Wikipedia:Help desk

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

• For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
• Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
• Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
• For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
• New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners.

Ask a question

Question about cooking show

FYI

 – Heading added, section has been malformed; original question missing. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:47, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Nina Schroeder, you've posted on Wikipedia, not whichever show you're referencing (which is not affiliated with said show). Perhaps you meant to post somewhere else? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:31, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

It's not a good idea to post your contact details on a public forum such as this. You never know how they could be used. JIP | Talk 01:01, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Spelling

Why is it MO for NY. I’ve notice that if a person is either born or dies on NY instead of NY it’s MO? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.113.21.195 (talk) 01:37, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

What's the context behind this? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:45, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

It's not. Where are you seeing this, 98.113.21.195? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:17, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

January 12

Why isn't DEFAULTSORT ordering working in this category?

I'm working my way through Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating a citation from Newgenbio with a missing parameter, adding volume and page numbers to references that lack them and noticed something odd. Some of the articles are listed in straight alpha order instead of respecting the DEFAULTSORT contained in the article. For example, Thomas Acton appears under T instead of A. He has a DEFAULTSORT defined, and appears properly listed in other categories he's a member of, but not this one. Other articles, for example Laurens Bake, do make use of DEFAULTSORT ordering.

What is happening here? Is there any way to fix it? Chuntuk (talk) 01:54, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@Chuntuk: This is phab:T40435: "Sortkey for categories is ignored when category is inside a <ref> and DEFAULTSORT comes after <references/>". Thomas Acton was fixed by moving DEFAULTSORT before <references/>.[1] This was just a test. I don't recommend doing it. If a category is added inside a reference then it's nearly always a hidden maintenance category not seen by readers on the article unless they have an account and enable "Show hidden categories" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:50, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, though I'm mystified as to why Laurens Bake (and several other articles) are correctly sorted, when they also have DEFAULTSORT after references. Oh well, I was hoping it might be something about the markup of the category page that I can fix - as it is, since I'm aiming to empty that category I'll just put up with it. Chuntuk (talk) 10:15, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@Chuntuk: Laurens Bake doesn't have {{Cite Newgenbio}} inside a <ref> so the issue doesn't affect her. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:32, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

I have documented the issue at WP:DEFAULTSORT.[2] PrimeHunter (talk) 10:42, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Australian Institute of Polish Affairs

I just noticed that the page for our very reputable organisation - Australian Institute of Polish Affairs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Institute_of_Polish_Affairs#:~:text=The%20Australian%20Institute%20of%20Polish,cultural%20life%20in%20Poland%20today.) has been suddenly deleted. We suspect that this may be a result of a malicious effort by someone critical of our organisation’s principles and outlook. Could we request that the page is restored. The warning on Talk came during the busy Christmas/New Year period so we missed the 7 days given to object this deletion. I think, there were previous unsuccessful attempts to delete this website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex Dee (talk • contribs) 03:41, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Alex Dee, you can ask for a WP:REFUND from the deleting admin Liz, but just be ready to address her concerns that the article fails organisation notability, and that reliable sources should be found to establish notability. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:05, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Alex Dee. Please don't assume malice. The deletion log says "Non-notable organization, could not find sources to suggest notability. Fails WP:ORG" - in other words, there do not seem to be enough independent reliable sources about the organisation to provide the basis for an acceptable encyclopaedia article. Remember that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. . Not every organisation has been written about enough to meet those requirements. --ColinFine (talk) 12:09, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia is broken, why no one wants to fix it?

I posted a new topic yesterday but the aether bunny ate it and now it is missing.

Charts on all pages are missing also. I wrote about this a few days ago, but no one wants to fix it. Someone changed something and broke Wikipedia just recently, can you please fix it.

The above comment is signed by Firdaus Bin Mohammad, 2021-Jan-12 Thanks for your attention — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.187.94.75 (talk) 05:06, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

It's most likely #All charts are missing on all pages. Please continue discussion there if it is. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:38, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Graphs made with mw:Extension:Graph require JavaScript in your browser now. A January 8 post at phab:T242855 says "Drop ability to attempt server-side rendering with Graphoid". PrimeHunter (talk) 09:06, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Tricky issue

Not sure what to do about this one. The article Rideshare Drivers United was until recently about the American Rideshare Drivers United. That org has a website here. Then the Australian organization called Rideshare Drivers United came along to claim the article and promotionally edit it to say the Australians are the boss of Rideshare United. Their web site, for reference, is here. I have added good sources to the article, but it turns out the article may not be correct as it is mixing mentions of the organizations. Ideas? I was thinking it might be good to move it to draft until they get their act(s) together vis-a-vis naming. Possibly (talk) 05:15, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@Possibly: If both organizations are notable, then we need two separate articles. The question is how to get there. I propose that you revert the article back to the latest version that was still "pure" US, and then move the article to Rideshare Drivers United (US). Then, create Rideshare Drivers United (Australia)) by copying the content of the last-but-one version (attribute your copy on the article's talk page) and removing the US stuff. Finally, edit the redirect page that was left from the move to turn it into a disambiguation page. If the Australian article has questionable notability, then nominate it for deletion. All of this "extra" work will minimize any bickering with the Australian editors. -Arch dude (talk) 16:26, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the good advice @Arch dude:. I moved the page to Rideshare Drivers United (California) as the US org seems to be only active in that state. I'll have a look later at whether there is enough sourcing for Rideshare Drivers United (Australia). Possibly (talk) 20:06, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Editing on Android

I've been contributing to Wikipedia for a while via desktop, so I generally know my way around the site. however, I'm having issues editing on my Android phone, which I'd like to do. I can use the main desktop site in my browser, but that's obviously not a great experience. both the mobile site and the app feel like they're a lot more designed for readers than editors, for example, I can't easily view page history in the app. any recommendations? Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 06:00, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@Elliot321: My recommendation is always to use the desktop mode, and to set a responsive skin (monobook or timeless) in your preferences. The funny thing about those two is that they are able to adjust the viewport and the menus based on the avalable screen width, so that everything will fit. You can test this out (on a desktop broswer) by opening this link or this link and making the window smaller. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:39, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Restore material

My article was deleted because I used different language. I wrote on ru.wikipedia in english. I want my text back! I worked a long time on it!! I want to save it for myself!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tilessova (talk • contribs) 10:02, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

I can't find any deleted materials from this account - just this one singular edit. However, the English wiki is not ru.wiki - you will have to write in English. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:12, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

If you wrote your article on Russian Wikipedia, Tilessova, then it will have been deleted in Russian Wikipedia, and you will have to ask for it to be restored to you there: nobody on English Wikipedia can help. You probably want to start by asking at ru:Википедия:Форум/Вопросы. --ColinFine (talk)

@Tilessova: The page has been restored and moved to ru:User:Tilessova/Orbis Kazakhstan. See Wikipedia:Articles for creation for how to submit an article for review in the English Wikipedia. It should satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). PrimeHunter (talk) 21:37, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

The information aboud my bio is incorrect

Hello,

I writing to object about my bio information on wikipedia, My name is Jamaluddin Badr the former governor of Nooristan province. In wikipedia my bio appears with corruption allegation, after legal invistigation by afghan court I was acquited and declared clear from any allegation. I am attaching court desicion for your consideration and please edit my bio with supporting docs that are attached.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamaluddin_Badr

thank you

Jamaluddin Badr — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.172.5.154 (talk) 10:23, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Please visit the talk page of the article about you and make an edit request(click for instructions) detailing the changes you wish to make, and any independent reliable sources you have to support them. Court documents are considered primary sources. 331dot (talk) 10:27, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

i am free editor

i am just making a page and this is gone in speedy deletion. please help me to complete this any one here help me please url of page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chirag_shah . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indobrothers (talk • contribs) 14:21, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Note - editor blocked for repeated attempts at promotion. --ColinFine (talk) 15:20, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Asking for the effect of a table template

There is a table that is in the Chinese Wikipedia (I ask here because I got no answers in the wiki), but there are some effects I don't know how to make. Here is the table.

1. There are 60 columns in the table, and I set "2%" trying to make the content having same width, but it turns out it can't, especially the ones with only one digit. By the way, this happens specifically in Chrome when the web page view zooming is 100%. - George6VI (talk) 15:42, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

number of edits compared to oldid?

