Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:HD)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The Wikipedia help desk is a place where you can ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia. For other types of questions, use the search box or the reference desk.
  • For other types of questions, see Help:Contents and Are you in the right place? 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.
  • We are all volunteers, so sometimes replies can take some time. Please be patient. Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
  • If you need real-time help, you can join our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
  • If you are a new editor, you might prefer to ask your question at the Teahouse, an area specifically for new users to get help with editing, article creation and general Wikipedia use, in a friendly environment.
  • Remember to sign your post by adding 4 tildes (~~~~) at the end of your post. Alternatively, you can click on the signature icon (OOjs UI icon signature-ltr.svg) on the edit toolbar.

September 13[edit]

Paul Drewitt author page[edit]

Hi There,

I am an author with four published novels and would like a wiki author page. Do you have any volunteers who are willing to write this up?

Paul Drewitt — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Paul.drewitt (talkcontribs)

‎Paul.drewitt Wikipedia does not have mere "pages", it has articles. If you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable creative professional, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to write about you, someone will eventually take note of your career and choose on their own to write about you. Be advised that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable; there are good reasons to not want one.
You can make a request at Requested Articles, but the backlog there is severe and your request may not be acted on for some time, if ever. Instead of trying to force the issue, I would just proceed with your career and allow others to take note of you independently. 331dot (talk) 00:10, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
@Paul.drewitt: to add to this excellent explanation with an understanding of why it is not likely for you to be able to force the matter, my personal backlog of articles I'm actively interested in writing or updating would take me literally years to complete even if I could work 24/7 (by which time I'd have a new list five times the length). I imagine this is similar for many experienced volunteers. As such, I'm not likely to spend the maybe six hours it takes me on average to create an article on behalf of somebody looking to promote themselves, unless I've independently developed an enthusiasm for their writing. — Bilorv (talk) 11:36, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Special pages[edit]

Hello! Why are some special pages restricted, like Special:TranscodeStatistics are limited to users who are Autoconfirmed users, Administrators, and Confirmed users? Vitaium (talk) 10:51, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

@Vitaium: I know that some special pages are restricted because they could be used maliciously for targeted subtle vandalism, or sophisticated vandalism. I cannot tell you why that particular page is restricted, because I don't understand its contents, but even if I could tell you why, WP:BEANS would suggest it's better for me not to share that information. — Bilorv (talk) 11:31, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
I'm actually inclined to think that special pages probably default to that level, and are changed downwards if needed - even as an admin, the page is read-only Nosebagbear (talk) 21:08, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

What links to Commons?[edit]

Am I missing something? Is there an easier way to find out where a Commons item is used on en:Wikipedia, other than calling up the What Links Here page and pasting in the File:random.jpg link? Call me lazy, but perhaps I've got used to all the convenient shortcuts hiding in Wikipedia.--Verbarson (talk) 12:17, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

@Verbarson: File:random.jpg redirects to an image which isn't used in the English Wikipedia. Please include a real example in posts so we can se what you talk about. If a file is used then both the Commons file page and the English Wikipedia file page should have a list of uses at the bottom. You can also click "What links here" in the left pane of the English Wikipedia file page. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:36, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
OK, more carefully this time. (random.jpg was intended a a filler, not an actual example.)
The file File:Weymouth_boat_train_1_(374393697).jpg is used in GWR 5700 Class, but if I go to that file's page on Commons, and click "What links here", it only lists the links on Commons. I have to copy the text "File:Weymouth_boat_train_1_(374393697).jpg", come back to en.Wikipedia, call up "What links here" for any page, paste the "File:..." into the search box, and then it tells me that it is linked from GWR 5700 Class, and nowhere else, in en.Wikipedia. All I was asking for was a shortcut? Because as far as I am concerned, the most significant thing about Common's images is how they are used in en.Wikipedia. (Other people may have different priorities.)--Verbarson (talk) 19:52, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
@Verbarson: commons:File:Weymouth boat train 1 (374393697).jpg#filelinks shows "Usage on". It's on the file page itself so there is no shortcut but your End key probably jumps to it. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:20, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Below is code for commons:Special:MyPage/common.js to add "enwiki links" after "What links here" on Commons file pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:43, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
$( document ).ready( function() {
  if ( mw.config.get( 'wgNamespaceNumber' ) === 6 ) {
      mw.util.getUrl( 'w:Special:WhatLinksHere/' ) + mw.config.get('wgPageName'),
      'enwiki links',
      'What links here at the English Wikipedia',
Well, isn't that fantastic! I don't think I ever looked down further than the file history. Thanks for the code, but if it's already on the page that's good enough for me.--Verbarson (talk) 21:01, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Template message on Kate Zambreno's page[edit]


My name is Philo Cohen, I am writer Kate Zambreno's assistant. I was in charge of creating and editing Kate's Wikipedia page a few months ago and just noticed that there is a template message warning readers about the contributor's proximity to the subject when reading the article. How could I fix this? All information is correct, referenced, and verified. Let me know.

