:::{{u|Blocky44}}, your sandbox is for experimentation ''directly related to improving Wikipedia'', not for general experimentation. [[User:Cullen328|Cullen328]] ([[User talk:Cullen328|talk]]) 07:37, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
:::{{u|Blocky44}}, your sandbox is for experimentation ''directly related to improving Wikipedia'', not for general experimentation. [[User:Cullen328|Cullen328]] ([[User talk:Cullen328|talk]]) 07:37, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
::::Alright, but where would I put general experimentation? Would I have to obtain a webserver for MediaWiki? If so, what does that mean and how?
[Edit Conflict} Have you read the Project page Wikipedia:Good articles to understand thoroughly what the criteria of a Good article are (and how to start a Reassessment), and have you read the detailed assessment on the article's Talk page? (Just checking.)
If so, and you still think the assessment is wrong, you should open a new Section on the Talk page, set out why you think it's wrong, and participate in the ensuing discussion. Perhaps the faults you perceive can be easily addressed without going through a Reassessment. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 5.68.252.202 (talk) 07:03, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A number of similar images were added to commons by c:User:Flag Creator, under pd licensing, but with the source invariably some story on a website, mostly deadlinked. They look like scans from like a children's illustrated guide to the Han dynasty, and I note the clearly modern similar image from one such arbitrary website story. Who knows whose artistic vision this is. For the non-specialists, the "similar image" linked not only looks nothing like premodern Chinese portraiture in style, but the words at the top are typeset in a modern typeface, and reverse order to how they would have been presented in a legitimate pd-old source, although it does appear to be a derivative work, so doesn't tell us much on its own.Question for the team here: is there a template or infobox parameter "doesn't need image" that can be applied to articles about topics in early history? In addition to stuff like this, I've recently reverted someone adding a CG render of the word "周" to some king, as if that were an improvement over no image at all. Folly Mox (talk) 12:40, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know of any such template, and sometimes there is a statue or something, like Arminius. It's not how he looked, but it's how he's been depicted. By someone with enough money to commission a statue. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:19, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I wrote a request+suggestion but it disappeared
I just wrote a suggestion on talk page of Al-Ahli Arab Hospital explosion and it vanished I searched in archives its nowhere. Is improvement to this article limited to some editors. I thought talk page is open so that everyone can discuss and improve. My suggestion is actually would not be contested its about a spelling mistake. Ankraj giri (talk) 14:17, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!! But I really couldn't find it earlier I also tried page find(browser tool) and search box in page(it was not meant for that i learned now) Ankraj giri (talk) 14:31, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there, I am new here, just would like to ask, is it any way to change this picture on me? It’s an 15 years old picture, I have several other personal reason why I would like to change this picture.
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bence_Fliegauf.jpg#mw-jump-to-license
What is the shortest way to change the picture above to this one?
Hi IP 2A00:1110:22C:583E:1C75:90C1:ED55:AEA1. Just going to add that before you try replacing any photos (even after following the steps laid out above by Arch dude), you might want to consider creating an WP:ACCOUNT and following the advice given in WP:DECLARECOI so that other users don't simply mistake you for some random IP account randomly changing the main infobox photo of an article. I also suggest that you try and make the photo as encyclopedic looking as possible because anything too wild might end up being removed by another editor. Photos are like text content in the sense that they too are subject to WP:CONSENSUS and disagreements over them will need to be resolved through article talk page discussion per WP:DR. A simple headshot showing how you look today should be more than sufficient. In addition, you should upload the file to Wikimedia Commons (see c:COM:UPLOAD and c:COM:L for more details on that) since that makes it easier for others to reuse the photo. You should also make sure you leave a clearly worded edit summary explaining that it's you adding the photo and why you're adding it when you actually add the photo to the article. The more transparent you're about things, then less likely you're going to find yourself running into problems. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:21, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What if i'm editing at the same time as another person
Inevitably, this happens not infrequently. One tip is: every time before you hit "Publish", copy your new text to your clipboard so that if there's a conflict you don't need to type it all out from scratch again. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 5.68.252.202 (talk) 05:42, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How to connect Uwe Holmer to the Spanish and German counterparts?
