Jump to content

Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RiniX (talk | contribs) at 19:02, 26 September 2022 (→‎Edits using bot: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

    ↑ To top of page
    Shortcuts
    Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)
    Ask a question

    September 23

    Hoax Death Report on Wikipedia

    Scott Michaelson is alive and well. This is a hoax death report. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Michaelson


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Michaelson 120.88.153.246 (talk) 01:42, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Hey. I've reverted the hoax now after verifying that there were no reports in the media of Scott's death. Thanks for letting us know. Sideswipe9th (talk) 01:46, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Is it possible to see a list of all the pages I've created?

    I know I can check all of the contributions I've made, but I've been searching and can't seem to find how to check specifically the pages that were created by me ReidMoffat (talk) 03:03, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @ReidMoffat: At the bottom of Special:Contributions/ReidMoffat you should see links for "Edit count" and "Articles created". They should provide the information you want. Just the first link will do. Johnuniq (talk) 03:08, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That's a bit misleading since it only includes (main namespace) articles and excludes redirects. Anyway, this functionality is now built in to Wikipedia. When looking at the contributions, click on "Search for contributions" at the top, then click on "Only show edits that are page creations".[1] -- zzuuzz (talk) 07:42, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Interesting, thanks. Johnuniq (talk) 10:26, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Zzuuzz You can also tell Xtools to include redirects and pages in all namespaces in its page count like so https://xtools.wmflabs.org/pages/en.wikipedia.org/zzuuzz/all/all. If you go to the form https://xtools.wmflabs.org/pages there's a few other options for the page count, like namespace selection and date ranges. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 13:19, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Wrong information

    this information is wrong and they are doing propaganda about Islam please remove this content because there is no present khalifa of Islam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirza_Masroor_Ahmad 39.42.232.118 (talk) 09:32, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Read the article. "His official title within the movement" is just that: his title within that organization. We are reporting a fact. Do not expect us not to report that fact. --Orange Mike | Talk 09:38, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    See also Wikipedia:Ahmadiyya Caliphate information. It's Google searches which can give the wrong impression that Wikipedia calls him the current caliph of Islam. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:25, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Assistance with linkspammer

    I came across this IP address spamming link on Movie projector and a suspeciously similar IP address making similar edits on Filmmaking. I reverted on one article and manually edited it out in the other. I think they may have made other edits as well. Is there a way to find edits from very similar IPs? Squeezdakat (talk) 11:18, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    You can look at ranges of IP addresses using CIDR notation. For example, Special:Contributions/1.38.0.0/16 shows all contributions from IP addresses beginning with 1.38. In this case, the disruption seems to be coming from the range 1.38.158.83/22. Madeline (part of me) 12:12, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, that's very helpful. Fortunately this person seems to have stopped. Squeezdakat (talk) 12:20, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Relayball

    I need help with the article I created it’s new and been played numerous locations — Preceding unsigned comment added by Relaybola (talk • contribs) 11:20, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    There may not be much we can say that hasn't already been discussed under a previous account. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zaner25/Archive. Thanks. Larry Hockett (Talk) 11:54, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Larry Hockett This editor REALLY wants an article on this new "ballgame". David10244 (talk) 01:28, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Please see WP:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. ColinFine (talk) 13:43, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    RE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Group

    Hi there, I've noticed our company logo as seen in the above URL is our old one, yet when I click on it and then click on the URL at the bottom of the page, it shows our new logo. How do I get the new logo to pull through onto the landing page in the URL I've noted above?

    Many thanks in advance Rachael Hufton 82.5.202.207 (talk) 12:56, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    The logo in the infobox is Phoenix Group logo which is on Wikimedia Commons as a SVG file. From the Phoenix Group website, it looks like the logo has been updated. This means that someone may have to do a new SVG, or upload a newer version of the logo.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 13:26, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    File:Phoenix Group logo.svg says the source is https://www.thephoenixgroup.com/sites/phoenix-group/files/phoenix-group/phoenix-logo.svg. The new svg logo is there now and still satisfies the same license so I have uploaded it to Commons. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:20, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, it's now fixed; you may have to clear your browser cache to see the updated logo.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:08, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    "Invoke navbox"

