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 (but please don't ask in both places).

Ask a question

July 10

Page on Fernando de la Rúa's presidency needs serious reformatting

The article on the Presidency of Fernando de la Rúa has overly large paragraphs and incorrectly formatted footnotes. Could someone please fix it? Normally I'd try to do this sort of thing myself (at least, when the problem is less complicated), but the whole thing is rather overwhelming to me.--Thylacine24 (talk) 00:07, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@Thylacine24:Based on your questions here, you appear to be more interested in improving the form of articles rather than the contents. Thanks! The form is very important, and we all specialize. I suggest that you take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. This appears to be a project that aligns with what you wish to do. Perhaps you can join that project and introduce yourself on its talk page, and then ask them how to deal with problems like this one where you identify a need for copy editing but are not comfortable with doing the job yourself yet. Please keep up the good work, and if this suggestion does not work out, come back here. -Arch dude (talk) 14:29, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Hopefully, I'll get around to it sometime.--Thylacine24 (talk) 21:26, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

List of alumni of Trinity College, Cambridge

In the "Business" section on this page, could you please help with a link on Francis Martineau Lupton to his actual section on the Lupton family page. I cannot do this.

Also - reference number 10 should have UK Daily Telegraph as the newspaper source. Please put that in as well.

Also - I have totally ruined adding in a file of Francis Martineau Lupton.

Francis Martineau Lupton

Please change name underneath file/photo to "Francis Martineau Lupton, businessman, landowner and politician" - not Frank Lupton - as it says on file now.

Please correct so sorry

Please help if able Thanks so much2001:8003:D9A2:5501:891D:707C:85CB:12C0 (talk) 02:14, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

It's alright. First, to create a Wikilink to a specific section in an article you first put the name of the article followed by a "#" and the name of the section. Like for example [[Lupton family#Francis Martineau Lupton]].

The ref 10 should be fixed as well.

Fixed the issue with Francis Martineau Lupton photo in List of alumni of Trinity College, Cambridge, remember that there can't be a wikilink inside a wikilink.

Fixed the issue with the wrong name appearing. Just [[File:Alderman Francis Martineau Lupton, Esq., of Newton Park Estate.jpg|thumb|upright|Frank Lupton]] to [[File:Alderman Francis Martineau Lupton, Esq., of Newton Park Estate.jpg|thumb|upright|Francis Martineau Lupton]]. Notice how the "last" parameter, the ones in purple are changed, that's how you change the caption. Thanks for the questions! OkayKenji ^{(talk page)} 04:43, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

About Reliability of Wikipedia

Is Wikipedia fully reliable? If yes, then what it's reliability percentage. The reason behind asking this question is that, I want to edit Wikipedia articles but before that I want other editors to answer my question. What is the reliability percentage between 0-100%? If it's less than 50% then it will not be the best use of my valuable time to contribute in Wikipedia's article. Thanks. (223.230.163.6 (talk) 06:21, 10 July 2019 (UTC))

Hard to answer and probably differs from area to area and because of other factors. If you like, "as reliable as the last editor who edited it", but that's not entirely true either. See Reliability of Wikipedia, Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia and Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia. But no, WP can not be fully reliable because of it's structure. It can still be pretty good. There is also an argument that no source is fully reliable. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:26, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

You can also see Reliability of Wikipedia. Eagleash (talk) 08:55, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

"A 2005 study by the journal Nature found Wikipedia roughly as accurate as the Encyclopedia Britannica", according to this article on www.livescience.com. Hogyn Lleol (talk) 19:28, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Lupton family

Please fix ref number 159 which has the incorrect symbol for "copyright" in it. It shouldn't be the @ symbol. please leave in all of eth quote. Thanks 175.32.82.245 (talk) 06:25, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

 Done Maproom (talk) 07:26, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Remove 's' from page title

Hi We would like to rename the page Schools of Isolated and Distance Education to School of Isolated and Distance Education (School - singular) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SIDE OTL (talk • contribs) 06:28, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@SIDE OTL: Who is WE in “We would like to rename the page”...? Are you aware that our Wikipedia:Username policy requires: Your username must represent you as an individual person? --CiaPan (talk) 06:42, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@SIDE OTL: Page moved, the old location is now a redirect to School of Isolated and Distance Education. --CiaPan (talk) 06:44, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Reliable source

On the following page information and a source was removed which according to the remover was because the source is not reliable:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Leon_Krijgsman&diff=905585988&oldid=905526847

Why is this source not reliable?

--Molting (talk) 08:10, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello Molting! Basically, no wiki is a reliable source on WP, reasons at WP:SELFPUBLISH. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:19, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. --Molting (talk) 08:27, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Finding which articles link to which other articles

Hello. Is there an easy way to find how many articles link to a given article, and which articles they are? FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 08:15, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

FreeKnowledgeCreator, see "What links here" under "Tools" in the column on the left (if you are on a laptop). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:21, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

The link is present in the desktop version of the site. If you use the mobile version then start by clicking "Desktop" at the bottom. You can also use linksto: in the search box, e.g. linksto:"Gary Gygax". This includes a count of search results. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:17, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Lupton family

Ref 145 is all wrong - it is a leather bound book. I am so sorry. Please fix if able. Thanks 175.32.82.245 (talk) 09:01, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

 Fixed You had 'author:' instead of 'author= '. You really should be able to fix this after what ? four years editing? Also, multiple threads here with the same heading again. Eagleash (talk) 09:55, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Line 2 removal

We request removal of the second line as it is damaging Mr. Gurnani's reputation - In 2018, he was the highest-paid executive in India according to the Fortune magazine with an annual package of ₹150 Crores. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.151.72.80 (talk) 12:03, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

