't archived, then there is sometimes little difference between a live link and one that is dead. That's why we have an access-date parameter, to say that the information came from that specific website at that specific time. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:19, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

If there is no possible way to access a web source (and has been tagged dead for a long time), would that not make the source unaccessible and therefore not verifiable? Ecourter (talk) 18:18, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

But is removing the source and not the accompanying text an improvement? It's now an unsourced piece of information,. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:58, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Then I could remove that information as well or, per WP:DEADREF: "If it is material that is specifically required by policy to have an inline citation, then please consider tagging it with {{citation needed}}." Tagging with CN has been the method I have been doing when I've previously stumbled upon this situation. Ecourter (talk) 19:33, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

That is kind of my point. Our policies suggest that we tag it with citation needed, but I don't think that is a better solution than retaining the source even if it is dead. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:34, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

@Ecourter And because we'd be irresponsible and destructive to go around assuming everybody was lying all the time. Requiring evidence is good. Requiring constant fresh sources of evidence is not smart. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 07:35, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Why would that not be smart? If "verifiability means that people can check that facts or claims correspond to reliable sources," how could a viewer verify a certain statement made if the attributed web citation has been tagged permanently dead with no archive or alternative found in over 2 years? An editor would have to either replace the source, remove the dead source and tag with {{cn}}, or delete the claim entirely. I agree with WP:DEADREF stating that tagging with citation needed is the correct method because I think it allows more editors to attempt to find a replacement accessible source for the claim. Ecourter (talk) 09:32, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

How is adding citation needed a better solution than {{dead link}}? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:39, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

If you mean keeping the dead link, I'd say replacing the entire web citation with a 'citation needed' tag is the better solution because A) it removes the inaccessible, therefore unverifiable source and B) allows others to search for a replacement source (as mentioned above).

If you mean the initial discovery of a dead link, then no, I think adding {{dead link}} is the appropriate choice if I could not find an archive or replacement at the time. Ecourter (talk) 09:57, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

I disagree that having no information is better than having some information. can be used in-line for the exact same purpose as Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:04, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

We have to assume that the original link and the original source were both valid at the time. Proof doesn't unprove itself just by our not being able to find it anymore. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:21, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

I would like to move this discussion here. @Lee Vilenski @Pigsonthewing @TooManyFingers you are welcome to participate and add your arguments. Ecourter (talk) 19:21, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Template & section header positioning issue

While reading the Addiction article I came across this mess at the start of the 'Stimulus control of behavior' section. It appears that the Template:Operant conditioning at the end of the previous section was placed to the right side and the article is trying to squeeze the following (fairly long) section header into the tiny gap between the template and the left edge.

I don't have much experience with templates like these so I'm mostly relying on the template pages. Things I have tried to fix the issue include: adding |clear=left and |clear=both parameters to the Operant Conditioning template (which did nothing); adding a Chart Top template with |clear=both directly above the Operant Conditioning template (which put the entire following section in a box); adding a Chart Bottom template below as well (which fixes the header but displays the tree box in a box); and trying to add a blank line of text between the template and the header (which I couldn't figure out how to do; blank lines, spaces, and line breaks didn't work). The main issue I'm running into is that the parameters that might be able to fix this if it were just a Template:Tree chart don't seem to be available on the derived template.

Anyone know how to fix this? TypoEater (talk) 20:28, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

@TypoEater: It looked OK on my desktop but I have moved the wide {{Operant conditioning}} to the start of the section so it doesn't squeeze the section heading in narrow windows. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:58, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

AI Agents as source authors

So I came across the site AInvest (aiinvest.com) while reviewing citations as part of new page patrol activities. The article that the author has cited ( https://www.ainvest.com/news/emerald-expositions-navigating-recovery-post-pandemic-world-2505/ ) has a byline of "Generated by AI Agent Cyrus Cole". It is an interesting issue about whether we should consider AI Agent authors as reliable for 3rd party sources or not. I did not see this was obviously addressed here, which is why I'm posing this new question. I think this is a major emerging issue and I'd be interested in understanding where Wikipedia editors stand in general on this. Personally, I am loathe to treat any AI Agent as an author of a reliable source, but understanding how the community of editors considers this would be very useful to me. Thanks for your input. Regards --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:06, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

An AI "author" is not only never reliable, it's also never an author. It's a generator, and the difference is that it's incapable of thinking. ("Never reliable" does not mean "always wrong"; it means "can't be trusted".) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:20, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Ceyockey. The answer to your question about whether or not a source written by AI is reliable is "absolutely not". If the content is accurate, then the AI bot is rewriting actual reliable sources written by humans, and those are the sources that should be cited. Cullen328 (talk) 04:33, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

On further thought, I think it might even be more important in the minds of the AI boosters that AI, being inanimate, cannot be held responsible for its bullshit. (It's incapable of anything as intelligent as making a mistake.) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:21, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Update to Scottish Law Commission account

Good afternoon,

I've having difficulty adding a footnote to reference 5 as it keeps inserting number 1. Grateful if you could assist with this.

Thank you.

Wilma Wilma Campbell (talk) 12:45, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

@Wilma Campbell: I'm not sure what you mean by adding a footnote to a reference. If you mean there is already a reference and you want to add a footnote which applies to that reference but is displayed somewhere later then it's not something we do. You use VisualEditor so see Help:VisualEditor#Editing references for how to make references. Note that if you add a new reference then you should not edit the references section but only the place where you want the small bracketed reference number to appear in the body of the article. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:46, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

@Wilma Campbell: you can in fact put a footnote on a reference, but first please think hard about whether or not this is the best editorial choice. Probably better to just put the "footnote" information in brackets inside the ref. If you are sure you still want to do this see Wikipedia:Nesting footnotes. One situation might be when the same footnote will be used in multiple places in the article. -Arch dude (talk) 17:57, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Concern about disturbing images on an article

Hello, I came across the following article: Sexual practices between men The article includes images that may be disturbing or inappropriate for general readers, especially minors. I wanted to ask if these images are correctly placed according to Wikipedia’s guidelines, or if they should be reviewed. Thank you. ~2026-73308 (talk) 16:35, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Please see WP:NOTCENSORED. If you think you may be offended by images of sex, I would advise not reading encyclopedia articles about sex. CoconutOctopus talk 16:37, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

The images seem properly placed. Images showing genitalia are drawn and not placed at the top of the article, to minimize shock value.

Wikipedia is not censored for any reason, including to protect minors from graphic imagery. Readers who do not want to risk seeing images they view as inappropriate should follow the guidance at WP:NOSEE. 331dot (talk) 16:40, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

It is inadvisable to give minors (particularly younger ones) unsupervised access to Wikipedia. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:41, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Help:Options to hide an image may be of help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:49, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

The only thing that I would say is that there are probably too many images in the article and that some pruning would not hurt.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:00, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

the two lower down with images directly relating to a specific practice seem fine, the only question to me is whether the legality section needs an image of that type in addition to the map. Naraht (talk) 17:12, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

YE GODS! There's GAY SEX in the article GAY SEX?! Athanelar (talk) 02:27, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

I should probably write an essay for scenarios like this mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 18:58, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Editing and adding to a Wiki page

Dear Wiki, I recently added to a Wiki page for the American Football player “Tommy McDonald”.

Are the changes under review by Wiki, because I see the next day that my additions to the page are not there? I believe I followed all the wiki rules, so I’m not sure why the new edits are not showing. Maybe it takes a few days for your review before it’s final?

Thank you in advance for your reply. Bluehen04 (talk) 14:52, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Bluehen04. Your edits were reverted because you provided no sources to verify the new information. We cannot accept unsourced information, and verifiability is our most important policy. This is especially important for biographies of living people, where unsourced content is removed as soon as possible. qcne (talk) 14:56, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Fully understand and my fault for not fully reading the rules/guides. Of course, integrity and accuracy is what makes Wiki a valuable source. I will make sure I include the sources next revision. Bluehen04 (talk) 19:22, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

You may find Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners useful. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:45, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Some freely licensed files are getting tagged for PROD

How can I seek help from someone to readdress PROD situation? I already found some photos eligible for automatic transfer to Commons. Ahri Boy (talk) 10:32, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Which ones? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 12:13, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Some tagged PROD by @Iruka13. Ahri Boy (talk) 12:35, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Then this isn't a technical question so much as it's a content dispute. (If you get a technical solution they'll still keep doing it.) So you should go to their talk page and ask them about it. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:14, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Please give specific examples. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:43, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Message about a calendar invitation

I just got a calendar invitation from "Wikipedia Admin" to have a Google Meet with a Will Morris. Note say that my Wikipedia page currently contains citation issues that may affect its accuracy and standing on the platform. I am not sure what this is all about. Can you enlighten me? Thank you ~2026-12255-5 (talk) 22:57, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Hey @~2026-12255-5! This is very likely a scam that you should avoid. See Wikipedia:Scam warning for more info. _{S.G. (They/Them) (Talk) (Edits)} 23:00, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-12255-5: I should note that I checked to see if any user even goes by "Will Morris", all I got was User:Willmorris97 and they are clearly not an admin. This should be another clear red flag that this is a scam. _{S.G. (They/Them) (Talk) (Edits)} 23:01, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

I venture to guess that most articles here have citation issues. We can fix them ourselves. (Just in the last few hours I've corrected a reference to a piece purportedly by Stephen Winick and purportedly about Europe to what it really is: a piece by Nancy Groce that's about the US. And I'm sure that as I continue going through that feeble article I'll discover more horrors.) The article "Will Morris" is referring to, if it even exists, has a talk page. If you're the subject of the article, use that talk page to make suggestions and requests for the article. What articles here don't do is stand on platforms. A very strange notion! It occurred to me that "Will Morris" might be insane, but on reflection perhaps somebody touched base in his thought shower. -- Hoary (talk) 23:25, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

I'd venture to guess that "Will Morris" is probably trying to scam someone as well. Even if it isn't for money, this just seems like a way to annoy someone with random nonsense. So maybe not a "scam" but still "spam". Spam, spam, lovely spam! What a strange person... _{S.G. (They/Them) (Talk) (Edits)} 23:29, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

If you would like to tell us the title of the page that is about you, we can advise further.

See also: WP:About you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:45, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Advanced watchlists

Is there any way to watch a page for only keywords, for example watching a talk page but only being notified when a section with "edit request" is created? As in any gadget, script, etc? Thank, Chorchapu (talk | edits) 00:10, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Why do I need my email address to use mute features?

Mute features do not exclusively affect email. Why do I need a confirmed email address to use them? Dronebogus (talk) 17:48, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Which mute features? Where did you encounter this? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:43, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

If I try to “mute user”, like for notifications, it says I can’t because I haven’t confirmed my email address. Dronebogus (talk) 20:00, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

See WP:MUTE. I also wasn't aware of this. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:11, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Hii can someone review contribution history for user:Stefan2702?

I unidid their one edit on Daniel Peel page and suspected of them making edits for no reasons and it turned out to be correct. Special:Contributions/Stefan2702. They have been making vandalizing edits for some time now. I do not how to raise this behavior to administrators for some actions. It will be appreciated if someone can check their contributions and report in proper medium. ~2026-14349-6 (talk) 19:59, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

I think that you mean this edit to Daniel Pearl. Yes, it wasn't a good edit. I reverted another of his edits. Neither edit was beneficial; but, in my view, neither was "vandalizing". (I wonder if for you, "vandalizing" means "not beneficial". If so, this is an unusual understanding of the word.) An alarming number of this person's edits have been reverted; but the third edit I looked at seemed good. -- Hoary (talk) 22:17, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

By vandalizing I didn't mean it for just the edit I Undid but the pattern of their previous edits. You can see this in their edits for Indian economy, TLP, Satyendra Bose... So on. If those are okay then I guess idk properly what vandalizing an article mean yet. ~2026-14349-6 (talk) 08:24, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Vandal = all they want is to ruin everything

Not a vandal = they want everyone to hear their opinion TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 08:31, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

"Vandalism" is defined and discussed in "Wikipedia:Vandalism". It's probably longer than you'd much want to read, but its content is summarized well in its short first paragraph. Do please read this first paragraph (and I encourage you to read the rest as well). -- Hoary (talk) 08:51, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

How do I revert to the previous desktop layout?

I was using the site on desktop when, without warning or notice, the layout changed to resemble a mobile or tablet style. I can't find any option to revert back. I don't know if the site changed the layout or not. WeirdoTZero (talk) 09:55, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

At the bottom of the screen there should be a link that says "Desktop"; clicking that should return you to Desktop mode. 331dot (talk) 09:58, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

This worked! Thank you. WeirdoTZero (talk) 11:31, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on William Eagleson Gordon

Special:Diff/1331462757

I can't see what's wrong with the date in my citation to the VC&GC Association - no such error has been flagged up on the date in the CWGC citation which is identically written. Thanks, Cloptonson (talk) 12:46, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

@Cloptonson: The access date is in December 2026. Editors are not allowed to time travel when verifying references. DuncanHill (talk) 12:49, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

We are in January. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:50, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

@Cloptonson minor edit FIX  Done CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 14:16, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

There's no rule against time traveling! You just have to edit on the date you travel to. (I always follow this rule.) Clarityfiend (talk) 13:53, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Reverting major changes made by Urayahahah

Been seeing users raise concerns (I did too) on Urayahahah making major articles in the firearms area without at least trying to see if the other users would object to it. As of now, he got rid of his own account. I won't be surprised if the user comes back to Wikipedia with another account. I forgot how many times the user's been doing this, but I suspect that the user did it three times (eg doing articles without consulting others and later on, asking to globally lock his account. Ominae (talk) 03:32, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Ominae.

If you have concerns about the long-term behaviour of another editor, then WP:ANI is the place to take it. But please read the guidance at the top of that very carefully before you post there. ColinFine (talk) 16:05, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Starting a new page

Hi - I would like to start a new page and do not understand how to do it. Is there a step by step guide please? CarbonSix6 (talk) 14:58, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

@CarbonSix6 Welcome to Help desk... I sent you full tutorial on How to start a new page check your Userpage or Click here please CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 15:06, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @CarbonSix6.

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) 16:07, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

See WP:Your first article.

Looking at Draft:Mohammed Abu Tair, you need to strip out all the promotional hyperbole (what Wikipedia calls "puffery"), such as "seasoned", "define his future influence", "political ascent", "his political work deepened" and so on. Regarding "A trained and highly experienced professional pilot"; are there any professional pilots who are not trained? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:52, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

WP:RfD

Is there any way that I can get a notification when someone replies me in the RfD? Jako96 (talk) 17:28, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

if someone directly responds to you (using reply-link) you should get a notification, do you not?

If they edit the page instead you won't get a notification. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:31, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

I also don't get notifications when people reply to me in deletion discussions unless they tag me, I have no idea why. Athanelar (talk) 19:50, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

If you're referring to "subscribing" to the RfD section (as you can on, for example, this talk page), it's not currently possible because of the level heading that is used. See Wikipedia talk:Redirects for discussion/Archive 15 § Subscribing to individual RFDs, Wikipedia talk:Redirects for discussion/Archive 16 § Can't subscribe, and Wikipedia talk:Redirects for discussion/Archive 17 § Making it possible to subscribe to RFDs for a few previous (brief) discussions. There is a Phabricator T275943 task for implementing more flexible subscriptions, and a related community survey, but I don't think it's had much recent progress. Skynxnex (talk) 20:14, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Aymeline Valade

Reference help requested. Hi! I am quite new to Wikipedia, and I thought that it would be right to edit a few pages on a whim. On this specific page, I added a citation to a website, but I received a message saying that the citation had a "generic name". If you could help me, I would be more than happy to comply. Thanks, Diorzhou.

Diorzhou, thank you for asking. You wrote within a citation template | last=FashionModelDirectory.com |first=The FMD-. But the pair "last" and "first" is intended for an individual (e.g. | last=Marx |first=Karl). If "The FMD-FashionModelDirectory.com" were informative, you should give it as | author=The FMD-FashionModelDirectory.com". But it isn't: it's no more informative than "Editorial staff" (a generic name). So just skip it (no "last", "first", or "author"). -- Hoary (talk) 23:57, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Tyr putting the ulr through this - may have to add better title.

• Template:Editor tools

Moxy🍁 00:02, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Trouble logging in with my phone

Hi, I'm having trouble logging in with my phone. I can log in just fine on my laptop, but when I use the same user name and password with my mobile, it says there's an error with the user name or password. What am I doing wrong? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 04:36, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

can you try clearing cookies of the websit or use incognito mode to see if that works? ~2026-14349-6 (talk) 08:25, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Nope, that didn't work. I can access Wikipedia on my laptop, but when I use the same password on my phone, I get the pink box that says error in password or user name. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 14:02, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

@Mr Serjeant Buzfuz: Are you certain you are using the same username and password? Are you typing it on your laptop when it works or relying on something the browser stored? At which url are you trying to log in on the phone? Does it help if you switch to the desktop site on the phone by clicking "Desktop" at the bottom of a page? You can switch back later by clicking "Mobile view". PrimeHunter (talk) 14:24, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

I figured it out. Somehow the keyboard on my laptop got changed from CA to GB, and when I entered the new password, it mapped to the GB layout. So when I tried to enter the same password on my iPhone, with a North American keyboard, it didn't match the GB version. When I noticed the mistake, I changed the keyboard on my laptop back to CA, then entered the new password with the CA layout. Then I tried logging in on my phone and it worked! Weird -- every so often the laptop keyboard changes to GB and I don't know what I've done. Thanks for the suggestions, everyone. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 02:37, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Changes Reverted

My changes to Jeff Lew got reverted because it was "advertising" but I believe this was incorrect and unfair Flamewrites (talk) 21:03, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

You're saying links to merch on Etsy is somehow not advertising?? Sorry, you're wrong, it was advertising. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 21:18, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Flamewrites, placing an unreferenced biography of a living person into Wikipedia is a violation of policy. Linking to an Etsy page selling "Official Killer Bean Gifts and Merchandise" is also a violation of policy. Please stop violating Wikipedia policies. Cullen328 (talk) 03:32, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Article about my uncle, should be removed

I don't if if this is the right place

There a edit notcie about my death notorious uncle, Rodrigo Noval: Notice about sources
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy. For all related material:"

But this editnotice should only be used when someone is alive. Can this notice be removed? VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 04:19, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done If it's not fixed now, it should be fixed soon. Noval was under Category:Living people, which is what was causing the editnotice to generate. DonIago (talk) 04:24, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Archive bot

Archive bot takes very long time and its almost impossible to archive. Any solution..? --Gpkp (talk) 11:27, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

At the top of the page to which you link is a "report problem" link. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:34, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you User:Pigsonthewing. --Gpkp (talk) 09:16, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Cladogram

Shortfin mollies P. catemaconis P. sphenops P. gillii P. orri P. mexicana P. sulphuraria P. butleri P. latipinna P. velifera P. kykesis P. latipunctata

Phylogenetic relationships based on combined D-loop and ND2 genetic data

In the cladogram to the right, P. velifera, P. latipinna, P. kykesis, and P. latipunctata are supposed to be labeled as sailfin mollies the same way the other species are labeled shortfin mollies. I cannot for the life of me figure out how to do it. Whatever I try ends up labelling only one of the two branches, i.e. either only P. latipinna and P. velifera or only P. kykesis and P. latipunctata. Surtsicna (talk) 15:33, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

like this?

  |label2=Sailfin mollies
  |2= 
    {{Clade
    |1={{Clade|1=''[[Poecilia latipinna|P. latipinna]]''|2=''P. velifera''}}
    |2={{Clade|1=''[[Poecilia kykesis|P. kykesis]]''|2=''[[Poecilia latipunctata|P. latipunctata]]''}}
    }}

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:50, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

I have no idea how that differs from what I have been doing, but it works and mine did not. Thank you, @Trappist the monk! Surtsicna (talk) 15:54, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Wikipage section titles on the left margin

Why has the left margin which used to show the sections and sub-sections titles of each Wikipage subject been removed again?~2025-37691-51 (talk) 13:58, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2025-37691-51: It's a setting. Click the icon to the left of the page heading. Then click "move to sidebar" to display it permanently. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:07, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Some people want it there all the time, other people say it gets in the way of reading and they only turn it on when they need it. (It probably depends on how wide the screen is.) That's why it's made so you can set it either way. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:03, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Assistance needed with non-free file rename

Hi, I need help renaming a non-free file. The file is:

File:Leslie Howell and Trevor Buchanan.jpg

It won't let me add the rename template to the file page, could someone please rename it to or help me add the right rename template to:

File:Lesley Howell and Trevor Buchanan.jpg

This corrects the spelling of Lesley Howell's first name. Thank you. ItsShandog (talk) 21:39, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

I've moved it. For future reference, WP:Moving a page#How to move a file. —Cryptic 00:38, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

It lets me move other pages but It doesn't give me the option on that one. ItsShandog (talk) 09:09, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

The file has been moved. Mjroots (talk) 17:37, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

I understand that I was just replying back to the editor as they sent me something about how to move a file. ItsShandog (talk) 18:41, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Looking for feedback for declined draft

hey there just wanted to get some feedback on my latest draft that was declined (Draft:Zumper). I followed the guidance from a previous help desk inquiry that told me to start simpler and I did so with sources from wired, wsj, fortune, etc and a govt entity citing the company's data. Any feedback/guidance on the draft would be greatly appreciated as I think about next steps/edits. ZumperCrystal (talk) 18:36, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

My advice is that you abandon this endeavor. Please see WP:BOSS, and show it to your superiors and colleagues. The vast majority of companies on Earth do not merit Wikipedia articles, and most company representatives fail in attempting to create one. Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell about themselves, their offerings, and routine business activities(like raising capital).. 331dot (talk) 18:42, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

False admin claim

I've recently happened upon something questionable, a newly registered editor claiming to be both an administrator and a checkuser. I had reverted it, as it seemed to be plainly disruptive, but when I searched for a template to warn them or a policy to cite, I couldn't find a policy directly about false rights claims. Is there a policy on this? Was I wrong, and it was actually permissible? MetalBreaksAndBends (talk) 16:11, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Some possibilities: WP:DAPE, WP:CIVIL, WP:BITE. But I agree with you that "Don't claim to be someone you're not, or to hold positions you don't hold" is a good rule that seems like it should already exist but I haven't actually found it anywhere. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:45, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

A-ha! There is an essay, WP:FAKEADMIN, and it contains a link to WP:TALKNO, part of the guideline for talk pages, where it prohibits claiming to be an administrator or to have an access level you don't have. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:49, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! I don't know how I didn't find that in my searches. MetalBreaksAndBends (talk) 17:14, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

I think I might actually know: the way the guidelines are structured, "Talk page guidelines" seems to act like sort of a "separate rabbit-hole", so that if you don't start your search with that, you may have less chance of finding it. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:57, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

It's not permissible, no, but generally wouldn't be dealt with any more severely than other forms of disruptive editing. We'd probably just tell the user to stop doing that, and escalate enforcement if they did not. If they are impersonating a specific administrator, or any editor for that matter, then they would be blocked very quickly (WP:IMPERSONATOR, Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry#Joe job, WP:JOEJOB). Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:07, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Ok! So, it's just under the category of disruptive editing. Cool. MetalBreaksAndBends (talk) 18:17, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

@MetalBreaksAndBends Depending on the situation, WP:THREATEN might apply. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:46, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Public domain name image adding

I am trying to insert an image of the Funbag logo, but when I tried to add this link ( https://ised-isde.canada.ca/cipo/trademark-search/0771241 ) as the public domain tag, it doesn't work. What do I do? WVWG9652 (talk) 21:58, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @WVWG9652. I'm not an expert on this area, but that link seems to say that its registraton as a trademark has lapsed, but says nothing about its copyright status (they are entirely separate issues).