I was looking at Wikipedia:Time_Between_Edits#Projections. It has one number for NUMBEROFEDITS and a different, larger number for oldid. What is the meaning of these two values, why are they different, and which one is closer to the actual edit count for Wikipedia? RudolfRed (talk) 16:47, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: they refer the same thing, though because of implementatiosn, they are different. NUMBEROFEDITS refers to the total number of edits saved in the database (i.e. the number of entries in the revisions database table), oldid refers to the largest revision number currently in use. They differ (at least from my knowledge) because the revision numbers (oldid) aren't retained when a page is deleted. Instead, they are given new oldid numbers when they are undeleted, which means they increase the maximum oldid currently in use, even though they are technically no new edit. Deleted edits are kept seperate by page title and edit timestamp. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation! RudolfRed (talk) 17:48, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed and Victor Schmidt: Admins cannot access deleted revisions by oldid but the oldid is kept if the revision is restored, at least currently. See for example oldid's in the page history of Draft:Boyertown Grizzlies which was recenly restored. According to [3], {{REVISIONID}} was "over a hundred million less" than {{NUMBEROFEDITS}} in January 2017. Today {{REVISIONID}} is around 4.7 million larger than {{NUMBEROFEDITS}}. I don't know what causes the difference. Wikipedia:Statistics displays {{NUMBEROFEDITS}}. It has been archived many times at https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Statistics. 6 February 2017 it said 873,239,337. A sandbox edit at the time: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&oldid=764067289. That's 109 million less so it's a good match to the earlier quote. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:16, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

I thought I read that some time ago, though it might have been fixed since. I can't go on a hunt right now, because I don't have the time. Victor Schmidt (talk) 22:06, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

IIRC, a long time ago, there was a problem or two that caused duplication or skipping of revids. If it's like other database apps, there can be other reasons why some ids don't get used. Specifically, an id might be allocated to an insert that doesn't occur for some reason (failure, cancellation, etc.), and that id might not be re-used unless the app is specifically coded to handle this (usually a real pain to implement, and not worth doing unless it's a very common occurrence and there is a concern about running into the max value of the id within the lifetime of the app). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:53, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Mescalero Sands Natural National Landmark update

Extended content

I am Museumsmithc, 164.47.227.50 and after receiving input from Ivanvector on January 5, 2021 I have reduced the content of my submission taking out any reference related to my personal activities concerning the establishment of Mescalero sands Natural National Landmark. Only my publications remain which are necessary to the original fieldwork. I have taken the liberty to attach the newest version for your editing hoping you can give me direction on where it should be submitted, e.g. in the initial description of the Wikipedia article reserved for the NNL, or as a "Featured Article", or one of the "Protected Areas"? I prefer to place it in the former location as that is where most people will search for the information surrounding the area. I had already pursued the links suggested, Mescalero Ridge, which does not give information about the south dune field; Mescalero Sands, which is limited to the north dune field; and the National Natural Landmarks of New Mexico which, as observed, does not link to the "Mescalero Sands South Dune". I have an additional ~ 60 more references but the ones included are the most relevant for this purpose. Mescalero Sands National Natural Landmark The Mescalero Sands National Natural Landmark lies just below the western edge of the Llano Estacado known as Mescalero Ridge, locally called "The Caprock". U. S. Highway 380 bisects this sandy region located midway between Roswell and Tatum, New Mexico. The most outstanding physiological feature from Mescalero Point, 4,511 feet above sea level are three very light-colored mobile dunes named the Mescalero Sands by early pioneers and travelers through the area. The dune field is located 10 miles west of the small combination Post Office and general store of Caprock, New Mexico and from 6 to 10 miles south of U. S. 380. A separate mobile dune field is located just south of U. S. 380, 36 miles east of Roswell, New Mexico is open for All Terrain Vehicles (ATV's). The 610-acre recreational area designated by the Bureau of Land Management as the Mescalero Sands North Dune Off Highway Vehicles (OHV) Area [17.,18.]. The three main dunes are located at the extreme northern limits of the Chihuahuan Desert and peripheral grasslands environment of the southern end of the Great High Plains making it ideal for ecotonal studies. The climate is typically semi-arid but influenced by both the Upper and Lower Sonoran vegetative groups with mesquite, creosote bush and occasional juniper with dominant "Quercus harvardii", called shin oak or shinnery, surrounding and separating the dune fields. The rainfall averages 15 inches a year and 200 days without a killing frost from April to October. The potential evaporation can reach 33 inches per year considering the 60-70 percent of sunshine. Temperatures are generally mild but can range from 110 to minus 25 degrees Fahrenheit [2.b., 2.c., 8., 14.]. From Mescalero Point to the base of Mescalero Ridge the escarpment drops off steeply to 4,200 feet or about 300 feet to the sandy environments. There is a slight downward topographic change westward to the Pecos River approximately 40 miles away with a channel altitude of 3,600 feet at this point in its drainage. The escarpment is essentially composed of the Dockum-Lykins formation of the Upper Triassic and is overlaid by the Ogallala formation which is of a limestone composition commonly referred to as caliche which is of Pliocene age. There are Permian outcrops in the breaks around the Pecos River but the sandy regions are from Quaternary origins composed of Pleistocene and Altithermal period Aeolian deposits created during the Altithermal some 7,500 years ago. Unlike the White Sands National Monument to the west of Alamogordo, New Mexico which are composed of gypsum, the Mescalero Sands are fine grain quartz attributed to the Monahans deposition. They overlay the Judkin formation of the mid-Wisconsin glaciation some 18-20,000 years ago and are from lake beds that have been dated from snail samples to approximately 13,000 years ago [9., 12.b.]. The oak forest of shin-high, Quercus harvardii, stabilizes most of the dune field with only a few mobile dunes which, due to the prevailing southwesterly winds move up to ten feet a year to the northeast. The dunes themselves are normally Barcan in form, reaching heights of 60-70 feet, but as they move perpendicular to the winds they become lenticular in shape. Being just above the alluvium, moisture bearing strata, there are a few seep springs within the three main dunes and windmills are pumping water from 35-65 feet deep. There were many springs at the base of the escarpment during the historic settlement period at the turn of the 20th century and best known was Mescalero Springs which supplied ample water for large herds of cattle and horses, but they rarely flow currently. The springs and atmospheric moisture running away from the escarpment never reach the Pecos River, with the sand serving as an entrapment thus all water percolates into shallow sub-surface catchment basins. The wetness within the sands may also contribute to the vast quantities of fulgurite found in the mobile dunes. Often called "petrified lightning" these tubes of glass are formed when lightning strikes the sand [1., 8., 12.b, 12c., 12.d.]. The earliest evidence of humans occupying the region is from the Clovis-Folsom Paleo period from 13-11,500 years ago. Although there are remains of mammoths eroding out of the Judkin "hardpan" three miles south of the south dune and fragments of one at the edge of the remnant lakebed in the south dune there is no evidence of direct association with humans. There was, however the base of a Folsom Point found in the center dune. It is believed that the lakebed(s) forming the three main dunes were still active until the end of the Pleistocene or at the boundary of the Holocene [12.a., 15.]. The Archaic Period appears to have been temporary occupations from the west and south with few concentrations representing the early Holocene up to the Formative Stage when large amounts of arrow points, pottery and tools are common on the surface throughout the immediate area. Several middens have also been surveyed and reported just below the escarpment mostly to the south. There is also evidence of later Native American cultures such as Comanches and Apaches utilizing the Llano Estacado and the edge habitat the sands offered in alternative resources [12.a.]. The first European contact was during the Spanish Colonial Period from early 1600's through the early 1700's when "Pearlers" made treks from Santa Fe down the Pecos River to lower Bosque Grande where the Sacramento River (now the Rio Penasco) flows into the Pecos River they then cut across the sands to the escarpment with fresh water and onto the treeless and waterless "Staked Plains" on over to the eastern edge of the Llano Estacado and down to Tobacco Creek ending up on the Concho River where they collected freshwater pink to purple pearls, one of the few treasures they were able to send back to Spain [12.d.]. The southern end of the western escarpment was described by Captain C. L. Taplin in March, 1854, who was assistant to Captain John Pope who was in command of exploring the southern route for the Pacific Railroad Survey. He found the travel extremely difficult discouraging any further wagon or rail passage through the area and early maps indicated, "Void of Wood and Water" that prevented homestead settlement in the region for many years. Lieutenant Colonel William Shafter entered the area in 1875 in an attempt to push the Apaches onto the reservation in the Sacramento Mountains and discovered "Dug Springs" where indigenous people had dug out several springs as well as Monument Springs where there was a natural flowing spring both at the southern edge of the escarpment [10., 12.d.]. The first permanent resident of the Mescalero Sands was a buffalo hunter named George Causey. He had built a house in Yellowhouse Canyon west of present-day Lubbock, Texas and established a camp at the springs near Ranger Lake north of Tatum, New Mexico but sold out to the Littlefield Ranch and he and his brother John built a way station just north and below Mescalero Point as a stopover and resting location for freighters transporting goods from the nearest railhead in Midland, Texas to Roswell, New Mexico. Another prominent figure in the settlement of the Mescalero Sands was a character called "Old Man Harry", an English sailor who jumped ship and swam to Padre Island, Texas and made his way up to the Littlefield Ranch and eventually established a herd of his own and built a rock house east of the south dune at the base of the escarpment just south of Mescalero Springs. He was remembered for having the only phonograph in the area before he was buried just north of his house where the marker reads: "AT REST HARRY ROBINSON BORN KENT CO ENGLAND JAN 9 1836 DIED AUG 3 1911 Out of Sight but Memory Never". Another one of the original Anglo settlers was Clyde Browning, who moved to just below the escarpment as a child when his father homesteaded in the 1880's south of Old Man Harry's place [16.]. Just after the turn of the 20th century "nesters" began to take advantage of the strips of free government land that were found between the larger ranches, often under the protest of gunfire. One of these homesteaders was a man by the name of Lon Levi who in the 1920's lived in a dugout on the east side of the north dune. He plowed a field and planted subsistence crops which included watermelons. Some of his farming equipment that remained consisted of a planter and a rake which perpetuated the erroneous story that a wagon train had been attacked by Indians because of the quantity of flint "arrowheads" that had been found in the hollows or "blowouts" adjacent to the field. Although a motorized vehicle got stuck between the Causey way station and Roswell and the occupants had to be rescued, there is no verifiable evidence of a wagon train being endangered in the area [11., 12.b., 12.c., 12d.]. Near the old field the last of an elk herd that had been brought in by Joe Lane who owned the Four Lakes Ranch northwest of Tatum had escaped their compound and made their way down into the sands in the late 1940's and survived until the 1960's when the last old cow was killed. She had been feeding with the cattle and was shot and left by poachers and the antlers of the last bull were at the Culp Ranch just west of the north dune [7., 12.b., 12. c., 12.d.]. Extensive research was conducted from 1965 – 1970 within and adjacent to the three mobile dunes making up the south dune field under the direction of the Paleoindian Institute and the Natural History Museum at Eastern New Mexico University. Over 300 cultural artifacts and natural history specimens were collected and place in the repositories of the two entities. One of the objectives was to determine if the Whitetailed deer inhabiting the area were a unique subspecies and while two of the deer were captured and released with collars that could be seen during aerial surveys there was not enough conclusive serological evidence to prove their taxonomic separation from other, Odocoileus virginianus, species. However, the studies did justify the establishment of the three main dunes as an Outstanding Natural Area (ONA) by the Bureau of Land Management [2.a., 4., 5., 6., 12.b., 12.c., 12.d.,13.]. It was a small lizard, which had been taken during the summer of 1967, that helped establish the 6,293 acre preserve, now accessible only by foot or horseback and secure the dune’s permanency for future generations. The Dunes Sagebrush Lizard, Sceloporus arenicolus, (occurring, burrowing or inhabiting in sand) was declared threatened by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service with a great deal of pressure from numerous conservation societies and organizations but has been pulled from the list until further research on the species can be conducted [3. and 19.]. The three main dunes were declared a National Natural Landmark in 1982, as “The best example of an active sand dune system in the southern Great Plains” [17.]. References 1.) Bagnold, R. A., 1941, The Physics of Blown Sand and Desert Dunes, Methuen, reprinted by Springer, 1974, 256 pp. 2.a.) Bailey, Vernon, 1931, Mammals of New Mexico, North American Fauna, No. 53, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Biological Survey, U. S. Government Printing Office, 412 pp. 2.b.) 1913, Life Zones and Crop Zones of New Mexico, North American Fauna, No. 35, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Biological Survey, U. S. Government Printing Office, 100 pp. 2.c.) 1905 Biological Survey of Texas, No. 25, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Biological Survey, U. S. Government Printing Office, 262 pp. 3. Chan, Lauren M., J. Archie and Lee Fitzgerald, 2013, Review of the Systematic Status of Sceloporus arenicolus, Degenhardt and Jones, 1972 with an Estimate of Divergence Time, Zootaxa, Vol. 3664, pp. 312-320 4. Findley, James S., Arthur H. Harris, Don E. Wilson and Clyde Jones, 1975, Mammals of New Mexico, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 360 pp. 5. Hall, H. Ernest, 1944, Sandhill White-tailed Deer Restoration, Project Record Report, New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Santa Fe, New Mexico 6. Hibbler, Dr. Charles, Colorado State University, 1969, Personal communication 7. Johnson, Carl Lane, 1969, Personal communication 8. Ligon, J. Stokley, 1927, Wildlife of New Mexico Its Conservation and Management, New Mexico State Game Commission, Santa Fe, New Mexico, 212 pp. 9. Oetking, P., H. B. Renfro, D. E. Feray and A. P. Bennison, 1967, Geological Highway Maps for the Regions: Great Plains, Mid-Continent and Texas, USGS Map Series No. 2, Tulsa, Oklahoma 10. Pope, Capt. John, 1854, Route Near the Thirty-Second Parallel, From the Red River to the Rio Grande, Explored by Bvt. Capt. John Pope, Top. Engineers, in 1854, 52 pp. 11. Rogers, Walter, 1968, Personal communication 12a.). Smith, Calvin B., 1966, The Paleo-Indian in Southeastern New Mexico, Transactions of the Second Regional Archaeological Symposium for Southeastern New Mexico and Western Texas, Special Bulletin No. 1, Midland Archaeological Society, pp. 3-8, Midland, Texas 12.b.) Smith, Calvin B., 1971, Mescalero Sands Natural Studies Plan, Natural History Museum and the Paleo-Indian Institute, Eastern New Mexico University, 50 pp. 12.c.) Smith, Calvin B., 1971, Proposed Study Area in the Mescalero Sands, Southeastern New Mexico, New Mexico Academy of Science Bulletin, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 19-20 12.d.) Smith, Calvin B., 1985, To Save A Dune, The Greater Llano Estacado Southwest Heritage, Vol. 14, No. 1, Hobbs, New Mexico, pp. 5-3, 12 and 19 13.Taylor, Walter P., 1965, The Deer of North America, The Wildlife Management Institute, Washington D. C., 668 pp. 14. Tuan, Yi-fu, Cyril E. Everard and Jerold G. Widdison, 1969, The Climate of New Mexico, State Planning Office, Santa Fe, New Mexico, 169 pp. 15. Wendorf, Fred, Alex D. Krieger, Claude C. Albritton and T. D. Stewart, 1955, The Midland Discovery: A Report on the Pleistocene Human Remains from Midland, Texas, University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas 139 pp. 16. Whitlock, Vivian, 1970, Cowboy Life on the Llano Estacado, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma, 320 pp. External links • www.example.com 17. National Park Service, 1982, “Mescalero Sands South Dune”, National Natural Landmarks, https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nnlandmarks/site.htm?Site=MESA-NM 18. Bureau of Land Management, 2020, "Mescalero Sands North Dune OHV Area" https://www.blm.gov/visit/mescalero-sands-north-dune-ohv-area 19. Biological Diversity, 2011, "Dunes Sagebrush Lizard" https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/species/reptiles/dunes_sagebrush_lizard/index.html