I recently created an article about Uwe Holmer and I know there are existing articles about him in Spanish and German. However, if you go to languages, it does not list either. When I click "add language", it only talks about changing the interface of Wikipedia, not connecting articles in different languages to each other. Thanks for any help given! ❤HistoryTheorist❤17:16, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@HistoryTheorist: This link magically occurs in Wikidata. A bot named "Pi Bot" added your new English article to the Wikidata item some time today. It takes awhile for this to propagate back out to the various affected Wikipedias. -Arch dude (talk) 17:26, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For reference: one can also login to Wikidata and manually add a link for a newly published (or accepted) article. If there is an existing Wikidata "Item" which corresponds to the article (in this case d:Q1634260), it's very straightforward (scroll to the bottom of item page; select wiki; select article; "publish" – voilà. (The process is slightly more complex if the item doesn't already exist, although new item creation is relatively simple to learn too.) Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 18:32, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't a place to list things for sale. This is a project to write an encyclopedia. If you want to write an encyclopedia article about a dune buggy, and have significant coverage in independent reliable sources to summarize, an article may be possible, but will be challenging. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 17:40, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To add a tooltip, I added a span with title to my signature, which gives something like this. Apparently, it works well around the last three words of the preceding sentence, as it does in de.wp (such as here). Why does it not work in my signature here? It's not because it is surrounded by ( like this ), because this works fine. ◅ Sebastian Helm🗨 21:33, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
After some more experimentation, I noticed that it doesn't always work on de.wp, either. But when it doesn't it behaves differently from en.wp: It shows nothing at all, not even the usual file context menu. After refreshing the page it behaves as intended. ◅ Sebastian Helm🗨21:40, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SebastianHelm: It works for me in Firefox. Your signature span with a title is around an image and not around text. I don't know what "the usual file context menu" is but maybe it's something your browser adds on an image with a file link. File:Blue and yellow ribbon UA.png has a license which requires a link for attribution. File:Blue and yellow ribbon.svg does not require it so |link= is allowed to disable the link. Does this work as you want: . As a possible bonus, it actually looks blue and yellow for me while your signature image looks green to my eyes at that resolution. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:38, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It has "access-date=20 October 20233". I fixed it, but it should be easy for you to do next time. Also, please read WP:CITETRIM, one brief sentence does not need six references. RudolfRed (talk) 04:03, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I've set up an alternate account for edits when not on my main laptop. I like to test on mobile device and old computers, but I don't want to go log in to a bunch of random devices or stay logged in on my phone. So I tend to make small corrections as an IP. As I've been around, I've come to see many users create an alt, and I've seen a lot of people express the idea that there is something inherently fishy about logged out editing. I have several questions even after reading about alts:
Is there anything specific I need to do to edit with an alt? I've chosen a similar user name, put a notice, and linked both of my talk pages to each other.
Am I meant to fold my old IP edits into the alt account somehow? If you check the most recent edit on NotLD[2]: that's me and all other edits under that IP are also me.
Can I participate in discussions with the alt? I made it for small fixes, so this will likely not come up. I just want to make sure that I understand. I think if I want to participate in an RfC or AfD, I'm meant to not use this account, since it could appear as bonus person?
From my general experience (others may point you to specific policies):
1. You have done exactly the right things – you have a good reason for having two accounts, and you have made their connection completely clear.
2. It isn't possible to combine IP edits into a named account, but you can if you wish mention on either or both of your User pages what IP(s) you have previously used, although this might compromise your anonimity if it's a fixed IP you still have, so you don't have to.
3. In such discussions, you can use either account, BUT you should only use one in any specific discussion or linked discussions.