You should make this request on the talk page of the relevant article. I'm not sure who "we" is but if you represent this individual, you will need to review WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 12:09, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) You haven't told us to which page you are referring, but it is presumably not to this Help Desk. The {{request edit}} template is for use on the talk page of the article for which you are requesting an edit. Note also that a subject's reputation would not necessarily be grounds for removal of text if that text is supported by a reference to a reliable source. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:14, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

For anyone wondering, the article is (I think): C. P. Gurnani Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:18, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Apparently yes, User talk:119.151.72.80#Help me! says the same. --CiaPan (talk) 12:22, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Added a reference to The Economic Times:

"Tech Mahindra CEO CP Gurnani took home Rs 146.19 crore in FY18". The Economic Times. Jul 9, 2018.

CiaPan (talk) 12:34, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Per the above comment, I have marked the help request as indirectly declined by CiaPan. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:20, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Trouble changing title of page for our organization

Hello,

I'm writing to see if you can help me to update the page title for our organization.

The title that one of our members originally created a few years ago is this: Sisters of Notre Dame of Coesfeld. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisters_of_Notre_Dame_of_Coesfeld

I would like to change the title of our organization's page to Sisters of Notre Dame.

Could you please help me understand how to make that change? Or I could create a new page for our organization since it does not yet exist.

I also tried to contact the editor, User:BonBontheJon, but their talk page doesn't seem to have a place for me to send a message.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tresagowland (talk • contribs) 18:03, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@Tresagowland: Changing the title of an article requires a page move; you may request a page move at Requested Moves. Since you are a part of the organization you are seeking to edit about, please review the conflict of interest policy as well. 331dot (talk) 18:32, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

We already have a page at Sisters of Notre Dame. It is a "disambiguation page" that lists all of the pages that would have that name. We cannot place your article at that name. the best we can do is to rename ("move") your page to "Sisters of Notre Dame (Coesfeld)" in accordance with our WP:DISAMBIGUATION conventions. -Arch dude (talk) 19:07, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Note also that there is no concept of "the editor" of an article. More than 82 million separate individuals have edited Wikipedia, and more than 200,000 of them have edited Wikipedia in the last 30 days. Each of them (including you) have the same rights and responsibilities as editors of all articles, except that an editor with non-wikipedia association with the subject of an article (such as yourself for this article) has a conflict of interest (WP:COI) and should not directly edit an article, but should instead make suggestions on the article's talk page. -Arch dude (talk) 19:18, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

How to fix a messy dead URL situation?

Hi! In this edit, I tried to fix a citation. The cited URL is now a dead link, that goes to a different Web page. So, I added the Archive URL to it. That citation is used four times in the article. The citation links to the first page of the article. The second page however is what supports some of the content. Unfortunately, the Internet Archive does not have a copy of the second page of the interview (clicking on the link to the second page in the archived version goes to another Web site). So, should the citation be changed to link to the second page of the article, and tagged with "dead URL", or should it be left as is (misleadingly implying that the content can be verified by loading the linked Archive URL)? (The whole interview is available from the social media Web site of KerliPoland fan club, but that seems like a potential copyright violation since I don't see any libre license on the original interview, so I won't link it.) Thank you! —{{u|Goldenshimmer}} (they/their)｜😹｜✝️｜John 15:12｜☮️｜🍂｜T/C 19:22, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia and Commons file with the same name

Hi. I just uploaded a file on commons that has the same name as a file on Wikipedia. In the article Recess (TV series), only the Wikipedia file would be inserted if I type the name in the infobox. How do I insert the commons file? Thank you. DanWarpp (talk) 21:08, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@DanWarpp: You will need to rename/move one of the files. If the files have the same name it will always pick the local one. RudolfRed (talk) 21:55, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

July 11

Does Wikipedia have a profile feature?

Hi, just wanting to know when I sign up on Wikipedia is there a feature that allows me to create a profile or would my User page be considered my actual profile in Wikipedia?

Carolyn — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.133.158 (talk) 02:11, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Answered at the Teahouse. Nick Moyes (talk) 02:29, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Lupton family

In this section at the end of the page - Agnes and Norman Darnton Lupton - the "s" at the end of the name Norman should be removed (3rd last line) please remove the "s" at the end of the word Norman. i.e. "Normans and Agnes's donation to the Leeds Art Gallery included works by J....". I cannot do this on my normal device. Sorry and thanks 175.33.248.139 (talk) 02:33, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I've added an apostrophe instead. I'm puzzled as to what device does not allow you to delete a character? Dbfirs 06:37, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Regarding Draft Article Publishing on Wikipedia

I have created 2 draft articles on wikipedia and want to publish both articles Live but not able to find how to do this. Please give me support for solving this issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AniSingh1991 (talk • contribs) 06:19, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

AniSingh1991 New users cannot directly create articles until they are what is called 'autoconfirmed', the account being four days old and at least 10 edits. You can submit the drafts for review using Articles for Creation; however, I would not do that yet as your drafts would be rejected as promotional. If you were to just wait and make a couple more edits to move them to mainspace yourself, they would likely be nominated for deletion. Please read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial to learn what is expected of articles(such as needing independent reliable sources with significant coverage). If you are associated with the subjects you have written about, you also must review conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 07:30, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Almost entire content of article disputed.