I suggest asking at WP:MCQ. ColinFine (talk) 23:05, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

TV episode "air date"

Articles about a TV series usually include a list of episodes including the "first aired date". If the episodes are first shown on transmitted TV (eg Freeview in the UK) on different dates, but the entire series is available for streaming at one common date, what goes in the "first aired date" field? -- SGBailey (talk) 22:26, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @SGBailey. Does MOS:TV answer the question? If not, I suggest asking at WT:WikiProject Television. ColinFine (talk) 23:16, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

semi automatic cleaning for remnants of spam link based WP:QS

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#Dwellics.com. There are about 35 pages still contaminated with this spam. Most of them added by sock farm. I've first spotted this source being cited in religions stats for Portland, Oregon and found it to contain error. So, the quality of data is in question too. Is there a semi automated way to clean up something like this? Could someone help out? Graywalls (talk) 03:06, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

@Graywalls 35 could probably just as easily be done by standard edits. However, you could try at WP:BOTREQ. There may be an existing bot that could do the necessary and the experts will be watching there. Mike Turnbull (talk) 23:23, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Blacklist

Why is it banned to link YouTube videos? ~2025-40048-69 (talk) 17:25, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Why do you think linking YT videos is banned? WP:YOUTUBE doesn't make such a claim, and in fact states the opposite. DonIago (talk) 17:28, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

I added a YouTube link on Reference Desk and a pop up told me that. ~2025-40048-69 (talk) 17:34, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

the case is actually that shortened links are banned, as the last paragraph of wp:youtube details. the easy solution is to just replace the "youtu.be" with "youtube.com/watch?v=" consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 17:33, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

... and short links are banned because people have to be already able to see where the link goes, before they click. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:49, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

And also because some providers allow their shortlinks to be changed, and it is therefore possible to manipulate a shortlink to insert a link to a malicious website, although that's not so much of an issue with youtu.be links AFAIK. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:01, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

...actually, yeah, why is that specific shortlink banned? there doesn't seem to have been a discussion about it, aside from one admin in wt:el's archives having said that it was a bad idea (here's a link) 14 years ago, so maybe it could just be procedural by now? weird stuff. alternatively, i'm just bad at looking, since i haven't found their reason for saying it was a bad idea consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 18:08, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

You could take a look for example at: meta:Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2024-10#youtu.be (there have been other discussions). One argument is that allowing multiple domains allows the actually blacklisted items to be easily bypassed. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 18:27, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

...huh. ignoring the mild trainwreckiness of that discussion and how it seems it would've been closed as "remove blacklist" if it was closed, the arguments for blocking youtu.be are either purely procedural or... just a tiny little wee bit completely nonsensical? if the discussion hadn't devolved into "nuh uh, you prove your claim first", i'm pretty sure the question of why they don't also apply to youtube.com would've been followed further, because it absolutely also does

but that's besides the point here, even if it is something that can be discussed in another forum in the context of wp-en. i'd probably still vote to have it blacklisted, but instead to filter out people who want to cite reviews from their favorite #content creator or the kind of unwatchable slop that makes me glad to stick to siivagunner consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 18:46, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

It's not a great discussion, but it contains some useful links and information. The meta blacklist is probably the wrong place to discuss it anyway (in enwiki's case). Instead the whole domain can be whitelisted at MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist, and at the same time, amend some 10 existing entries in the local blacklist plus any going forward. If one is going to propose a change, it probably should be a relatively well advertised, and definitely well explained, local RfC. I'd personally rate its chances quite high. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:50, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

How to link to pages I accessed via the Wikipedia Library for sourcing

How do I link to a page I used the Wikipedia Library to find as a source so that people without the Wikipedia Library can use the link? Nononsense101 (talk) 22:32, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

@Nononsense101 Please don't use such links, because as you realise most readers will not be able to use them. Instead, just give the full citation to the source using {{cite journal}}, {{cite news}} or other as appropriate. Links are for the convenience of readers but are not generally required. In a few cases, you can strip out the library part of the link and it will work: we can give more advice if you specify the citation you were thinking of using. Mike Turnbull (talk) 23:14, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

What I meant was how to remove the library part. Nononsense101 (talk) 00:13, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Template:Simon Property Group

I think that this discussion was closed prematurely by the nominator themselves. If I started Template:Simon Property Group, how should I proceed? --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:19, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

I'm with them, on this one. I honestly think it's not worth doing. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:41, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

@TooManyFingers:, come again? --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:42, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

I totally misread the discussion over there. Sorry. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:45, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

(I don't have a worthwhile opinion on how to fix it.) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:46, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Someone reverted anyway. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:04, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Forgery, Threats and harrassing me for 4 years but I can't get anyone to listen and help me

Not relevant to Wikipedia

Is there any way I can talk to an agent about my situation with this person from Nigeria that has threatened more than once. ~2026-19160-3 (talk) 01:39, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Hacking my phone and account's Google account email account my Google maps and just after 4 years of this constant harrassing and I have had enough. I need to speak to someone as soon as possible because I feel she's going to try to hurt me because my husband left her and he's home with us but like I said I can bet on it that my husband was involved and he took my birth certificate and social security card and his to and gave them to her in 2021 or 2022. He denies it and he denied living with this person while she was planning my Death, but I need help now and my Police Department isn't listening to me ~2026-19160-3 (talk) 01:46, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

This is not a general help desk for the internet, just for Wikipedia. If your local authorities will not help you with your issue, unfortunately we can do nothing to help you. 331dot (talk) 01:47, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

The only other thing you can do is consult with a qualified legal professional in your jurisdiction. 331dot (talk) 01:49, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Reference Error

I made this edit and I can't see what I've done wrong.

If I float my mouse over, say, footnote 402 in the "Wars and Battles" section I get: "Miola 2002, p. 206. Cite error: The named reference "FOOTNOTEMiola2002206" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page)."

Yet the error message, and the linked help page, both refer to "named references". But I wasn't attempting to create any named references, just several normal {sfn}s to several different pages of the source. Can anyone see what's wrong with my syntax, that's making Wikipedia treat some (but not all) of the references I added as if they are named?

I haven't seen this problem before. AndyJones (talk) 11:04, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

• Solved! The error was that I'd typed "pp=" where I should have typed "p=", in one place. Changing that seems to have fixed it. (In passing, I'd say the help message was not helpful and sent me off in the wrong direction.) Anyway, this can be considered resolved. AndyJones (talk) 12:28, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

How do I ask for a move request to be closed?

There’s been a move request for Hans Island since February 2025. I posted to it so I can’t close it. How do I request that an uninvolved admin consider whether to close it? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:45, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

WP:CR is the way to go. Szmenderowiecki (talk · contribs) 17:54, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 14:48, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on John Herdman

Special:Diff/1323255121

Reference help requested.

Can you specific what the reference error you raised is? Thank you!

Thanks, AnnWinterburne (talk) 17:14, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @AnnWinterburne. I don't see a reference error in that. What are you seeing? ColinFine (talk) 17:42, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

@AnnWinterburne: the reference error in the version you linked is that reference 62 is a cite web reference that is missing a "title" field. It has been fixed in a later edit. TSventon (talk) 18:16, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Writ petition

writ petition no. 9401 of 2019, s citation identity need for ~2026-20422-6 (talk) 14:25, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Your question is not clear; please clarify. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:58, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

on involvement

for the purposes of closing discussions, which of those would you consider "improper", assuming different levels of involvement, but regardless of if the closure would require admin perms?

1. closing on non-procedural grounds (keep, merge, retarget, etc.), after a comment or correction regarding another editor's mention of policy (i.e. "that's a2, not g2")
2. closing on non-procedural grounds after a comment or correction regarding another editor's mention of a page's topic (i.e. "it's a berry, not a follicle") that is not actually opining on the discussion
3. closing on procedural grounds (already speedy deleted, disruptive nom, malformed or duplicate nom, redirect overwritten by an article, they took earth to afd again, etc.) after a comment or correction regarding the stuff already mentioned above
4. closing on procedural grounds after a vote (for this, it usually shouldn't matter if the vote supported or opposed the result)

yes, this is mostly a matter of opinion on stuff i'm only very slightly iffy on, so don't worry too much consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 17:29, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

I think the reason these are not found in any rule book is that they can't be solved by any set of unchanging abstract principles; they depend very much on the context. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:55, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

...yeah, hence the disclaimer that it's "mostly a matter of opinion". as in, i'd say "no > no > doesn't count > yes if you overwrote it", but arguments could really easily be made that they'd be different, like #2 being a tentative or even strong "yes" consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 22:10, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

I don't agree that it's a matter of opinion. I think many reasonable people would say "Show me the discussion you're referring to. I have no opinion on this random question, until I see what's actually happening." TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:30, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

(By "not agreeing that it's a matter of opinion" I meant that, unlike "which do you like better, plums or apricots" which is unambiguous and has a very short list of possible answers, these questions are far less clear, and much more likely to elicit "no opinion", "unfair question", "it depends", and other legitimate non-answers.) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:42, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Am I being bullied?

Another user has repeatedly undone my edits https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allison_%26_Busby&diff=1331899421&oldid=1331898912 but I did not introduce any external links; nor did I introduce any false information. I only added information already in the sources; everything I added is verifiable. Please help! Vollerhass (talk) 20:30, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

I'm not absolutely certain what's happening here, but seeing the type and sequence of edits makes me ask first: what's your relationship with Allison & Busby, and with the people there? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 21:02, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

@Vollerhass I hope you saw this; please respond TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 07:33, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Reference desk

Good saturday evening. Is it considered to spam to have too many questions on the Reference desk? I already have three there and i just got another one. I don't want to clog it.~2025-40048-69 (talk) 20:51, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

The latest question (I think): "I believe that School disco is mostly used in non-US countries like the UK, while the US mostly uses School dance. Is it correct or not? Also,what are those houses with a big amount of bedrooms as well as well as social rooms called? Maybe cabins, but i'm not sure." I don't know why you're asking. I don't suppose it's to help you improve an article, as it doesn't seem that (while using this temporary ID) you improve any articles. You don't ask how you might find the answers to similar questions (seeing how lexical preferences between putative synonyms in US English compare with those in UK English; finding a word to match a meaning). When it gets to i went to the same camp next year and there was the camp director's daughter and her friends (I was 9 and they were 13) and they let me watch a movie with them and we danced during the credits. Wanna know what movie? I get the impression that you simply want to chat. Perhaps some alternative to Wikipedia would suit this better. -- Hoary (talk) 07:52, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

How do non-talk pages have the talk page format?

Many pages, like this one, WP:TEA, or WP:AN/I, are not talk pages, however they have the format, with the "Add topic" and "Reply" buttons. How is this done? dot.py 05:25, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

@Dot.py thy has been marked as a discussion page in the site configuration which is why it has the Add topic and Reply buttons similar to the Talk pages. CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 05:50, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Ah, so it's not something like a template that can be added. Thanks! dot.py 05:57, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

@Dot.py, I believe you can just add __NEWSECTIONLINK__ anywhere on the page. It may be done via a template so you won't see that code on the page. Help:Magic words. Commander Keane (talk) 10:21, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

How do you add a person to Wikipedia?

Y ~2026-22492-7 (talk) 14:26, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

First you need to check that they meet the criteria at WP:NBIO. See WP:42 for advice on how to measure that.

Then see WP:Your first article—but we strongly recommend that you get some experience making smaller changes to existing articles, first. I've left some links to guidance on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:54, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Hijacking of The Morning Leader

Hello, I am usually not editing here, so maybe posting in the wrong place -- sorry for that. I just noticed that The Morning Leader was hijacked about two weeks ago. Coming from Wikidata, a lot of the respective user's edits there seem problematic. Also, it might be coincidental, but there are contributions overlapping with activity of users blocked due to SPIs concerning Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aboobackeramani. I hope you can do something with it. Thanks, Dorades (talk) 22:09, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

You should report this on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. GarethBaloney (talk) 22:13, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

I've rolled the page back to the previous topic (the matter still needs to be reported). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:07, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Review

Can someone review the article Ogden Round Lake Wilderness Area? It is only edited by me. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 15:46, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Link Versions111 (talk • contribs) 15:48, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

@Versions111: WP:NPP are currently running a backlog drive so hopefully your article will be reviewed fairly soon. I am aware that reviews can take a long time between backlog drives. TSventon (talk) 15:55, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

It looks good to me, albeit it needs more sources. The "Routes" section is completely unsourced.

Pictures would also be good.

Thank you for your contribution! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:57, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Remove deceptive link

How to remove a link that appears in "Films Scored by Miklos Rozsa"? "Ministry of Fear" was actually scored by Victor Young, though some Rozsa cues may have been incorporated. Rozsaphile1 (talk) 14:48, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

We have no article of that title. We have Miklos Rozsa and List of compositions by Miklós Rózsa; but neither include "Ministry of Fear".

Please can you clarify your request? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:13, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

I think it’s that Ministry of Fear appears in Category:Films_scored_by_Miklós_Rózsa. Entmaiden (talk) 15:58, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I have removed Category:Films scored by Miklós Rózsa using Wikipedia:HotCat. TSventon (talk) 16:00, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

My page has disappeared and I do not know what to do.

I recently created a page called Quiichaar. It is about the book series. With in a minute after it was created someone put issues at the top. They said it was focused too much on the plot and also that it seemed too real. It is a science fiction fantasy novel series. It states this in the first sentence, so I do not understand how people would think this is real. There was other information other than the plot, but obviously that would be what most people would want to know about a book series. I did not give anything away in the summation, so I do not understand how to fix this issue. My page is no longer visible. Can someone please explain what I am supposed to do. This is my first time creating something on here. Thanks in advance. Showik123 (talk) 00:00, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Showik123! I assume you're talking about this page? Draft:Quiichaar. It's still here. _{S.G. (They/Them) (Talk) (Edits)} 00:01, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Showik123, you need to read Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. There is no possibility of your draft being accepted while it fails to demonstrate that the book meets our notability criteria - which is indicated though significant coverage in published reliable sources with no connection to the subject matter. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:06, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

The reason you thought it was gone is they moved it, to be only a draft. They do that when an article is not close to good enough and needs a lot of work before it gets accepted. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:10, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

@Showik123: Drafts are not included in searches by default. You could have found it by clicking the user icon at top right and then "Contributions" to see Special:Contributions/Showik123. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:35, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate you telling me that. I was nervous it was all gone. Showik123 (talk) 03:06, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Let me address the main point of your confusion here;

For something to be included on Wikipedia, it is not enough to simply prove that that thing exists. Much like many other kinds of publication, Wikipedia has criteria for inclusion that determine whether we should have an article about something.

Our main criterion is something we call 'notability,' which essentially means that the topic has been written about in reliable, independent, secondary sources.

To use a fantasy book as an example, The Lord of the Rings is obviously so famous that entire other books have been written about its themes, meanings, its history, the story of its creation etc. That's the sort of thing we mean when we say 'notability,' that reliable, independent sources have taken enough interest in the subject to write about it in depth.

Wikipedia, then, is a tertiary source. We take the information available in those secondary sources and we compile them into an article. Essentially, a Wikipedia article is a summary of what other people have said about a topic; there should be essentially no original thought in a Wikipedia article; we even have a whole rule about it, WP:No original research

The problem is not that you haven't been able to demonstrate that this book exists, it's that you haven't provided any significant coverage in reliable, independent, secondary sources which means you haven't demonstrated that the book meets our criteria for inclusion. Athanelar (talk) 11:24, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

I am confused. Can you explain what you meant by "no possibility of your draft being accepted while it fails to demonstrate that the book meets our notability criteria - which is indicated though significant coverage in published reliable sources with no connection to the subject matter." It is a real book. I have held it in my hand and read from the pages. I even included the ISBN numbers. I am quite certain that I do not understand what you are saying. Can you please explain further? Is this something that I can fix?

Yes, it is a real book. However, per policies arrived at by the editing community over two decades or so, Wikipedia only includes articles that meet our inclusion criteria. The only 'fix' is to demonstrate that the book has received significant coverage in independent published reliable sources. A quick Google seems to find nothing to indicate that, and without such coverage, your draft will not be accepted. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:27, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

I am certainly not meaning to sound like I am arguing with you. I merely wish to understand what you mean. When you say you ran a google search, may I ask what you mean by "significant coverage in independent published reliable sources?" I guess I just don't understand what that means. Can you give me an example. Sorry, I am just very unclear as to what you mean and I don't want to make assumptions to what you are referring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Showik123 (talk • contribs) 01:36, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

You need to go to the links you were given, and read everything at them. That's why they gave them to you. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:24, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Notability (books). PrimeHunter (talk) 02:25, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

I did read the links. What was confusing was that it said a book wasn't a reliable (notable) source if the author was the same as the publisher. But upon reading that it appeared to be referencing the fact that those types of books were not reliable as a resource to prove something else correct. How could they not be reliable for their own existence? If there is a blanket statement that no independent authors who publish their own work can have presented here with their own page, then I understand, although I wish I hadn't taken the time to make the article then, as I was unaware of this. To me they are real and I enjoyed them, so I wanted to make a page for the books. Next time I guess I will write one from a published author instead of an Indy writer. Thanks though for your input. Showik123 (talk) 02:43, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

The notability and reliable source criteria are linked earlier, but basically, notability has to be shown by showing that it is the main topic of coverage (say, the main topic of a news article) in multiple reliable sources (sources not by the people who made the book and which are sources by places that have a reputation for fact-checking--so like a news or magazine or journal article, but not like a tabloid or blog article usually). It's kind of like how I exist and am a real person, but I can't have a Wikipedia article because news/academic journals/etc. aren't talking about me in a way that shows I'm notable. - Purplewowies (talk) 02:27, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your time. I will have to wait and see if there are things written about it as it is still fairly new. Showik123 (talk) 12:27, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

That makes sense, but if you can buy the book on Amazon it must be real. Are they a source?

Storefronts can sometimes be sources for specific factual information, but usually they're not considered the best, and they don't prove that a subject is notable. I'd really recommend reading through the links provided to you. They're wordy, but they're troves of information. - Purplewowies (talk) 02:41, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

I did read them. Apparently, I am just not understanding them. Thanks though for answering my questions. I'm disappointed and confused, but at least I tried. Showik123 (talk) 02:45, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

If you have questions about specific parts of those things you read, I'd be happy to try. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:49, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Sure. So in the reliable sources section it says: "When editors talk about sources that are being cited on Wikipedia, they might be referring to any one of these three concepts:" and the first thing stated was "The piece of work itself (the article, book)"

Which is why I used it as a reference and included its ISBN number.