-- 164.47.227.50 (talk) 17:47, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

If you have suggestions for an article, start a discussion on that article's talk page (and don't just post a big wall of text, explain what changes you want). If you are trying to start a new article, follow WP:YFA for guidance on that and use the wizard there to create a draft. RudolfRed (talk) 17:50, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

you as info are not judge and jury

Sedition - Wikipedia n 6 January 2021, in an attempt to stop the formal certification of the electoral votes for Joe Biden in the US Presidential election of 2020, a group of right-wing protestors, encouraged by or at the behest of the outgoing president, Donald Trump, infiltrated the United States Capitol and overpowered the Capitol Police. Michael Sherwin, the US Attorney for the District of Columbia, told the Associated Press: "All of those charges [sedition, unauthorized access, theft of federal property] are on the table... We’re not going to keep anything out of our arsenal for potential charges. We will bring the most maximum charges we can based upon the conduct." [65] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.144.232.114 (talk) 18:22, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm not really clear on what this is meant to be discussing. Wikipedia is not a judge and jury. It is an encyclopedia that summarizes what independent reliable sources state. If you feel that an article inaccurately summarizes what sources say, please discuss it on the relevant article talk page. 331dot (talk) 18:28, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Looks like yet another of those far-right zealots accusing Wikipedia of a pinko leftist communist bias. JIP | Talk 19:05, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

The poster is quoting from Sedition#United States but missed "O" in "On" at the start. You can post suggestions for the article at Talk:Sedition but include reliable sources. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:57, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Should football club article names be transliterated, if they are from a country that doesn't use a Latin alphabet?

There is an inconsistency in article names of football clubs that use the Cyrillic script, the issue is with their transliterations.

For example, FK Partizan is a Serbian football club, its full name is Fudbalski klub Partizan , which is a transliterated from (Serbian Cyrillic: Фудбалски клуб Партизан). FK Vardar is a North-Macedonian football club, its full name is Fudbalski klub Vardar coming from (Macedonian: Фудбалски клуб Вардар). The majority of articles about football clubs in Serbia and Macedonia, who both use the Cyrillic script abbreviate Fudbalski klub as FK.

However, when it comes to countries such as Bulgaria, Russia, Ukraine, who also use the Cyrillic script, many football article names are transliterated as FC. For instance, PFC CSKA Sofia stands for Profesionalen Futbolen Klub CSKA Sofia (Bulgarian: Професионален футболен клуб ЦСКА София). Taking into account romanisation laws the aforementioned club name should be abbreviated as PFK CSKA Sofia. An example with a Russian club is FC Zenit Saint Petersburg, in Cyrilic that would be (Russian: Футбольный клуб «Зенит»), transliterated as Futbolʹnyi klub Zenit. However, the wrong transliterations write ФК as FC rather than FK. I assume in an attempt to translate the club's name and use the English spelling of "football club".

Other non-Latin alphabet countries, like Greece have opted for a different approach, where they just use the English naming customs. For instance, Greek club Olympiacos F.C. uses the typical "F.C." after its name, rather than a transliteration. Whereas countries like China and India brand their clubs in English.

So many article names are wrong as a result of faulty transliterations, should their names be altered?

Divpatok (talk) 18:47, 12 January 2021 (UTC) Divpatok

Different clubs from different countries speaking different languages, which all happen to use Cyrillics, might perhaps transliterate them into Latin script in different ways.