    How come the second navbox here is not displayed? Hildeoc (talk) 15:13, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Category:Pages where post-expand include size is exceeded
    Too many templates. Editors need to edit; remove redundancies, split the article, etc.
    —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:21, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I made a small template change [2] which fixes it right now but the article will soon hit the limit again. It currently uses 98.7% of the limit. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:10, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The article is number 11 at Special:LongPages and sadly this war will probably be much longer. The timeline will eventually have to be split. Let's hope it doesn't end up like Category:Timelines of the Syrian civil war. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:20, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Getting the map pin on the map in infobox

    Article: The Harrogate Club. I have added the coord to the infobox, and a map, but cannot yet get the location pin to appear on the map. Can you help with that? I am wondering whether I have converted the coord from Geograph wrongly. The original coord was WGS84: 53:59.4683N 1:32.1782W. Thank you. Storye book (talk) 18:12, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Update: The coord is now accurate; I have checked it on Google Street View, and it works on that site. However, there is still no pin on the map. Storye book (talk) 09:49, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Mistake

    I mistakenly finalized a mistaken edit of the "References" section of my "William Everdell" Wikipedia page which eliminated everything in that section. Any way to get it back?WREverdell (talk) 18:28, 23 September 2022 (UTC)WREverdell[reply]

    Here's what disappeared: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=William_Everdell&action=edit&section=3&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro WREverdell (talk) 18:28, 23 September 2022 (UTC)WREverdell[reply]

    @WREverdell: I have used Wikipedia's undo functionality to restore the previous section contents. Please see WP:REFB for the citation format used in William Everdell. Using the preview ability might also be a good idea in general. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:43, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    WREverdell, given that you have a conflict of interest with respect to yourself, 331dot states elsewhere on this page that 'you should make an edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page, detailing changes you feel are needed. The article about you should be summarizing what independent reliable sources say about you, and not merely link to your work. Please see the autobiography policy for further guidance in editing about yourself.' --Quisqualis (talk) 21:33, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    DAB by capital letter

    We have the page Local group, a DAB page, and Local Group, an article about an astronomy topic. The only difference in the title is "g" vs. "G". Is this a valid arrangement? Cambalachero (talk) 18:59, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    It's a valid option per WP:SMALLDETAILS. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:02, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Babel

    Hi there, I’ve been trying to set up babel in my user page but I dont know how it works

    Can someone help please? DavidTDC3377 (talk) 19:16, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    The general help page is Wikipedia:Babel. Ruslik_Zero 20:29, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]


    September 24

    Searching references

    When using the search engine, does it also include the references? For example if I wanted to see how many articles have the string "wikipedia.org" somewhere in the references, would those articles be listed in the search? Thanks for the help. Ned n07b07 (talk) 01:03, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Sometimes such a thing can work, but in this case wikipedia.org is a WP:REDIRECTed page; so, searching for it directly will bring you to the article about Wikipedia. If you want to search the url "wikipedia.org" then you might have to tweak the syntax a bit (i.e. use a syntax trick) that will allow you to search for it as an url. Have you tried asking about this at WP:VPT? -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:41, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    This search finds 12 articles where:
    <ref...>...wikipedia.org
    Maybe that is a good search; maybe it can be improved.
    —Trappist the monk (talk) 02:53, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    And it can. If I remove the extraneous space character, this search finds about 6100 articles.
    —Trappist the monk (talk) 03:06, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    But that is too loose because it finds <ref.../>...wikipedia.org. So this search requires proper open and close <ref ...>...</ref> tags and finds about 900 articles.
    —Trappist the monk (talk) 03:16, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You can use insource:"search text" as part of your search string to force the search to look in the wikitext. Doing so with "wikipedia.org" turns up 60,890 articles, but not all of those are in references. One imperfect way to narrow it down is to search for "insource:"url=https://en.wikipedia.org"", which gives (mostly) results from Template:cite and its derivatives, mainly used in references. Most of these probably need to be fixed, as Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:54, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    my workpage/wikipedia