Hello. I used to edit a lot of Wikipedia articles but have been away from it for a few years. I've forgotten my account password and the email address no longer exists -- the whole domain was closed by the company. How would I go about regaining access to my account? I remember an old password, though that must not have been the last one I used. Many thanks 2A02:6B60:E363:0:DD7:DBBE:9EBD:D690 (talk) 09:21, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
yeah, we can't help you here. you can create a new account, noting the username of the previous account on the new account's userpage. ltbdl (talk) 12:02, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To expand on ltbdl's reply, it's not that we don't want to help you: it is technically impossible to recover an account where the password has been lost and there is no valid email attached to it. That's why ltbdl suggested creating a new account. ColinFine (talk) 13:09, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There have been cases with a large edit count or elevated user rights where somebody with server access set a new mail address for an account if a user made a request at Phabricator with strong evidence it was their account. There are no standard criteria for it and English Wikipedia administrators like me cannot do it. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:41, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If the old domain name is unregistered (lapsed or squatted), you could buy it and set up an email account there to receive the password reset emails for the old account. If the domain name is still owned by the company or usurped by e.g. a scummy gambling site, you're outta luck, but I would encourage you to register a new account and embrace the experience of rebirth. Demonstrate to yourself the ways you've changed since you were last active here, what within you has remained constant, and maybe what parts of yourself have lain dormant that you'd like to reclaim. Mystically, Folly Mox (talk) 22:28, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Link
Added a name to a list, and I was able to get the name to link but the band associated shows up on Wikipedia as; Raspberries (band), if I leave out ‘band’ it just links to a page about the fruit. If I add band in parentheses it says page not created. Tamastein (talk) 13:24, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I opened a discussion by creating new section in talk page of an article. Now that I was satisfied to close discussion. Can I do it? And if YES then what is the template. I seen below my section an edit request was closed using a edit request answered template. Is their any such template to close a discussion?? Thanks in advance! `~ᴀɴᴋʀᴀᴊ ɢɪʀɪ🎇✨14:56, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is no formal process required to close a discussion on a talk page, unless it is already formal in some way (such as an WP:RFC).
Hi Folks!!, I created this category. I don't know if its correctly formed. I found four people who were from that town. If somebody could take a look at it. Thanks. scope_creepTalk19:34, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am in the communications department at the University of the District of Columbia and need to add our President to wikipedia. Can you please assist? Ashantai1983 (talk) 19:40, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To add to what Arch dude says: first, thank you for asking, rather than just ploughing in and trying it. Secondly, I recommend you read BOSS first. ColinFine (talk) 20:06, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mandatory first step: declare you status as a paid editor: see WP:PAID
Read several ariticles here on similar subjects as yours: (university presidents) to get a feel for the proper tone and format.
Make certain that your subject is notable by our definition. Notability is the only absolute requirement for a Wikipedia article. See WP:N. Do not skip this step.
Gather references that establish notability. Your university web site is not by itself sufficient, because it is not "independent of the subject".
Is there a generally recognized order in sorting party apportionment diagrams on legislative articles. Pages on French parliaments seem to order the diagrams ideologically (left-wing to right-wing). Diagrams I create go by majority to minority (left to right). I figured I'd make sure if one is more common than the other before creating a bunch more. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 20:45, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would have a mild personal preference for sorting ideologically from left to right. I also have two comments:
Your Bolivian example starts with two singletons, at the majority end. My guess is that these are two members with special roles (like the Speaker in some English-speaking countries).
In both your examples, small parties appear as straggling or broken lines. It would be better to shown them as connected clumps — though I appreciate that programming that would be hard. Maproom (talk) 08:04, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For point two, that's an easy fix as I have a bit of know-how on editing svgs. In terms of your first point, this actually brings up a second concept I was curious about: is there an ideal way to show members of individual parties within a larger alliance? In this instance, I took the two non-party members (red and green) and bordered them with the alliance's colors. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 18:21, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't 'register' anything. You edited an existing article. An article which like any other is open to edits from multiple contributors. And given the largely unsourced and clearly promotional nature of your edits, the subsequent revert seems appropriate. If you wish to discuss this further, I suggest you do so on the article talk page. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:17, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please note, Violet Windsor, that "official sources" are usually not what we want: they are usually primary sources, that can be used in only limited ways. Reliable, independent, secondary sources are what a wikipedia article should be based on.