Bearing in mind that on the English-language Wikipedia we use the most common forms of names found in English, rather than those that might be more technically "correct", I suggest that we should follow what the clubs themselves have used in any English-language material they may have produced, or failing that what authoritative English-language newspapers (for example) have used.

However, that's only my off-the-cuff response: have you looked for guidance at any of the Association Football WikiProjects? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.40.9 (talk) 19:30, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

This sounds like a case of WP:TRANSLITERATE and WP:COMMONNAME apply here. For another example, see Beitar Jerusalem F.C. Shushugah (talk) 19:38, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

2021 NCAA Division I FBS football season

What No 2021 NCAA Division I FBS football article the 2020 season ended last night. 68.102.42.216 (talk) 19:32, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Feel free to write the article. We are all volunteers and we each do whatever tasks we want to do. See WP:YFA. -Arch dude (talk) 19:35, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Rollback doesn't use the edit summary it asks me for

When I rollback a user's edits, I'm asked for an explanation, which I consistently submit. Where do such explanations end up? Not in the diff, where the user might benefit from it. Users I roll back are provided with "reverted", as far as I can tell. This curtness is likely to alienate users, particularly the newer ones who need guidance. In fact, it alienates me, by giving the impression that my explication has be preserved when it hasn't been. What happens to rollback explanations?--Quisqualis (talk) 20:10, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Please clarify. Are you saying the edit summary for the revert is not what you entered in the edit summary box?

Since you are not a rollbcker, you cannot technically rollback edits. As to reverts I only see in your contributions that edits summaries are present for the reverted edits. Ruslik_Zero 20:26, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

It appears Quisqualis is using Twinkle. Would your explanation happen to be "Unsourced", by any chance? It appears in the edit summaries. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:31, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Tenryuu. I guess my question should have been, "why do diffs selected from some history/contribution pages not display with edit summaries, while the same diff selected from another history/contribution page will show the edit summary?" I'll find examples later today, as there definitely is some sort of intermittent-appearing failure to display the edsum for rollbacks--Quisqualis (talk) 20:55, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

It's back to my original question. This diff lacks my "unsourced" designation.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:27, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Your edit summary (diff) includes your "unsourced" designation. The tag that says "reverted" which is applied to the edits that have been reverted is applied by the system to the reverted edit for tracking purposes, and would not include your edit summary. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 22:31, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@Quisqualis: You wrote: "This diff lacks my "unsourced" designation." The diff you gave is between numbers 2 and 1 (the edit by 420Prince1012). Number 4 is your edit, "rolling back" to number 0, and the edit summary ends with "Unsourced".

No.	Timestamp	Id	Editor	Edit summary	Tag(s)
4	2021-01-12T19:56:26Z	999952611	Quisqualis	Reverted to revision 998459265 by Pvmoutside (talk): Unsourced	Undo Twinkle
3	2021-01-12T19:49:45Z	999951541	420Prince1012	Reorganizing link	Reverted
2	2021-01-12T19:49:18Z	999951462	420Prince1012	Added Blue Collar Caucus	Reverted
1	2021-01-12T18:29:00Z	999938233	420Prince1012	Added Medicare for all caucus
0	2021-01-05T13:40:18Z	998459265	Pvmoutside	External links

—[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:09, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

My basic question now is "does using Twinkle change the format of diffs in any way, vs not using Twinkle?", given that my confusion began consequent to using Twinkle. Never mind that I need new glasses...--Quisqualis (talk) 17:52, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

@Quisqualis: Twinkle does not change the format of diffs. (Tag: Twinkle) is automatically displayed after the edit summary. That's all. Another time, please post an example from the beginning. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:33, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

How to submit a new word...

Hello. Just wondering how I would go about submitting a new word to Wikipedia? Thank you. Amy — Preceding unsigned comment added by CookMeSilly (talk • contribs) 21:27, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

You don't. GRINCHIDICAE🎄 21:32, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@CookMeSilly: You may be more interested in Wiktionary. Seagull123 Φ 22:29, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:32, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Suggested citation change

Hello,

With articles of impeachment introduced yet again for the 45th president of the United States, I reviewed the Wikipedia article for Impeachment in the United States. In reading the article, I found a citation to a given line, "The President may not grant a pardon in the impeachment case, but may in any resulting Federal criminal case." This is cited under citation [35]. However, this cites an article on the website for The Heritage Foundation. Given that The Heritage Foundation is a conservative think tank and has a clear bias, I thought the objectivity of the Wikipedia article would be better suited to cite https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S3-C7-1-1/ALDE_00000037/ which explains the same point. This site is backed by the US Government and is a direct description of Article I, Section 3, Clause 7 of the Constitution. Essentially, I'm proposing using the constitution.congress.gov citation as it accomplishes the same requirement and comes from a non-biased source.

If this is not the correct forum for this question, I apologize. I ask that you please direct me to the appropriate forum.

Thank you, H — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhatsHerFace09 (talk • contribs) 22:31, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@WhatsHerFace09: welcome to Wikipedia. The best place to suggest changes to an article is on that article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 22:42, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Donor potential and subject for publication

Good day; I would like to have our Charity - Bikers Against Bullies, the largest non-gov't anti bully program (501 C3) as a part of reference in Wikipedia. We can give the copy, which we have in the past and never been published. In return, I will make a personal donation of between 250-500.00 to assist your publication. Please approach me periodically and ask, "how come you and your organization is not found on Wikipedia?"

Please advise and thanks in advance,

Flash! Co-Founder, Bikers Against Bullies/Bikers Against Bullies USA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.174.133.186 (talk) 23:54, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Donations do not determine if an article will be created, and if an article is created for your group, you will have no control over the content of the article. Start at WP:NORG to see if your group would even qualify for an article, and if it does, you can create a draft using WP:YFA but you will need to comply with WP:COI and WP:PAID policies. RudolfRed (talk) 00:02, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

What RudolfRed says. But look, even ₩500 is very low. Five hundred bitcoins, and you might tempt somebody. However, all of us here are virtuous -- unlike a lot of hucksters who, on other websites, will promise to provide an article if you pay for it. (These promises are fraudulent. Don't fall for any of them.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:42, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

The fact is, that if Wikipedia started taking payment for articles then it all of its credibility a free encyclopaedia would go down the drain overnight. Then what would you have paid for? An article on some website with no credibility, sounds like a waste. --Paul ❬talk❭ 11:07, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles are not for the benefit of their subjects (though obviously some subjects do get benefit from being the subject of a Wikipedia article: some others get the reverse!). The way to get onto Wikipedia is not to try and write about yourself, still less to pay (Wikipedia or anybody else). It is to become notable: to be such that journalists or scholars, off their own bat, write about you. If that happens enough, then somebody will eventually write a Wikipedia article about you. --ColinFine (talk) 11:53, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

January 13

Translation wanted

I have found that there are articles about traditional Latvian grey peas over at the Lithuanian Wikipedia (lt:Pilkieji žirniai) and the Russian Wikipedia (ru:Серый горох). I'd like to translate either of them into English but unfortunately I don't understand either Lithuanian or Russian. Is there some place I could post a translation request, or should I try to use Google Translate first and then correct the errors in the English text myself? JIP | Talk 01:27, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

@JIP: Those are both options. You can't use a machine translation directly, but you may start with a machine translation and then edit it to good quality. See WP:TRANSLATE for guidance on how to translate articles, including how to attribute the source article. Alternatively (or in addition), there is Wikipedia:Translators_available, which lists Wikipedia editors who are willing to help translate articles. If you can find one for the language you are interested in, you can post on that editor's talk page to see if they will help you. RudolfRed (talk) 04:23, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I found that the Lithuanian article seems to be more comprehensive than the Russian one, so I think I can start with either trying to contact a Lithuanian translator or trying to Google Translate it and fix the translation errors myself. JIP | Talk 04:33, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

The new article is available here: Grey peas. Feel free to fix any translation errors or otherwise fix the article. JIP | Talk 02:15, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

What's the difference between "authorship" and "top edits" in page history of "Xtools" site?

What's the difference between "authorship" and "top edits" in page history of "Xtools" site?

Example Rizosome (talk) 02:39, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Rizosome, there will be three things you'll see on xtools for any specific article, "top 10 by edits", "top 10 by added text" and "authorship". The first two are pretty self explainatory - the first is the amount of edits users have, for example on that one, one user has 151 edits. The second is the total amount of bytes added from these contributions.

Authorship is the ratio of the current article that is written by each user. So, 30% of the current edition of the article is written by the first user (along with how many bytes that is). Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:56, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Lee Vilenski Please simplify "authorship" only. Rizosome (talk) 16:02, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

The amount of the text in the current revision of the article that is written by each user. Rizosome. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:06, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Resolved

Wikipedia is broken, why no one wants to fix it?

[quote="PrimeHunter (talk) 09:06, 12 January 2021 (UTC)"]Graphs made with mw:Extension:Graph require JavaScript in your browser now.[/quote]

When will you be able to fix it?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Firdaus Bin Mohammad (talk) 10:56, 13 January 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.187.94.75 (talk)

What error need to be fixed? Please specify clearly. Rizosome (talk) 03:00, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

The error I want fixed

... is that all charts everywhere are missing.

When can you fix it to make it like it was a week ago? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.187.94.75 (talk) 03:12, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

We've answered this already. As PrimeHunter said:

Graphs made with mw:Extension:Graph require JavaScript in your browser now. A January 8 post at phab:T242855 says "Drop ability to attempt server-side rendering with Graphoid".

—Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:14, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't understand what this means

FYI

 – Merging section with above. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:42, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

"A January 8 post at phab:T242855 says "Drop ability to attempt server-side rendering with Graphoid"."

Can you please explain that. Can you fix the error? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.187.94.75 (talk) 03:31, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

It means you must enable JavaScript to see graphs on Wikipedia. There is no other solution. RudolfRed (talk) 04:03, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)It means that you must enable JavaScript to see the graphs. The developers have removed the server-side code that was trying to build and serve the graphs dynamically to browsers that have JavaScript disabled. Presumably, that server-side code was either too processor-intensive or too buggy to justify continued support. Thus, this inability is not a error, it is a deliberate decision on the part of the developers. -Arch dude (talk) 04:05, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Most web browsers have Javascript enabled by default. If you can't see the graphs, either you are using a (rare) non-Javascript browser, or you have disabled Javascript on your browser. --ColinFine (talk) 11:55, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

List of all people

I'm trying to compile a list of all people with Wiki pages, and I'm surprised such a thing doesn't already exist. Is there a list or some identifier that all pages for humans fall under?

Thank you!

Charles — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlesaverill (talk • contribs) 06:40, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

You must have a lot of time. There is no real benefit to having a single, gigantic list. (The One List is just as bad as the One Ring.) Lists of people breaks it down into lots of more manageable sublists. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:45, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Per WP:SALAT: "Lists that are too general or too broad in scope have little value, unless they are split into sections." Clarityfiend (talk) 06:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Charles. The Biography WikiProject manages about 1.8 million articles about people through templates and categories. You can browse their subcategories on their project page [[4]]. Orville^talk 07:06, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

@Charlesaverill: Your list will have 1.8 million or more entries, which if printed one per line will occupy about 32 thousand pages or about 32 large volumes if printed. Any reasonable use of such a list would use a database. We already have that database. It's called Wikidata. Go to Wikidata and create a query for all items that are an instance of "human" and that have an entry on the English Wikipedia to create your list, or learn to make more specific queries to actually get specific information. -Arch dude (talk) 17:04, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

@Charlesaverill: Wikidata can be intimidating (at least to me). Go to its main page at d:Wikidata:Main_Page and look around from there to get started. You will probably eventually arrive at d:Wikidata:SPARQL query service/A gentle introduction to the Wikidata Query Service, where you are guided through some queries. Pulling out just the ones with an English Wikipedia article is more advanced, but will look something like ?wp schema:isPartOf <https://en.wikipedia.org/>. -Arch dude (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Declined Article Submittion

After declining submitted article, I edited it and now I don't know how to re-submitt it again. I was not able to find an appropriate action button, could you please help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelWazosky (talk • contribs) 10:43, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

MichaelWazosky It looks like you figured it out, but the resubmit button is located in the notice that declined your draft; those need to remain on the draft until it is accepted. 331dot (talk) 10:45, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Help with watchlist/recent changes display

Hi - in attempting to help another editor with their recent changes filter settings, I clicked on a link they provided which showed me their filter settings. Warning - don't click on it if you're not confident with fixing MediaWiki peculiarities! The link is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:RecentChanges?damaging=likelybad%3Bverylikelybad&goodfaith=likelybad%3Bverylikelybad&hidepreviousrevisions=1&limit=50&days=7&enhanced=1&damaging__likelybad_color=c3&damaging__verylikelybad_color=c5&goodfaith__likelybad_color=c3&goodfaith__verylikelybad_color=c5&urlversion=2 . Since clicking on it, my watchlist and recent changes feeds look rather strange. Normally, from left to right, I'd expect to see a bullet point, then (diff|hist) links, the name of the article, the date of the edit, the byte change, edit summary etc. Now, the order is jumbled up - at the left I have a large white space with a bullet point in the middle of it, then the time of the edit, then the name of the article, and only after that do I see the (diff|hist). This change also happened to Roxy the dog when they clicked on the link. I'm guessing that it's changed something in my preferences, but I've no idea what; I've looked at the MediaWiki documentation to see if I can figure it out, but nothing is jumping out at me. Any suggestions? Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 10:48, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

@Girth Summit: Disable "Group changes by page in recent changes and watchlist" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rc. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:25, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Sweet - that worked - thanks PrimeHunter! Roxy the dog, this should sort it. GirthSummit _(blether) 11:27, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Noted. Also, many thanks. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 13:21, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Happy dog here. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 13:38, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

(I unlinked the potentially damaging link above so people don't accidentally create a problem for themselves, despite the warning. No offense intended.) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:38, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Public url

public url — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.104.207.61 (talk) 11:31, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Please clarify what your post is about. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:35, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Requested Correction for Article Titled 'Starving Time'

Hi,

So I noticed that in paragraph 4 of the section 'Trading with the natives for food' of the Wikipedia article mentioned in the title, there is an event which was said to have happened on 'August 69'.

Obviously, this does not make sense. Although the reader may be able to infer that the date was supposed to mean 'August 1609', based on the context of the article (which describes a period in the early history of the colonial city of Jamestown), I think that it is best if this error is investigated and corrected as soon as possible.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.46.218.152 (talk • contribs) 2021-01-13T13:12:39 (UTC)

Thank you. This was a piece of petty vandalism that had gone unnoticed since last September. You could have corrected it yourself, but thank you for alerting us. I have undone the vandalism. --ColinFine (talk) 13:32, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Left leaning, anti conservative

After looking up different things it is apparent that wikipedia is part of the left's strategy to shut off free speech . Why do you allow things from the left discrediting conservative speech based on opinion then lock those articles so they can not be edited ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1000:b123:75cd:0:44:8c7a:ff01 (talk)

Sounds like Conservapedia might be a better place for you. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:38, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

(ec) Articles are protected from editing in order to prevent disruption. Wikipedia is a private organization that is free to have whatever content on its computers that it sees fit, just as you are permitted to have whatever rules you wish within the four walls of your residence. Wikipedia is not a free speech forum. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state. If those sources are being summarizes incorrectly, or you have independent reliable sources with additional information, please offer them as an edit request on the article talk page, but be aware of WP:FRINGE and WP:UNDUE. If you are just here to push conservative talking points, you are going to have a difficult time here. If you are interested in civilly collaborating with others regardless of political viewpoint to arrive at a consensus as to what an article should say, you will be welcome. 331dot (talk) 15:40, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

How to suggest a picture be edited

I want to suggest a picture be edited. The page on wildstyle grafitti has a great example attributed to RIME But the webaddress in the upper right corner of the photo links to a porn site https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildstyle — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:1DB0:43A0:C0C5:C182:E843:F8E2 (talk) 15:49, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we cannot do anything about that. It looks like jerseyjoeart dot com was Rime's former website, but it has since moved. However, the web address is not a watermark, but rather part of the graffiti itself. So, it would be like changing the signature on a painting. In general, we cannot alter photos except in very specific circumstances. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 15:59, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

I wonder if it might be acceptable to simply crop enough of the right edge of the photo (which in any case does not appear to show 100% of the original artwork) to obscure the full address? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.40.9 (talk) 23:41, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata item exists but doesn't show on Wikipedia article page

I'm editing the article for Allied Artists Music Group and I'm trying to get the Authority Control to show up properly. There was no Wikidata item for the article, so I created one at Q104806762. I added the English Wikipedia article to the Wikidata entry for Engish Wikipedia pages. The "Page Information" shows the Wikidata reference number of Q104806762, but there is no "Wikidata Item" link under "Tools" on the left panel. Can anyone let me know if I need to do anything else to get the Wikidata information to propagate to the Wikipedia article? Is it just a matter of waiting? I'm really a neophyte when it comes to Wikidata entries interfacing with Wikipedia articles, so I appreciate any information anyone can give me. Thank you very much! --Warriorboy85 (talk) 17:32, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

@Warriorboy85: I forced the software to rethink the page by doing a null edit. Whether that helped, I don't know, but the "Wikidata Item" link and the authority control box are now present. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:45, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

@John of Reading: Yes, it worked perfectly! Thank you very much. I can't tell you how helpful this "Help Desk" is. I really appreciate everything you all do!--Warriorboy85 (talk) 17:49, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Resolved

Updating spouse details marriage & divorce info

I have tried updating the marriage and divorce dates of a BP’s (Troy Hunt) spouse (Kylie Hunt, formerly Kylie Bragg ref: www.kyliehunt.com) but it keeps getting rolled back (they separated in 2019 but divorced in 2020). I know the couple personally although wish to remain impartial and anonymous to alleviate any sense of taking sides. I have provided reference information but that does not seem to help. Adeline unicorn (talk) 19:34, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Adeline unicorn The only reference you provided was a link to Kylie's website. We need reliable, independant sources for the information. Think magazine or newspaper articles, or books. We also need more specific links to the information. For example, if the information you are citing is not on the main page of the website but a subpage, cite the specific page. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 19:38, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

I've started a discussion at Talk:Troy Hunt, Adeline unicorn (n.b:which you were free to do yourself), so MichaelMaggs can give some granular explanation or else back down. As far as I know, the celebrity's own website is an adequate source for uncontroversial info.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:46, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Quisqualis yes, it is an adequate source for uncontroversial info, but you still need to cite the part of the website where the information appears. The information Adeline unicorn was trying to source does not appear on the homepage for Ms. Hunt. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

January 14

sfn template question

In the article Cai Lun I briefly cite Fan Ye with sfn, though his work was "published" in the 5th-century and the sfn template doesn't put {{sfn|Fan Ye|5th century}} properly, even when I use an anchor, since it thinks "5th century" is an author (so it produces "Fan Ye & 5th century). I've opted to just citing without the century, though if someone knows how to do so, it would be much appreciated. Aza24 (talk) 00:20, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

@Aza24: I suggest reading up on template documentation (for example, Template:Sfn) if something isn't rendering properly. Using your example, the first two unnamed parameters are for the first two authors' last names. The template does not appear to be able to take anything for date other than 4-digit strings for year (<year> – required; four-digit year; may have a lowercase disambiguation letter). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:28, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

A ha! I've read up on the documentation like you suggested Tenryuu, and discovered a solution, using |ref=CITEREFFANYE and then [[#CITEREFFANYE|Fan Ye 5th-century]]. So not a real sfn ref, but appears the same way, which is all that matters. Aza24 (talk) 01:21, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

an article on Tongan/Uvean pre-European history.