On one article's talk page I'm editing, it has been determined that the consensus of the primary sources and the editors is completely different. Although there's few published sources to back up the editors' claims, the editors have concluded that the topic as explained in most published sources about it does not actually exist - it was confused for other topics. Mot published sources, however, treat it as different. For now, I've almost entirely blanked the article to remove most of the incorrect information, and it's difficult for me to find any source that cites my side of it that isn't OR or disputed. However, there are many, many inconsistencies in the literature on the published topic. It's now very hard to add any cited information that wouldn't lead to a dispute about the factual accuracy of the topic. In fact, the topic may end up being a historical accident - something that should have never had an article on it in the first place.

Did I do the right thing in almost entirely blanking the page? ― Дрейгорич / Dreigorich Talk 07:00, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

• That must be about V774104. The crux of the argument is that mainstream media (that would count as WP:RS) gave incorrect information. I will assume that to be true (I cannot check it for myself one way or another).

My feeling by reading the talk page is that the almost-blanking was justified per WP:BOLD because no other editor was likely to object strongly to it. That is rarely the case; page blanking is usually likely to be contentious (because it is usually used as a substitute for fixing solvable problems, in which case it is a no-no).

Re the whole "RS get it wrong" situation: a common Help Desk occurence is that we base the date/place of birth/death of semi-famous people off the local press obituaries, then the daughter/son of that person complains that the press got it wrong. Technically, policy requires we follow RS. It would certainly be against policy to write stuff that is directly contradicted by RS. However, it is not against policy to not write stuff even though supported by RS, so we can collectively exercise a pocket veto. (In the "wrong DOB" case, we usually remove the entry entirely, and/or leave a comment in the source saying that the obituary is likely wrong.) Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 08:50, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I find this contribution a little confusing. There is a difference between a primary source and a published source. Sometimes they might be the same however. It may also be be a help to know what kind of article you are talking about or the name of the page and whether there are many published sources on the subject. In a historical article, for example, a letter (say from a soldier at the front in a war to his family) which is in your personel possession is a primary source and should not be used in the wikipedia article. If the letter is published in a book of letters or a book based on soldiers' letters (eg the excellent " Book of 1918" by Malcolm Brown it becomes a published source and might I think be used -but carefully. Most historical articles would however be based on a historian's published account of what happened (eg The First World war by John Keegan.)These are secondary sources. With a subject where there are lots of secondary sources, the article should be based on those sources, which are verifiable, rather than on what you believe to be the truth but have no published sources to back you up. Where there are lots of published sources they will often disagree. In that situation you can refer to both I think. This could be done by referring to the sources in the article which disagree. You might say for example "Professor X says that the russians attacked the Poles whereas Professor Y says the opposite happened. There are examples of this in some of the various articles about the Russian Revolutions of 1917 or about the Battle of Jutland for example. Wikipedia does however have a problem where there are very few sources which you might know to be incorrect. For instance I am a retired criminal lawyer. In one of my cases there was a quote from something I said which was published in the local newspaper but not only did they get my name wrong the paper incorrectly said I was a police officer. In the unlikely event of that case becoming the subject of a wikipedia article or part of an article it would be difficult to correct it and I am not sure how that could be done. Spinney Hill (talk) 09:18, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

@Spinney Hill: It's not a major article (it's really only of interest to extreme space nerds), but it has been concluded that most of the RS about it was written in a manner that led to confusion later on. You can read the talk page if you wish. ― Дрейгорич / Dreigorich Talk 09:24, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Wrong word translated

Hello,

in the article : https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonas_Gon%C3%A7alves_Oliveira

it's saying that Jonas is homosexual

the english word is mononymously , that word does not mean homosexual, i think you should correct it please

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.153.151.1 (talk) 09:54, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

No, 'mononymously' does not mean 'homesexual'. Rather 'known mononymously' means 'known under a single name', specifically 'known mononymously as Jonas' means 'commonly called just Jonas, without specifying Gonçalves or Oliveira'. That's correct and needs no correction.

What concerns homsexuality, that can be added, but has nothing to do with mononymousity. --CiaPan (talk) 10:05, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

This is a help page for the English Wikipedia. Other Wikipedia languages are usually not translations from English and we don't control their content. The Portuguese article had an unsourced claim that he is homosexual. It was probably vandalism and has been removed. It was not a translation from "mononymously" in the English article. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:33, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

How do I know which link is blacklisted?

Helped Others are also having the same issue. How do I know which link is black listed in this page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qaidjoher_Ezzuddin Muffizainu (talk) 10:08, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

This same question has been answered at the Teahouse. Please don't post the same question in multiple places. RudolfRed (talk) 16:57, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Wolverine edit

I, recently, added a one sentence addition to a paragraph that notes various sightings of wild wolverines. Since sightings of these critters are fairly rare, I thought the addition of my sighting would be appreciated, but when perusing the entry, I find that it has been removed. Curious, as to why. Hikertoo (talk) 10:46, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Citing yourself isn't good practice. Was this reported in the local media? If so, you can cite that and it will be accepted. ― Дрейгорич / Dreigorich Talk 10:53, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Since much of what we encounter in media these days is fake news, I find it strange that media reporting is used as a standard of acceptance. Because the wolverine disappeared into the wild before I even thought about my camera, I wasn't able to grab a photo of it, but that does not erase my sighting of the animal. I confirmed the appearance of the animal by comparing it with photos of wolverines. Since bears are common in the area, I at first thought it was a small bear, but upon further consideration I eliminated bear, because bears do not have bushy tails.172.221.106.178 (talk) 12:08, 11 July 2019 (UTC)172.221.106.178 (talk) 11:12, 11 July 2019 (UTC)172.221.106.178 (talk) 12:09, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

We try to stay clear of Fake news (in the original sense) and in general find it (news) preferable to anonymous/pseudonymous comments made on WP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:23, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

How to Reset A Company's Wikipedia

Hi there,

The company I work for is trying to gain access to their Wikipedia page however it seems the person that created the page left without giving anyone the login details, is there a way to gain access or reset the password without normal access?