I will also point out that editors who plunge into the challenging task of creating an article before they have spent time learning how Wikipedia works often have a frustrating and disppointing time, so I always advise spending a few weeks or months learning about Wikipedia by making improvements to existing articles (especially to their sourcing and referencing before trying it. ColinFine (talk) 10:32, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Violet Windsor: First, make sure you understand the Wikipedia definition of notability: See WP:N. Notability is the only absolute requirement for an article. If your subject is not notable, you will be wasting a lot of your time and some of ours, so don't skip this step. Next, find published reliable sources (WP:RS) that document this notability. Then read some of our articles that are about people more or less like your subject to get a feel for the proper tone and format. After all that, proceed to WP:YFA. -Arch dude (talk) 02:51, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thankyou so much. The person I wish to publish has an Order of Australia Medal for services to the Country as well, I'll look into whether that meets the "Notable" criteria. Violet Windsor (talk) 03:35, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, JackkBrown. If you see something in an article which you don't think is right, then be bold and edit it. I really don't understand what your purpose is in posting about it here. ColinFine (talk) 10:34, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ColinFine: since I cannot edit every page of every Italian food (I am one person, not a hundred thousand), I ask here so that I can find someone to help me (apparently, no one wants to help me). JackkBrown (talk) 11:50, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I apologise for the dismissive tone of my original reply, and note that the title of this thread at the time was "Serious problem", but still only talked about text formatting. User:JackkBrown, sometimes we are the only active editor who cares about something enough to bother "fixing" it en masse. I've had this experience a number of times. If this is something that is really important to you, you're definitely personally capable of standardising mortadella, ricotta, etc, to either italic or non-italic depending on what you may strongly feel is correct. It will just take a long time. Wikipedia is a big project, with a lot of problems, and will never be perfect or complete.If you're able to generate consensus somewhere applicable (maybe Talk:Mortadella or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Italy or something, including all the terms you feel are problematic so people can discuss them each at the same place, and with neutral notifications elsewhere so that interested editors will be able to find the discussion and weigh in), you could probably submit a successful AWB request to have whatever text formatting gains consensus applied by script to all the appropriate articles.It's not that nobody wants to help you, but nobody wants to do the work that – as far as we can determine from your post here – only you think urgently requires repair. There's a bit of a misconception some editors have that the Help Desk is less about learning how to perform a particular task on Wikipedia, or learning what should be done in a particular situation, and more about recruiting editors with nothing on their own plates to do work on your behalf. Sometimes we will just fix something an editor brings up here, especially if it's a quick fix, but it's an unreasonable expectation that we'll take over your pet project instead of helping empower you to complete it yourself. With kindness, Folly Mox (talk) 21:22, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, JackkBrown, I am an anglophone in my seventh decade, and have never heard of any of those four foods before: this suggests to me that they are less than "world famous", although doubtless non-Italian chefs and gourmets know of them. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 46.65.231.103 (talk) 21:25, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On the Provinces of Italy page, there are both upper and lowercase "Provinces" in the list (e.g.: "province of Arezzo", and "Province of Naples"). Could someone very kindly fix this for all the provinces of Italy? Thanks in advance. JackkBrown (talk) 03:05, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You are a well-known Italian speaking editor with quite a bit of experience, JackkBrown. Why don't you just fix the problem yourself? Do you really think that more experienced Italian speaking editors are also Teahouse hosts? Cullen328 (talk) 07:14, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a file of the crest of the Martineau family - on a chair - (top of article). Perhaps it should be on the right hand side of the page. Please can you get a close up of the crest to replace the one I just uploaded - the crest on the seat is what is important. Thank you58.179.137.31 (talk) 03:24, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So many points here.
In order to switch from the left to the right, simply replace "|left|" with "|right|" within the "File:" link.
In order to crop photos, please use GIMP. This runs on any computer, costs nothing, and (for purposes such as cropping) is easy to use.
Is it too much to give each discussion thread a distinctive title, or should other people here retitle your threads?