I would like to contribute an article 6 pages long on Tongan and Uvean pre-European history. Is this possible? If so how do I go about doing it?

Mrs L. Vasalua Jenner-Helu MA(Hons) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.226.17.188 (talk) 01:19, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Six pages is rather specific. I would read up on Your first article and run the content through Wikipedia's Articles for Creation process, as if you had it off of the site, there's a high chance that formatting may not be up to Wikipedia standards, and the sources used may not be reliable enough to establish the subject's notability. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:33, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

You will also need to avoid original research (see WP:OR) RudolfRed (talk) 01:37, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Makaronopizza

I found this draft when searching for new culinary articles. There are quite many things wrong here.

1. Makaronopizza itself does not appear to be notable.
2. The draft cites only one source, and even that is just a recipe.
3. The draft uses personal commentary, with the creator appearing to insult the dish.
4. Most of the draft consists of only a recipe.

The author has not submitted the draft for review. If they had, I would decline it in a flash without a second thought.

If this were an actual article instead of a draft, I'd just go ahead and speedy delete it. But what should be done when it's an unsubmitted draft? Can I just delete it or nominate it for deletion? JIP | Talk 02:13, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

JIP, maybe it's eligible for deletion due to copyvio? The recipe is taken from the external link provided practically verbatim. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:19, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

@JIP: A draft is a work in progress. Unless there is a major issue such as copyright or BLP, leave it alone. RudolfRed (talk) 02:20, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I'll leave it alone for the time being. Someone will probably come along later to handle it. JIP | Talk 02:31, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I have added a suggestion to the talk page but is this article a hoax?Spinney Hill (talk) 10:26, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

The draft seems to have been speedily deleted as a blatant copyvio. JIP | Talk 15:06, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Does this violate the rules?

I've created a user sandbox for another user as a learning aid. I have copied parts of WP articles into it (with full markup). Does this fall afoul of any rules?--Quisqualis (talk) 03:21, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Barring any issue with the original Wikipedia article (copyright etc..), you're allowed to copy any content on Wikipedia, but must attribute to it. If you didn't, you can make a WP:DUMMYEDIT and mention the name of the Wikipedia articles you copied from. Shushugah (talk) 03:34, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

See WP:Copying within Wikipedia - David Biddulph (talk) 03:36, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

How to find articles to edit?

How can I find articles to edit? And after editing, how can I find someone to review it for me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HappyVisitor (talk • contribs) 08:26, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello HappyVisitor! Check Wikipedia:Community portal under "Help out". Or, at an article about a topic you're interested in, check the categories at the bottom of the article and see if you find anything interesting in those categories. About "reviewing", you can ask here or at WP:TEAHOUSE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:57, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Try to make a correction on my information Axel Addy and lost most of the content - How do I get it back

Hi, I read my wikipedia page and tried to make some minor corrections and ended up losing most of the other sections. How do I get it back? Kindly assist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Axeladdy (talk • contribs) 10:17, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

It looks like you've been adding unsourced content to Axel Addy which was removed because Wikipedia requires reliable sources. Also it looks like you might have been editing an article about yourself which you absolutely should not do. --Paul ❬talk❭ 11:46, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Actually, editing an article about oneself is only strongly discouraged, not strictly prohibited, as the policy provides an example of what is allowed. The OP is now blocked, but for readers passing by, content addition in such cases are best done through edit requests on the article's talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:07, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Tenryuu, Axeladdy is only soft-blocked, pending verification that the person using the account is indeed Axel Addy. --ColinFine (talk) 12:50, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Repeated Warning Message

Hello, I have been editing a page that was created before but this message keep showing although I fixed the category, message warning here: To list a page in this category, do not edit this category page. Instead, edit the page you want to list. Either add Category:Youth organisations based in Lebanon at the bottom of the page"How do I fix? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tima93Lb (talk • contribs) 13:03, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello Tima93Lb. The problem is that you have treated the page as if it was an article that you could edit. It is not, it is simply a page listing other articles which have been marked as being about Youth organisations based in Lebanon. You need to go back and revert all your additions on that page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:32, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Alright, so, you should never (practically never) edit pages marked Category: - instead, you should only edit articles which are actually articles. I will move your edits to a Draft page. See Draft:Youth organizations in Lebanon. Make your edits there. See Wikipedia:Articles for creation for info on getting your article published. Cheers ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 13:34, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

wikipedia

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

Off topic. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 13:47, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

---

just the same old liberal line at this site. your politics sicken me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.11.20.145 (talk) 13:43, 14 January 2021 (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.

Suppressed files blocking export to Commons

There are four public domain files, here, here, here and here, that I'm trying to copy to Commons using the "Export to Wikimedia Commons" tab, but I'm getting this message on Commons: "Can't import file because at least one of its revisions contains a suppressed file". Can the suppressed files be un-suppressed, or the revision in question deleted? Thanks. —Bruce1ee^talk 13:49, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

So it looks like these files were reduced in resolution as non-free cover art at some point; since then, they've been determined to be too simple for copyright. However, the auto-export tool must see the reduction as a sign that this is not actually a free piece of work. There may be some work around or trick but if I were you I would just re-upload it on Commons and then have the version here deleted. Or, just consider not exporting it, as I can't really see any valid use of the cover art within the public domain. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 14:16, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

@El cid, el campeador: Thanks for your reply. The option to simply manually upload the image into Commons and tag the local copy for deletion was my first consideration. But my concern was that the file's history here would be lost. If the history isn't important, then I'm happy to do that. —Bruce1ee^talk 15:08, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

@Bruce1ee: - Yes, that's a good point. Personally, I say: it's a public domain image and the original uploader did not create the image, so there is no harm in just doing it that way. But, I don't want to lead you down a garden path, so I would suggest posting this inquiry at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. I imagine an admin will be able to help you there. There is precedent for file revisions being undeleted for transfer; see Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2019_June_26#Suppressed_file_blocking_a_Commons_move_via_File_Importer_extension. Cheers ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 16:18, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

@El cid, el campeador: I'll take it to Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. I see there are already a handful of requests to undelete previous file revisions. Thanks for pointing this page out to me. —Bruce1ee^talk 17:19, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

@El cid, el campeador: That worked, thank you. This discussion can be closed. —Bruce1ee^talk 06:34, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Why this section not getting scanned by "Who Wrote That" addon?

I am pretty sure it's not template like already discussed [5]. Why this section not getting scanned by "Who Wrote That" addon? Rizosome (talk) 14:17, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

@Rizosome: I don't know. You could ask the developers. See mw:Who Wrote That?#We Want Your Feedback! PrimeHunter (talk) 20:41, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Collapse family tree by default

How can I change the default rendering here to collapsed? (state=collapsed does not work ...) Thanks in advance for any assistance! Cheers--Hildeoc (talk) 14:40, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Have you tried |collapsed=yes instead, Hildeoc? That doesn't work for me in preview but I wonder if it will when saved. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:47, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I edited the template code so that the template auto-collapses. The code I used was collapsed=yes.‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 16:49, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both very much for resolving this issue! Best wishes--Hildeoc (talk) 22:02, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Libra (astrology)

I recently endeavored, as I often do, a light handed correction to the subheading "Air Sign": as the entry professed that Rome is a "Libra city", I simply added that "however" the traditional date of Rome's foundation is April 21, 753 BC. I received a message by an Aloha57 (on the heading of a successive wikipedia search) telling me s/he removed my note because I did not quote a source. I was flabbergasted, but I posted a message to the page s/he indicated, politely pointing out it is common knowledge, and if s/he saw fit to let misleading information stand, it would be a consideration in my (potential) future contributions. Just for the record: I learned the date of the foundation of Rome in elementary school; asking for a source, to me is the equivalent of asking for a source for the date of the Declaration of Independence. The entry stands "corrected" to Aloha57's "truth", I just checked; incidentally, Wikipedia's Rome page has the date I added as that of the mythical foundation of Rome (and the only one on record I am aware of).