Due to confidentiality I cannot say who the company is.

154.117.146.194 (talk) 11:35, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello, there is no 'log-in' for an individual page or for Wikipedia in general. Any person, with or without a Wikipedia account, can edit any page (subject to some restrictions where pages become disrupted). However, neither you nor any person connected to the mysterious company should edit the page. Please see WP:COI and WP:PAID for more information and for the required disclosures. Requests for changes can be made at the article talk page citing independent sources in corroboration. Also, it is not the company's page but Wikipedia's article about them. They have little, if any, say in what the page contains as Wikipedia reports on what has been written about a subject in independent reliable sources and not what a company has to say about itself. Eagleash (talk) 12:04, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

(ec) That's very good, I must say. Wikipedia policy on user accounts (Wikipedia:Username policy) strictly forbids using a company's account (WP:CORPNAME) or role account (WP:ROLE) for editing Wikipedia. Each account should represent an individual, a single person, and not be shared (WP:ISU & WP:NOSHARING). So, just create you own new account and edit from it. Be aware, however, that when you edit a page about your company, then you're in the WP:Conflict of interest and you are required to disclose it. The more, if you edit as your work, i.e. editing Wikipedia pages is (a part of) your job, the WP:PAID policy applies. --CiaPan (talk) 12:11, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

If you work for the company and intend to contribute about it, you must declare your company relationship per the paid editing policy. That is a Wikipedia Terms of Use requirement and not negotiable. 331dot (talk) 15:29, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

• You may not want to see who the company is, but (per 331dot) you will have to if you intend to edit further. Anyway, I can sense what company it is thanks to my extrasensory perception. I see a pair of letters... LG... LG Electronics, maybe?

(Extrasensory perception is not a thing, but Special:Contributions is, and you edited LG ThinQ.) Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 08:51, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

• Just for the record: the above attempt at being funny is a guess of the unnamed company's identity from OP's only two contributions, one is an edit on a company's product page and the other the HD post where they say they work for a company. I have no off-wiki information to confirm or infirm that guess. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 14:08, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Can I disable redirection to mobile version?

Helped

Until recently, I have usually been directed straight to the web version from the links in emails which inform me of changes to my watched pages, when opening them on my Android tablet. Although slower, it did allow me to see changes, use Twinkle and revert edits easily if necessary - which the mobile version doesn't seem to allow. Very frustrating. Changing the url doesn't work - it just changes back to the mobile version.

I've had a look in the help archives and haven't found anything positive, so I might be stuck with it - but can anyone advise if I there's a way to switch this off? Or alternatively, am I missing something in the mobile app which would allow me to revert edits? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 12:42, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Hey Laterthanyouthink. Yeeeeah...the mobile version is pretty crappy for editing. If you scroll to the bottom of any page however, there should be a link to view on desktop version, and it should stay that way pretty consistently once you click it. GMG^talk 12:44, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Hey GreenMeansGo. Aahh, finally got there, thank you! (Found that when editing in the beta app, which I was just then, had to do it twice - first time took me to the mobile web version, then clicked on desktop version there and, bingo!) Great, I'm very happy to have learned that. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 13:04, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

July 12

Changed terminology of paragraph

In the page for The Porcelain Fat Lady, I changed the following paragraph from:

"The story might be a story about the regime in Chile (with Pinochet as dictator). And at the same time, the story is written when Isabel Allende got a divorce from her first husband in 1973, and because of that it's understandable, that she writes a story about the main character Don Cornelio, who lives a monotonous life (just like she did while she was married)."

to:

"The story might be an allegory of the Pinochet regime in Chile. At the same time, the story was written when Isabel Allende got a divorce from her first husband in 1973, which may have inspired the monotonous life of protagonist Don Cornelio (like that of Allende while she was married)."

Could anyone please tell me if this was a good execution, and if "might" should be replaced with "may"?--Thylacine24 (talk) 01:25, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

You've definitely improved those two sentences (I've no opinion on whether "might" or "may" is better there). But there is a problem. Those two sentences, indeed the whole section which they constitute, are unreferenced. They are the opinion (no doubt an entirely reasonable opinion) of the editor who wrote them. That makes them "original research", which policy says has no place in Wikipedia. There is a risk that someone will some day delete them as unreferenced. This could be avoided by finding and citing a reliable independent source which expresses that opinion about the motivation for the story. Maproom (talk) 07:00, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Agreed, and thanks. I'll add "citation needed".--Thylacine24 (talk) 14:40, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Edit: I fixed the italics around The Porcelain Fat Lady.--Thylacine24 (talk) 14:42, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Was this preposition change correct?

In the article "Religion in Rome", I changed the following sentence in the Christianity section from:

"Papal authority has been exercised over the centuries with varying degrees of success, at times triggering divisions among Christians, until the present."

to:

"Papal authority has been exercised over the centuries with varying degrees of success, at times triggering divisions among Christians, to the present."