It also says, "Published means, for Wikipedia's purposes, any source that was made available to the public in some form. The term is most commonly associated with text materials, either in traditional printed format or online."

And as the book is available to purchase in multiple formats including text and e-book, then how does that not qualify as available to the public? The book is also in several libraries. I have seen it myself. Is that a source?

Sorry for so many questions. I'm trying to learn and understand. Showik123 (talk) 02:56, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

It's saying there are different kinds of sources. It's in the middle of an idea. You need to keep reading so you understand the entire thing, not go searching for little bits to support your old idea. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 03:24, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Please show me the specific part that says the book is not eligible. I would like to understand. Showik123 (talk) 04:24, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

The most important parts are in Wikipedia:Notability (books) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 05:17, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

The five numbered items near the beginning already pretty much show what a book needs to be eligible. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 05:19, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

TooManyFingers is right; but perhaps a little more clearly: The book series is not notable (as defined by and for Wikipedia) and thus is not eligible for an article until/unless you cite reliable, disinterested sources for a claim that the book series satisfies at least one of the five criteria listed at the head of Wikipedia:Notability (books). -- Hoary (talk) 08:10, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you that actually makes it quite clear. I understand the policy now. That is the first time I have seen that specific page on books. I will look for something like that, if it exists. Would a review on Goodreads count or does it have to be a newspaper? Perhaps the book just isn't old enough yet. One of my ex-teachers wrote the book and I only knew about it because of his author's page. I was wanting to surprise him. I understand the criteria though, now. I think :) Showik123 (talk) 12:26, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Anyone can post a review aboit any book on Goodreads, so no, it doesn't count. A review in a newspaper like the The Guardian or the Washington Post might Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:10, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Got it! Thanks again. Showik123 (talk) 18:02, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on List of rulers of Timor

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.

---

Special:Diff/1332168709

Reference help requested.

Thanks, Javed Khan king of India (talk) 07:31, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Javed Khan king of India, start by changing every instance of "Februari" to "February". -- Hoary (talk) 11:48, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

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

Question about replacing a non‑free image in Murder of Michaela McAreavey

Hello, I would like to check something about non‑free images in the article Murder of Michaela McAreavey.

The article currently uses a non‑free family photograph that includes Michaela McAreavey with her father and brother. I am considering whether it would be acceptable, under the Non‑free Content Criteria, to replace it with a different non‑free image that shows Michaela alone on her wedding day. This type of image seems more appropriate for identification purposes and is directly relevant to the widely reported circumstances of her murder on her honeymoon.

Before doing anything, I want to confirm whether such a replacement would be allowed. If it is permitted, I would also like to know the correct way to tag the old non‑free image for deletion once the new one is in use.

Could someone please advise on whether this approach complies with NFCC, and what the correct procedure would be?

Thank you. ItsShandog (talk) 09:32, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

@ItsShandog: replacement of one non-free image with another is permissible. Photographic quality should be the main consideration. You could upload a new image at the same title as the current image, which would avoid breaking historic versions of the article as an image would still be displayed instead of a redlink. Mjroots (talk) 08:09, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

I have added the new Image but I keep having issues with being able to change the name of a file it doesn't give me the option to move it to change the name. ItsShandog (talk) 09:10, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Sorry never mind I have got the right template but on my browser it is showing the old image and then on the Wiki app it is showing the new image I have uploaded so not sure if there is a glitch. ItsShandog (talk) 09:38, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Please see WP:OVERWRITE to learn why uploading a totally different image, which does not even portray what the title is, is not appropriate. Consider how looking at an old version of the page would display the new image with the caption that instead describes the old image. I have therefore declined the rename-request and will undo the over-writing. Feel free to upload at a new filename with its correct descriptions, etc. The WP:HISTSPLIT process is a lot more complicated than simply uploading images to proper names from the get-go. DMacks (talk) 18:54, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

But do you mean upload another non free file what happens to the old image? Since there is already a fair use image in use? ItsShandog (talk) 19:26, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

The old image file will be deleted outright as an unused non-free image once it is replaced in the article. This type of action would have to be taken anyway with the overwrite, to delete the old image out from under the new one at the same-filename. DMacks (talk) 19:43, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining. That is the action I was going to take originally but wasn't sure if it was allowed or not I think I must of been confused as to what the person replied to me earlier as I thought overwriting would be a bit silly but thought that is what they meant. Thank you again. ItsShandog (talk) 20:10, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Deprecated source and automatic filter

Hello. When I tried to upload a finished new page, an automatic filter refused the page, saying that I was linking to a deprecated source, but I cannot find any link to a deprecated source. I'm using no source listed on the Wikipedia:Deprecated sources page. All my text links to other Wiki pages link to existing pages. I'm writing about a plant species using only technical/botanical references and there's no controversy about the topic. Thanks for any help. Gaiacoyote (talk) 19:43, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

@Gaiacoyote: It was https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/veterinary-science-and-veterinary-medicine/rotenoid per Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 432#ScienceDirect Topics (AI-generated pages). It may be missing in a list. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:55, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks PrimeHunter. That's good to know and I'll try to fix it. Gaiacoyote (talk) 21:12, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Copy-pasting a sentence added references

So i copied a 186 char long string from a wikipedia article and I ended up putting +1,950 chars into that article, including references I - if i remember correctly - never touched. Tried again, happened again. 1st: To make a copy of that sentence i opened the editor with an old revision. 2nd: i think i made it the

Question: Are there configurations of the default editor, where this could happen, as a kind of feature? Like "hey, you copied a sentence without its refs, here, take it all"? Or could this happen as a feature to prevent an edit conflict?

I'm just asking to make sure, it was my mistake and that i didn't miss some feature differences between the editor software of the different languages I'm editing in. Amtiss, SNAFU ? 11:58, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Amtiss, I assume that the article was Killing of Renee Good. I think that the explanation is that the Wikipedia:Article size#Markup size reported in the edit history is in bytes, not characters, and some characters have a value of more than one byte. Possibly other helpers have a better grasp of the detail than I do. TSventon (talk) 14:40, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Do you refer to this edit?

This text is 1925 characters <ref>{{cite news |last1=Kanno-Youngs |first1=Zolan |title=We Pressed Trump on His Conclusion About the ICE Shooting. Here's What He Said. |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/08/us/politics/trump-minnesota-ice-shooting-video.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.today/gopZ4 |archive-date=January 8, 2026 |access-date=January 8, 2026 |work=[[The New York Times]]}}</ref> This account has been contested by eyewitnesses, journalists,<ref name=LumStein /> local figures, and [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic Party]] lawmakers, some of whom have called for a criminal investigation.<ref name=startribune_601559829>{{Cite news |last=Barnett |first=Sofia |date=January 6, 2026 |title=Mayor Jacob Frey's Remarks After ICE Agent Fatally Shot Woman in Minneapolis |url=https://www.startribune.com/mayor-jacob-freys-remarks-after-ice-agents-fatally-shoots-woman-in-minneapolis/601559829 |work=[[The Minnesota Star Tribune]] |archive-url=https://archive.ph/nqweZ |archive-date=January 8, 2026 }}</ref> Minneapolis mayor [[Jacob Frey]] and Minnesota governor [[Tim Walz]] called on the federal government to end their presence in the city. Thousands of people [[List of Renee Good protests|have protested]] in Minneapolis,<ref name="MinnPost">{{Cite news |last=Mitchell |first=Trevor |date=January 7, 2026 |title=Minneapolis Vigil Draws Thousands as City Reels Following ICE Shooting |url=https://www.minnpost.com/metro/2026/01/minneapolis-vigil-draws-thousands-as-city-reels-following-ice-shooting/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260108044045/https://www.minnpost.com/metro/2026/01/minneapolis-vigil-draws-thousands-as-city-reels-following-ice-shooting/ |archive-date=January 8, 2026 |access-date=January 8, 2026 |work=[[MinnPost]] |language=en-US}}</ref> and more have protested in other cities including [[Chicago]], [[New York City]], and [[Washington, D.C.]]<ref name="mpr" />}}

-- Andy Mabbett Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:59, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Let me be more clear. The numbers are not too important. Sorry for that. My question is: is there some kind of automatic assisting when using copy-paste or not? (I did, at no point select and copy the >1000 bytes, just the sentence.) --Amtiss, SNAFU ? 15:18, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

@Amtiss: I think that the answer to your question is no. When you use source editing, the text you add or remove is what gets added or removed. In some cases, e.g. where you try to add a blacklisted internet link, you may not be able to publish your edit. Copying and pasting is an automatically assisted process, so I think it is possible that you highlighted more than you realised and thus copied and pasted more than you realised. It is often useful to preview the changes an edit is making before posting to check nothing has gone wrong. TSventon (talk) 18:48, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

I guess you're right, thanks. Amtiss, SNAFU ? 21:46, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

I can’t create an account!?

Hello, I’m trying to make an account so I can permanently enable dark mode on safari (iOS) lol.

I keep getting the proxy error, but I don’t think I have ever made an account, or if I have, I don’t remember it and it would have been with an old email.

I did have iCloud Relay active when I attempted to sign up the first time, then I turned it off and tried again. I assumed my IP would have changed to my actual one, because when it was active the the IP had been banned—it still didn’t work. Did that have something to do with it?

Thanks! ~2026-25117-4 (talk) 15:55, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, make sure your relay is off and your browser cache cleared. You may also need to wait 24 hours, though if you were able to post here, you may be able to create an account. 331dot (talk) 15:58, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

I need urgent help.

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.

---

Hello, I am an Afghan commando soldier living in Afghanistan. My financial situation is not very good. I need urgent help. Kusarjan (talk) 16:33, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this page is not a general help desk for the internet. We Wikipedia users are unable to provide assistance. 331dot (talk) 16:37, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

@Kusarjan: We cannot help with such matters. You'll need to find out what sort of options are available to you within your local area or your chain of command. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:41, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

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

Referencing errors on Spatial epidemiology

Reference help requested. tho i've been a wiki editor for decades, i find the creation and placement of references very confusing, so i'd appreciate any help! Thanks, Lee De Cola (talk) 20:07, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi there! The error is saying that something is wrong with the DOI's formatting. When you open the reference template, under DOI, it says: "Digital Object Identifier; begins with '10.'". Your (full) DOI is: https://doi.org/10.1559/152304002782008413 -- you only pasted the numbers after the last slash, but you need everything after that '10.' (and nothing before that, or the template won't work either). Barbalalaika 🐌 21:13, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Query regarding Draft:Candlelight Homes

Hello Wiki Help Desk, We’re reaching out for guidance regarding an article we recently submitted about our company, Candlelight Homes. The content was written to remain neutral in tone and supported by multiple third-party sources; however, it was declined due to concerns that the sources were not sufficiently in-depth. Candlelight Homes is an established, legitimate company, and our intent is not promotional. Our goal is simply to provide accurate, verifiable information so the company can be discoverable and properly represented within the community. We’d appreciate any direction on what types of sources or additional context would be required to meet Wikipedia’s notability and sourcing standards. Thank you for your time and assistance.

Requesting guidance on acceptable sourcing and notability requirements for a company article that was declined due to insufficient depth of sources. ZacharyBinx99 (talk) 17:42, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I'm a bit overwhelmed (just lots to do today, kind of a bit busy) to answer your actual question, but your repeated use of "we" has me wanting to make sure you know about WP:NOSHARING. - Purplewowies (talk) 17:48, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Note: I have moved the original section header as the first paragraph, to not break formatting, and written what I think is a neutral heading. Skynxnex (talk) 17:52, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

You say "Our goal is simply to provide accurate, verifiable information so the company can be discoverable and properly represented within the community." that is pretty much the definition of "promotional" here. Theroadislong (talk) 18:03, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. The intention isn't to be promotional. We do want to put out accurate information about our organization. If that's considered promotional – they please disregard my ask. I reached out to get help to ensure I'm doing this properly. But, I understand this is a guarded group. Thanks. ZacharyBinx99 (talk) 18:30, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, that's considered promotional here, see WP:YESPROMO. The place for you to provide accurate information about your company is its website and social media. Please see your user talk page for an inquiry. 331dot (talk) 18:43, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @ZacharyBinx99.

A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what the majority of people who are wholly unconnected with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, (see Golden rule) and not much else. What you know (or anybody else knows) about the subject is not relevant except where it can be verified from a reliable published source.

What your company wants people to know is irrelevant.

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.

It is even harder when you have a WP:COI: you would need to:

1. Find several sources which meet all the requirements in WP:42.
2. If you can't, stop there.
3. If you can, effectively forget everything you know about your company and write a summary of what those sources say. They leave out something important? Tough. They are nasty about you? Tough. They are wrong, according to your knowledge? Tough. Wikipedia's fundamental principle is verifiability, not truth.

ColinFine (talk) 18:57, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

This is incredibly helpful—thank you. Apologies for taking up your time. I was asked to explore creating a page for our company given how frequently AI tools reference Wikipedia content. In my initial submission, I focused on linking to third-party sources, but I now understand the concern around promotional content when it comes from someone affiliated with or paid by the company. I appreciate the guidance and clarification. We’re all set and will not add to this discussion again. ZacharyBinx99 (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

arbitration

There is an article that tries to cover 2 standalone topics. I want to open an arbitration case against it for its deletion Gnosticfind (talk) 21:23, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

1. Which article are you talking about?
2. There's no need to involve arbcom in a routine deletion case. See WP:Deletion for how the deletion process works.

Athanelar (talk) 21:29, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

@Gnosticfind, welcome to Wikipedia! Arbitration is meant for intractable behavioral issues that the community can't otherwise handle. You cannot open arbitration cases against articles. If you feel an article is too broad in its coverage of the subject, you may raise this issue at the talk page of said article. If you really wish to delete the article, please see WP:AFD for instructions. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 21:30, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

@Gnosticfind, does the article in question cover two subjects about which Wikipedia (a) already has two separate articles, or (b) has an article for one but not the other, or (c) has no article about either?

If (b) or (c), is there any reason (aside from lack of WP:Notability) that either or both subjects should not have articles? If not, why not look towards creating a second suitably named draft about one of them, editing the existing article and new draft to 'segregate' their content, and change (move) the existing article's title appropriately? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2025-31359-08 (talk) 21:48, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

I hear you and you sound so nice. However, I have asked before and was rejected. That is why arbitration needs to be opened. Here is the useless article:

Christianity and Islam

This nonsense article was posted by somebody with an ulterior motive.

Each is a standalone topic and has carloads of information. Additionally, the religions are very different--almost opposites.

Also, I am fine with bankrupting you until you remove it. Gnosticfind (talk) 00:47, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia has no process for deletion by arbitration. The arbitration committee does not rule on content issues. As for bankrupting Wikipedia, good luck with that. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:53, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

The article is pretty clearly focused on comparison between the two religions, and the ways they have interacted. Now, whether the title and lead do a good job of communicating that is another matter, but it is not true that the article 'tries to cover 2 standalone topics'.

Also, we already have independent articles on Christianity and Islam if that's what your complaint is.

I'm also not sure what you mean by I am fine with bankrupting you until you remove it. but this sounds like a WP:THREAT which is categorically not allowed here. Athanelar (talk) 00:53, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

An encyclopedia covers many kinds of topics, and this is one of them. Nobody is making you read any of it.

If Wikipedia followed my religious beliefs, all articles would be required to use the words "fantasy fiction" to describe every religion. That would be a ridiculous and stupid way of censoring an encyclopedia, so it's a good thing they don't do it. But your proposed way of censoring the encyclopedia is no better than mine. Encyclopedias don't follow any person's religious beliefs, and it's pointless to ask them to. Encyclopedias do respect everyone's religious beliefs, by not forcing people to read articles they aren't interested in. TooManyFingers (talk) 02:21, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

I see you cannot tell when you are being played. I am now going to write an article on Christianity and Dentistry ALSO Unitarianism and Frisbees. Its very important to be so open minded you can prove your brain has fallen out. Wikipedia is not about integrity and scholarship; Wikipedia is about feel-good verbiage Gnosticfind (talk) 03:25, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

You can write anything you like. Just not on Wikipedia, since we don't permit random contributors to abuse its facilities to construct nonsensical 'articles' to prove some sort of facile 'point'. Should you attempt to actually add such content, you will no doubt find yourself blocked per WP:NOTHERE. We can manage well enough without your input. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:52, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

How about pseudorandom contributors? —Antonissimo (talk) 03:06, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Regarding me having been played: which part of "your religion is fantasy fiction" did you misunderstand? TooManyFingers (talk) 04:29, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

You can write "Christianity and Dentistry" if you can find and cite WP:N-good sources that covers that subject, compare Jehovah's Witnesses and blood transfusions. I started Shakespeare and Star Trek myself. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:23, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Ah, you take me back to 1982 when I heard a Unitarian minister preach a sermon on Frisbee. —Antonissimo (talk) 03:04, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Second sentence of that article: "Both are Abrahamic religions and monotheistic, originating in the Middle East."—so no, they are not "almost opposites". It is entirely appropriate for this project, as an encyclopedia, to have an article comparing and contrasting them.

Your dislike of the article, or of one of the two religions, is not a reason for its deletion. You are not here to build an encyclopedia, but to "right great wrongs", and as such you are wasting your own, and our, time. If you persist, your account will be blocked.

(This, then this, and also this may be related.) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:28, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

"Wikipedia wants to trick you into thinking Christianity and Islam are similar so that you'll convert to Islam" has to be the strangest WP:CABAL theory I've ever heard. Athanelar (talk) 18:01, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Meh, it's a natural part of our liberal agenda. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:07, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

I always wondered what Template:Convert was for... Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:47, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Per your links above, I also wonder if "demi-urges" is a term for people who wants something, but in a half-assed way. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:56, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Demiurges was meant, I think. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:03, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Well, both can be argued to make sense. Kinda like Christianty and Islam. Can be, I said. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:34, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

We're off topic by now, but given their new username is 'Gnosticfind' they were likely referring to, as Andy said, the Demiurge of Gnostic Christianity Athanelar (talk) 20:29, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Vorrei e non vorrei, mi trema un poco il cor, ...

-- Zerlina in Mozart's Don Giovanni, having a famous demi-urge during "Là ci darem la mano" TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 07:02, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång I may have to steal your definition of demi-urges. Ha! That was funny. David10244 (talk) 10:56, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

P.S. I was also confused by the "agenda" comment. David10244 (talk) 10:57, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

@Gnosticfind: I think the point you are trying to make is that Christianity and Islam is a synthesis of information, and indeed synthesis is not allowed per policy: Wikipedia:No original research#Synthesis of published material. However, if there are sources comparing two standalone topics then an article can be written using those sources. Essentially, any ulterior motive is by the authors of those sources, and Wikipedia simply reflects that. Commander Keane (talk) 14:05, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

URL for a physical book

I've purchased an encyclopedia (The Pigeon by Wendell M. Levi) and in compiling the URL for my citation, I've found that the only websites I can use are commercial sites that sell the book, and the internet archive. Both seem insufficient to me. I'm unsure what I should do in this situation because the book hasn't got a PDF either, and the internet archive is a short review (one page) that is of the 1945 edition, while I have the 1977. Any help at all is appreciated :) Gone Extinct (talk) 00:09, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

You can just cite the book. See Template:Cite book for directions. The URL is just a convenience, not mandatory. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 00:42, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Oh thanks. So the ISBN is fine on its own with no access date or URL required? Gone Extinct (talk) 00:43, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

@Gone Extinct: Yes. Template:Cite book will make a link like ISBN 978-0910876018 to help readers search for the book on other websites. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:08, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Gone Extinct, I notice that you're asking about a fairly old book. If you had instead obtained the 1945 edition, it would have predated ISBNs. For such a book it would be helpful if you'd supply an OCLC number, which you get from WorldCat. Very often a single edition of a single book has two or more records at WorldCat, records created sloppily by overworked librarians, scrupulously by librarians with time on their hands, or somewhere in between. Then it's your job to determine which of the alternative records is better (or the best), and to provide the OCLC number for that record alone. -- Hoary (talk) 02:18, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! :) Gone Extinct (talk) 02:20, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

@Gone Extinct: Reference books existed before we had an Internet. URL is nice but not mandatory. An OCLC is very helpful for anyone who actually wants to find the book, because you can use Worldcat to get a list of physical libraries that have the book, and your local library can get it for you with an inter-library loan. -Arch dude (talk) 14:49, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

I'm aware reference books existed before URLs, I initially put in the access date on autopilot, which made the URL mandatory. It was a quick fix, thanks. Gone Extinct (talk) 00:05, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Gone Extinct, in situations like this, I will use the Google Books page for the book. Google does not sell books. They just catalog them and scan them and make excerpts available. If a book is in the public domain, they offer the full text for free. Cullen328 (talk) 03:28, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip! Gone Extinct (talk) 04:18, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Drafts

I happened to see that Draft:Milos Ercegovac is hanging in the air. This is quite strange because as I said on the talk page there he is a big shot in computer arithmetic. FYI I have met him, but we are not friends or anything, and I have not seen him for 20 or more years. What can I do to support his page? Thanks Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 10:56, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Yesterday, all my dreams....