In your earlier thread with this title, you seemed to be complaining about your "device". What device is it, and what trouble are you having with it?
I cannot do the GIMP activity - I was able to change the top image from left to right.
Please help with an enlargement / closeup of the Martineau coat of arms on the seat of the chair as seen in the top image of the article
Use GIMP which I failed to understand. Thank you in advance175.38.42.62 (talk) 07:05, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please help with an enlargement / closeup of the Martineau coat of arms on the seat of the chair as seen in the top image of the article Use GIMP which I failed to understand. Thank you in advanc.
Click on the rectangle icon (the first among a lot of icons; it has a tooltip [pop-up description], "Rectangle Select Tool").
Imagine a rectangle that contains what you want, and excludes what you don't want. Choose any one of its four corners. Press down the mouse button there, move the cursor to the opposite corner, and release the mouse button. You'll see a rectangle.
Menu: "Image | Crop to selection".
Menu: "File | Export as". "Select File Type (by Extension)": choose "JPEG image". Specify the quality (86 should be enough).
Upload the file to Commons (with a new filename, of course). Describe the file informatively, put it in relevant categories, and do all the other necessary administrative stuff. (Of course, do not pretend that the file is your own work. Instead, it's in the public domain.)
Sorry, please help with an enlargement / closeup of the Martineau coat of arms on the seat of the chair (and rotated so that it is straight please if possible) as seen in the top image of the article. I cannot use GIMP which I failed to understand. Thank you in advance and sorry. 08:52, 21 October 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.38.42.62 (talk)
For rotation and cropping in GIMP, first do the rotation, and only then do the cropping. Cropping is explained above. For rotation, "Tools | Transform tools | Rotate" brings up a little menu saying (among other stuff that you can safely ignore) "Angle 0.00" with a little up and a little down triangle. Play with these triangles; don't worry if you overshoot (you won't damage anything). When you're happy with the angle, click "Rotate". -- Hoary (talk) 09:10, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can download the file but I cannot "Open the file with GIMP" - I dont know how to do that - I can go to the GIMP website but then I loose the original file of the chair. Im so sorry 175.38.42.62 (talk) 09:38, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You are unlikely to achieve what I suspect you are aiming for, which is a presentation of the family arms, similar to this one. Because the picture of a chair was not taken directly above the seat, you need to not only rotate the image, but also skew it.
I suggest you instead aim for a simple close-up of the chair seat; you can do this using an image editor such as GIMP (see Hoary's comments above), or with the {{CSS image crop}} template. I am happy to help on the latter if needed.
GIMP will let you correct skew. In practice, it's very difficult to do this convincingly. (I long ago gave up trying.) Better to say that GIMP will let you ameliorate skew. This isn't at all hard to do: "Tools | Transform Tools | Perspective". -- Hoary (talk) 10:04, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Like Chrome, Safari, Firefox, Excel, and so forth, GIMP is software that has to be installed on your computer before you can use it. Download it from either a source that you know is trustworthy, or from gimp.org. (You may be asked if you also want any of a list of add-ons; you won't need any of these.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:58, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would be truly appreciative of your efforts to do this - as long as the image is not blurred. I simply don't have the skills for this at all. Thanks in advance175.38.42.62 (talk) 10:41, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have cropped it as requested. There is no mechanism within Wikipedia to rotate an image; in any case, it would look strange because, as I noted above, the image needs skewing as well in order to appear "straight". Bazza (talk) 14:10, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia Search
Is it possible search the intersection of categories?
Such as: Category:CNN people AND Category:Daily Mail journalists AND Category:The Apprentice (franchise) winners = ?