Could anyone please tell me if this was correct? Also, I split the paragraph this was in (right after this sentence, in fact), but since it was already single-spaced on the edit page, I think was okay. (Still, if anyone here thinks I was wrong to do so, then could you please tell me?)--Thylacine24 (talk) 01:46, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I think your change of preposition, and splitting of the paragraph, were both improvements. ("until" may be understood as implying that this changed very recently; "to" implies no change.) Maproom (talk) 07:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Also, I left out a "citation needed" which was at the end of this sentence, though I didn't remove it from the article itself.--Thylacine24 (talk) 14:39, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Z Suby

Sreehari Subhash known professionally as Z suby is an professional music producer and an inspiring musician he was born in bangalore,india and had moved to australia when he was 12. his music career begin when he was twelve. distrokid a record label or a music platform had supported sreehari to come up. he released his first album "zelectronic" which wasn't successful but after a few months he released his first single short beat which made it to spotify, aplle music and other musical sites his sings made to the 20'th position in BB2 ember nivel's a music producers playlist which includes micheal jakson, jennifer lopez and other successful artist his age currently is 12 and has a lot to be successful he is still working on his music now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suby2407 (talk • contribs) 01:53, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

If your question is whether you can or should create an article about yourself in Wikipedia, {{|U|Suby2407}}, then I'm afraid the answer is a resounding No! Many people have an entirely mistaken idea that Wikipedia has anything whatever to do with promoting themselves or their concerns. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, which contains neutrally-written articles about notable subjects, based almost entirely on what people unconnected with a subject have chosen to publish about that subject. If at some point we have an article about you, it will not be your article, you will have no control over its contents (though you will be encouraged to suggest improvements to it) and little of it should derive from what you say or publish, but only from what people write about you. Please see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY and WP:PROUD for more. --ColinFine (talk) 11:24, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@ColinFine: I think you meant to ping, Suby2407, but it looks like it did not work, so this reply should ping Suby2407. OkayKenji ^{(talk page)} 15:02, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

/* "The Australian Sensation" Craven */

Hi,

I am writing due to the fact that user Addicted4517 keeps deleting links I am providing as proof. I am trying to link to match footage videos as proof of the matches that are being referenced. I am the owner of the company that filmed them, as well as the owner of the footage itself This is irrefutable proof that Craven is a wrestler, and as the owner of the copyright to the footage I am legally allowed to use it as a source.

I think Addicted4517 has a vendetta against certain companies, due to their not being a fan of them. That is a personal feeling and belief, and is therefore not in keeping with the nature of wikipedia, which like all encyclopaedias is based on fact not personal emotions.

I request that this user be stopped from their crusade of trying to undermine the professional wrestlers they do not like. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Generic (talk • contribs) 03:21, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Page

I don’t think I have seen a more bullshit article in my life. Do you only let communist edit article? I served my people proud for 3 terms and some how that’s not important? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1014:B105:D4A1:D0DB:E0CA:FDA3:8F74 (talk) 03:53, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

This may be about Jake_Highfill which the IP editor edited recently. RudolfRed (talk) 05:12, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I have deleted the second paragraph from Jake_Highfill, as lacking context. Maproom (talk) 07:13, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

How to upload an actress image for her bio

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketki_Kadam

This is the actress Wikipedia page

https://i.imgur.com/fJ2oVVD.jpg And this is her picture that I want to upload — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anu1999 (talk • contribs) 08:12, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Please help so that this pic gets uploaded — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anu1999 (talk • contribs) 08:10, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello Anu1999! The answer is that you don't. Almost all images you randomly find on the net is copyrighted, and so can't be used. People, including you, can upload/"donate" their own work, more at [1] and Wikipedia:Image use policy. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:19, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång But it's not from internet ,it's from Instagram and I have uploaded it myself and even the actress won't have a problem because she is a friend of mine and I am doing this to improve her page ! If I can't upload a image of hers then you find a image that will abide the rules and upload it .

https://instagram.com/me_ketki_kadam?igshid=22dszelt49me

Select from here any picture that will suit her profile.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Anu1999 (talk • contribs) 08:28, 12 July 2019 (UTC) 

(edit conflict) @Anu1999: The copyright lies with whoever took the picture. If this was not yourself then you will have to obtain the photographer's permission and provide evidence of this. See WP:UPIMG for more information. Wikipedia takes copyright seriously and any violations will likely quickly be removed. Please do not make demands for edits. If you want an image then it is up to you to do the work necessary to include one. (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.) Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 08:39, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@Anu1999: To make sure we have not all confused each other, I'll summarize. Instagram is on the Internet. If you took the picture, then you are the copyright holder of the picture, otherwise not. If you are the copyright holder, then you may upload it and license it to us according to copyright law. We do no want and do not need permission from the subject. Start by getting the picture onto your own computer. Then, click on the "upload file" link in the left-hand column on any page (such as the page you are on now) and follow the instructions. When you get to the part about copyright, claim it as your own work. At the end of those instructions, you will have uploaded the image, and the instructions then tell you (tersely) how to add the image to the Wikipedia file. If you get confused, please come back here. -Arch dude (talk) 16:21, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

To restore information

In course of editing Dr. Shamsheer's article I wiped off major part of the article. Please! anyone restore that. Thanks. (223.230.132.12 (talk) 10:59, 12 July 2019 (UTC))

 Fixed Several edits over the last two days disrupted the article: all have been reverted, the latest by Dbfirs. Eagleash (talk) 11:09, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I added a vandalism warning on the talk page of 223.230.132.12 because a repeated edit summary of "added content" when in fact content and references were removed certainly looks like vandalism. If it was not deliberate, then please be more careful with edits, and perhaps put an explanation on your talk page so that others do not think that you are a vandal. Dbfirs 11:18, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@Dbfirs: Thanks. This seems very likely to be the same editor who has made multiple requests for edits at Shamsheer Vayalil over the past few weeks. (Same IP range; geolocates same area). Eagleash (talk) 11:37, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I've just done the same research and come to the same conclusion. I left a further note on the talk page. Dbfirs 11:39, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