Draft:Milos Ercegovac is not "hanging in the air". It was submitted for review by @Jh2024 one week ago, and is sitting in the pile of drafts awaiting review, with a note at the top saying "this could take 2 or three weeks".

The review process is not about Ercegovac, it is about whether the draft meets Wikipedia's criteria for an acceptable article; and in my opinion it does not, since as far as I can see, not a single one of its fifteen cited sources meets the requirements of being a reliable source wholly independent of Ercegovac and containing significant material about him (see WP:42).

There is not much that you or anybody can do to speed this up, but you or anybody can certainly increase the chances of it being accepted by adding some better sources.

A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what the majority of people who are wholly unconnected with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, (see Golden rule) and not much else. What you know (or anybody else knows) about the subject is not relevant except where it can be verified from a reliable published source. ColinFine (talk) 12:08, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, that clarifies the issues. Would you consider SPIE reliable? He is an IEEE fellow. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 13:22, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, but it's not independent, @Yesterday, all my dreams.... Even appreciation from bodies he is a member of would not help, never mind mere listings. ColinFine (talk) 13:30, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

I am certain that you know the process much better. And I am certain that the logic of the process is beyond my small brain. In an important and crucial field such as cpu design a top expert will be a member of every important organization. And NY Times Is not going to write about cpu design. So Milos is in trouble and some singer with 3 CDs that are mentioned somewhere is in. Thank you. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 14:09, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that may well be the case. Some fields of activity are underrepresented in Wikipedia precisely because existing publications don't cover them very often. ColinFine (talk) 15:51, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

I agree, and your use of the term unfortunate is well put. Thanks. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 15:55, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

@Yesterday, all my dreams... We have a specific set of notability requirements for academics which are designed to get over some of the problems of coverage. An academic only needs to pass on one of these criteria, so please see if you can justify inclusion based on this. You can comment at the top of your draft to say which bits of the requirement he passes. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:50, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Well, thank you and thank you. He passes items 3 and 5 immediately, IEEE fellow and head of department at UCLA. The question is: will his UCLA bio be ok? Mentions in his book back cover? Do we still have an independent problem? If UCLA says he was head of dept, is that Ok? Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 18:04, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

By the way, what do you think of the comment by Mike T? Thanks Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 19:05, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

1. Mike T is in general a reliable person who gives good advice.

2. In this case, he is 100% correct. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 23:02, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

So there should be no problem in getting that page approved? Could one or two of you guys please comment there soon it gets done. I did not write the page, but I think it deserves to exist. Thanks Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 01:59, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Yesterday, all my dreams..., I have moved the draft to main space since Ercegovac clearly meets WP:NACADEMIC. Thank you for your work to improve the encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 06:05, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 08:20, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Page never underwent review and was published without?

I just created this page today and rather than going under review when I pressed publish to save my changes, it went up instantly, skipping categorisation and now it is missing things like a Local Description and Wikidata Item ID. I've only been contributing since December and all of my other pages had to be reviewed. Sorry if this question should rather be on the page's talk page, I'm new to this. Gone Extinct (talk) 06:00, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Well, according to WP:NSPECIES, it's likely notable by default, so it's OK in mainspace. If you want it reviewed, you should create it in draft space, following the instructions at WP:AFC. It can be moved into draft space if you prefer, but it looks to me like all you need is a bit of cleanup. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 06:14, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Oh I had no idea pages could just be considered notable, thank you for telling me. What about the local description? Gone Extinct (talk) 07:03, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

To clarify, Gone Extinct, the Articles for Creation review process is entirely optional for all but very new accounts and those with a conflict of interest. Personally, I have written over 100 new articles and have never submitted one to AfC or had one article deleted. It is a great process for editors unsure about notability and with doubts about how to reference and structure an article to show notability. I am confident that I know what I am doing. As for any perceived shortcomings of the article, just edit it as needed. Cullen328 (talk) 07:16, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Oh perfect, thanks for letting me know, the process being an optional stage for everyone but fresh accounts makes total sense. Gone Extinct (talk) 07:19, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

The Articles for Creation review process is useful also for experienced editors to get a second look at something you may not be sure about before putting it in mainspace. I've used it that way, and the reviewer gave me useful advice, suggesting I rewrite the draft to be about a related topic that actually is notable (a book) rather than the topic I chose (an author biography). ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 07:25, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Oh good point, I can see the use in that. I can totally see myself using it that way for the zoology related articles I enjoy writing. Gone Extinct (talk) 07:27, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

The local description is optional. Sooner or later someone will add one, and add categories, if you don't. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:18, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Tah, thanks. Gone Extinct (talk) 14:34, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Capital Fringe Festival

Special:Diff/1332628438

The source, as it exists, has a generic byline. There's no other author name to use. How do I rewrite the reference to reflect that, and not order the words like a name?

Thanks, DavidK93 (talk) 08:47, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

For an article not under a specific person's name, just omit the |first= and |last= parameters in the citation. Never use a generic byline like "News Desk" or "American Theatre Editors" in those parameters. Deor (talk) 15:34, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

png thumbnail issue

Chester A. Arthur - Project Gutenberg eText 13632

on the left hand side is the original picture; on the right hand side is the thumbnail. The thumbnail is broken on my side, but if I zoom in to 110%, it works as normal again. Does anyone know what's the problem?

this is what I saw on my side

NDR0216 (talk) 15:27, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

It works when you zoom because it switches to a different image. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/03/Chester_A._Arthur_-_Project_Gutenberg_eText_13632.png/250px-Chester_A._Arthur_-_Project_Gutenberg_eText_13632.png (the broken thumbnail) is throwing a too many requests error. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/Chester_A._Arthur_-_Project_Gutenberg_eText_13632.png (the 110% thumbnail) is not. - Purplewowies (talk) 16:19, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Articles

Articles for creation Sumeetsinha1972 (talk) 15:30, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

How can we help? Were you searching for Wikipedia:Articles for creation? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:48, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Editing page on John Campbell UK

I signed up last year as a fact checker, I’ve only contributed to one article that incorrectly identified a public official that was sworn in and confirmed by the Senate is a nominee. It was accepted and the process went smoothly.

I’m trying to suggest an added to talk to John Campbell UK I have watched him since the beginning of the pandemic, like me, he was excited about the vaccine, I took the first two Pfizer vaccines and had no side effects His views have shifted but only was peer reviewed journal articles I don’t think he is controversial but perhaps within orthodox medical circles, his podcasts there are always evidence based still properly just disclaimed, people may disagree but labeling him as a purveyor of misinformation is inaccurate. I guess controversial is a result in his focus focusing on government and pure review data that is often not widely covered.

His recent highlighting of a 2013 study that supported higher vitamin D levels but calculated the amount of supplementation required is factual and extremely important information The error in the paper has been acknowledged by the authors but public health officials and some of the medical societies have not changed the RDA, only specialist to an endocrinologist seem to be aware. Can you provide me with the required background for the acceptance of characterizing John Campbell as a purveyor of misinformation? I certainly don’t want the name I just want to see the specific journal article which is almost always the basis for each episode. I do not know John Cambell and I’ve never communicated with him beyond subscribing to his YouTube channel I am based in the US and find it troubling that in 2026 we are labeling him as just “disinformation” source. I would respectfully request that you reconsider that characterization in the introduction I read Wikipedia briefly this morning because the information on vitamin D3 was consequential and the credibility Wikipedia, for me, plummeted if this description is current. I was unable to suggest an edit Z-factwriter (talk) 14:53, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

There are several John Campbells related to the UK, can you be more specific? 331dot (talk) 16:01, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Z-factwriter.

Wikipedia does not have a view: Wikipedia articles (should) summarise what reliable published sources say about a subject.

The article John Campbell (YouTuber) cites apparently reliable sources for the description of him as purveying misinformation.

If you wish to challenge that description, you need either to show that the sources are not correctly summarised in the article, or that they are not reliable sources, or that there are equally reliable and at least as numerous sources that say something different, remembering that we require an even higher standard of reliability for medical subject than for others - see WP:MEDRS.

If you have an argument of that source, the talk page Talk:John Campbell (YouTuber) is the place to discuss it. ColinFine (talk) 16:15, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

@Z-factwriter I would also really think about whether you are here to build an encyclopedia or rather here to right great wrongs. Ultimately we have to write what the preponderance of sources say, whether or not we think they are correct. If you find yourself having the thought that you need to use Wikipedia to "set the record straight" or such-like, that is a good indicator you may be going astray. Athanelar (talk) 17:35, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Translation of the article "Pharmazimuseum Brixen" into English

Could anyone help me to figure out how to translate the article of "Pharmaziemuseum Brixen" into English? When I try it tells me I don't have the rights to do so. Th article is already available also in Italian and Spanish. Thank you for your help! Pharmaziemuseum Brixen (talk) 16:23, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@Pharmaziemuseum Brixen You have guidance at Wikipedia:Translation. If the article doesn't meet en-WP policy like WP:N, it will not be accepted. See also WP:ORGNAME. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:55, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Note especially the part about machine translation. Your account will not be allowed to use that tool and you should only undertake a translation if you are sufficiently competent in the languages you are working with. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:32, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

... incidentally, your username is the same as the article you are proposing to translate, which may not be in line with our username policy and suggests you have a conflict of interest, which means you have to use the articles for creation process. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:35, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Shady users

I have come across a "shady" user while tending to my watchlist. Looking through their past edits, I found weird behavior, like many small and unimpactful additions to sentences that often get reverted. There's some potential they are blindly adding AI content. I also see a pretty strict routine of editing that I find unusual. But they've done nothing blatantly wrong, which is why they haven't been banned yet. I want to assume good faith but I fear they may be farming their edit count to sell their account once it's extended confirmed.

Where is the best place to discuss users who may be farming edits? Edit7hesadparts (talk) 11:07, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@Edit7hesadparts Your best approach is to assume good faith at first and politely ask them on their talk page about your concerns. Only after that and seeing their response should you consider WP:ANI: but read the advice at the top of that page before making a report. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:40, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Edit removed

Hi, my edit on Preston Hollow, Dallas was removed automatically. It was a minor edit describing a former resident, Richard B. Spencer as a neo-Nazi, which his page describes him as, and I'm guessing it was removed due to the inflammatory nature of that topic and I think my edit was assumed to be vandalism. I added it because he is primarily known as Richard Spencer, potentially leading to confusion, and he has not been a high-profile figure for several years. IXequilibrium (talk) 03:59, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

It appears your edit was mistaken for vandalism. Pinging @MakaylaHippo1998. MetalBreaksAndBends (talk) 06:16, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes I have indeed mistaken it for vandalism, the edit description had a very high ORES score and was labeled as a "very likely damaging" edit, so I reverted it. Including a source confirming him as being a Neo-Nazi at the top of the as article would be the best thing to do for something like this because many users (including bots) are highly likely to revert added unsourced claims of a person being a member of a seriously infamous organization or mass criminal or other type of abuse. MakaylaHippo1998 (talk) 07:03, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

thank you for the advice! IXequilibrium (talk) 22:53, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

i can’t add message

i want to send a message to a user but talk page says it is protected to prevent vandalism. why is this? i want to send message so that editor understands what to do. grazie. ~2026-28017-1 (talk) 22:57, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

If you're talking about sending email to a user, then that user must have enabled email and you must be logged in. (There may be other conditions as well; I forget.) If on the other hand you're talking about leaving a message on the user's talk page, this is rather surprising. User talk pages can be protected or semiprotected, but seldom are. -- Hoary (talk) 02:05, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

@Hoary: I don't want to jump to conclusions here, but judging by the edit history, I think I have an idea of which user they wanted to send a message to. (See the edit history of the help desk for what I mean) _{S.G. (They/Them) (Talk) (Edits)} 02:10, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Freibahn

Special:Diff/1332783384

CS1 error on Freibahn.

I have no idea what went wrong.

Thanks, Neptun22 (talk) 21:30, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@Neptun22, hello! There was missing pipe symbol "|" before "page=53-54", I added it and the problem was fixed. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:42, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Neptun22 (talk) 08:56, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Tool for LLM detection?

There is a current discussion at WP:RSN#Tool for detecting AI writing? which indicates lack of information on that topic. I suggested a few links there because the users at large seemed not aware of them. Does anyone here know of any tools? If not where should we suggest that WMF should hire an expert to guide them on that? Text analysis is not my area of expertise, but I know that general programmers will have no hope of success in that area without guidance. Please make suggestions. Thanks Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 22:16, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@Yesterday, all my dreams..., hello! I believe that's a bad idea to have a tool which tells whether the text was generated by AI or not by looking at the writing. Because it's definitely not going to guarantee 100% accuracy and the witch hunt it could generate isn't worth it.

The most important thing to check is if the sources are not hallucinated and support the statements in the article. I don't think a tool can be that smart to check all that by itself, so it needs to be done manually, by human.

If the text reads like it was generated by LLM, but the sources are fine and support the text, and the text follows manual of style, then I think it's fine. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 08:53, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi. As the WP:RSN link above indicates, the question about an LLM tool started there by other users. So I am not the only one hoping for it. Regarding the accuracy of "author identification" it is of course never 100%. In fact the Conference and Labs of the Evaluation Forum holds yearly contests (PAN) to see which tools work best. Some work pretty well, and far better than most humans, who are far less accurate in the tests. Of course Cluebot is not 100% accurate but no one doubts that it is very useful. As always we all have different ideas about what should be done, given that most of us are not twins. So let us see what others may suggest as well. Thanks Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 10:32, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Lemon Tree Hotels

Special:Diff/1332857061

Reference help requested.

Thanks, Saimi Sattar1 (talk) 07:11, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Saimi Sattar1, are you perhaps employed by this company, by Patu Keswani, or both? I ask because this is what your pattern of editing suggests. -- Hoary (talk) 10:53, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Content Translation Tool Error

Hello, can someone help me? I'm trying to translate a page from Spanish to English and it tells me I am not an extended confirmed user, but I am. Thanks Josep a11 (talk) 12:24, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

@Josep a11: Are you sure it says that? I see: "On the English Wikipedia this tool is limited to extended confirmed editors, and the machine translation component is disabled for all users". It's an orientation and doesn't mean I'm not extended confirmed. I can use the tool (not machine translation). PrimeHunter (talk) 12:40, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Question

Random question.. can an editor be completely blocked from Wikipedia? I.e not even aloud to visit the website?

Not a topic ban, editing restrictions, indefinite block etc but completely disallowing someone from visiting/reading some/all articles ?? ~2026-19602-0 (talk) 01:29, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi, @~2026-19602-0! To answer your question, I'm not aware of such a thing ever happening before and I doubt that it would ever be allowed. It goes against the very nature of Wikipedia. If we blocked someone from reading it, we would not be the "Free Encyclopedia". Wikipedia's purpose is to allow information to be given to all even if they may be users who were blocked or banned in the past, so again, to do this would be to go against the very nature of Wikipedia itself. _{S.G. (They/Them) (Talk) (Edits)} 01:33, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

There wouldn't be any point in Wikipedia stopping someone from reading Wikipedia, because reading doesn't harm Wikipedia or any of its editors.

People have been completely and permanently banned from writing on Wikipedia though (i.e. everywhere, not just articles). TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:27, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Censorship_of_Wikipedia#By_country. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:36, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

There are countries that (try to) do this, see Censorship of Wikipedia § Blocking all Wikipedia sites (in one or every language), but they are working against, not with, Wikipedia. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 14:26, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Translations

 Courtesy link: User:PUZEG1/Grand Duke Butigeidis Dragoon Battalion

Hello,

I am writing to ask for help translating our military unit wikipedia page. As I understand, I have to be an editor who made over 500 changes in wikipedia to publish translated pages. Is it possible to publish our page translated into other languages by being new account in here? PUZEG1 (talk) 11:59, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

This is the English-language Wikipedia. We only host articles in English. If you wish to add content (translated or otherwise) to Wikipedia projects in other languages, you will have to conform to their rules, not ours. They may differ substantively in regards to editing restrictions, and in regards to sourcing requirements. Check with the individual project. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:36, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Per an edit summary, the above user page has been "Created by translating the page 'Lietuvos didžiojo kunigaikščio Butigeidžio dragūnų batalionas'". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:30, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

To add to the above, I would strongly advise you to read Help:Your first article before proceeding further. Your draft as it currently stands is entirely lacking in cited sources, and the only external link is to an article which doesn't support almost anything in the text. Citations to published reliable sources are required. You should probably also read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, and note that should we have an article on this unit, it will not be 'your' page, and you will have no control over content. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:46, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Adding: If you have been ordered to translate the page by a more senior person, please show them WP:BOSS. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:28, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

returning image to entry.

I uploaded an image of Dame Louise Richardson. It was taken down due to copyright issue. The organization I represented, Carnegie Corporation of New York, in which Mrs. Richardson is the President, owns the rights to the copyright. May I reload a new image to her biography? Looking forward toward your response. Sincerely, Ronald Sexton (talk) 19:42, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

To my knowledge, you can upload the image it meets the WP:NONFREE content requirements at WP:NFCCP which may require your organisation officially permitting the image to be used on Wikipedia. Athanelar (talk) 19:51, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

That answer is self-contradictory. Fair-use of a non-free image by definition does not need the rights-holder's permission. However, given this person is still alive, non-free fair-use image would generally be prohibited. Instead, we would need an image that has a free license, and that is something that the rights-holder would have to grant explicitly. DMacks (talk) 21:18, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@Athanelar You're confusing things. We don't ask permission for non-free stuff, if it fits the non-free rules, we just use it. What a copyright holder can do, if they want, is putting a license we can use on an image, thus making it "free." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:05, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Ronald Sexton.

To amplify DMacks' answer: the intention of Wikipedia is to provide a resource which is free for anybody to use or reuse for any purpose, without requiring permission; this should include media (images, sound) which are therefore required to be explicitly either in the public domain (which does not mean just "freely available", but "devoid of copyright"), or else licensed by the copyright holder under a free licence such as WP:CC-BY-SA. (Some Wikipedias, including English, have a tightly limited set of criteria under which non-free images are permitted, but as DMacks says, this would not apply here).

So it is not enough that the rights holder has given permission for the image to be used on Wikipedia: the requirement is that the rights holder has explicitly released the image under a suitable licence. (This must be done either publicly, or in a direct message to the Wikimedia Foundation - see donating copyright materials)

Please see Image use policy for more information. ColinFine (talk) 21:42, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@Ronald Sexton Welcome! We'd love to have a picture of her for the article, but we take copyright seriously, and things must be done right. There are several ways you can go about this, see Wikipedia:A picture of you.

A good way for the Wikipedians is this: Mark one or several pictures of her at https://www.carnegie.org/about/staff/dame-louise-richardson/ with the caption "This picture is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 license." Then you can tell us here it's done, and one of us will add it to the article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:16, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Or take a new image of her yourself, and release it here as Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:53, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång Thank you so much! I sent an email to photosubmission@wikimedia.org with a subject: Image of Dame Louise Richardson Ronald Sexton (talk) 15:41, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

You were given advice about this last November; and in the same place last week.

Furthermore, although you have declared being paid to edit, you should be more more clear about your conflict with regard to the above article; and more cautious about editing that and other articles where you are conflicted as a result; I have left further advice on this matter on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:59, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Non-free image url

I have a talk page message from Iruka13 which deals with non-free image urls. Is it still recommended to use the URL to the page displaying the image, even if the URL to the page is non-unique? Sswonk (talk) 14:39, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

All URLs are unique, by definition.

In this case the URL requested by User:Iruka13 is https://amandashiresmusic.com/#music Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:22, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks Andy, I will take your suggestion and list the URL as you have. Sswonk (talk) 16:48, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Iraq Page

I noticed a rule on the Iraq wiki page where it said I had to be extended confirmed to make an edit (it's only protected for confirmed/auto confirmed). Am I not allowed to do the edit request (Listed under the semi edit requests) that is requesting a typo be fixed? AirmanKitten203 (talk) 14:44, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@AirmanKitten203: If it was the "salboat" typo, it has been fixed. Mjroots (talk) 16:52, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

It was. I was also wondering if there was any exceptions to that rule when it's posted? AirmanKitten203 (talk) 18:08, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Edit requests are the best way to ask for an edit if there is some kind of protection on the main article/page. If there are restrictions on asking for edit requests - it will be obvious on the top of the talk page. Example: Talk:Gulf of Mexico. -- Reconrabbit 17:25, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

How do I use Twinkle to warn?

Alright so I'm new to using Twinkle and I can't figure out how to warn people. I checked the doc and it mentions a "warn tab" but I can't find it for whatever reason? I know for a fact I have warnings enabled in configuration. Thanks in advance :) Monkeymoo458 (talk) 18:49, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Basically all of twinkle resides under the "TW" menu you see on the top bar. The button to warn is under there. MetalBreaksAndBends (talk) 18:52, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Found it! Thank you! Monkeymoo458 (talk) 18:55, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

How to translate?