There seems to be an archiving glitch at Talk:Bog. One discussion, unhelpfully called Untitled, seems to be out of place, being from 2002 but near the bottom of the talk page. Meanwhile, the current talk page has three discussions from 2006-7 which have somehow escaped the notice of the archiving bot. Can these errors be rectified, please? Many thanks. --Viennese Waltz07:44, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wanted write article on a particular subject how to rite it. Also on 20/10/2023 wrote an article on "BLUE BIRD let's play a game" a toys and games manufacturing company from Bengaluru, India. What is the status of that. Kindly do the needful. Vijay Dhwaja (talk) 08:31, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article you wrote in your userpage was deleted per WP:G11 - in other words, it was blatant advertising. There is a message on your talkpage explaining this. Before going any further, you need to read WP:PAID, which discusses the steps that people who are writing as a part of their job need to go through before editing; you also need to read WP:COI and WP:NOTPROMO. If you try to publish another advert about this company, your account will likely be blocked from editing. GirthSummit (blether)08:37, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't, just don't add things to Wikipedia because you have been WP:PAID to do it. As Girth Summit said, this will get the account blocked. Even if you are not getting paid, you should not create articles about things that you are involved with, because this creates a conflict of interest. Also, if "BLUE BIRD let's play a game" does not have significant coverage in reliable secondary sources (it doesn't appear to) then it would not be suitable for a standalone article. There is a Facebook page about the company here, that is literally all I could find in a web search.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me)09:13, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Vijay Dhwaja: Let's start over. We have ways to help you recover from "paid" and "promo", but we have no way to help you recover from a lack of what we call "notability". Therefore the first thing for you to do is to determine if the subject is notable by our definition. See WP:NCORP, then look at WP:AMOUNT. It is unlikely that your subject is notable. There is no way to fix this, so you will get extremely frustrated if you try and will waste your time and ours. -Arch dude (talk) 13:06, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A photo on Commons has been deleted
On Commons a file has been deleted because of copyright violation of the sculptor. That file is also here on EN-WP, see the talk page of File:Sculpture exhibition, NWU Botanical Garden.jpg. See my requests there (adjusting this file + perhaps delete it here too). I have no idea how that works here (I am mainly a Commons volunteer). Can you please address these requests? JopkeB (talk) 14:22, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
JopkeB I am afraid this is a bit confusing. File:Sculpture exhibition, NWU Botanical Garden.jpg is on Commons, see the message "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. Information from its description page there is shown below." You have now created a talk page for it on Wikipedia. The deleted file was File:Sculpture in the NWU Botanical Garden.jpg, which does not exist on en Wikipedia, if you click on the link you will see that it was deleted on en Wikipedia after it had been up loaded to Commons. You could request deletion of the remaining image on Commons there if necessary. TSventon (talk) 14:52, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, this is confusing. I guess there were two files on Commons, with nearly the same name. The deleted one probably had the sculpture in the foreground of the photo, and this one has it less prominent (and then it can stay because of "De minimis"). I am sorry.
Can you refer me to information on since when Criticism/Controversy sections are discouraged
I'm seeing users deleting Controversy sections from at least 2 universities, but I can't understand exactly when and why it was decided to delete this sections, as there are lots of information being deleted, and apparently to me this sections are following the proper guidelines stated in Criticism, properly cited and neutral, but are tagged indiscriminately as WP:NotAdvocacy or WP:Indiscriminate. Antiinterference (talk) 16:46, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not yet, I'm asking because I'm seeing at least 1 very active users, deleting this section making this statements "no, per WP:NOTNEWS, WP:UNDUE, and because "controversy" sections are discouraged. Those are all well-accepted guidelines, and weigh more heavily than some individual's opinion" and deleting whole sections, so again, this seems serious, and before getting into an actual discussion I need to understand if there is some true to this statement that controversy is discouraged or are just power users making some kind of abuse of power... Antiinterference (talk) 17:09, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Antiinterference, you mentioned WP:CRITICISM. That essay says In most cases separate sections devoted to criticism, controversies, or the like should be avoided in an article because these sections call undue attention to negative viewpoints. Articles should present the prevailing viewpoints from reliable sources, whether positive or negative. Segregation of text or other content into different subsections, based solely on the apparent POV of the content itself, may result in an unencyclopedic structure, such as a back-and-forth dialogue between proponents and opponents. This is not a matter of policy, but I think it is fair to say that many experienced editors agree with the essay on this point. Cullen328 (talk) 18:36, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Suddenly deleting criticism from multiple wikipedia pages, on similar dates, seems like a policy.