See also the section above about reliability of Wikipedia. Eagleash (talk) 11:42, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I'd missed that connection. Interesting in view of valuable time. Dbfirs 11:56, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Editing help

I need to edit my company's wikipedia page to edit the title of the company name as we have recently rebranded and dropped the second half of our old name. So far i cannot find anywhere that gives me advice on how to resolve this issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KonditorIntern (talk • contribs) 11:14, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello, KonditorIntern. The information you need is on WP:COI and WP:PAID. In short: first read those pages, and make the declarations required, then post a request on the talk page of the article about the company (note, that it is Wikipedia's article about the company, it is not "the company's Wikipedia page"). Please include a reference to a published source that documents that change. If you attach the template {{edit request}} (including the double curly brackets) to your request, then somebody will be along to make the change to the article. --ColinFine (talk) 11:31, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I've moved the article for you, but please do not try to erase all trace of the "Cook" part which was retained for 25 years. Please make the necessary declarations about your WP:PAID status as an intern. Are you the only intern at the company? If there are others, then you should change your username to a personal one. Dbfirs 11:51, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

You might also like to update the website at 30stmaryaxe.info], though this has no connection with Wikipedia. Dbfirs 16:20, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata and Google search engine

(Sorry for my bad English!) Please search to "Duhok" on Google and read below to understand me.

Hello everyone, Does Google search engine take data from Wikidata? Let me explain! Someone search (on Google) to "Duhok" and see "Azadi panorama" in the side box instead of the name article on enwiki! And i noticed the same name (Azadi panorama) on wikidata. However, i am fixed the label text to "Duhok" (the name of the article) 15 days ago, but it didn't updated to Duhok from google result yet! Do Wikidata and Google search engine related to each other? Thanks ⇒ AramTalk 13:11, 12 July 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aram (talk • contribs)

@Aram:Yes, we have noticed that Google uses the "short description" from Wikidata, although we have no control over Google. You can edit Wikidata. I have no opinion of what the correct short description would be, as I have not researched it. -Arch dude (talk) 17:12, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Arch dude, Duhok is correct! However, can you give me a link or a smart username link on wikidata to ask them (Wikidata project)? Thanks! ⇒ AramTalk 17:47, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Arch dude, I'm fairly sure Google use wikidata to some extent, they may use something completely different. Consider using the "feedback" link on the google search-page. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:28, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, meant to ping @Aram:. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:29, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Arch dude and Gråbergs Gråa Sång, Wow! I am searched to "Duhok" on Google again and saw! It is updated to my edit (the above link) on Wikidata. I'm understood that Google texts related to Wikidata updated every edits on Wikidata after two weeks (about 15 days). Just i have one question... Are you edit anything to update it? Now try to search Duhok to see the update. Thank you both! ⇒ AramTalk 10:14, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

RevisionDelete

Hi Guys looking to delete the below or make it invisible , please help?

Chukyo University: Revision history

curprev 12:21, 12 July 2019‎ 80.169.172.178 talk‎ 2,849 bytes -33‎ →‎Notable students undo curprev 12:20, 12 July 2019‎ 80.169.172.178 talk‎ 2,882 bytes +33‎ →‎Notable students undo — Preceding unsigned comment added by The hiddenlee (talk • contribs)

Conv. link: Chukyo University (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Please explain more fully. It just looks like a standard bit of 'test-editing' which was immediately removed. It is visible in the page history but not in the article itself. There seems little harm done and just because it is a bit disruptive that is not a reason to 'revdel' it. Not defamatory not a copyright violation. Eagleash (talk) 14:17, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

there is a name present in the initially editing which all users can view in the page history, that name is affiliated with Chukyo University and the party hasn't given consent for their name to be published. the thrid party is a freind of mine and feels very uncomfortable with her name visible in the page history — Preceding unsigned comment added by The hiddenlee (talk • contribs) 15:35, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Revision deletion

need help with Revision deletion — Preceding unsigned comment added by The hiddenlee (talk • contribs) 15:16, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

See above. General Ization ^Talk 15:17, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Without your intervention, it's unlikely that anyone would ever have noticed your friend's name in the article history. You're not doing your friend any favours by drawing attention to it here. Maproom (talk) 22:20, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Turning a draft into an article

Hello. I need help to turn the following draft to an article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tal_Svoray

This is a translation of the article about the same guy from the hebrew wikipedia, as you can see Here.

132.72.152.176 (talk) 15:15, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello, the biggest drawback is that the page seemingly contains no references. Please see WP:BLP; unreferenced biographies of living persons will not be considered for inclusion in the encyclopedia. If you do not know how to do this, please see WP:REFB for a guide on adding references. In the meantime I have unlinked dates (see WP:OLINK) and added ndashes to year ranges. When you consider the page to be ready for mainspace I.e. it is sufficiently well-sourced, you can add {{subst:submit}} (incl. the brackets) to the top of the mark-up, which will submit the page for review. Eagleash (talk) 18:28, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

shick razors

How can you advertise this product and have little girls see it and think its ok to take scissors to their private parts. Its disgusting and needs to be taken off.2601:82:C201:2DC0:D026:1526:EC03:4BDE (talk) 15:23, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not advertise any products; Wikipedia is not censored for any reason, see WP:NOTCENSORED. If you object to certain article or text, you should avoid reading it. The internet use of children should be supervised by their parents or guardians. 331dot (talk) 15:37, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

This is not the Web page to give feedback to the company that produces Schick razors. Try https://www.schick.com/us/en/help?uniqueCode=contactUs . General Ization ^Talk 15:38, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Our article on Schick (razors) has no advertising and no images. I think you must have seen something on Google and been misled by what Google puts together. Google often shows images from elsewhere together with text from Wikipedia. Dbfirs 16:08, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Articles Not Indexed After 90 Days?