Dear Editors, I would like to translate an article, that was written by me, from Hungarian to English. I have done it already on 'paper' but I do not know how to type it into the 'English Wikipedia' version. How to link them? I do not need automatic translation and I am not an advanced editor. Thank you for your answer and help. BEK2022 (talk) 21:11, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

@BEK2022 There is general advice at WP:TRANSLATE. I assume the person you want to write about is Gyula Ernyey and the main issue at en:Wikipedia will be to demonstrate that he meets our inclusion criteria for academics, listed here. Note that he only needs to meet one of the criteria but you can't base information only on his own writings: we need evidence of his impact and/or Awards etc. I suggest you use our articles for creation process so you'll get feedback on your draft. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:24, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

See also WP:Your first article, and the links I have just left on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:26, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Question about source

I was using the CIA World Factbook (judicial branch section) to learn more about the judiciary of Mozambique for an article and noticed they got a basic fact wrong about the Constitutional Council judges' term renewal wrong. Should I consider the rest of the information I got from them ok, or re-source everything else in the article that used that source? Urchincrawler (talk) 01:09, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Urchincrawler. Every generally reliable source makes an occasional error. It is only when there is an ongoing pattern of repeated errors and that pattern is discussed by other reliable sources that we would consider removing all uses of that source. All sources have shortcomings including this one, but this source is widely used and considered to be accurate most of the time. As in all cases, editors need to use good editorial judgment. Cullen328 (talk) 05:27, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Ok thanks! Urchincrawler (talk) 06:51, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

@Urchincrawler There's some useful guidance in the essay Wikipedia:When sources are wrong. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:09, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

You should trust that source the same amount you trusted it before finding the mistake. If you found many more mistakes on the same topic, then you might start wondering. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 05:35, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

ISBN ===> cite book template

Is there a tool to convert ISBN's to the template, populating as many fields as possible?

Humpster (talk) 09:22, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Good question, I think. Back in July 2021, I proposed just such a {{cite book| ...}} feature: see WP:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_182#"cite book" ISBN database?.

Alas, it wasn't followed through. A few problems were raised, but to me these seemed to be "edge cases to be lived with" rather than blockers. So the whole idea was lost.

Perhaps we should resurrect the idea.

Feline Hymnic (talk) 10:47, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

WP:CITOID. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:16, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

or citer.toolforge which can take ISBN and other inputs. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:43, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I read the 2021 discussion User:Feline Hymnic, and followed all the suggested links. Things such as citeQ and citeDOI don't fill the need I had.

To see what already exists, I searched the Internet using the ISBN of the first book within reach which happened to have a 10 digit ISBN.

EBay gave me an answer in a snippet without even opening the website.

There are several ISBN look up sites of which the notable ones are:

Book Finder

Amazon

ABEbooks

They are better than Special:BookSources

RefToolbar or Citoid work reasonably well to get references in place efficiently. However, they have deficiencies such as inability to handle 10 digit ISBNs and they don't include an archive. But they have the advantage of taking URLs as input as well as a few other things.

I like Citer as a standalone lookup to produce cite templates from URL, DOI, and ISBN. It allows options and gives me the sfn format I prefer. It handled the 10-digit ISBN.

None stand out for the old books I often use. But then I get the data manually from the book, either my own hard copy or e-book, or Internet Archive. (I would counter claims about bad ISBNs by saying "If you want a truly reliable source, you must have the book in front of you.")

I will try the toolbar option for a while. When it fails, I'll continue getting my data from Book Finder. It scrapes data from many new and used book sites, so even the British Library might not match it.

At one time, I contemplated a database such as you proposed. It makes sense for insuring the information is as we want it, but would require much overhead to maintain. On principle, data should only reside in one place, so we shouldn't repeat the work already done by book people. However, since I'm doing a lot of work on similar topics, I have effectively collected a few dozen frequent references.

Thanks for setting me on the path to more tools.

Humpster (talk) 01:46, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

You might also want to look at Zotero (and WP:Zotero). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:54, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Edit "not been published"

I recently tried to add one (1) sentence containing a quotation to a page about a prominent WWII officer Ernest N. Harmon, citing a very reliable, eminent historian who was quoting yet another reliable witness/historian in his latest, acclaimed nonfiction book. But for the very first time ever in my many years of contributing to Wikipedia, I was confronted with a box informing me "Your changes have not been published."

To correct this, the same box refers me "to go to the report page and follow the instructions." But I must admit I was totally stymied by that report page and don't understand at all how to use it and resolve my edit problem.

Looking for assistance to figure this out. Thanks for any reply & guidance. Mwprods2 (talk) 23:00, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm not familiar with this error. Have you tried just making the edit again? If it's an edit conflict, that should fix it. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 00:28, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your reply. Prior to seeing your message, just minutes ago I did re-edit my contribution but deleted the word "Niggers" which was part of the infamous slur by a prominent WWII general, quoted by two historians.

That might have been the problem(?)...even though my current edit now does include the general's other insulting reference to "jigaboos."

Btw, what is an "edit conflict?" Mwprods2 (talk) 00:36, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

An edit conflict means two editors are making conflicting changes at the same time. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 00:48, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks again! Got it. Mwprods2 (talk) 00:50, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Edit conflict only means "two people trying to edit at the exact same time". As you can imagine, the Wikipedia machinery doesn't always handle that situation perfectly. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:48, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks so much,TooManyFingers! Mwprods2 (talk) 00:51, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Mwprods2 the word you added probably triggered a Wikipedia:Edit filter. If you still want to add the word, you could add a request to Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives. TSventon (talk) 01:11, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

@Mwprods2: It happened because you used the N-word in the edit summary. Just avoid that. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:14, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Funny, np now, even though I re-edited and did include the N-word plus another derogatory word that were both used by this WWII general to describe Black soldiers.

My latest edit with both words included has been accepted, so far, thanks! Mwprods2 (talk) 06:25, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, all good now despite my re-edit which now includes two "triggering" words. Mwprods2 (talk) 06:28, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

@Mwprods2: you can see if any of your edits triggered a filter in the log. Depending on the filter you may see exactly what triggered it. Many filters will only silently log or add a tag to the edit instead of showing a warning or preventing the edit. MKFI (talk) 09:25, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

You may see the whole code of the filter but not which part triggered it. Some filters have many conditions. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:47, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Right, yes, thanks MKFI, I see on the Log--which I never knew existed nor checked before--that there was a "trigger." But again, my preferred edit remains intact. Mwprods2 (talk) 14:53, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks again, PrimeHunter, all good now with my edit, and I've learned a bit about triggers, filters and the log! Otherwise, I've been more of a benighted contributor for about 15 years. Mwprods2 (talk) 14:55, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Contacting non-English article editors

Not sure if this is the right place to ask this, but does anyone know how I could do this? They don't seem to have user pages on the English edition. Thanks, Fort esc (talk) 23:37, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

@Fort esc: I would check they are still active and post on a foreign talk page. You could use automatic translation or apologise for using English. Or you could start an English talk page, which should create a notification when they edit on another Wikipedia. TSventon (talk) 23:52, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Do you want to contact one or more specific individuals or just someone who edits in a specific language? For the latter, see WP:Local Embassy, and the pages on other Wikipedias that are inter-wiki linked from there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:43, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for helping. Fort esc (talk) 15:12, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Creating Art for Wikipedia

As a user, am I permitted to create art for certain pages on Wikipedia that lack any visuals? I'd like to add images to extinct animal pages that are lacking any visual. I'm a hobbyist artist and have experience making paleoart. I know users like Apokryltaros have done valuable work for this exact situation on Wikipedia, and I would like to create art in a similar vein (mostly for Holocene extinctions that lack paleo reconstructions). Are there any qualifications I need to have before doing this, or can I just try my hand without preparation? Gone Extinct (talk) 00:09, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I say "GO GO GO." Check in with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Palaeontology/Paleoart review regulars, like User:FunkMonk, User:Zhenghecaris, User:Gasmasque and User:Ta-tea-two-te-to, for additional protocols to follow, mostly to post at the Paleoart review, first, so what you post are "accurate" Mr Fink (talk) 01:45, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Sure, also check WP:Dinoart. FunkMonk (talk) 01:50, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Somewhat off topic but I love how "dinoart" is an actual shortcut to an actual page. It's so silly I love it mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 17:41, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Sick, thanks! Gone Extinct (talk) 01:51, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Err, do you plan to use AI to make this art?—S Marshall T/C 15:35, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

AI doesn't make art, it just churns out in-offensive slop disguised as it (all the while leeching off real art available to it). There's no circumstance where I'd ever use it. Gone Extinct (talk) 15:36, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Please carry on, in that case. If you were going to use AI, I would have started a discussion with you about the rules for that, but since you're ethically opposed to AI, I don't need to!—S Marshall T/C 15:39, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

You'd be hard pressed to find someone as vehemently opposed to generative AI as me. Glad I could clarify! Gone Extinct (talk) 15:40, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

(psst, if you ever want to do something other than just biology articles, you might want to check out WP:WikiProject AI Cleanup) Athanelar (talk) 17:17, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Ooh right down my alley, thanks! Gone Extinct (talk) 01:42, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

What if?

If someone vandalizes an article but than immediately deletes the vandalism, do they still get punished? ~2026-24671-3 (talk) 04:14, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Nobody gets punished for vandalism. They just get stopped. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:32, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

If someone does it across many articles (vandalize and then immediately revert it), they can be blocked for making disruptive edits (probably for some period of time, not indefinitely). Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 08:45, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Nope, if it's a consistent behaviour they might be asked to stop, but otherwise it isn't hurting anyone. mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 17:48, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Create a wikepedia page

I would like an assistance in creating a wikipedia page for my football club. Maryfelsports (talk) 20:19, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

@Maryfelsports It is unlikely that anyone will be able to help with your venture. Unless you can provide reliable, independent sources which cover your club in some detail, it simply won't meet Wikipedia's inclusion criteria, which are given at this page. As a new editor with a conflict of interest, you should read that linked page and this essay. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:24, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

@Maryfelsports: Is the club notable enough to sustain an article? See WP:NFOOTY and links therefrom for guidance. Mjroots (talk) 14:36, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

unless your football club is special in some way, it's unlikely to be notable enough for a wikipedia article mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 17:51, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

changing email login

I am registered to edit wikipedia under an old email address which I haven't used for several years and no longer have access to. Is there a way to retain my pervious access with a different email or would I have to start over? ~2026-31751-6 (talk) 17:15, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

If you have the correct user name and password, it should be possible to log in and change the email address in Preferences.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:19, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for replying.

I only have my old email as I was always logged in and didn't use user name and password. ~2026-31751-6 (talk) 18:26, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

HOW TO ENTER AN ARTIST IN WIKIPEDIA

The dominican singer and composer Alicia Baroni meets enough merits to be in Wikipedia, but so far I could not enter her bio. Can somebody help me, please? ~2026-32405-1 (talk) 19:20, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Please don't enter a request here on all caps. People won't think you are serious. I'd recommend talking to an WP:Admin 𝚃𝚑𝚎 𝙶𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚝 𝙴𝚙𝚒𝚙𝚑𝚊𝚗𝚢👁👄👁 (talk) 19:22, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

This is the right place to ask; and this is not a matter that needs an admin's attention. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:26, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

You will need to show that she meets the criteria at WP:NMUSICIAN. Can you do that?

If so, see WP:Your first article; but we strongly recommend that you get some experience making smaller changes to existing articles, first. I'll leave some links to guidance on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:28, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL: This looks like it would be hard to find enough secondary coverage to create an article.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:52, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Shenandoah Presbyterian Church

 Courtesy link: Draft:Shenandoah (Miami)

I'm trying to add a page for an historic church in Miami, Florida. Did I botch the title? It just says "Shenandoah." How do I edit it? LBK1Wiki (talk) 20:09, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

You can continue to work on the article where it is, and the title will be fixed if and when it is published.

You may also wish to read WP:Referencing for beginners. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:24, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Please note that as it currently stands, none of the material comes from sources that are independent. Anything that comes from the church's own publications, whether local, national, or in between, can't be used to tell the story. Church publications can be used to confirm details such as the date it was founded, but can't be the source of the main parts of the article. The reason is we want to see how significant the place is to "everybody in general", not how significant it is to members of the Presbyterian Church. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:30, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Unfortunately you have copied text directly from web pages. This is not allowed (unless they are under a suitable open licence, which is not the case here). It will shortly be deleted.

Please try again, but write on your own words (and use independent sources, as noted above). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:38, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Variety of English used in articles about an author's works?

The biography of author Roald Dahl is tagged with {{British English}}. Should this also apply to all articles about his books and short stories? Personally I think it should per MOS:TIES - but I regularly see editors changing UK to US spelling, such as this edit. (Admittedly, Dahl did live in the USA for many years, and many of his stories were first published in the USA and are set in the USA.) Muzilon (talk) 21:19, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Whenever there's a British vs American spelling case doubtful enough to ask a question about, the answer is "leave it alone then". Except make each individual article consistent within itself, based on the chronologically first evidence of either spelling that it contains. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 21:27, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

(Or consistent with an already long-standing, carefully and responsibly placed tag. Slapping a new tag on an article and then editing it to conform to the new tag is not a good method, unless it has a very obvious necessary connection to only one variety of spelling.) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 21:40, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Legend for map in sidebar

I was trying to add this map to this sidebar but I can't figure out how to make the legend visible without A. Going to Commons, or B. Having a big caption with a legend in the sidebar (which seems inappropriate). Is this possible? When I click on images like here that use {{legend}} in a caption, the colors don't appear Placeholderer (talk) 01:43, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

I.e I want the legend, with colors, to be visible by clicking on the image Placeholderer (talk) 01:44, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

MEDAL AWARD DEVICE IS INCORRECT COLOR

My Father has a page on Wikipedia and his medals are displayed. But his Purple Heart should have a SILVER STAR on it, NOT a GOLD STAR… He has 6 PURPLE HEARTS AND THE MARINES Designate that with a SILVER STAR for 5 awards and the ribbon makes it 6…. We would like to see the Gold start replaced with SILVER STAR as the award device. Mdsd77 (talk) 02:54, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Using all capitals like that is taken as shouting. Please don't. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:58, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Mdsd77, please go to your father's article. Somewhere along one of the edges of the page, you'll see a link to "Talk". Click that. In the article's talk page, make the request above. -- Hoary (talk) 02:59, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

And it would help if you could tell us which article you are taking about - we have no way of knowing who your father is if you don't tell us. Acroterion (talk) 03:04, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

A disruptive user

Some users are annoyed (including me) that there's a user who constantly makes (mostly) disruptive edits to articles without saying why that's done or by asking in the talk page and wait for consensus. The user is "Boringhuman404", but the person using it has used it from the other old names, including Urayahahah and "Renamed user c2ca70d12a943d959769c7559822e2ae". Ominae (talk) 17:05, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Hey! Have you tried talking to the user? If you have and the behaviour still persists, you should bring this to WP:ANI mgjertson (talk) (contribs) 17:55, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. Someone's already doing that. Ominae (talk) 03:33, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Mobile watchlist

The desktop watchlist can group all edits to a single page together. Am I correct that the mobile watchlist doesn't have the option to do this? Thanks! Helpful Cat {talk} 03:39, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

wikipedia25.org

Happy 25 years, but is wikipedia25.org supposed to work? It only shows a Wikimedia error. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 23:44, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Where did you see someone saying it was supposed to work? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 08:24, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

@TooManyFingers: This is the Help Desk, where people come to ask for competent help. I also was flummoxed by wikipedia25.org's presentation. How is your comment helpful? Are you saying it's a joke and is not supposed to work at all? I managed to get something to work eventually, so your reply was not only unhelpful but verged on being misleading. If you can't provide the assistance requested, then it's best not to comment at all. Bazza 7 (talk) 10:05, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

I had no idea it was supposed to exist. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:15, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

I am also curious about where this is being seen saying it is supposed to work. I hadn't seen any mention of it before this post. CMD (talk) 05:15, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

@Versions111: On an Android tablet in desktop mode, I swiped down, up, left, right and tapped the screen repeatedly in frustration. One of those must have worked as the presentation stirred into action.

It's got some interesting facts in it, but the presentation is decidedly amateurish and difficult to follow in places. Bazza 7 (talk) 10:08, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

It works now! Versions111 (talk • contribs) 14:16, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

It seems good to me. I'm sure I don't belong to its target audience, so my opinion is particularly unimportant -- but I remember seeing, some years ago, an animation of the growth and alteration (both constructive and childish) of a single article. I don't remember its title, or even anything of its subject area, or indeed whether the animation was a GIF, an MPEG, or whatever. I wonder where I'd find the animation, or whether there've been other attempts at a similar illustration since. -- Hoary (talk) 05:12, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Bruno fernandes

See I was thinking we should include something about bruno's recent Twitter hacking ~2026-14741-7 (talk) 06:05, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia is the free encyclopedia anyone can edit, so if you feel comfortable doing so, and you're certain that it's important enough to be in the article, add that yourself, as well as citations to reliable sources to support your claims. If you don't, you can mention it to other editors on the article talk page — Talk:Bruno Fernandes. JustARandomSquid (talk) 06:43, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Mahendra Singh Dhoni

Special:Diff/1331997235

Reference help requested.

Please fix this error in the article of Mahendra Singh Dhoni now.

Thanks, ~2026-33072-4 (talk) 04:33, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

"Reference help" denied. Anyone thinking of providing "help" should first look at the history of the redirect/article. A single article (MS Dhoni) is sufficient. -- Hoary (talk) 04:50, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

I corrected this article now. It is perfect for viewing. I have successfully corrected a deformed article into perfection now. ~2026-33072-4 (talk) 05:24, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

I long-term semiprotected as the redirect to prevent this problem for a few years (same editor doing same bad-faith edits to another page as well, which I likewise semi'ed). DMacks (talk) 06:57, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

External guide

who is external guide ~2026-33882-3 (talk) 08:20, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

If this is a question about Wikipedia, please word it more understandably. -- Hoary (talk) 08:42, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Opening a request for un-protection

Hello,

Back in 2008, the Bulletball page was deleted. I think it's gone back and forth a few times and ended up protected indefinitely around 2012.

I think, at the time, that was understandable. Bulletball was probably put on here as a joke because of that one YouTube video .

The thing is, many years after the American Inventor incident, it actually did make it into the Olympics, it is quite literally an Olympic sport. As such, I do think that the game itself is notable enough to be in an encyclopedia. A list of Olympic sports would, by definition, not be complete without Bulletball.

We don't need to make it read like "whoa the inventor was so whacky and they made him a meme!". Just a short article about the sport, its rules, its appearance on American Inventor, and eventual debut at the 2012 Senior Olympics. I'd be happy to write it. We could semi-protect it to stop people turning it into a meme page.

Anyway, sorry. My question is: Is there somewhere I can go to argue the above and at least open a vote or discussion on the issue?

Thank you for your help! LegalUsername (talk) 03:02, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

@LegalUsername: the page is creation protected (salted). WP:SALT gives several options. Editors wishing to re-create a salted title with appropriate content should either contact an administrator (preferably the protecting administrator), file a request for reduction in protection level, or use the deletion review process. To make a convincing case for re-creation, it is helpful to show a draft version of the intended article when filing a request. TSventon (talk) 03:46, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

What TSventon said, LegalUsername. The draft version (if it's worth creating at all) might go in User:LegalUsername/sandbox. I note that your claim for Olympic status is actually a matter of the "Senior Olympics", and that this is not an international but a US affair; saying "A list of Olympic sports would, by definition, not be complete without Bulletball" seems quite a stretch. Incidentally, my browser finds no mention of "Bulletball" in that article. -- Hoary (talk) 04:16, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Why would you say "an Olympic sport", when it has nothing to do with the Olympics at all? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 08:59, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

"Incle Vanyan"

the play Uncle Vanya" ~2026-33068-4 (talk) 03:14, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

If this is a question about Wikipedia, then please rephrase it understandably. -- Hoary (talk) 04:03, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-33068-4 Are you looking for our article about Uncle Vanya? Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:55, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Police#Israel

Police#Israel

in this page it talks about policing in ancient Israel, although some of the areas existed like Jerusalem, Judah there was no Israel till 1948. Wikipedia should stay impartial and not peddle political messages to try and make out a state existed before it actually did. ~2026-31843-5 (talk) 20:05, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Please take that up on the article's talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:22, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Modern Israel yes, but ancient Israel existed around 1000 BC-500s BC Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a (talk) 12:58, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Page

Hello,

I hope this message finds you well.

I am the owner and General Manager of Flex FM, and I am writing regarding our existing Wikipedia page.

Unfortunately, I no longer have access to the account originally used to manage the page, and as a result I am unable to log in to update or correct information. I would like to update elements of the page, including historical information and ensuring that the content accurately reflects Flex FM’s development and current status. I understand Wikipedia’s policies regarding neutrality and conflict of interest, and I am more than willing to follow the correct process to request changes rather than editing the article directly.

Here is the link to the page in question:

Flex FM

I can provide proof of ownership and any supporting documentation required, and I would appreciate guidance on the appropriate next steps to have these updates reviewed and applied correctly.