But yeah not my issue I guess, and there is probably no one monitoring that.
Or if you, or a group, suddenly decide to delete criticism that was there for years, information that was a very useful source for many people using Wikipedia for years, and suddenly there is a change in attitude from multiple super users, and maybe admins, a new editor will not have much to do, as there is no proper way to denounce arbitrary citations of "What Wikipedia is not", and you have to expend extra effort in trying to defend your case of why that criticism should be there, while someone just arbitrarily labeling criticism as not welcomed is accepted by default.
Sorry but this is weird, somehow after a conversation with someone in reddit saying wikipedia is not reliable, few hours later I go check what I had just cited and it was deleted, in my opinion arbitrarily, and somehow it coincides with the deletion of the criticism section of several universities of the united states...
Antiinterference, discouragement of article sections devoted to controversy or criticism is not the same as discouragement of controversy or criticism. Article sections devoted to controversy or criticism are discouraged; however, coverage of controversy or criticism is not discouraged. (This doesn't mean that such coverage is always acceptable: policies about neutrality, sourcing, etc also come into play.) It's sometimes pretty obvious that the content of an article about this or that university is monitored by one or more persons who are intent on presenting the university in the best possible light, and perhaps you are seeing this. If you do see it, avoid charging the other editor with being a censor, a PR flack or whatever and avoid speculating openly about motives; instead, simply ask for the reason(s) for the deletion of well-referenced facts about the university. -- Hoary (talk) 01:39, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Question about splitting an article
What do I do when I propose an article be split, but I cannot perform the split myself (assuming that the split is accepted by consensus)? Is there somewhere I can ask for someone to perform the split for me? If yes, how and where do I ask? – Treetoes023 (talk) 16:49, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Missing topic page
Some time ago I created a page for the former business Bullwinkles (gentlemen's club) and thought I'd finished it for publish, but have not seen it nor a hyperlink appear anytime during Google searches. Could you look into this for me please? I wasn't a huge article, roughly one full paragraph. But I don't wish to feel that I wasted all that time, for it to get lost in cyberspace.
"Publish changes" realy means "save changes", it doesn't mean "publish this to the encyclopedia". The reason the button was labeled this way is because every edit on Wikipedia is publicitely viewable, assuming one knows where to look. User:Cugrad16/sandbox has a long way ahead before it can be promoted to an article, amongst other things its lacking sources. Pleasee see your first article. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:26, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there, I'm having trouble with Wikipedia in general, but particularly because I tried posting an article about a person, and when I went back to see if it was published, it seemed to be removed from my account. I can't find it anywhere. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Isabelleresnick (talk) 17:15, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In some ways the formatting is indeed very strange, Isabelleresnick. But more importantly, you'll have to demonstrate notability. (For a subject who makes a living off "astrology-based products and services", this is likely to be a tall order.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:03, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How to request comments without an RfC
I forget how to ask draw attention to a question that's not a dispute. I'd like the article Kenneth Chesebro to be rated as more important than "Low," and posted that on talk, but don't know how to get eyes on it. YoPienso (talk) 20:57, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
User:Yopienso, you could post a neutral notification to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Donald Trump, but I'm not sure to what extent (if any) the WikiProject "importance" ratings are used for anything or by anyone. It seems like they're mostly a relic of a bygone era when WikiProjects were well staffed and had lots of missing content to create or substandard content that they felt core to their topic area. What outcome are you hoping to achieve by increasing the "importance" assessment of this article? Whatever it is, there's almost certainly a more effective and more direct approach than twiddling a parameter that no one pays attention to. Folly Mox (talk) 21:30, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yopienso, I changed to mid-importance for the Trump project. Give that Chesebro has pled guilty and probably will be testifying against Trump and his co-defendants, that seems reasonable. Cullen328 (talk) 02:16, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cullen328:What do you think of bumping it up to B class for content? A great deal of editing has been done in the past couple of days. The article is quite substantial and organized. YoPienso (talk) 05:10, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Inhibiting edit limitations
There's a bunch of Venezuelan census data on the official government website and I'm trying to update some pages to reflect that (namely of the states) since, except for one page, they don't have any historical population info. I created a template to facilitate adding this information.