    Hi, I have worked as a music producer and composer for many years. I would like to update what is written about me in wikipedia with links to productions and films etc. Is there a good guide on how to do this? thank you so much for your help! 217.213.134.192 (talk) 08:36, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    You should make an edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page, detailing changes you feel are needed. The article about you should be summarizing what independent reliable sources say about you, and not merely link to your work. Please see the autobiography policy for further guidance in editing about yourself. 331dot (talk) 08:38, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    hi ip user! we heavily discourage editing articles you are connected to yourself. there are also many policies regarding this kind of situation in Conflict of interest, like that you have to disclose that you are the subject themself and thus have a CoI (and for this, it's best to have an account since IPs are prone to changing all the time, but it's not required required as long as it's always clear there's a disclosure). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 08:42, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Additional information on Gilbert Jose

    I do want to add to this page, my grandfather had 2 sons Geoffrey and Tony. Geoffrey has been omitted from the information, and I would like his name included please. With Thanks. Woodville 19 (talk) 12:51, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello, Woodville. If you have a reliable published source for the other son, then it is possible that he could be included. Since, as a relative, you have a conflict of interest, you should make an edit request on the article's talk page Talk:Gilbert Jose. (see that link for details of how). But please note that while a reliable published source is essential for information to be included, it is not necessarily enough: there is an editorial decision to be made, by uninvolved editors, on whether or not it is appropriate. Tony Jose is mentioned because he also met Wikipedia's criteria for WP:notability, and there is an article about him, but if his brother did not meet those criteria, it is not obvious that he should be mentioned. ColinFine (talk) 19:38, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, having looked at Tony Jose, I'm not convinced that he meets the criteria for notability. He certainly doesn't meet the special criteria in WP:NSPORT, and the existingarticle has no independent sources at all. I have tagged the article accordingly.
    ColinFine (talk) 20:55, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    ABOUT SPELLING MISTAKE

    Banaras Hindu University

    THERE IS A SPELLING MISTAKE IN ARTICLE A WORD `MENTAL` HAS BEEN USED INSTEAD OF ` METAL` CRAFT. GENEROUSLY REQUEST TO CORRECT IT FOR NOT FACING FURTHER INCONVENIENCE SOULPALETTEBYJAS (talk) 16:20, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    I couldn't find such a mistake at Banaras Hindu University, but I did find and fix one at Bharat Kala Bhavan. If you spot any errors like this in the future, I encourage you to be bold and try fixing them yourself. Otherwise, you might try posting about the error at the article's associated talk page (like Talk:Bharat Kala Bhavan). Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:26, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I have just corrected it, YES it was regarding bharat kala bhavan thankyou SOULPALETTEBYJAS (talk) 16:54, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    References

    I can't seem to figure out or fix my reference errors message on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:List_of_Danger_Force_characters. Maybe I don't need it but then again I know it's better to be safe then sorry. Magical Golden Whip (talk) 16:46, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    I've fixed it. If you're interested in how, use the edit history to check what I did. Maproom (talk) 16:58, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    two articles on the same topic

    I just noticed while working on Wikidata that there are two articles on the same topic here in English Wikipedia. There is an article The House of Black (professional wrestling) and House of Black. Could someone here take care of the fact that the two articles are merged? --Gymnicus (talk) 20:43, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Given that the two articles consist of nothing of significance beyond misrepresenting performance art as 'sport', and fail to demonstrate that this 'House' has any significant independent notability, the number of articles should probably be reduced to zero. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:49, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @AndyTheGrump: Because I am not familiar with the relevance criteria, I am happy to leave this decision to you. I don't care if there is only one article or no article because the stable is relevant to Wikidata. It's just unfavorable if there are two articles on the same topic, that's difficult to handle in Wikidata. --Gymnicus (talk) 20:59, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The duplication has been sorted out now, by User:DuncanHill. I'll look into the notability issue further, when I get the chance. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:13, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    I will no longer be donating

    Do not reply to inflammatory posts like this. They're talking at us and not to us. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 21:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