3 months ago, I wrote 5 Wikipedia articles. One was reviewed in less than a month, the other 4 (as far as I can tell) were never reviewed so weren't indexed by Google or other search engines. I read all the Wikipedia content on this issue that I could find, and it appeared to say that unreviewed articles will automatically have the 'no index' tag removed after 90 days, but now that 90 days has gone by, the articles are still not being indexed.

Is there something I need to add (or remove) from articles I have written in order for them to be available for indexing? I can't figure out what's wrong. Here is the first one I wrote: Nicholas Hogg. Thank you for your help. Lilipo25 (talk) 15:44, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Even after being patrolled, articles can take some time to get indexed on google. I've reviewed the one you liked to. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:02, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you!Lilipo25 (talk) 16:08, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@Lilipo25: You created Matthew Parker (author) and The Day That Went Missing: A Family's Story 20 April, 83 days ago. They still have the noindex html tag telling external search engines to not index them. It should be removed automatically in a week. We don't control how long after that they will be indexed by Google and other search engines. The three other articles allow indexing and are already indexed by Google. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:55, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you - Nicholas Hogg and Thomas Penn (historian) actually weren't indexed by Google until about two hours ago. Google indexed them within minutes after Lee Vilenski reviewed them. I know Wikipedia doesn't control search engine indexing; I just thought maybe I had done something wrong with the articles that was keeping them from being indexed because the 90 days had passed on the first few and they weren't picked up, but it must just have more to do with whether or not they've been reviewed than with the removal of the noindex tag. Lilipo25 (talk) 19:43, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I think Google monitors our recent changes. Lee Vilenski also edited the pages. This may have caused Google to revisit the pages and discover they no longer had noindex. An automatic removal of noindex after 90 days does not create a log entry Google can notice. It's also possible Google monitors our logs. A review does create a log entry. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:47, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

I need help creating an account.

Because I tried creating one, but I can't really read the captcha because of my bad eyesight and now the site is preventing me from making one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.111.134.158 (talk) 18:29, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

See help here: CAPTCHA help. You can request an account to be created here: Wikipedia:Request an account – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:19, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

About that, I really don't feel like waiting for 4 months. Mainly because nearly every other website that I've been on does this automatically. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.111.134.158 (talk) 19:40, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

The Foundation have been aware of the problems creating accounts faced by people with sight loss for 13 years. They have recently said they hope to have a solution in the next 3 to 5 years. DuncanHill (talk) 19:43, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Wow, that is some backlog. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:44, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

You can request an account be created for you here. Be aware there is a backlog, so it will be some time before you receive your credentials. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:48, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

resolved problems with "Encounter Point" Wikipedia page - please update

Hello,

I'm writing because I've just edited the wikipedia page for "Encounter Point" (here's the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encounter_Point). There were several problems with the page, including that the page did not cite sources, and also that it sounded like an argumentative essay. These have been resolved. I would like for Wikipedia editors to verify that these have been resolved and then, if possible, to remove the warning "this article has multiple issues" at the top of the Encounter Point film Wikipedia page. Please let me know if this is possible.

Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.103.254.50 (talk) 21:00, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

The referencing is much improved and the tag could probably be removed. I have added a refs section. However, the external links throughout the page need to be removed and you link to other Wikipedia pages as follows [[Page name]] with a pipe where necessary. E.g. you would pipe thus: [[Davy Jones (musician)|Davy Jones]] to render just the name on the page but have the link go to the correct Wiki page. Also only link once to the same page after the lead... lists and tables usually have an additional link.

I think there are still some POV issues that need to be addressed though. This is often a contentious area and not one I'm involved with, so (for me) I would not recommend removing the tag just yet. Would welcome other opinions though. Eagleash (talk) 21:38, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Also see WP:EL. I've hatnoted it accordingly. (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.) TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:51, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Should "indigenous" be capitalized?

The template for "International Indigenous and minority rights" has, as I have written here, the word "Indigenous" with its first letter capitalized. Could anyone please tell me if this is correct?--Thylacine24 (talk) 21:01, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@Thylacine24: According to this, in Canada you want to capitalize the term Indigenous Peoples as a sign of respect. [[2]]. Same for Australia [[3]]. To err on the side of caution, you're better off capitalizing it than not. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:46, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Okay, thanks.--Thylacine24 (talk) 01:06, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Is it all right to edit a help desk post?

Sometimes I screw up the phrasing, grammar, or punctuation* in these things, or forget to sign. Could anyone please tell me if it's it all right if I edit them without adding something to the effect of "Note: I edited this"?