I keep encountering two errors:
1. I keep having to do CAPTCHAs for all the http://www.ine.gob.ve URLs I cite as I always get this:
Your edit includes new external links. These may be much welcomed links to references. Please note that the nofollow HTML attribute is applied to external links in Wikipedia, instructing search engines to ignore these links when computing page ranks. For information on our standards for adding links, please see our External links Guideline.
2. Due to the efficiency of the template and knowing exactly where to get the numbers, the pace of my edits keeps running into this:
It appears you are adding external links to many different Wikipedia pages in rapid succession. This is often a sign of people spamming Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites. Before you continue you may wish to review Wikipedia's guidelines about external links and spam as these may help you decide whether these links are appropriate for Wikipedia. Please feel free to ask at the Help Desk if you have any questions.
So my questions are,
1. Is there a way to avoid the CAPTCHAs? http://www.ine.gob.ve/ is the official Venezuelan government site of statistics. Plenty of the pages I've edited have direct links to pages from it as well.
2. Any way to get around the pace limit? The edits are pretty trivial. I'm literally just copying numbers from a PDF published by the government.
I'm unsure. I'd recommend waiting a few days until your account is autoconfirmed, which already solves most of the issues you're describing. Manual confirmation exists but is relatively unlikely to happen, I think. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:39, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Many of those quotations appear to be from online source that are not behind paywalls so the quotations are not really necessary. If the quotations are important to the article, put them in the article body and cite them. Quotations require citations; citations do not require quotations.
How do I update the profile picture on a biography page I'm working on? Is there a guide somewhere specifically about the correct procedure? Heideana (talk) 03:45, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Take a photograph of Martin Burckhardt (if it is he) yourself, so that you, indisputably, are the copyright holder. Upload it to Wikipedia Commons, copylefting it (or, if you prefer, waiving all rights to it). Categorize it, etc. If you upload it there under some filename (say, Martin Burckhardt 2023.jpg), then in Wikipedia you can invoke it with the same filename (you don't have to say that it's at Commons).
But I don't think you need to worry about the image. Rather, the text. The "About" section contains some Deep Thought, involving, inter alia, "our sequential great Universal Machines with their outsourced historical unconscious Psychotopes" [Come again?], and it's completely unreferenced. -- Hoary (talk) 03:58, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A subpage I made to experiment with Infobox country was deleted for using Wikipedia as a web host.
If I put a disclaimer that it is experimentation along with various family trees and infoboxes relating to a personal project on my sandbox, will it be deleted for the same reason?
I wanted to make sure about things this time.
Doctor Alex (talk · contributions · sandbox) 04:47, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your use of Wikipedia should be for the benefit of Wikipedia, Blocky44 ("Doctor Alex"), not for "a personal project". For the personal project, well, Mediawiki is free software, so you'd be free to install it on your own webserver and use it there. -- Hoary (talk) 06:20, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But it would be placed on my sandbox and with a disclaimer. Also I do not have a webserver and did not realize I still had Doctor Alex in my signature. The sandbox is for experimentation, isn't it?
Courtesy link: Benedek Fliegauf - very poorly sourced BLP - 57.140.16.27 (talk) 17:28, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
🗨 21:33, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
After some more experimentation, I noticed that it doesn't always work on de.wp, either. But when it doesn't it behaves differently from en.wp: It shows nothing at all, not even the usual file context menu. After refreshing the page it behaves as intended. ◅ Sebastian Helm 
. As a possible bonus, it actually looks blue and yellow for me while your signature image looks green to my eyes at that resolution. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:38, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
Fixed. Reference name was used more than once, which caused the error. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 02:00, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
Resolved) if you wish. See Template:Close for a list of such templates. ColinFine (talk) 19:44, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
Sorted ideologically
Sorted by majority