    This is no longer a politically neutral website and so I will no longer be donating. Super sad too, wikipedia started out as such an awesome project for all humanity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ironinthepath (talk • contribs) 23:35, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Ironinthepath Whether you donate or not is your decision, though we editors have nothing to do with the donation process, and donations or lack thereof do not impact content. If you see content that violates policy on neutral point of view, we'd like to know what it is. But neutral point of view does not mean whitewashed or providing a false balance. 331dot (talk) 23:48, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    donations or lack thereof do not impact content If it did, that would be called bribery. --Hob Gadling (talk) 18:55, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Also consider, Ironinthepath, that in any calendar month around 100,000 different editors make edits on Wikipedia, all with their own motives and all without anyone routinely vetting most of their edits. In such circumstances, some edits are bound to be sub-optimal in their neutrality. These can only be corrected if someone (a) notices and (b) either corrects them or asks someone else to do so. Have you done either regarding material you deem politically non-neutral?
    None of Wikipedia's entirely voluntary editorial contributors (including yourself) are specifically tasked with anything, and certainly not with regularly scanning all articles looking for non-neutrality – this would be impossible given the available resources. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.227.236 (talk) 17:49, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It should also probably be pointed out that 'political neutrality' isn't a thing. Or at least, it isn't a meaningful concept, unless you define the terms under which you measure it. 'Neutral' according to who? This is a global project, and what is seen as 'neutral' in say the U.S. (if anything is, these days?) may not be so elsewhere. Wikipedia doesn't aspire to abstract notions of 'neutrality' - it instead attempts to cover issues in terms of how the broad range of 'reliable sources' do. Sometimes, it fails at even that, and of course 'reliability' can be influenced by political perspectives. Wikipedia is written by people. Politics is part of what we are. We can't eliminate it from our mindset when editing Wikipedia, and shouldn't try. Anyone who thinks this is possible is of course free to set up an alternative elsewhere. Written by robots... AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:18, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    ...written by robots programmed by whom? CiaPan (talk) 18:44, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    September 25

    Need help using the "JustReplace" script by User:Sreejithk2000

    Hello,

    I am not sure if this is the right place to ask this but I'll give it a shot anyway.

    Has anyone here ever heard about and/or used this script that globally replaces images? I've been trying to use it for a while now but it keeps giving me an error. I've tried using the newer, updated script made by User:Perhelion but it also didn't seem to work. Probably because I don't know how to use them.


    The pop-up error using Sreejithk2000's script reads as follows:


    An error occurred while trying to do the requested action. A detailed description of the error is shown below:

    Error while asking CommonsDelinker to replace Flag of Ichikikushikino Kagoshima.JPG with Flag of Ichikikushikino, Kagoshima.svg Reason: API request failed (abusefilter-warning): ⧼abusefilter-warning-delinker-filemover-page-syntax⧽ at Sun, 25 Sep 2022 01:07:54 GMT served by mw1362


    User:SpinnerLaserzthe2nd has been helping me by globally replacing the images I upload on Wikimedia, but I want to do it on my own. Any help, guidance or advice on this would be greatly appreciated.

    Thank you. EnviousBird (talk) 01:22, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Your deletion of the page I created

    I protest against all your complaints and removing the page I created. This is pure discrimination. JonathanV123 (talk) 02:59, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi JonathanV123. The article Jayvé has been tagged for proposed deletion. You can halt this process by removing the tag from the top of the page, as it's intended for use in situations where deletion is uncontested. Before you remove the tag, I recommend spending some time looking for reliable, independent, secondary sources that could be used to prove Jayvé's notability. If you remove the deletion tag without such a demonstration, it's very likely the article will be taken to Articles for deletion where a discussion might lead to its deletion anyway. You can save a lot of time by either leaving the tag up or proving that Jayvé is notable. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:07, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    hi @JonathanV123 and welcome to the help desk! Reliable sources basically people who are reputable and completely unaffiliated with them talking about them, which you'll use to back up the claims you make in their article and especially their notability criteria. fulfilling both of them is essential in making sure an article stays, and the lack of them means anything may not have an article regardless of any other qualities they may have. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 03:12, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @JonathanV123: You were given help on how to stop the article being deleted a few days ago. Have you done anything about that? Bazza (talk) 09:08, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello,