Thank you for your time and assistance. Kind regards, Terry Little Owner & General Manager Flex FM Noelsie tl (talk) 15:58, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi Noelsie tl, welcome to Wikipedia. You are probably by now already familiar with our policies on conflict of interest, and the recommendation to request edits on the article's talk page rather than updating information yourself. You may not yet be familiar with our requirements on paid-contribution disclosure: generally to comply with Wikipedia's terms of service, you must follow the procedure to identify and disclose your business relationship for any edit where you receive or expect to receive compensation. That procedure is described at Wikipedia:Paid contribution disclosure. You've already been upfront about that here so you're already ahead of many commercial editors, but the proper disclosure is still mandatory.

Once you have properly disclosed, you should go to the talk page of the article you would like to update, and write an edit request. For that you can see our summary guide at WP:Simple conflict of interest edit request, or check the links from that page for more detailed information. Cheers. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:09, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Noelsie tl.

I'm afraid that you have a (rather common) misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is and how it works.

Wikipedia's article Flex FM does not belong to you or the company, is not controlled by you or the company, and preferably should not be directly edited by you or anybody associated with the company, though you are welcome to make edit requests concerning it.

A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what the majority of people who are wholly unconnected with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, (see Golden rule) and not much else. What you know (or anybody else knows) about the subject is not relevant except where it can be verified from a reliable published source.

All Wikipedia accounts are personal: group or role accounts are forbidden; and almost any account may edit most articles (COI being one restriction). ColinFine (talk) 16:12, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Given the OP says "I understand Wikipedia’s policies regarding neutrality and conflict of interest, and I am more than willing to follow the correct process to request changes rather than editing the article directly... I would appreciate guidance on the appropriate next steps to have these updates reviewed and applied correctly.", I wonder who has the misunderstanding? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:30, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

This is actually one of the things that made me assume the OP was using unfiltered LLM output in their post here. However, given their edit was reverted as promotional (and it's very much not hard to see exactly why) there's little to no chance the changes they've been trying to force would be accepted thru an edit request without completely re-writing the lot. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:35, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

The sequence has been (with some repetition):

• Conflicted editor does things the wrong way
• Conflicted editor is reverted
• Conflicted editor is given advice on their talk page
• Conflicted editor asks here for further advice in order to do things the right way, while at the same time declaring CoI
• Conflicted editor is correctly answered (in this case by Ivanvector)

Correct me if I'm wrong. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:43, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

That's the way I see it. They may make a request for an edit that is entirely unacceptable, and we may be able to work with them from that point. At any rate we're still a few more steps away from "experienced editor tells conflicted editor their edits are trash and to go fuck themselves", hence my warning to Jéské Couriano about their original message here, which I removed. They've made the proper disclosure on their userpage, but I don't see a request yet. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:11, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello

Thanks for the reply, IN ot very good at this page but i am of a understanding that the disclosure is if i expect payment? i dont expect this i just want to update my business details. please xplainm what i need and i will get this done.

Regards

Terry Noelsie tl (talk) 16:19, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello

What i have written is a history of whats happened NOT promotional, i can back this with facts/links if needed.

I just would like to update this to show our achievements

Regards

Terry Noelsie tl (talk) 16:31, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

It's your business, which weans you expect to make money from it, which means you must abide by our policy on "paid contributions".

Please make change requests on the article's talk page, as you have been advised to do, on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:48, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Its a non profit business my friemnd a community radio. Can someone please tell me how to make edits Noelsie tl (talk) 12:53, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

I answered that question on your talk page on 12 January, here, and in doing so quoted an answer you had already been given.

You are in danger of exhausting this community's patience if you keep asking for an answer that has already been given. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:18, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

People's Bank Arena

Information about this location is incorrect regarding Boston Celtics games. It does not list the game of 3/2/1975 vs. Seattle SuperSonics

• https://www.apbr.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=16705&sid=77b734caf98d1fc158e884a86b67f363#p16705
• https://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/197503020BOS.html

-- ~2026-33794-7 (talk) 13:00, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-33794-7Your question is unclear. If you think you have found a mistake in a Wikipedia article, please visit the Talk page of that article and suggest a correction there, ensuring that you cite a reliable source for your claim. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:24, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

How to change what wikiproject messages are recieved on.

Is there a way to set what wikiproject I get important messages on? I got the messages for the wikipedia birthday celebration on my wikisource account as it was the first account i made, but I would prefer to get my messages like that either here or on meta-wiki. Is there a way i can set that? i looked for quite a bit through my various preferences but could not find anything to do so.I know you can enable global notifications, and i do have them on, but it's not the same. Sorry if this is not the right place to ask this question, i want really sure. ¿VØ!D? ☄ 13:33, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

I don't know how, but I know exactly what you mean, and it's a good question. "Wikiproject" is a different kind of thing (they're sort of like topic workgroups on Wikipedia), but the reason you used the wrong word is that you've never been told what the right word is! I don't know either: "what account"? "what Wikipedia"? "what part of the Wikimedia agglomeration of similar-but-different websites"?

I guess "How to change which of my Wikipedia accounts is treated as the primary one" is close enough. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:52, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Unless the answer is to go to Settings -> Preferences on the Wikisource account, adjust which kinds of notifications it should receive (i.e. turn some of them off), and then separately go to Settings -> Preferences on the Wikipedia account and turn some of them on. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 19:08, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Yeah i meant like wikipedia's side projects not wikiprojects, whoops. I poked around in preferences a bit but couldn't find any way to change which account is treated as the main one. Thank you for the suggestion though! ¿VØ!D? ☄ 17:35, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

It's called the home wiki. I don't think it can be changed. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:28, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

oh thank you, sucks that it can't be changed. ¿VØ!D? ☄ 17:37, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

WP:SEAOFBLUE and introductory sentences to clergy members

WP:SEAOFBLUE

Hello.

I've noticed that in several articles for notable clergy members, It'll introduce the subject as a Anglican priest or a Baptist minister etc etc, and I'm a bit confused on how I should improve the readability, if I should improve it at all. Do I de-link the denomination or the title? Rework the sentence (somehow)? Is there any relevant consensus on this topic?

Thank you. Cawfeecrow (talk) 06:51, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Quick note, I can't infer based on previous wikilinks because (being the introductory sentence) it'd be the first instance of their respective wikilinks in the article. Cawfeecrow (talk) 06:55, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

@Cawfeecrow That same page suggests not linking MOS:COMMONWORDS, so I suggest remove the links to priest and minister. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:52, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Alternatively, make the links like Anglican priest, using [[Anglicanism|Anglican priest]]. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:22, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Right, thanks!. Cawfeecrow (talk) 14:35, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

If such a decision is hard to resolve by simple rules, I try using "Which of these potential links, if followed, is more likely to make the reader say 'Oh, now I get it!'?" It might be the one that seems most difficult/hardest to summarize.

Example:

Minister: "It's a kind of leader"

Protestantism: "... Ummm, let me link you to that, OK?" :) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:45, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

[[Anglican|Anglican minister]] and similar is the way to go. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:50, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Licensing deals with Amazon, Meta, and Microsoft

In light of the recent licensing deals with Amazon, Meta, and Microsoft, what will change with Wikipedia? Will the free encyclopedia remain?

Thanks, John Roche "john54roche" (talk) 16:28, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are referring to by "licensing deals". 331dot (talk) 16:32, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

@331dot They're referring to this. New Wikimedia Enterprise Partners: Wikipedia’s 25th Birthday qcne (talk) 16:51, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

(more discussion at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(WMF)#WMF announces new AI partnerships with Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, Perplexity...) qcne (talk) 16:53, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi @"john54roche". The Wikimedia Foundation has signed these deals, it has to do with API access to project data and should not affect the English Wikipedia in any way. qcne (talk) 16:52, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

It's also worth pointing out that no content is being licensed that wasn't already licensed here. Wikipedia is under a free license already so these companies already have the right to access our content and use it to do whatever. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:00, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

in addition to the above, it'll have zero change in how Wikipedia editing is handled. It's an external thing. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:51, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Nothing to do with licensing, or our content, each of which remains unchanged.

There is a good analogy: Wikipedia content is water. They're getting the same water, but paying for a bigger pipe. The pipe is Wikimedia Enterprise.

Someone else said it's like we sued them for overloading our web servers, and now they're paying damages. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:55, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Aggressive robotic screen-scraping places a very high demand on web servers, including Wikipedia. It's much more efficient at both ends if the same data is provided using a machine-to-machine interface. It reduces both computational load and bandwidth by a factor of at least ten and probably more than 100. The entire philosophy of Wikipedia is to make that data available to everyone for any purpose, at no cost, so doing this with a minimum delivery cost is greatly to our advantage. -18:18, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Jenbacher J624 photo

Hello, I have been working (periodically) on the Jenbacher J624 page and have recently uploaded a non-free, low resolution image from Jenbacher's website in order to provide a photo for the page. Unfortunately, this has prompted discussion over the validity of the non-free usage rationale. I am here to hopefully settle that one way or the other before the page can be deleted without an outside opinion. My rationale is that the photo should remain because it is a photo with no copyright-free equivalent, which does no harm to Jenbacher's commercial efficacy, which is used minimally, which is displayed publicly on the Jenbacher website, which is quality and worthy of encyclopedic inclusion in nature, which is properly displayed in only the relevant article, which is contextually relevant to the article, and which is properly cited to the URL of the Jenbacher website it is taken from.

Please, if you have the time, weigh in and help find a resolution.

Thank you. TheSaturnLover (talk) 16:04, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, TheSaturnLover. This non-free image is not appropriate for Wikipedia. The policy language can be found at WP:NFCI and says Non-free images that reasonably could be replaced by free content images are not suitable for Wikipedia. You could contact the sales or public relations people at the manufacturer and ask them to release a freely-licensed image. You could take a factory tour of some facility that has one of these engines installed and take a photo yourself. Perhaps the engine is might be displayed at a trade show. Attend and take a photo. And so on. Cullen328 (talk) 17:37, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

I've actually tried contacting Jenbacher before about this. They seem to be very confounded and paranoid. Nevertheless, I'll look for a better one and let this current rendition expire as expected before. TheSaturnLover (talk) 17:57, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

TheSaturnLover, please read Wikipedia:Example requests for permission for the best wording to use. Cullen328 (talk) 18:22, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

And it's perfectly fine to have no picture at all, until you (or anyone) gets to do one of those things. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:51, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Other language Wikipedia as an authoritative source?

As seen in Talk:AmericaFest#Feedback from New Page Review process, a user told me that MSN is depreciated because the Chinese Wikipedia said so, even though it seemed to have been called generally reliable in the English Wikipedia per WP:MSNOW. They then said You should find the original URLs and use those, as these MSN sources appear to be aggregated instead. could anyone confirm that MSN should be depreciated, and if so, I'll add it onto WP:RSP? Wikieditor662 (talk) 22:15, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

As with more of less any other policy matter, the decisions of one Wikipedia language project have authority have no authority over any other. They are autonomous. See the recent discussion on WP:RSN regarding MSN's suitability as a source - it really needs to be looked at on a case by case basis. As a news aggregator, it should say where it is getting its material from, and that will be the major indicator of reliability. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:31, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

"Have authority" -> "have no authority", right, Andy? Bishonen | tålk 22:51, 15 January 2026 (UTC).

Oops. Corrected. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:57, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Hmmm okay, so if I'm understanding correctly, for exampleif it hosts The Guardian then it can be used, but if it hosts TH (hypothetically) then it can't? Should this information be added to RSP on the english Wikipedia? And thanks for being nicer to me, I really appreciate it! Wikieditor662 (talk) 22:38, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, in most cases we'd assume that if the source that MSN got it from was reliable, we could use it - though ideally you'd find the original, and cite that instead. As for adding MSN to WP:RSNP, note that the list is for 'sources whose reliability and use on Wikipedia are frequently discussed'. I don't think we've really done that with MSN, or at least, not enough to say that there is a consensus regarding its use, beyond the more general one regarding news aggregators as discussed at WP:NEWSAGG. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:49, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

...I feel as if I must note that MSN and MSNBC (MS NOW) are not the same thing. MSN (Microsoft) hasn't been connected to MSNBC/MS NOW since 2005 for the channel and 2012 for the website (in 2012 the website became nbcnews.com and then later the msnbc.com site became a website for the cable channel). - Purplewowies (talk) 19:08, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for that! I think I realized this recently, otherwise MSN would've been typically considered reliable without needing to look at what it hosted. Wikieditor662 (talk) 19:12, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Jone Gonzales Surgös banditák fogták el a Pilotat

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.

---

Kijevben repült orvosokat szállított. Masnap orosz katonák el vették a telefonját es a pénztárcáját. November ota bujkált mire tudtam neki pénzt küldeni hogy telefont tudjon venni. Akkor tudta kollégait értesíteni. Egy orosz támadáskor lábon lőtték. Egy taxis kérésemre be fogata és gyógyította.Megbeszélték hogy a Magyar hátárhoz el hozza. Igy 1600000 forintot utaltam át neki a taxisnak.8 an indultak. Kettő kolegája várta a ukrán Magyar határnál. 45 percre volt már a határ mikkor muszlin banditák elfogták ö-ket a kettő kiérőt hejszinen agyon löték. Vátiság díját követeltek.7000eurot . El kudtük a kolegái segitségével egy pilota ismerösének. De ö a nö csak 6500eurot tettle ahova kérték. a pénzt. Igy mos nem engedték el. még 3000eurot kérnek. Én sajnos kuldtem a 7000 be 1000eurot. De nem volt csak a rejtek helyen 6500 euro. Igy engem es a kolegákat ujabb péz küldésre kényszeritenek. De sajnos ezt már nem tudom hogy lesz. Ha nem tudnak segiteni kivégzik. Az hogy még él az nekem köszönhető. De itt most már tehetetlen vagyok. Segitsék ki fizetni a válság dijat különben fejbe lövik. Kettö pilotta minden probál de nem tudják a pénzt már elö teremteni. Én sem sajnos kicsi nyugdijbol élek. Nem vagyok csalo öszintén írtam le mindent. Nagy Jánosné. Önök biztos tudják ki az a kettő pilóta aki itt van a Záhonyi hatarnál nal. ~2026-34736-2 (talk) 19:48, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

We can't help you with this. This is a page for issues with using or editing Wikipedia.

[Nem tudunk segíteni ebben. Ez az oldal a Wikipédia használatával vagy szerkesztésével kapcsolatos problémákkal foglalkozik.] Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:03, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

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

Original or fake

in our city many shops are selling fake royal stag so how can I check it is original or fake Royaltester 123 (talk) 17:44, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

The teahouse only has help for Wikipedia questions. Sorry about that. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:48, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

This is the Help Desk, not The Teahouse. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:04, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

@Royaltester 123 You can try asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:15, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Help on creating a new article

Hi, I used to edit Fandom and Wikihow pages as a child and am used to writing factual, objective information in those contexts, but am not really familiar with Wikipedia's conventions.

I am looking to create an article on the now-defunct game Fight My Monster (Jan 2011-Late 2016). I have a collection of sources (Silicon Republic articles, Techcrunch articles, Guardian article, Companies House page, official FMM blog posts (from archive.org), as well as many more niche journalism and non-journalism sources) towards the game's existence and notability (5 million accounts in total throughout its lifetime, and was generally thought to be very innovative), but am unsure whether this game would meet the notability requirements for Wikipedia. The game also had commercials aired on British TV, had comics featured in The Beano, had trading cards you could order, had a book and membership cards that were in British bookstores, and had a planned animated TV series. I also have some fears that maybe I would be a conflict of interest in relation to the game, as I am a community moderator for a currently-active rewritten project. This would not be an advertisement and I have no intention on mentioning the rewritten project within the article, but I still thought a conflict of interest might need to be disclosed.

My main motivations are to ensure that information on the game is briefly compiled into an article as I would love for this information to be easy to access, since even though so many sources exist, they are very disjointed.

Would I just have to write the article, publish it, and then see what people think of it? Or should I create a sandbox and then ask for dynamic feedback somewhere on Wikipedia? Or should I not bother, due to lack of notability (or the conflict of interest issue)? Thank you so much for any input/feedback, I appreciate Wikipedia as a resource so much but have no idea of the inner workings of how to edit it lol. -kat279 (talk) 04:38, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

If you exclude all interviews, all announcements, and all material on company websites and on any blog, exclude all user-editable sites like wikis, AND exclude your personal knowledge - so that the article is nothing but a compilation of the sources that didn't get excluded - is there enough to write about? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 05:05, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

I believe so, but I don't entirely know how substantial a Wikipedia article has to be. Most sources are not from the company websites (ergo no announcements), and the wiki for FMM has only recently been created (by another member our community). Here is most of what I have immediately available to me in chronological order (disregarding the topics you mentioned).

• Raising $2.1mil due to how unique the game was : https://www.siliconrepublic.com/start-ups/fight-my-monster-raises-us2-1m-in-seed-investment-from-greycroft (pre-the game's release)
• Companies house page, detailing when the company was founded/disbanded: https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/07236034
• Fight my Monster x Brown Bag Films: Fight My Monster and Brown Bag Films Announce Animated TV Series - Business Insider
• Growth and targeting boys: Ten Year-Olds Versus the Triple-A Market | GamesIndustry.biz (I think this might be a blog, but apparently the woman who wrote it was a Managing Editor at IGN?)
• Fight my monster brand ambitions: Fight My Monster Borrows From The Angry Birds Playbook - Merchandise And Movies Up Next? | TechCrunch
• FMM growth, including game mechanics and industry-leading parent centre: FightMyMonster.com: a monster of an idea that just keeps getting bigger | Games | The Guardian
• The Beano collaboration: https://downthetubes.net/fight-my-monster-joins-beanomax-beano-strip-to-follow-in-august/ (lasted throughout the latter half of 2013) https://www.inpublishing.co.uk/articles/fight-my-monster-to-appear-in-the-beano-8373
• The book they published (Fight My Monster: Monstrous Official Guide), mostly detailing game mechanics: Fight My Monster: Monstrous Official Guide: Amazon.co.uk: Simon & Schuster UK: 9781471115707: Books

Coverage does mostly fall off after around the start of 2013 unfortunately (it's not confirmed anywhere official, but it's common consensus that they just ran out of funds and let it die).

There's a lot of journalism detailing mostly these points on

https://kidscreen.com, but I don't know if this is a good enough source for Wikipedia really. As well as these, there were two official blogs for the game (one for industry, and one for children), which is pretty well-stored at Archive.org.

-kat279 (talk) 05:53, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

But your first item is an interview. And your third is an announcement. And the official guide is from the company. Let's see what's left when there's nothing that the company had any hand in producing, and no interviews, and no announcements. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 08:21, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

How are we defining these words? Sorry, I'm not really familiar. I see "interview" as somebody being asked questions and getting answers, and "announcement" as somebody who has a hand in a production making everybody aware about an update. -kat279 (talk) 08:41, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Exactly. Wikipedia isn't interested in what a person or a company says about themselves, as that is likely to be self-serving. Articles here are based on what third-parties have written without prompting or conflict of interest. This is summarised here. You need to demonstrate how the game is notable in the quirky way Wikipedia defines that word. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:06, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

I don't really understand how the first link was an interview - it seems to have quoted from a conference Dylan was at GiG2012. Is it just that direct quotes from a creator cannot be used as a source? I was more planning to use the parts of the sources that were objective i.e., the funding they got, where it was from, and why it was obtained. Is this not okay to do either? I guess maybe not in the context of demonstrating that there are enough independent sources. Is "<creator> has announced <thing>" not substantial? I would've assumed that was secondary?

The FMM Beano strips are listed at List of Beano comic strips, so I assumed that was already substantiated by the articles announcing its release.

Is there a way to tell whether articles may have been prompted? I don't believe any should have conflict of interest, but I'm also not really familiar with the gaming journalism/investment industry.

I understand the non-independent sources should not substantiate a lot of the article, I just provided their existence as it could help with sections explaining gameplay or updates. I was looking at other online children's webgames from the same era to get an idea of how to format these articles, and it seemed like non-independent sources were often used as sources for things like that (this may not be wanted though, a lot of these pages do have infoboxes at the top stating that the pages have issues). Basic gameplay information is listed in the sources I linked, though (of the ones which were valid). -kat279 (talk) 10:27, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Sorry if I was unclear, but that's exactly it - what the company and the creator and their associates have to say can be peripherally useful in small ways, but isn't something you can build an article from. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:23, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

And my reason for saying certain things are just announcements is that they don't contain "The History Of Fight My Monster" or anything even close; they're reminders of temporary blips in its existence.

For an extreme example of why those don't contribute anything of significance, consider "vapourware" (does that word still get used?) - anybody can announce anything, and it doesn't prove much. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:35, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Vaporwave, like the music genre? Sorry, I have no idea what you meant by that comparison lol. I feel like the vaporwave genre is still pretty relevant (or at least, relevant enough for lots of facets of it to be Wikipedia articles).

Do you think it is unlikely to meet notability requirements, given the sources I have provided? It's totally okay if not. These are the major ones that I could obtain immediately, but I can make a more notable/comprehensive list to overview. It seems like other similar games have primarily "announcement" citations, for example when I look at Fantage, Bin Weevils, or Moshi Monsters. Of course these articles existing does not mean they are doing things correctly. I could also just still be misinterpreting the meaning of an "announcement". -kat279 (talk) 04:48, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

I believe they meant vaporware. JustARandomSquid (talk) 08:53, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense, I keep misreading words online recently LOL. I think I understand what they meant, now. -kat279 (talk) 10:08, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

I misread words all the time. :)

I just meant it happens too often that a big announcement is not followed by big results. Wikipedia is only looking for reliable sources that tell the long story of how the results turned out, and throws away all the exciting announcements. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:40, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

That makes sense! I can try to find more references that mention it post-announcement.