• I'm not sure if I've ever screwed up on spelling in the help desk posts (though I certainly have elsewhere), though I probably will one day or another. Sorry if this footnote comes off as boastful.--Thylacine24 (talk) 21:10, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@Thylacine24: You can certainly correct or otherwise alter your own posts. Not really necessary to state the fact. It is seen as less than good practice to alter another editor's though. Eagleash (talk) 21:17, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for telling me.--Thylacine24 (talk) 21:23, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Thylacine24 see WP:REDACT, basically avoid it after someone has replied. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:13, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know.--Thylacine24 (talk) 22:13, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Thylacine2 The codes <del>...</del> or more simply <s>...</s> placed around your original text works if you want to change your comment after someone has replied, but keep the original, so they don't look like they missed the point. I do this on AfD where I voted one way, and someone else convinced my I was wrong, and then I struck and voted differently, just to be totally transparent. You also see this a lot in RfA requests for adminship. 23:34, 12 July 2019 (UTC)TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)}

​If the issue is only about correcting straightforward "phrasing, grammar, or punctuation", then you can go ahead and edit them without adding something; however, if your edit affects the context or character of the conversation, better do what Tim suggests above. Lourdes 05:59, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

July 13

Category confusion - Australian Indigenous v Aboriginal Artists

I'm a bit confused about who goes in which category here, lacking any guidance on the Category pages for Australian Aboriginal artists and Indigenous Australian artists. Not sure where the best place to discuss this is, but the talk page directed me here. I'm guessing that there may be Aboriginal artists in either category who may better be grouped in the same one. My understanding is that Indigenous includes Torres Strait Islanders, but all of those I randomly selected in that category were Aboriginal. I'm about to add a few more to the former category. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 01:46, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Later... Which talk page directed you here? It would be better to take this discussion up at Category talk:Australian Aboriginal artists, leaving a note also at Category talk:Indigenous Australian artists about the original discussion. If you don't get many responses, convert the discussion into an RfC subsequently. Thanks, Lourdes 05:56, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Lourdes - thanks for responding. That is what I was going to do, but when you open the edit box on one of those pages, there is a warning, thus: "Attention Talk pages in this namespace are generally not watched by many users. Please consider visiting the Help desk for a more prompt response or reviewing the Categorization FAQ for quick tips.", with blue link behind "Help desk" to this page. Oh well, I'll give it a try, and/or wait and see if one of the Category experts objects to my putting people into both categories at some point, and/or raise an RfC if no response (and I remember!). Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:44, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Can't get flickr2commons to load. Is it down?

Pauses on "loading...."

https://tools.wmflabs.org/flickr2commons/#

- Scarpy (talk) 02:18, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

It's a problem we've been facing since the past few months.[4] Will be resolved when it is resolved. Don't expect it to happen soon. It'll keep coming up and going down intermittently. Lourdes 05:50, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Question about WP:EXTENDEDCONFIRMED

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

---

At User talk:CVasil, the user has written "I want to be an extended confirmed protected editor. I need 500 edits to do that. I have 100 edits. So, I'll revert this sentence 400 times." (I'm evidently watching this talk page because I issued a welcome to the user at some point). The user is currently following through on their plan to revert the edit on their talk page 400 times in order to gain WP:EXTENDEDCONFIRMED. Is this allowable? Thanks. Marquardtika (talk) 02:36, 13 July 2019 (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.

Resolution on proposed article for deletion

I'm editor on an article where I have COI, but have since ceased to edit and wish to follow guidelines. My experience on WP is minimal. Another user has nominated the article for deletion (disputing notability of the subject), created a discussion page (see [5]) and summoned other editors that they have worked with in the past to briefly rule for "delete". I submitted a couple of lengthy arguments in defense of the article and the subject's notability. The nominating user dismissed these points immediately, labeled me as "disruptive" for submitting lengthy content, and collapsed my posts so that they are not immediately visible. My impression was that a deletion discussion page was precisely to list pros and cons for deletion. If my posts are being diminished as disruptive, I'm concerned the "rough consensus" will fall to the nominator, resulting in article deletion. This nominator has used a disrespectful tone throughout their edits, and clearly is strongly in favor of deletion, without consideration of support for the contrary. Though the profile for the nominator is hidden, the profiles of the other editors do not reflect any association with, or expertise in, the subject matter (the arts), making this blanket disregard of evidence disputing the nominator's opinions troubling.

My questions:

• Is my participation in this process outside of WP policy or protocol?
• How are the assertions of a potentially biased editor/user balanced if not by someone who believes in the content?
• If there are no other supporters for the article, do my own arguments to Keep get any consideration, or can the nominator simply delete at the 7-day mark (which is 7/14/2019)?

Thank you for your help, Pdtompkins (talk) 05:51, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Pdtompkins:

• Is my participation in this process outside of WP policy or protocol? No.
• How are the assertions of a potentially biased editor/user balanced if not by someone who believes in the content? You need to keep focused on providing only those reliable sources that confirm that the artist meets our notability guidelines. Back of the envelope summary is, please show at least two news or scholarly articles that have reviewed the artist's work neutrally. Whatever you have exhibited till date, seem to be either connected to the artist or primary, that is, connected to the museum or exhibition space. Even the one news report within the article is clearly a press release (see the website link of the artist provided below the La Italiano news report).
• If there are no other supporters for the article, do my own arguments to Keep get any consideration, or can the nominator simply delete at the 7-day mark (which is 7/14/2019)? Nominator can't delete it. Administrators can. And right now, in my neutral opinion, this is run-of-the-mill PR puff piece. Sorry for that.

Thanks, Lourdes 06:12, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Lupton family

There is a funny gap between references 22 and 12 please fix if you can Thanks 175.32.82.245 (talk) 06:41, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

There was a space between a </ref> and the following <ref>, which I have removed. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:46, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Found page title in italics for no reason

Specifically, the page "Northern Paiute people", which I'm pretty sure shouldn't be in italics. Could anyone please tell me for sure if this is an error, and also please fix it if it is?--Thylacine24 (talk) 12:56, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

@Thylacine24: I'm not seeing the italics. A change to the "italic title" code in Module:Infobox was installed and then undone just now, so that might have been the cause. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:26, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for telling me. And thanks to whoever fixed it.--Thylacine24 (talk) 13:29, 13 July 2019 (UTC)