    I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I had question regarding using OABot to add freely accessible links to citations. Is there a guide to how it exactly works? When I do a preview of the links it suggests to add, it either says "allowed", "unknown", "restricted" or "forbidden" (I usually just add the ones that have all three criteria as "allowed"). The reason that I'm asking is because I don't want to mistakenly add something that constitutes as a copyright violation whenever I use this tool. Any explanation or guidance would be appreciated. Thanks in advance. Losipov (talk) 05:58, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Losipov Bots are implemented as if they were User accounts. So you can look at the page User:OAbot to see how it works and if you wish can post a question on its Talk Page at User talk:OAbot. One of the humans who look after the bot will then reply there to answer your query. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    my username is NOT capitalized....sabastianblak

    help me access my old acct, please? Sabastianblak (talk) 06:31, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    I believe that this is a technical limitation. All usernames, like page titles, are uppercase. – robertsky (talk) 07:29, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Noting that robertsky's username is actually Robertsky, as seen at User:Robertsky. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:14, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, on my user page the user name appears as Ianmacm, but when I sign in, it is with ianmacm (all lower case). This may lead to some confusion.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:47, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    hi @sabastianblak and welcome to the help desk! Sabastianblak and sabastianblak act as the same account due to the technical limitation above. you may edit your signature via Preferences > User Profile > Signature to display your username as lowercase. if you ever create a userpage, you can also use {{Lowercase title}} to make it display as lowercase. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 08:56, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Claim for creation of the term Generation Z

    On the Wikipedia entry for Generation Z (Generation Z), it suggests that the term Generation Z was first used by demographer Cheryl Russell in 2009. This is incorrect as I wrote an article for Brand Strategy magazine in February 2007 in which I posed the question 'when would we meet Generation Z'. I have a PDF copy of the article as it doesn't exist online. I have tried to update Wikipedia but it's been rejected or, rather, changed back to the original entry. Please advice. Thank you. Crispin Reed CrispinGJReed (talk) 09:39, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello. You added the text in this edit on 2017-08-18, and it was removed by an IP editor in this edit on 2017-09-29, with the Edit summary "removing vague and unreferenced material". This is part of the normal give and take in Wikipedia (see WP:BRD), and your next step if you wish to pursue this should be opening a discussion on Talk:Generation Z. Given that you are wishing to cite your own work, you also had a conflict of interest in inserting that information (though the editor who removed it probably didn't know that) and so you should have discussed it on the talk page first anyway. ColinFine (talk) 11:15, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with the whole of ColinFine's comment above. Also, according to the article, Cheryl Russell allegedly coined the term iGen, not Generation Z. Yes, you need a citation from an authoritative source for any new fact that you add to an article; however it does not have to be online. I cannot yet find Brand Strategy magazine mentioned online, but if it is (or was) a published magazine, then you can cite the magazine's name, author's name, article title, date, and page number. Optionally, if you want your citation source to be online, then try to get your pdf uploaded to a reliable website (not a blog). Hope that helps. Storye book (talk) 11:36, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Donations

    Hello,

    Some time ago I started making regular donations to Wikipedia. Something I am glad to be doing, and continue to do. However, I regularly still get prompts to donate. So, I've created a Wiki log in, but I can't find a way to link my regular donations to my new account. Is there a way to do that, or Should I cancel my original donations and set up a new donation plan? TuryScrema (talk) 11:44, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi TuryScrema - we don't link donations to accounts, but provided you always use your account, the next time you receive a donations request, there should be a dismiss button, allowing you to block any further requests - Arjayay (talk) 12:52, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, TuryScrema. There is (purposely) no way to link donations to an editing account: absolutely nothing in Wikipedia knows anything about who has made what donations. But what you can do is to go to Preferences and ask it to surpress the banner. (You can do this whether you actually donate or not). ColinFine (talk) 12:52, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Delete user profile

    I set it up incorrectly and cannot change the user name ass so wish to delete the profile. Not obvious how I do that. Thanks Bill Wkbrannigan (talk) 12:43, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Accounts cannot be deleted for technical and legal reasons. It is possible to change a username (see CHU), but since you've made no other edits on this account, the easiest thing is just to abandon it and create a new one. If you choose, you can create a User page for this account saying what you have done, but there is no need to. ColinFine (talk) 12:54, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Please be aware that User:Wkbrannigan is not a "profile", and should not be regarded or treated as one. It is your user page, intended only for your activities in Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 15:36, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Account blocked

    How can you help me to restore my account? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.81.1.56 (talk) 13:52, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Can you remind me the duration of this block please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.81.29.56 (talk) 13:57, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Please log in to your account to request unblock, all information should be there. 331dot (talk) 13:59, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    When will be the end of this block? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.81.53.56 (talk) 14:22, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Posting questions here is block evasion. Stop posting here. Log into your account. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:31, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Dr. Donna Singer Wikipedia Page