I think it's possible FMM may just not meet notability requirements for Wikipedia, but I will try to make a comprehensive list of every source I have including brief points of what is specified in each source. I think I do probably have enough to meet the standard of the similar articles I specified in my previous comment, but of course this may not be the requirement for a new article.

If I do make a list, do you think you could overview it (since you have been the primary person helping me with this query), by either sending it here or your talk page? Totally OK if not, I do understand this is very personalised advice. I plan to keep trying to edit and learn about Wikipedia in the meantime irrespective of whether the article can eventually go into fruition. -kat279 (talk) 21:19, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Beano collaboration = just another announcement TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 08:26, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

-kat279, your ambition is admirable, but it seems that you're surprised or puzzled by a number of considerations that most likely you'd understand well if only you'd worked on existing articles. I mean, it would be unrealistic for somebody (like me!) with no experience of car maintenance to ask for advice on replacing the transmission of his ICE car. Much better to start with jacking up the car and replacing a wheel, changing the spark plugs, and doing suchlike day-to-day stuff, and gradually working up from there towards pulling out one transmission and putting in another. (Take heart: For the new article you won't need special equipment, dropping anything won't risk crushing your foot, the whole operation won't cost you any money, just time and a little frustration;....) -- Hoary (talk) 12:11, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, I can try dedicating more time to Wikipedia! I've been reading talk pages of articles recently whenever I use the site lol and it's extremely interesting to me to learn about the customs and culture here. -kat279 (talk) 04:53, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

To answer the question, "Would I just have to write the article, publish it, and then see what people think of it? Or should I create a sandbox and then ask for dynamic feedback somewhere on Wikipedia?"

The best practice is to use the Article Wizard to set the article up as a draft, and then submit it to Articles for Creation, where an experienced editor will look over it and decide whether it's suitable for inclusion. JustARandomSquid (talk) 12:49, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I will use this if I ever do end up creating this (or any other) article :-) -kat279 (talk) 04:49, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Issue with IP editor

Hello there. I have recently had issues with an anonymous editor. They have been regularly editing out sourced content regarding Bosnian former footballer Miralem Pjanić. Specifically, they have been removing cited, relevant content about Pjanić being "regarded as one of the best midfielders of his generation, and "one of the greatest free-kick takers of all time." I have sourced this info with relevant references all naming him as one of the best free-kick takers ever and a world-class midfielder of his generation, which is easily verifiable (I even replaced some older sources with newer ones specifically regarding Pjanić as such). These are some of the IP's pointless edits: 1, 2, 3. Their most recent edit was him reasoning by saying: "removed bs". I think it's clear what they mean by "bs" lol. I could use some help resolving this issue. Bakir123 (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Bakir123.

Unless it is very clearly vandalism, which these edits are not, you need to engage the other editor in discussion, normally on the talk page Talk:Miralem Pjanić. See WP:BRD. ColinFine (talk) 21:52, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Poppi

It states they are from Houston. The official Poppi page says Dallas. If you are from Texas this makes a big difference!! ~2026-34099-5 (talk) 19:54, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

To which article does this relate? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:04, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

A search suggests Errol McCalla Jr., also known as "Poppi". TSventon (talk) 20:58, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Then our friend who raised the issue needs to do so on The article's talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:16, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

I do not know if this is the case with Poppi, but there is frequent confusion between where a person was born (an objective fact) as opposed to where they are "from" which is a vague concept that could be birthplace, childhood home, current home, or where they lived the longest. Here is a personal example. I have a 36 year old son who was born in a hospital in San Francisco but he has never lived in San Francisco. He lived in the Napa Valley for nearly 30 years. He currently lives 110 miles from San Francisco. So, very few people would say he is "from" San Francisco. Cullen328 (talk) 01:41, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Erika Evans Profile Photo

I would like to change/update Erika Evans profile photo Sydne96 (talk) 19:53, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Do you represent Erika Evans? If so, please see WP:A photo of you.

Otherwise, where is the new photo? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:59, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

The photo is here, File:Erika Evans Seattle City Attorney.png. Sydne96 (talk) 20:50, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. That appears to be improperly described; Seattle City Attorney Office of Law is not part of the Federal government.

My question "Do you represent Erika Evans?" needs an answer, please. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:09, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, this is her official photo of the selected official, you can see the link here https://www.seattle.gov/cityattorney Sydne96 (talk) 01:16, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Sydne96, she is not a federal official so the claim that the image is in the public domain is not verified. The City of Seattle website includes copyright notices, which indicates the image is probably not in the public domain. Cullen328 (talk) 01:53, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Courtesy links to the Erika Evans article and photo uploaded to Commons by Sydne96. Lovelano (talk) 20:04, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Happy International Mentoring Day, mentors & Help Desk staff!

Did you know 17 January is an official day worldwide to recognise mentors and all they do ? It began as an extension of National Mentoring Month in the US throughout the month of January, but it’s now celebrated on just one day.

Navigating the twists and turns of becoming Wikipedia editors is so much easier with the help of a mentor. Here at the Help Desk, as well as at other Wikipedia help venues, we also get quick, insightful, and ongoing help—day in, day out from tireless hosts, who, like mentors, receive no pay other than the happiness that comes from helping. So ...

◆ Let's "think and thank", pausing to consider all we receive from them and perhaps sending them a few words of gratitude.

◆ Perhaps this occasion could also be a time for some to think of becoming a mentor or a help venue host themselves as a way of giving back.

◆ This year seems a perfect time to begin a new annual tradition on 17 January, as it's the 25^th anniversary of Wikipedia and mentors have been a large part of its success story! ~2026-35535-5 (talk) 04:25, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Historical Artwork owned by Gallery

If our gallery reports on original artwork that we own for historical details that only we can provide, is this a conflict of interest? It has flagged a filter, almost certainly because our reference to the artwork is on our website. Before we attempt to publish again we ask so that we do not fall foul of wikipedia rules but would like to offer expert advice particularly regarding album artwork. The gallery has the largest private collection in The UK and potentially the world. This includes unseen design work for prominent and historic artworks. Popnouveau (talk) 13:29, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

The artwork was already on wikipedia. Copies of that artwork are owned by tens of thousands of people. Our addition was to point out that an early incarnation of the work exists. Because we own that early version we believe that the additional information regarding its origins would be valuable information for those that are interested in its history. Much of the source and design artworks for prominent album covers changed before they were eventually released and we wanted to add that history that would be otherwise unknown. Popnouveau (talk) 13:58, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

This probably relates to the Pop Nouveau Gallery in Sudbury, Suffolk. TSventon (talk) 14:35, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

it does, we wanted to add some historical context to the article on the album Popnouveau (talk) 14:37, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

@Popnouveau What is the artwork? ~2025-31242-74 (talk) 02:19, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Popnouveau, for when you get unblocked: this is probably not a conflict of interest, but you may have a problem in that sources must be available to anyone who cares to look for them and they must be published by a reputable source. So if your sources are, for example, that the artist told you (or someone else who passed the information on), or wrote it in a letter that you possess, these would not be suitable. You may find WP:EXPERT a useful read. Meadowlark (talk) 06:57, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Help with tagging unused non‑free file for deletion

I added a new fair‑use image to the article Disappearance of Macin Smith, and the old non‑free file Macin Smith.jpg is now unused. I tried tagging it for speedy deletion but realised I was using the wrong template, so I removed it again. I’m unsure which is the correct template for an unused non‑free file that has been replaced by a different image. Could someone help me with this please? ItsShandog (talk) 10:14, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

In general, the right template to use is {{subst:orfud}} (and User:B-bot would have eventually tagged it), but since you were the uploader and only editor, I went ahead and deleted it immediately. —Cryptic 11:13, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, appreciate it. ItsShandog (talk) 11:51, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Guidance on reliable information for references

I am creating a page for my grandfather who has passed away. I do not have much information available online that I can as reference since there was not a whole lot of digital information kept during his time (1913-1995). However, I can provide written physical certification from organizations that he has been associated in his life. Can that be used? Just need some direction on how do I take this forward so I can preserve and present his memory through wikipedia to rest of the world. KhadiPen (talk) 18:01, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @KhadiPen.

Sources do not have to be online; but they do need to be reliably published, and most of them need to be independent of the subject - anything from organisations he was associated with will not help.

I'm afraid that, like most people who try to create an article before they have spent time learning how Wikipedia works, you appear to have written Draft:Ratan Lal Sharda backwards.

A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what the majority of people who are wholly unconnected with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, (see Golden rule) and not much else. What you know (or anybody else knows) about the subject is not relevant except where it can be verified from a reliable published source.

So you need to start by finding several sources that meet all the criteria in golden rule: books or magazines from reputable publishers, as long as the author was not associated with your grandfather or any organisations he was affiliated with. But each of them needs to contain significant coverage of him - say, three or four substantial paragraphs as a minimum.

If you can find several (say, at least three) such sources, then an article is possible. You will need to put aside everything that you personally know about him, and write a summary of what those independent sources say. (That is one of the reasons why it is so difficult to write an article about a subject where you have a a conflict of interest).

The truth is that most people in the world do not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and so there cannot be articles about them - even, sometimes, if they have done amazing things, or have become famous or popular. Note that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a memorial site.

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) 18:31, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Create a page for Narendra Chandra De Sarkar

He is one of the last custodian of Bengal School of Art and a legendary painter. Sarbbottam (talk) 20:55, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Sarbbottam. For an article to be possible, you must prove the person meet's Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion for people. You would create a draft article via the Wikipedia:Article wizard and then provide multiple published secondary sources that:

• provide significant coverage: discuss the person in detail, not brief mentions or interviews lacking independent analysis;
• are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight;
• are independent: not connected to the person, such as press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content.

If multiple sources do not exist, then the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia. qcne (talk) 21:10, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Sarbbottam.

If you can find the required sources to establish that Sarkar meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability either as an artist, or generally, you are welcome to go ahead and create an article. (If you are not experienced at creating articles, I strongly advise using WP:AFC).

Merely putting a suggestion here is unlikely to be effective. ColinFine (talk) 21:10, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

NB Wikipedia has no need for articles that call their subjects "legendary" (or similar promotional language). Or indeed for user pages that look like job application forms. -- Hoary (talk) 21:27, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

I can't seem to log back in

I have been trying to log back in and when I tried to reset my password is says my phone's IP address I have tried to reset my password 3 times now and I have not gotten the email to do so ~2026-37365-1 (talk) 21:50, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Curly quotes

The article United_States_v._Maduro_et_al. currently has lots of curly quotes. Question: When I see curly quotes, should I edit them into straight quotes? Is there a bot that does that? Are curly quotes OK to be left in articles?

The article may have received those curly quotes from the user who was involved in an ANI thread around Jan 9, which covered LLM use, user @ApoieRacional, a few editors mentioning LLM use on several articles... resulting in Cullen328 blocking that user from article space.

Thanks. David10244 (talk) 03:36, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, David10244. The guidance in the Manual of Style can be found at MOS:CURLY. Curly quotation marks should be replaced with straight quote marks. Cullen328 (talk) 05:17, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I change to straight quotes out of habit when I see curly quotes, but nowadays I'm wondering why we have that guideline. In every browser I use these days, searching for a string containing a straight quote also finds strings containing curly quotes. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 06:41, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

How to change "curly quotes" into "straight quotes", David10244, on the assumption that you're using a computer: (i) Set out as if to edit the "source" of the article as a whole. (ii) Get your text editor to start editing a new file. (My text editor of choice is Geany, but any decent text editor should be fine.) (iv) Copy the whole thing. (v) Paste the source into your text editor's window. (vi) Cancel your (non-) edit of the Wikipedia article. (vii) Use your text editor to change every instance of “ and ” to ", and every instance of ‘ and ’ to '. (viii) Copy the whole thing. (ix) Set out to edit the "source" of the article as a whole. (x) Delete the entire content (but don't press submit). (xi) Paste in your version; submit. All of this takes a lot less time than it took me to write it out. (I daresay a similar process is possible on a phone, somehow.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:24, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@Hoary @David10244 Yes, doing this on a phone is exactly the same, as long as you have a text editing app with find-and-replace capability. Such an app might not be installed by default, so you might have to find one and install it. Some of the apps don't function very well, so if one of them frustrates you it's probably time for a different app. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:07, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@Hoary, @TooManyFingers Yes, thanks, I do know how to change the quotes; I just wondered if I should. @Cullen328 answered that question.

I know it's one of the "tells" for text written by AI -- since it's generally (AFAIK) harder or less natural to use curly quotes when you are writing Wikipedia articles using VE or editing the source directly.

I think some of that Maduro article has been affected by AI...

Thanks. David10244 (talk) 01:38, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

How do I cite a personal conversation?

I'm writing an article about a TV Station here on Wikipedia and recently was able to get in contact with a former employee of that Station. Unfortunately a lot of the information that, that person gave me isn't available online or has vauge references. So I was wondering how do I cite our conversation? Do I post it on a third party website and cite it? Who do I show proof that this conversation happened? (Also, just incase, I did tell the person beforehand that I was writing a Wikipedia article but I haven't asked them yet If I can use their name or cite them using their name, I'm just asking this question beforehand If I do get their permission). JAV317 (talk) 03:49, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

This would qualify as original research if the information is not in a reliable, published source. • Quinn (talk) 03:53, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Well, Dang, I guess I won't be able to use the information that was given to me, now I feel bad that I wasted that man's time, im still waiting on him to clarify something that could be cited but besides that, I won't be able to use anything else. I will still post my findings on a third party website but I will not include them on the Wikipedia page. Thanks for the Help. JAV317 (talk) 04:11, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Temp accounts on TheBurntPeanut

Over the past week, different temp accounts with only one edit have been editing the TheBurntPeanut article and trying to change the wording- here is an example of their recent edits. I don't really understand what they are trying to do here, I have already seemingly fixed the problem that they are trying to fix (which is that the article doesn't use a real-world perspective). However, after I fixed the problem, the temp accounts keep reverting me and replacing what I've fixed with a sentence that says the same things but is just worded worse with bad grammar. To avoid edit warring, I've notified one of these accounts on their talk page, but they have not responded and have kept up with the reverting, now even adding a template and hidden text to the article. - dwarfroe (talk / contr) 23:46, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

What's the meaning of their hidden text? Which template did they add? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 01:46, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

It seems to me, at first glance, like these editors might be doing their best to improve a pretty bad article. TBH with the example edit you showed, I can't even tell which is worse, the "before" or the "after". TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 01:53, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

If you look at the article right now, there is a {{In-universe}} hatnote in the Career section that has been added. The hidden text is:

"Probably this is because some Wikipedians literally referred the sources that based on the virtual YouTuber's fictional setting."

I don't understand what they are trying to say here and I don't believe that the article has any problems that require the above template and hatnote. I don't know what to do though as most likely when I remove the template and hatnote the temp accounts will continue to revert me as they had previously. Should I request page protection here? - dwarfroe (talk / contr) 03:05, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Look at the mostly garbage sources - they just mention this guy, they don't tell his story in depth. There's honestly not much worth protecting in that article. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:27, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

So are you suggesting deletion here? - dwarfroe (talk / contr) 05:28, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

can some one help us?

Some modules in Pashto Wikipedia are not working properly, if anyone can fix them, please help us
For example this page شاه زمان پټان (talk) 05:09, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

@شاه زمان پټان: It happens on that page when groupstyle is set, e.g. if you only have {{Navbox|groupstyle = width:8em;}}. There are differences between the groupstyle code in Module:Navbox and ps:Module:Navbox but I dont know the importance. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:35, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Referencing own publications

Are there rules in Wikipedia about using your own (scientific) work as a reference in articles? Judithcomm (talk) 11:46, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Judithcomm Editing about your own work would be a conflict of interest, so you should not do so directly, but you may make a formal edit request(click for instructions) for consideration by other editors. 331dot (talk) 11:57, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

See WP:CITESELF Athanelar (talk) 13:16, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! Judithcomm (talk) 13:56, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Can't 'edit', only 'edit source'

I do not have the ability to use visual editor when editing articles, talk pages, or etc. I am familiar enough with syntax to edit from source as needed, but it's markedly easier to edit some templates with the visual editor and would appreciate the functionality. Is this a permissions issue or a technical problem on my end? In the case of the latter, I am using Firefox 147.0.1 (latest stable), and having the problem across both the Vector legacy and default Vector themes. Breadpachinko (talk) 20:07, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure--I don't think this is a widespread Firefox issue, at least, because that's what I'm using. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 22:46, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Not sure if this is related, but I had a problem using Firefox for MacOS where the visual editor would start to load and then stop before finishing. Ultimately, what resolved it was clearing all of my WP cookies. FactOrOpinion (talk) 03:20, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Have you checked your Special:Preferences? Per WP:VisualEditor, go to Preferences, click Editing, check Enable the visual editor, and click Save. Blepbob (talk) 14:52, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Yash Gupta Query

Hi team, I would like to create a new wikipedia page for myself. I have a basic draft version ready, but I am getting "Error, edit not published" issue. An automated filter has identified this edit as potentially unconstructive, so it has been disallowed. Can someone from Wikipedia page help me setup my initial page version first & publish it so that I can edit it later more ? Yash coder (talk) 05:37, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Best have a read of WP:COI and WP:NOT. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:49, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Writing about yourself is a waste of time. When people write about themselves, the chance of it getting rejected is very close to 100%. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:51, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Waste of time, yes; but I didn't know that the rejection rate was close to 100%, TooManyFingers. How close, and how do we know? -- Hoary (talk) 08:32, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

I don't know if the research has actually been done on it, but someone should. My anecdotal observations definitely concur with TMF. Athanelar (talk) 13:20, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Find as many autobiographies as possible that were successfully published on "modern Wikipedia" (i.e. after the BLP rules became somewhat stable in essentially their current form), are still on Wikipedia, and for which a reasonable argument for deletion is not easy to see.

(That initial number is very hard to get and bound to be incomplete, as far as I know. I don't know a better way.)

Number found, divided by the number of people who have begun an autobiography in that time (including all those who only spammed their own user pages or who gave up before clicking Submit), multiplied by 100, gives at least some rough idea of the success percentage.

I think it's that "number who have begun an autobiography in that time" part that pushes it toward oblivion; it would take a pretty large number of successes to put a dent in that. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:02, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Yash coder, you created something that, at a hurried glance, might resemble an article. You placed it in User:Yash coder. That's an improper use of a user page. I therefore moved it to User:Yash coder/sandbox. You are entitled to work to improve it there, but I warmly suggest that you instead forget all about it. (Perhaps try LinkedIn instead.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:32, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

@Yash coder To be more specific, Wikipedia is not a place to post resumes/CVs nor is it a web host for your personal use. For people to have an article about them they need to meet our standard for notability, which unfortunately you do not. Athanelar (talk) 13:50, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

While you are allowed to write about yourself and your work, according to strict limits, we only publish articles on people who meet these criteria, measured by these standards.

Nothing in your draft article suggests that you do. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:32, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

How Category:Lists of longest rivers are listed?

Aren't they original research?

Category:Lists of longest rivers

I am recently reviewing list of longest rivers of China in Chinese Wikipedia. It was a featured list once, but delisted for original research. Which part, you ask? It's the selection criterion: Rivers included in the article must at least 1000 km. However, a user suggested that the criterion itself is original research if no citations provided, and must provide a reliable source that defined a "longest rivers of China" as "rivers in China that are at least 1000 km".

Of course, the usage of the Chinese word 最 may contributed the issue (Chinese don't use grammatical number, so we can't tell if "最长河流" is "longest river" or "longest rivers", see plural for details), but after reading some longest rivers' lists, such as List of river systems by length, List of longest rivers of the United States, and List of longest rivers of Ukraine, I found that no citations provided to their definition of "longest rivers".

Then why list rivers longer than 800 km instead of 1000 km in the US? Why list rivers longer than 1000 km long in the world, not 800 km? Are there any sources supported their criteria? Why aren't these considered original research? - I am puzzled by these questions, and have no choice but ask in the help desk.

Thanks for reading. Saimmx (talk) 06:34, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Saimmx, I'd have asked not here but instead at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers. -- Hoary (talk) 11:10, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for help, I am not sure where to ask at the time. Saimmx (talk) 13:40, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

@Saimmx: Editors sometimes disagree about where to cut off a list of top-something but I have never heard the suggestion that the selection of the cut-off could be original research. I don't know whether "longest rivers" in Chinese implies a minimum size. It doesn't in English but if we chose a rather long list then we might call it list of rivers by length instead. But yes, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers sounds like a better place to discuss this if it's only for rivers. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:08, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

"I have never heard the suggestion that the selection of the cut-off could be original research."

This is actually unreasonable to me either, and I believe such claim would be seen as WP:POINT in enwp.