I could have easily let this go, it isn't a matter of "being right": simply, it nags to me that the cooperative spirit of Wikipedia, which I treasure, is undermined by this episode; the information on the historical record is discarded in favor of some of dubious (if attributed) and uncheckable source. This episode also makes me reflect on the excessive faith I sometimes put in Wikipedia: while the collective editing is mostly a reliable practice, and often unearths details that would take years of studies on more traditional sources, and I am very grateful for that, it presents some challenges and potential pitfalls, as evidenced by this episode. I'll leave it at that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.89.107.15 (talk) 14:51, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Pinging Aloha27 whom I assume is who is being discussed since we don't have a Aloha57. In general "I learned it in middle school" is about as far from an acceptable source as you can get - I had a primary school teacher tell me that drawing on my hand would give me ink poisoning, didn't make it true though did it. --Paul ❬talk❭ 16:28, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

We cannot accept "common knowledge". We require a source. If it's truly common knowledge, then you can find a source. It this specific case, go to the Wikipedia "Rome" article you mentions and find the source that it cites, and then cite that same source for your correction. Since citing sources is a little bit complicated, you may prefer to just make a note on the article's talk page. (And yes, it's like requiring a source for the date of the declaration of independence: we do that too.) -Arch dude (talk) 16:23, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I must disagree with part of what Arch dude wrote. The source given in the "Rome" Wikipedia article is

• Kinder, Hermann; Hilgemann, Werner (1964). Dtv-Atlas zur Weltgeschichte (in German). Vol. 1. Dtv. OCLC 887765673.

You can only cite sources you have read. To cite this source, you will have to gain access to it and read the relevant page(s). This means you will have to understand German. You will probably find it easier to find a different source. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:59, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I concur: I should have said "read and then cite". As Penance, I found better ref: "Technical Chronology and Astrological History in Varro, Censorinus, and Others", Classical Quarterly, N.S. 35 (1985), p. 454-65. -Arch dude (talk) 17:23, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Pinging Paul Thank you for the heads-up. I suggested to the user than discussion would best be started at the Libra Talk page in my comment here. The user did not choose to do that. Thus far, the same advice and reasoning has been given as I submitted. I see nowhere in the user's history of EVER editing the Rome page. I shall forthwith head to that page and see what needs to be done, if anything at all. Regards,   Aloha27  talk  17:00, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

A rather simpler source for Rome's foundation date (although less academic) is "this one".. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:27, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

And now I'm really embarrassed. There was no contradiction in the first place. The Libra (astrology) article states that "the Moon was said to be in Libra" not that the Sun was in Libra. Since the date of the founding of Rome is widely agreed to be April 21, but there was debate about the year, the moon may very well have been in Libra. Furthermore, mapping such ancient calendar dates to the modern calendar is problematical anyway, so "April 21" could be anywhere in a two-week window from today's April 21. -Arch dude (talk) 17:35, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Since there is ample evidence that there were only 360 days in a year before 747 BC, why not just let it all go? I suggest that there is literally no point in trying to work out what happened within a 2-week period approximately 2,773 years ago. I speak as one who, like Isaac Newton, has made an extensive study of the subject of astrology, and that includes the Babylonian Amizaduga tablet. You are welcome to leave your time, date and place of birth as proof that you don't care a hoot. At least no-one mentioned alchemy. MinorProphet (talk) 17:35, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Article about Dr. Vladimir Lumelsky

A few months ago I submitted an article about Professor Lumelsky. When will it be posted on line? If there are any issues with it could you let me know? Thank you, Michael Shur — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.169.34.90 (talk) 15:46, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Can you please link to the draft? I cannot find it. 331dot (talk) 15:49, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I guess you refer to User:Shurm. That is the user page for your account. It has not been submitted and nobody has viewed it. See Wikipedia:Articles for creation for a way to submit a draft. Try to include references to satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (people). PrimeHunter (talk) 19:33, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Different answers/information.

Why does Wikipedia give different answers when posting the same question in a different language? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.51.245.73 (talk) 15:59, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Same reason that you might get different responses when you ask two people who are completely unrelated to each other and have no affiliation apart from the fact that they happen to use the same software for something. --Paul ❬talk❭ 16:09, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

There is a separate Wikipedia project for each language. Each article in each language is written by different volunteers and there is no formal co-ordination or co-operation among the volunteers. If you see a discrepancy, please make a note of it on the talk page of the article ere on the English Wikipedia, and I assume that the other projects would want you to make a note on their article's talk pages also. If you are asking about questions on the various help desks, then different wikipedia projects have different rule and different volunteers answering questions. -Arch dude (talk) 16:14, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Why is there is no "pornography" in this category?

Why is there is no "pornography" in this category list? Rizosome (talk) 17:16, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

@Rizosome: Because the pornographic website categories are listed under the Entertainment websites sub-category. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:21, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Klete Keller photo error

This is Hunter Hojnacki with the University of North Carolina Athletics. It was brought to our attention that the photo that is currently being used on Klete Keller's Wikipedia page is a photo of our Head Swim & Dive Coach Mark Gangloff. We ask someone to please take this photo down and make a correction as this has brought a significant amount of unwarranted negative attention due to this mistake.Hunter.hoj (talk) 17:22, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Can you identify the real Klete Keller on the image shown here? JIP | Talk 17:34, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

(ec) Welcome to the Teahouse, Hunter.hoj. There has been a lot of editing to the Klete Keller page recently, so I'm unsure whether the current very poor photograph is correct or not. The best place to discuss this is on the article's Talk page, pinging the editors who have recently been working on that article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:36, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I have removed the photo pending discussion. Since the ID of Keller is unsourced and it is cropped from a larger photo, I think we should err on the side of caution and remove the photo until we determine whether it actually is him. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 17:38, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Add - there is an ongoing discussion at Talk:Klete_Keller#Picture. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 17:41, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Wrong citations

Question: if an authoritative source contains a demonstrable error, should Wikipedia repeat the error?

Example: I've been having a polite edit war with Murgatroyd49 about a mistaken citation. I changed some ships' tonnages from gross register tonnage (GRT) to gross tonnage (GT) and Murgatroyd reverted them because the source - the company's own webpage - stated GRT. But GRT has been obsolete since 1994 (replaced by GT) and the ships in question were built 15 years later. However, old habits die hard and some companies still cite GRT for ships built since that date, even though their correct tonnage cannot be anything but GT.

We discussed this. I said: "I have to question the "rules is rules" justification for changing something we both know is right to something we both know is wrong." Murgatroyd replied: "In which case change the citation."

If I cared enough and had enough time, I might be able to find a better citation, but the question in terms of Wikipedia policy is still valid: should Wikipedia use its citation rule to perpetuate errors and use that rule to prevent errors being corrected? Bear in mind we are talking (in this example) about a fact where there is no scope for interpretation: GRT is wrong and GT is correct.

What do other editors think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrick Neylan (talk • contribs)

@Patrick Neylan: Murgatroyd49 is correct in that Wikipedia only reports what reliable sources say for verification, which means information can be wrong, in which case a better source that uses GT should be sought. Doing the conversions by yourself would constitute as original research. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:46, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

If a source is obviously wrong then it is NOT a reliable source. DuncanHill (talk) 21:40, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

In that case that information should be removed without replacing it with GT in the absence of an appropriate source. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:12, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Edit an article

How do i edit an article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fuaacena (talk • contribs) 21:30, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Fuaacena, you push the button that says "edit", make the edits in the window that appears, fill in an edit summary, and push the button that says "Publish changes". Beyond that, it varies by what type of edit you are making. If it's a simple copyedit (spelling fix, punctuation, etc.) you may want to push the button that says, "This is a minor edit". If you are adding or changing information, you will need to cite a source for the information. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 21:39, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Template:Redirect with multiple redirects

Is it somehow possible to use Template:Redirect with multiple redirects, such as: "foo" and "bar" redirect here. For the computer placeholder name, see foobar.? JIP | Talk 23:47, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

You're looking for Template:Redirect2 (for two redirects specifically) or Template:Redirect-multi (for any number of redirects) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:48, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

20 years of Wikipedia!

January 15

President Donald Trump's Wikipedia has been vandalized

Hello- On President Donald Trump's page, as Biden hasn't been inaugurated yet, there is TWO pieces of misinformation on his article but it's locked to prevent vandalism.

Fact Check: - FBI investigation as of yesterday, January 13th 2021, concludes President Trump NEVER incited anything to promote an assult on the Capitol. Not only does the capitol police report to Congress, but investigators concluded that it wasn't just Trump supporters who were wearing MAGA. This was publicized.

- President Trump is undergoing a second impeachment. He is NOT, and I repeatedly stress, NOT impeached for a second time. Senate has to vote then VP Michael Pence finalizes this. That is the American process.

I trust Wikipedia has not gotten slack with checking their resources and citations. Please adjust this immediately as it is misinformation.

God Bless! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by VoteEducated2020 (talk • contribs) 00:05, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

VoteEducated2020, you'll have better luck on the talk page discussing these proposed changes with reliable sources. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:11, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Machine-translated source?