    Hello -

    I am wondering what the below means regarding this page Donna Singer


    The below was added, but this page has been up for a long time:

    This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find link tool for suggestions. (August 2016)
    This article contains wording that promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information. (June 2022)
    This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. (June 2022)

    How do I fix this? If nothing gets fixed will the page be deleted? ElizabethJamey (talk) 18:11, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @ElizabethJamey: It looks like the {{orphan}} tag has been removed, so I'll explain the latter two:
    • The article contains promotional wording, which should be removed. Articles should have a neutral point of view.
    • The article content appears to have been written by someone for financial gain, and should be edited to be more neutral (like above).
    —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:51, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for this response. I read the articles on Promotional wording and neutral point of view, however, the article for Donna Singer, to me, doesn't seem to fit that criteria. Can you please advise of at least a section or a sentence or something on the Donna Singer article that would point to either promotional wording or something that is not neutral, so I can see an example and update accordingly? Thank you for replying back to me and thank you for all of your help, I do appreciate it. ElizabethJamey (talk) 13:25, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It looks to me as if Marchjuly has cleaned up most of the puffery, but in the Career section, ". . . includes Doug Richards (bass), a highly applauded jazz musician who worked with . . ." should have "highly applauded" removed unless this description can be cited to a quote in a Reliable source.
    On a more grammatical point, in the The Doug Richards Trio section's first paragraph, ". . . which combined both jazz standards as well as original instrumental tracks" doesn't make logical sense – combined these two things with what? Presumably each other, though I doubt that the standards and originals were literally combined, but rather interspersed with one another, in which case something like ". . . included both jazz standards and original instrumental tracks" would be better. Ordinarily I copy-edit such things myself when I come across them, but in this case I'll leave you to do it. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.227.236 (talk) 14:36, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Adding a website to a movie page

    I am curious as to why I can NEVER add the movie site TMDB to a movies page? A couple of years ago a 'spam ' alert would come up if I tried. But it is a LEGITIMATE SITE & has been around for 14 years (2008)! Hardly spam. Any idea why I can't add it to the external references section?

    www.themoviedb.org Beccib23 (talk) 19:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    It's on the spam blacklist here so any attempt to add it will be blocked automatically. I'm not sure exactly when or why it was added to the list, but it is usually because the link was added in a spammy way to various articles.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 20:02, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You can read a discussion here. Ruslik_Zero 20:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Ellen Terry

    Please check ref number 2 - It is all wrong. Thanks 101.182.115.91 (talk) 23:56, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    It was you who made it. The right approach is to preview it, see that it's wrong, and fix it before "publishing" it. This is the approach taken by the vast majority of editors who are as experienced as you are. -- Hoary (talk) 01:32, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    September 26

    How to cite an anthology with a compiler instead of an editor

    Greetings.

    I'm trying to cite an Anthology work which has a "compiled by" instead of an "editor". How do I do that?

    I tried this:

    Heiki Jr., Robert Debs; Heinl, Nancy Gordon (December 1978), "The Marine Corps Gazette article The American Occupation of Haiti: Problems and Programs, 1920-1928", in Evans, USMCR, Col. Stephen S. (ed.), U.S. Marines and Irregular Warfare, 1898-2007: Anthology and Selected Bibliography, Quantico, VA: Marine Corps University (published 2008)

    but it's clearly not right, it lists the compilers name before the name of the anthology and adds "(ed.)".