"I don't know whether "longest rivers" in Chinese implies a minimum size."

No, "longest rivers" doesn't imply a minimum size in Chinese, either. But when referring the word, "最长河流", many will understand it as the "longest river" (no plural here), and believe the word only refers to the Yangtze in China. (Or in the US sense, the Missouri only)

I disagree such understanding and believe that "最长河流" can be understood as "longest river" and "longest rivers", but it is fact that some people understand by such sense. Saimmx (talk) 18:03, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

And thanks, I think I will wait further discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers#How Category:Lists of longest rivers are listed? Aren't they original research?. Saimmx (talk) 18:08, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

please help me

Hello, I have two questions: I would like to contribute to the Amharic Wikipedia and work with you. My goal is to write and document the life stories of various Ethiopian individuals. Amharic is a national language spoken by more than 80 million people in Ethiopia. I have written my own story in English and published it elsewhere. How can I upload or publish this story on Wikipedia? Thank you very much. ~2026-37760-4 (talk) 10:12, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi @~2026-37760-4. Unfortunately, Wikipedia does not host any original research. This means that we cannot accept content that has not been already published in mainstream sources (such as newspapers, books, magazines, etc). We are the wrong website to host the documented life stories of various Ethiopian individuals, I'm sorry. I would suggest starting a blog or website where you can host this content. qcne (talk) 10:19, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

For the Amharic Wikipedia, please see am:ውክፔዲያ_ውይይት:ምንጭጌ. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:22, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Please be aware that each language version of Wikipedia is a separate project with its own policies, guidelines and teams of administrators. Only editors with significant experience on Amharic Wikipedia can give you advice specific to that project. Cullen328 (talk) 18:14, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Copyright permission

Dear Sir, I am writing a book on WW2. I am currently covering merchant shipping losses in 1939. i am using a Wikipedia page called Shipwrecks in 1939. I this is extremely helpful. Although I am not copying what is written I am using the information to look further but in some cases there is no more information than what is provided by you, so i use that. Is the subject covered by copyright and do I need your permission? If yes, how do I obtain your permission? Many thanks #Geoffrey Marks

wikipedia ~2026-38739-3 (talk) 16:56, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

There is no copyright on facts, so you don't need permission. I would however advise you to look at the source cited for each wreck (most seem to have some sort of citation), and if the source seems credible, cite that in your book. As long as you don't copy wording (exactly, or through close paraphrasing), you won't have copyright issues that way either. Good luck with the book. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:17, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

However, please do not cite those sources unless you actually read (or consult) them yourself. If you cannot find the actual source or if you just do not have the time to do that, then cite the Wikipedia article instead. This is not a matter of copyright. It's just the correct way that you as a historian should cite sources. A citation is an implicit promise that you actually used that reference. We also need to avoid "WP:citogenesis". If your book is at all successful (I hope this happens), future Wikipedians might use your book as a reference. If our original Wikipedia article has an incorrect citation and you copy it without checking it, it can end up being treated as valid by someone else in a later publication. -Arch dude (talk) 19:00, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-38739-3: You can actually copy exactly what is written if you follow our license. See Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. Articles usually have many contributors and the rights belong to them, not to Wikipedia, so you cannot ask for permission but just have to follow our license which the contributors released their work under. If you do that then you can copy entire articles. Some websites legally copy millions of articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:22, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Mack Sennett

We affirm that Mack Sennett was born in Danville, but in his autobiography he claims to have been born in Richmond. I've opened a discussion on the talk page. ~2026-36417-8 (talk) 14:28, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. If you've started a discussion there, there's no need to tell us here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:43, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

I have responded at Talk:Mack Sennett#Birthplace. TSventon (talk) 19:44, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Draft undeletion

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.

---

Can someone please undelete Draft:Walter Steding? Requests for undeletion seems quiet right now. Steding just got a NY Times obit and I’d like to get the article started ASAP from the draft I created. Thank you, Thriley (talk) 06:40, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Article has been undeleted. Thriley (talk) 07:43, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

"Walter Steding (1953 - 2025) was an American artist and musician": what art and what music, Thriley? -- Hoary (talk) 07:49, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

What music it is! I'll be expanding over the coming days. Thriley (talk) 07:56, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

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

Inclusion of math functions in Wikitables

Hi all,

I have a table I want to include in an article; sample output below. How do I change the code so that there are two invisible columns between "track" and "ft", which define distances for start and end of a piece of railway track, then the "ft" and "m" columns would convert the difference between those numbers and "Trucks" would equal "ft" divided by 27.5? All numbers need to be rounded down to nearest integer. Or do I need to calculate and manually input each number?

Station	Track	ft	m	Trucks
Wangaratta	Transfer East	427	130	15
	Transfer West	308	94	11
	Transfer Stub	140	43	5
	East side	477	145	17

Anothersignalman (talk) 12:04, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

@Anothersignalman: You should input the information manually (although see my comment about converting feet to metres below). Remember to give, for the table, the reliable sources you used to obtain the figures used, including where you got "27.5" from.

You may also be interested in the {{convert}} template which will convert feet to metres for you and place the result in two table columns. So using {{convert|300|ft|m|disp=table}} in a row will produce:

300

91

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bazza 7 (talk • contribs) 13:57, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't know I could use disp=table, I'll have to experiment a bit. The above is only a small portion of the full table, which has about seven or eight RS's linked to it. 27.5 just happens to be the length of nearly every wagon that this specific railway operated.

Anothersignalman (talk) 21:55, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

William Hord Worthington links

Back in 2017, I submitted corrections to Captain Edward Worthington's profile. In the 2026 Captain's profile, it links William Hord Worthington as a grandson. There were two Edward Worthingtons living in Mercer and Lincoln Counties in Kentucky in the early 1800s. Wm H Worthington was the grandson of the second Edward Worthington. Per the history of the Rice-Worthington House (now in Boyle County, Kentucky) the second Worthington lived in Danville, Kentucky until 1833 as a Court Judge. This information can be found on the National Archives Catalog of Historical Places: https://catalog.archives.gov/id/123849449 History of the Judge can be found on pages 12 through 15 out of 34 pages of the Rice-Worthington request. Captain Worthington died in 1804 while in New Orleans, Orleans Territory. Judge Worthington died in 1846 in Hopkinsville, Christian County, Kentucky. One of Judge Worthington sons was Rev John Tolly Worthington, and the father of Wm H Worthington. Per the history of Rev Worthington on Findagrave.com, they list a bio on Rev Worthington's son, Col Wm H Worthington. In this bio, it is listed that his grandfather Edward Worthington was born in Maryland. https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/120431647/john-t-worthington Captain Edward Worthington erected Worthington Station, 10 miles south of Danville, Kentucky. My request is to not link Col Wm H Worthington to Captain Edward Worthington of Gen George Roger Clank's association. The Colonel is not a relative of Captain Edward Worthington. Camworth (talk) 22:04, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Camworth, you edited the article Edward Worthington in 2017; and doing so you attempted to reference some of what you were doing. But a lot wasn't referenced, and some was referenced unsatisfactorily (one reference read, in toto, http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Family:Edward_Worthington_and_Elizabeth_Madison_(1), rather obviously an inadequate source). If you believe that the article could and should be improved, please use Talk:Edward Worthington to describe how, providing reliable sources. (Findagrave.com is not reliable. Websites that invite their readers to add material are not reliable ... and if this makes you think "So you're saying that Wikipedia wouldn't count as reliable?", then yes, that's exactly right.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:43, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Would D.A.R. be an approved website for references? Camworth (talk) 01:08, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

There has been a Reliable Sources Noticeboard discussion about D.A.R. It was not enthusiastic, see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 480#Sons of the American Revolution and Daughters of the American Revolution. TSventon (talk) 01:42, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Ex.co

Special:Diff/1333495224

How do I fix generic name errors when the article says it was written by "Digiday Awards" as the author?

Thanks, Froggygoo (talk) 05:57, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Froggygoo, you have "last1=Awards |first1=Digiday" for something on digiday.com. If it were instead on msn.com or theguardian.com or lemonde.fr, authorship by Digiday Awards would be surprising and worth noting; but on digiday.com it's merely the default. So skip "last1=Awards |first1=Digiday". -- Hoary (talk) 08:21, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Froggygoo (talk) 05:17, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Links to the Seven Deadly Sins

Seven Deadly Sins

I noticed that Pride in Christianity, one of the seven deadly sins, wasn't a part of Pride (disambiguation), so I added it. However, I then noticed some of the other contents from the seven deadly sins weren't brought up in their respective disambiguation pages either. I look up Wikipedia:Disambiguation and didn't find any problem with the links being on there. Is there a reason for this, or should I add them? Wikieditor662 (talk) 04:26, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

You can add the ones that there are already separate articles for. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:44, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

What about for ones that are from sections for the seven deadly sins? Is that not okay? Also are we able to create articles for them even if they're stubs? Also how about for redirects to those articles, such as "lust in Christianity", is that okay for sections? (Because one of them I changed and it was approved so I thought it was okay). Wikieditor662 (talk) 04:47, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Also, @Voorts, thank you very much for your help; do you have any thoughts on this? Wikieditor662 (talk) 05:42, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

No, every item on a disambiguation page has to be an article by that name, not a section. Please see Wikipedia:Disambiguation dos and don'ts. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:06, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, do you also happen to know the answer to this question: Also are we able to create articles for them even if they're stubs?? Wikieditor662 (talk) 06:20, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

They would first need to be worth an article. Example: The deadly sin of lust is not a special kind of lust, it's the same thing we already have an article about. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:31, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Even though there could be more information about Christian views on it specifically, you're right that the general article is similar in this case. However, in other situations, it's different: take pride for example, the general article doesn't really make it seem negative, and mostly mentions things like LGBTQ Pride, which is quite different from the Christian view on pride (and "pride" may have different meanings in these situations). What about for those cases? Wikieditor662 (talk) 20:17, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Didn't you say there's already an article "Pride in Christianity"? Is it the wrong thing? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:45, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Oh I see, it redirects to the Seven Deadly Sins section on pride. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:49, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

In my opinion, the current article "Pride" does a really good job of supporting the Seven Deadly Sins concept of pride. As you've pointed out, it includes other concepts as well, but in my opinion writing another article for the benefit of the Deadly Sins really would create a WP:POVFORK in a bad way, even though its purpose was intended to be good. When the ambiguity of the term "pride" is hidden from view, even for a good cause, it uneducates people about the Seven Deadly Sins. Like I said, this is my opinion. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:59, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

So what do you suggest to be done? Should there be no separate articles for them? Wikieditor662 (talk) 03:41, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

First, see below for what Cryptic wrote, that disambiguation is fine for sections and not just articles.

I have a strong opinion that the Pride article is already a very good support for the Seven Deadly Sins article, because it does go into useful detail about that interpretation of the word, while also laying out the other interpretations that perhaps the Seven Deadly Sins were not referring to. I think a separate article for that one would merely put the Seven Deadly Sins into a sort of ghetto where it's divided from real understanding.

I haven't looked at all the others, but in general I think creating this kind of "walled garden" or "ghetto", where words don't mean what they really mean, is counterproductive. An intelligent person reading the proposed new articles would protest back to you "Yeah, but that's not what this word really means, and you know it" - and that complaint wouldn't happen when referring them to the Pride article the way it is now.

I do think it's right to make sure that if a historic or traditional treatment of some of those words is necessary to make sense of the Seven Deadly Sins, then it would be right to find reliable sources for them and have it on Wikipedia, whether in the main article about Greed or whatever, or inside the Seven Deadly Sins article.

And of course I might be in a small minority on my point of view, or I could be just wrong. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:34, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Putting it a different way: Having a separate library of "in-universe" definitions, thus treating religion as merely the top-grossing fantasy franchise of all time with an unbelievably huge fandom, was probably not your point. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:02, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. By the way, it turns out one of them already have a specific article for them: Sloth (deadly sin)... do you suggest it goes through WP:AfD? Wikieditor662 (talk) 06:55, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

No, every item on a disambiguation page has to be an article by that name, not a section - this is completely wrong. We have entire disambiguation pages where not a single entry has a dedicated section within an article, let alone a dedicated article; a couple minutes' searching found Garble, for example. What's important is that the disambiguated topic is discussed in the linked page, so that readers searching for a term find what information we have about it. There are special considerations for formatting on the disambig page when not linking to a full article - see WP:DABSECTION for when there's an entire section, and WP:DABMENTION for when there isn't - but there is in no manner a prohibition against including such entries at all. —Cryptic 04:23, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Then I grossly misunderstood what I was reading, and I apologize. Thank you for correcting my (unintentional) misinformation. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:14, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

How do I find a "soft hyphen"?

My edit here introduced a citation error I've never seen before, and cannot seem to locate - a soft hyphen. Is there any way of detecting where this is, short of counting out 530 characters in the quote? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 04:38, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

I don't know that there's an easy way, but I pasted the article into a file and piped it through od to find it. —Cryptic 04:46, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

@Laterthanyouthink: Depending on your editor you may have a "Syntax" button in a toolbar above the edit area. Click it and look for something unusual. I saw a small red circle at the character, after the first word in "connected­ – personally". PrimeHunter (talk) 04:55, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Oh, thanks very much for that, Cryptic. Useful to know about that od tool - not being familiar with Unix - do you have a link for how you do that? Thanks also to PrimeHunter. I usually use the classic editor (after finding an ongoing issue with WikiEd on Firefox), but switch to WikiEd sometimes for find-and-replace and things like that. I can't seem to see a Syntax button on either, but please let me know if I'm missing it! Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:05, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

@Laterthanyouthink: It's in the default source editor. By "classic editor" do you mean "Enable the legacy (2006) editing toolbar" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets? It's not in that one. Here is a general external tool I use to identify special characters: https://r12a.github.io/app-conversion/. Paste something into the "Characters" field and click "View in UniView". My goal is usually to find out which character I'm pasting but it also works for your purpose if you make a browser search (usually Ctrl+f) on soft hyphen. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:19, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

PrimeHunter No, I don't have that enabled, so assume it's the default source editor. I can't seem to see anything saying Syntax - just the Bold/Italic/Link/ etc. options, and Advanced option with a few more. Anyway, don't worry, thanks for that. Probably something I can't see for some reason, probably my brain... Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:46, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

@Laterthanyouthink: It's to the left of "Advanced" for me and has both "Syntax" and a pencil icon but the text may depend on "Improved Syntax Highlighting" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures. Maybe you just see the icon in the image. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:40, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

PrimeHunter Hmmm, thanks. I went and ticked the box for the Improved Syntax Highlighting box, but still missing the pencil or words in that spot (and the two to the left of it are swapped). I'll play around with it some more. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 23:46, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

@Laterthanyouthink: If "wikEd" is enabled at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets then try to disable it there (not merely on an icon at the top right of edit pages). Do you see the pencil in safemode? PrimeHunter (talk) 01:18, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Ah - thanks PrimeHunter - that gives me the pencil! I can now experiment with it (although I still find WikEd useful for the mass-change function), so may have to get used to switching in and out. At least now I know though - much appreciated. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 02:10, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

@Laterthanyouthink: The default toolbar has search and replace on a magnifying glass icon to the right. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:33, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Ah yes, must have forgotten that - thanks again. The other thing I use on WikiEd is the ability to change case over strings, which I don't see there, but not serious. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:23, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Any hex editor or hex dump command would be able to do it. od's output is kind of opaque (example collapsed below), but it's what I used since I'm already used to it. —Cryptic 05:25, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Cryptic Ah, interesting. Yes, could be too late to each an old dog new tricks (although I do have a techy background in some areas). At this point, I am just hoping it doesn't happen again - but at least now have a few pointers to help find the problem now. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:48, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Extended content

$ od -t cx1 article.txt |grep -3w ad
0002500 271 330 250 330 257     330 247 331 204 331 201 330 252 330 247
         b9  d8  a8  d8  af  20  d8  a7  d9  84  d9  81  d8  aa  d8  a7
0002520 330 255   }   }   ;       b   o   r   n       6       J   u   n
         d8  ad  7d  7d  3b  20  62  6f  72  6e  20  36  20  4a  75  6e
0002540   e       1   9   7   9   )       i   s       a   n           s
         65  20  31  39  37  39  29  20  69  73  20  61  6e  20  20  73
0002560   o   c   i   o   l   o   g   i   s   t   ,       l   a   w   y
--
0012520       I       w   a   s       c   o   n   n   e   c   t   e   d
         20  49  20  77  61  73  20  63  6f  6e  6e  65  63  74  65  64
0012540 302 255     342 200 223       p   e   r   s   o   n   a   l   l
         c2  ad  20  e2  80  93  20  70  65  72  73  6f  6e  61  6c  6c
0012560   y       a   n   d       t   h   r   o   u   g   h       a
         79  20  61  6e  64  20  74  68  72  6f  75  67  68  20  61  20
0012600   s   t   r   o   n   g       s   e   n   s   e       o   f

Soft hyphen shows up as "ad" in hex; the first appearance was part of a longer multi-byte character sequence (the name in Arabic script in the lead), and the second shows it occurred just after "I was connected".

I actually misread what you wrote as referring to searching through a 530-character quote. Since the error message gives you the position, you could have bisected the problem by replacing, say, "| quote= Nathalie Handal spoke with Randa..." with "| dummy= Nathalie Handal spoke with |quote=Randa...", moving the split around until you found a position with a reasonably small position number to manually count out. (Obviously you'd start with a much longer first section, ideally a little less than your best estimate of where 530 characters would be.) —Cryptic 05:02, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Good idea - thanks! I rarely use such long quotes, but it seemed apt in this situation. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:06, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

I need Help

Is this source considered a reliable source at web archive https://web.archive.org/web/20260116001304/https://kpop-teen-star.preview.emergentagent.com/innovation# Pinchmemore (talk) 00:40, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

I'd have to say not remotely reliable. It gives every appearance of being paid-for content. It concerns an American musician, yet is published in Lagos, and is overtly promotional. See WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA for more on the sad state of the Nigerian media - not that the problem is confined to that country alone. And note that we'd need a proper URL for the original, even if it were useable. Archives aren't 'reliable sources', they are repositories where copies of such sources can sometimes be found, and without a link to the original, we have no way of verifying it. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:53, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

So if it was from the United States would it be partially considered reliable ~2026-33235-0 (talk) 01:17, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

No. That's not a good source, no matter where it's from. The United States does have some good sources, but it has a lot of bad ones too. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:10, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

It's so promotional, and so cliché-ridden, that it looks to me like a parody of promotion. -- Hoary (talk) 02:55, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Yup. Fortunately for us, most brown envelope journalism is fairly obvious. Either that, or we are missing the more subtle stuff. Some of it is clearly written by the subject, rather than the journalist, who clearly doesn't care in the slightest about what impression it gives. I suspect that it is sometimes created with the direct intention of providing 'reliable sources' for Wikipedia, given that the content is highly unlikely to be of interest to most readers of the host publication.

Note that the subject of the 'article' linked above, one 'JFO Star' has already seen multiple attempts at a biography rejected for lack of evidence of meeting WP notability criteria. If Pinchmemore was thinking of making another attempt, and this crap was the best they could come up with, I suggest they stop wasting their time. And that whoever paid for it stop wasting their money... AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:58, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

@AndyTheGrump:, they have indeed. WidgetKid ^{chat me} 18:27, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Absolutely not. Close the Wayback Machine overlay and you will see that this website claims to be the BBC despite the URL being completely different. All the links in the page, such as the ones to "related articles", lead back to this same "article". The article (and comments!) are baked directly into the source code. I'm surprised this site does NOT lead to a cryptocurrency/investment scam, as every other website impersonating a news agency seems to do so. OutsideNormality (talk) 01:35, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

@OutsideNormality Wow, good find. That page appears to be made using React, but the source is pretty inscrutable. David10244 (talk) 08:30, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Question

Hi dear I’m new here can we be friends Johnhypolord (talk) 23:50, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

How can be abele to meet with friends Johnhypolord (talk) 23:48, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

If you make valuable and reliably referenced improvements to articles here, you will find yourself interacting with other editors, who will be amiably disposed towards you. It's unlikely that you will ever meet any of them, face to face. But if your purpose in Wikipedia is to make friends, you are at the wrong website. -- Hoary (talk) 01:58, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

See WP:Social. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:33, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Editing submission

When editing an article to add a spouse to an article, it said "That user has an actual or apparent conflict of interest". I was the spouse, so what conflict could I have? AFB-Fr62 (talk) 16:01, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

WP:Conflict of interest details a lot of this. "... contributing to Wikipedia articles about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, or your financial and other relationships." If you are/were the spouse of the subject, you still have a certain closeness to the subject and would fall under the COI guidelines, regardless of intentions. Potential edits should be posted on the talk page of the article for a neutral, third-party to review beforehand. • Quinn (talk) 16:06, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Conflict of interest means you aren't 100% committed to Wikipedia, because you're also committed to the subject of the article. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:07, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

You asked in the right place, on the article's talk page, but we need to see a citation for the fact that you wanted added. Simply saying "Lousiana Vital Records Registry" is too vague; can you give a specific web link (URL), or the details to allow us to find the relevant record? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:39, 19 January 2026 (UTC)