The text in the source given for the article Sinikka Nopola: https://pledgetimes.com/dead-author-sinikka-nopola-is-dead/ looks like it was machine-translated from Finnish. Does this need to be marked in some way? JIP | Talk 00:19, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps {{Better source}}? RudolfRed (talk) 01:06, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Correct Template

What would be the best template to place on this article to help in its improvement: Susan Blommaert? Maineartists (talk) 02:28, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@Maineartists: First, start by stating what do you think is wrong with it? Then, we can help you find a suitable template. Also, it is better to work to improve the article rather than just template it and hope somebody else does it. RudolfRed (talk) 02:30, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Really, RudolfRed? Come on. Don't be glib. You can see exactly what is wrong with that article. Absolutely no content except a list from IMDB. I know it's better to work on an article, but I have no interest or time. Do you? That's why WP has templates. If you don't want to help, move on. This is why I use the Teahouse. Maineartists (talk) 17:18, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

George Floyd

The Derek Chauvin page says he knelt on George Floyd’s neck for “several minutes”, which really implies 3-4 minutes and downplays his actions. I think you should list the exact amount of time, rather than linking it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.226.232 (talk) 06:24, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

You may want to bring this up at Talk:Derek Chauvin, but from what I can tell the wikilink is valuable. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:35, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia logo needs update

The Wikipedia article has the wrong logo it has the old outdated logo not the new one and my edit request was not honored for a false reason — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.169.176.57 (talk) 11:08, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

it's just a celebratory temporary logo. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:18, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_topics/Punic_Wars

The page above relates events of the Three Punic Wars. However,at the end of the article, the following sentences seems a bit anachronistic : "I love cheese and im pretty sure the Punic warsalso loves cheese. It mmakes them happy inside when they see cheese. It beautiful, who wouldnt? Connie also loves cheese she was in the punic wars so she knows. Great friend." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:194:480:B330:8D9C:5610:78B4:8932 (talk) 11:38, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I have removed it and will keep an eye on the page for a while. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:56, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Issues with my Archive Box

I want to use my archive box as a banner on my talk page, but using banner parameter breaks it style. Compare non-banner version[6] with banner one[7]. As you see, the banner version moves icon and search bar to the left and turns Archives into 'Archives:". Any solution? Keeping the archive box on top of my talk page, making it large, plus keeping its center alignment style/format. --Wario-Man (talk) 12:07, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I have the suspicion the developers are currently working on self-made overflow handlers to tables (as if the browser ones don't suffice), causing all sorts of messy stuff, including breaking most table layouts and anything dependent on it (such as most of the boxes on wikipedia) Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:47, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@Wario-Man: Is [8] what you want? PrimeHunter (talk) 16:35, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Thanks but it's still not similar to what I want. Search archives button should appear below the search bar. As I said, I want a banner version of this. Same style/format but appearing on top of my talk page and be larger. --Wario-Man (talk) 17:42, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I have added |search-break=yes.[9] PrimeHunter (talk) 18:22, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Cheers! --Wario-Man (talk) 19:02, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Adding photos to my great uncle's wiki page: Sir Alan Smith (RAF officer, spitfire pilot) and businessman

Hi there,

Sir Alan Smith's wiki page is great but sadly lacks any photos:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Smith_(RAF_officer)

I have some from when he was a spitfire pilot during WW2 (one of them has him with Hugh Dundas, Johnnie Johnson and Douglas Bader who were the 4 that flew together). It would be good to see these uploaded. I don;t know who owns them though and they were taken in WW2. The photo of the 4 of them would be a good addition to the other's wiki pages (especially Wing Commander Douglas Baders).

Hugh Dundas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Dundas Johnnie Johnson: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnnie_Johnson_(RAF_officer) Douglas Bader: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Bader

Can someone please contact me about getting these uploaded and added to the page please?

Your sincerely

Jeremy Channon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrchannon (talk • contribs) 13:21, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@Jrchannon: iff the photos are over 70 years old, have never been published before, and the author is unknown, they they are in the public domain. You can upload copies to Wikimedia Commons with the appropriate licence ({{PD-UK-70}} I think). Doing so will allow anyone to use the images for any purpose, including commercial use. Mjroots (talk) 14:20, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Looking for someone who might be interested in creating a article with me on 'KashBook'.

Hi, im looking for someone to assist me with writing this article on Draft:KashBook. it was a social media website by Zeyan Shafiq when the social media services were banned in kashmir in 2017, as per my research and suggestions from experienced editors i think this article meets notability guidelines and they have suggested me that this should be created. i am weak at english writing and grammer so i am looking for someone to help me write it cleanly, i can provide the researched rough write up's. we both can take credit as mutual creators for this article on our wiki user pages. thanks, drop a hi on my talk page if interested. Hums4r (talk) 15:58, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

To OP: Hums4r, please don't ask the same question in multiple places. That makes following discussion hard.

To readers: the same question was asked at Wikipedia:Teahouse#Looking for someone who might be interested in creating a article with me on 'KashBook'. --CiaPan (talk) 16:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Defamation of US leaders in their Wikipedia pages

Please remove conspiracy theorist from all replublican senators wiki pages. This statement is a defamation of character for all government officials. This type of behavior is building a general mistrust for our government and those that are running it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.125.128.16 (talk) 16:25, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP, this is the general help desk for Wikipedia editing, so we can't help with article specific issues here. Consider using the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard if you can't edit the page, making sure you can give good reason for these comments to be removed. ✨ Ed talk! ✨ 17:01, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Maybe government officials that egg on crowds with unfounded lies to go and storm a capitol building should be distrusted. In any event, Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state, and they use the term conspiracy theory. 331dot (talk) 17:04, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

why is wikidata employee count not shown in infobox company

Hi, I've updated the employee count of entity https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q95 (latest point in time is 30 September 2020 but there are previous counts at other points in time) and I tried to have it included on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google by removing the hardcoded one (which was ">100,000") but it is not shown, how come? -- ClementSeveillac (talk)

@ClementSeveillac: You didn't set the new value to preferred. I have done it (on the top left icon when the entry is edited), and set the old value to normal.[10] The infobox pulls the preferred value but will only show it if has a source other than Wikipedia. The former preferred value had Wikipedia as source. Google now shows the new value. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:19, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Got it, many thanks! -- ClementSeveillac (talk) 18:24, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Interlanguage links

In the cast section of the article about the film Magnolia, I clicked on April Grace and was surprised to be taken to the article on the German Wikipedia about her. It appears we don't currently have one in English. I checked Help:Interlanguage links and while it tells you how to make interlanguage links there, it doesn't say when you should.

I don't think it is helpful in this instance, as a red link might prompt somebody to attempt to create an article, whereas a link to the German Wikipedia is not very useful to most English speakers, but unless you click on it like I did, it is not apparent that we are lacking an English article on this actor. Can anyone point me towards a policy or guideline that addresses this? Thanks. Turner Street (talk) 16:44, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@Turner Street: I have changed it [11] to {{interlanguage link|April Grace|de}} per Help:Interlanguage links#Inline links (links in the text of the article). PrimeHunter (talk) 17:23, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Thanks, that's it. I obviously wasn't looking hard enough on that page I linked. Turner Street (talk) 19:29, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Putting text in columns for printable version

Hello,

Is is possible to define two layouts of same wiki page? One layout is default web-page and in printable version, the same text is put in two or more columns.

Thank you Marino 17:12, 15 January 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marino108LFS (talk • contribs)

@Marino108LFS: I'm not aware of this capability - the only changes I know of are changing the display skin, by clicking on preferences (link on top right menu bar). You could make a technical request at Wikipedia:Village pump. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:46, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: The no-print and no-display options make me think of defining a printable version of the wiki page where the text in the glossary is being placed in two columns, just as all dictionaries have being printed. Marino 21:09, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Is there a dashboard or forums page that shows suggested changes?

Hello,

Is there a dashboard or forums page that shows suggested changes? I read through a few pages within the community portal, but I didn't see how to submit a request or how to search for a previously mentioned request.

I want to place a request for a potential "dark mode" view to wikipedia....FYI — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glvatiekas (talk • contribs) 18:58, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@Glvatiekas: Is this what you're looking for? Wikipedia:Dashboard#Requested edits TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:04, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

And this Wikipedia:Edit requests? TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:08, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Since the user is asking for a "Dark Mode" I think this would something for the wishlist. Anyone know how to wishlist an item? RudolfRed (talk) 21:05, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

How best to improve a small paraphrased list added without consideration for style or placement

I came across a Wikipedia (W) page--Teamwork, with a short section at the end that was poorly phrased, so I registered a W account and revised for clarity. However, returning the next day, I realized the section I revised was simply a list of four ~7 word sentences written in a casual style that did not fit the academic style of the page, was crudely tacked onto the end, and the content belongs in the latter half of the preceding section--compare "beneficial" to "Benefits". It does have a citation in References, though while I've not seen the source material, it seems to be a condensed paraphrase. This short list is a poor fit at best. However, after reviewing the W style and guidelines, searching for an answer but what keywords to even use?, I'm unsure whether to a.) combine the content of the short list with the preceding section, style aside, b.) add a notation that the crudely tacked on short list does not meet W standards (or is that action a nominated process etc?), or something else. Without seeing the source material, I'm uncomfortable modifying content to fit the page style. Any suggestions? Thank you, and my apologies if this request doesn't follow protocol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alienhouse (talk • contribs) 20:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@Alienhouse: I modified the text a bit to make it fit better, and to provide context, although I can't read the source either and have to take it at face value. Thanks for pointing this out.  Courtesy link: teamwork TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:42, 15 January 2021 (UTC)