    Please advise, Thanks, Gecko G (talk) 02:16, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    You could use the 'others' parameter, like this: Heiki Jr., Robert Debs; Heinl, Nancy Gordon (December 1978), "The American Occupation of Haiti: Problems and Programs, 1920-1928", U.S. Marines and Irregular Warfare, 1898-2007: Anthology and Selected Bibliography, Compiled by Col. Stephen S. Evans, USMCR, Quantico, VA: Marine Corps University (published 2008) Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:33, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, Gecko G. In this context, I believe that a human compiler is pretty much synonymous with a human editor. Comparing the meanings of the words is complicated by the fact that both words are also used in a computer software context. Cullen328 (talk) 02:40, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict)I could've sworn I had tried that exact same thing and it gave me an "ignore" error message, but yeah, that works (I guess I must have had a typo or something), thanks Firefangledfeathers, that will work if there's not a proper way to cite an anthology!
    Cullen328-I suppose there is some overlap, but the source specifically labels him as a compiler, not an editor so I want to list him as such.
    to any/all- Given that this is an article originally from a magazine, collected into an anthology work, what's the best way to list the three titles (article title, original magazine title, and anthology title)? Is there no anthology specific citation templates? I tried to find the original magazine but I'm not finding any of that years Marine Corps Gazettes in my usual online sources, let alone that particular issue. Gecko G (talk) 02:54, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You don't. You cite the source that you consulted. cs1|2 or other forms of citation are not compliations of a source's publication history. If you consulted the magazine then:
    {{cite magazine |mode=cs2 |last1=Heiki |first1=Robert Debs Jr |last2=Heinl |first2=Nancy Gordon |date=December 1978 |title=The American Occupation of Haiti: Problems and Programs, 1920-1928 |magazine=The Marine Corps Gazette}}
    Heiki, Robert Debs Jr; Heinl, Nancy Gordon (December 1978). "The American Occupation of Haiti: Problems and Programs, 1920-1928". The Marine Corps Gazette.
    Compiler/editor for the purposes of a citation are synonymous. While |others= 'works', |editor= is the better choice. Omit Evans' rank and affiliation; name only.
    {{citation |last1=Heiki |first1=Robert Debs Jr |last2=Heinl |first2=Nancy Gordon |chapter=The American Occupation of Haiti: Problems and Programs, 1920-1928 |editor-last=Evans |editor-first=Stephen S. |title=U.S. Marines and Irregular Warfare, 1898-2007: Anthology and Selected Bibliography |publisher=Marine Corps University |date=2008 |location=Quantico, VA}}
    Heiki, Robert Debs Jr; Heinl, Nancy Gordon (2008), "The American Occupation of Haiti: Problems and Programs, 1920-1928", in Evans, Stephen S. (ed.), U.S. Marines and Irregular Warfare, 1898-2007: Anthology and Selected Bibliography, Quantico, VA: Marine Corps University
    Also, see MOS:JR.
    —Trappist the monk (talk) 12:27, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Labelling as 'false claims' news articles that had been corrected or retracted

    It is my understanding that news publishers sometimes make corrections or retractions, with or without notice, and that it is routine practice in the industry. I came across the article The Raw Story which has a long list of entries (18) under the heading "False claims". Every one which I have looked into was about an article which had been quickly corrected or retracted within a reasonably short period of time. Some of these articles had relied on news agency or syndicated articles which were even cited/linked in the published article. I have searched other Wikipedia articles on news organizations that published/corrected/retracted the same material and yet I do not find similar content in their Wikipedia articles, nor do I find any similar sections or lists for 'false claims'.

    Some of the language in the Wikipedia article The Raw Story is exaggerated, WP:OR, WP:SYNTH, WP:UNDUE or based on exaggerated or twisted claims by the cited articles. I have tried to remove some of the entries and have put my reasoning on the talk page, but one particular editor (who was a major contributor to content on the page and I believe who added this list) reverts and insists that the content is well sourced and NPOV. But it isn't. Regardless of what I write to explain my edit, this editor uses very strong and aggressive language to discourage me from continuing. I have tried to search for specific Wikipedia guidelines about this type of content, but have only been able to find NPOV, SYNTH, UNDUE and, frankly, WP:COMMONSENSE.

    If any of the 26 citations in The Raw Story were actually alleging that Raw Story routinely and repeatedly publishes false claims and is negligent about retractions, then that would be a different story, but there are no sources covering that concept. Instead, the majority of these citations are Snopes-like in that they mention some issue that made the rounds of the internet which they found to be untrue or unlikely and they happen to mention that Raw Story as well as others had published it.

    I am unsure how to proceed. The article is a wreck and even though I have only a limited amount of time to spend on Wikipedia, I don't want to abandon it to this "owner". Is there a more specific guideline or policy that covers this sort of content? Or does anyone have any advice or direction that can unstick this impasse with another editor? Grorp (talk) 04:52, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    This seems like a conversation you and Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d need to have on Talk:The Raw Story before EITHER of you revert again. I do see you have posted detailed reasoning for your changes on the talk page and Dr. Swag Lord has responded, but I can see how you might think his response (basically your explanation is TL:DR and to "Stop removing well-sourced content.") is less than productive. I think the two of you need to have a good faith conversation about if that material is being given due weight or not. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 14:53, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Severe problem with routine addition of content

    Hello, I'm having severe problems with routine addition of content, succeeding only on 5th or 7th try after 15-20 mins: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1112457436

    Can anyone please investigate it and explain why? Is there any problem with editing at the moment in general? Or any problem with this IP addr or range so it triggers some internal protection (I usually get assigned IP from a different range, this one is a very rare occurrence).

    This is infuriating, as I wanted to do one more edit of the page, and it keeps failing with "Error, something unexpected happened upon loading the preview. Please close and try again." reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.118.83.219 (talk) 12:41, 26 September 2022 (UTC) P.S. in case such questions should be asked elsewhere, please let me know.217.118.83.219 (talk) 13:31, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Making note here that it's definitely not an abuse filter issue (I checked and they haven't triggered any abuse filters). ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 14:38, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It might be just general internet problems. In case you hadn't noticed, IP, there is an ongoing war in Europe, and both sides (in the broadest sense) are doubtless making cyberattacks on each others' internet services. {the poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.227.236 (talk) 14:42, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That would make sense considering the IP is from Russia according to WhoIs. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 14:48, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    It appears the problem was entirely on my end: shortly after my futile edit attempts I noticed I couldn't watch YouTube vids even at min quality; YouTube-reported bitrate fell to 50-80 kbps – numbers I don't recall seeing before. The fact that I easily posted here, but couldn't edit the article, is probably explained by its big size – perhaps something in MediaWiki is sensitive to very low connection speed. Now the speed is back, and I edited the article as usual, without a hitch.

    So thanks to all who reached out to help, and apologies for the alert folks, if it occurred to me that I should have checked my connection, I would have done it. Case closed it seems (except someone here is brave enough to go ahead and fix that MediaWiki "feature" for the good of all editors sitting on flaky connections).217.118.83.219 (talk) 18:42, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't think that would be a MediaWiki issue but probably just a website issue. Usually if your connection isn't very good certain things won't work on websites because your internet isn't strong enough. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 18:45, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Censorship and propaganda.

    If Wikipedia wishes to remain a legitimate source of knowledgeable information, it should refrain from locking pages with politically biased information subject to propaganda laws and attributes to support narratives through emotion and remain factual and logical. Example: Fascism - Wikipedia States "far-right" and locked in Talk as: The lead of the article says that "Fascism is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and the economy that rose to prominence in early 20th-century Europe." This statement is the result of a very long process of discussion and debate and has strong consensus acceptance within the Wikipedia community, based on the consensus of political scientists, historians, and other reliable sources that Fascism is a (far) "right-wing" ideology and not a "left-wing" one. This has been discussed numerous times. Please see this FAQ and read the talk page archives." When in fact no discussion was had. I do not know, though I suspect government meddling, was the source cause of this. I have plenty of biased propaganda sources such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube for these kinds of content, and hope Wikipedia can return itself to normalcy while remaining unbiased in word definitions. The above example of "Fascism" is neither right nor left as described and outlined in the remainder of the article as well as its source references. This and other similar source information meddling is the reason I no longer monetarily support the Wikipedia foundation, see also redefinition of “Vaccine” as other source. ELXaber (talk) 17:42, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @ELXaber: Talk:Fascism has a "Search archives" field. A search of left-wing shows many discussions. Some American conservatives and others are trying to redefine the term but until they convince the World at large, Wikipedia will probably continue to use the normal international meaning. I don't know where you are from but if you mainly follow conservative American media then you don't get a proper impression of how the term is normally used. Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia and tries to avoid special terminology used by limited groups. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:58, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Edits using bot

    Hi, I need to find a talk page (or project) or a user who knows how to operate a bot (I've seen these edits before, but can't remember who made them). I don't edit English Wikipedia, so don't know where to ask my question exactly. Thank you RiniX (talk) 19:02, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&oldid=1112521397"