Thanks a lot.

Have a good day, Philo Cohen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philomenecohen (talkcontribs) Philomenecohen (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Philomenecohen There is nothing that you can do; that message only means that the article (not a mere "page") needs to be looked at by an independent editor.
If you are this person's assistant, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 16:16, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

COI Edit Request[edit]


I submitted a COI Edit Request for Thomas Homer-Dixon's biography page and edits have since been made. However, the request was marked as "Partly done" and some citation issues were marked in the article.

I can help find/fix the problematic citations. Should I just respond on the talk page with these citations? Or should I submit another COI Edit Request? I also have a few other change requests to make that weren't included in the initial Edit Request.

I am unsure what the appropriate (and most efficient) course of action is. Advice on the matter would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your assistance. SeaGrass91 (talk) 15:16, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Respond in the same thread, properly indented with the supplementary information needed to improve the references. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:38, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia Bio[edit]

I see the following on the top of my bio site:

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. (July 2021)

I do not believe this is correct, and I also believe that you should either confirm this accusation or remove it within a specified period of time. I have reviewed the changes made by a colleague, and there is nothing I can see inaccurate or amiss.

If you have a constructive recommendation for future updates, let me know.

I am a Wikipedia donor, so this matters to me.

Jamey Marth— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

As an editor, I thank you for donating, but we editors have nothing whatsoever to do with donations, and donating or not donating has no impact on content. Donations are collected by the Wikimedia Foundation that operates the computers Wikipedia is on; they are not involved in day to day operations.
The paid editing tag is there so an independent editor can examine the article(not a "bio site") about you. If a colleague created it, that could still be considered paid editing; one does not need to be specifically paid for edits. Any paid relationship triggers the disclosure requirements. If no one was directly or indirectly compensated for creating the article, feel free to bring that up on the article talk page. It may still be a conflict of interest even if unpaid. 331dot (talk) 18:00, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Any future suggestions for changes should be made on the article talk page, Talk:Jamey Marth, in the form of an edit request. 331dot (talk) 18:03, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Right, but just to point out that the person who wrote the article, User:Argiennes, has been kicked off the Wikipedia for making scores of accounts so as to pretend to be a different people. Their editing pattern is weird, usually between zero and three article edits, all small. Mostly OK but I see at least one addition of inappropriate link to a commercial site. His creation, in detail, of the Jamey Marth article is utterly and completely out of pattern to all his other edits. It's odd. Here's a guy deliberately screwing with us and egregiously and purposely violating our terms of service and making extra work for our volunteer administrators. Then out of nowhere they suddenly create a whole extensive and well-made article with a bunch of references properly done... it's just... I'm scratching my head to figure out a reason why out of the blue a hardened troll would randomly take an interest in Jamey Marth and jump completely of their well-established editing pattern and create a big article. I'd have to say that some connection with the subject is a reasonable suspicion. True or not, its reasonable.
And then, there's an editor who came in made a number of edits to the article, and no other edits ever, and seems to know a good bit about the subject. This doesn't prove anything. But its a data point.
There's no way to know if there's a connection or if there is if its financial. Maybe they are just a former student. Maybe the guy just randomly came across the name Jamey Marth, decided he looked interesting, and decided to put aside being a troll for a moment and research him and write an article.
No way to know for sure. That is why the message says "may have been". It's suspicious, and bears special watching, by both us and the reader, is all we're saying. After all we do get a lot of paid creation of biographies. Herostratus (talk) 04:00, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Oh, and on the article talk page I also see that there was extensive editing of the article by an agent of a big spam sockfarm. That also is suspicious. Herostratus (talk) 04:06, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
However, per WP:BLP, I've replaced the possible-paid-editing template with a possible-conflict-of-interest template. It has similar effect without sounding so accusatory. On that basis I think the subject has legit complaint, per BLP. Herostratus (talk) 04:29, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Mnmh even as we speak there continues to be suspicious activity on the article. It might be that the best solution would be just to delete the article altogether? Then problem solved. The subject is notable enough, so we can't do that here, but I think if you go to Wikipedia:Contact us/Article subjects you can request that the article be deleted. Whether they would or not I don't know. Herostratus (talk) 04:50, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Updating a footnote link[edit]

How do I update a footnote link that no longer goes to the correct site information? The organization's website was updated and pages moved around. I just need to update the link that the footnote goes to. The page is "Customer Data Platform" and it's the first footnote that needs to be updated and should go to this link: Cwolicki (talk) 19:32, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

You edit the link as you'd edit anything else. Edit the page Customer data platform (not just its "References" section). Look for the old, invalid link, and replace it with the new, valid link. -- Hoary (talk) 00:25, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
@Cwolicki: You should also change the |title= field to be "What is a CDP?" and |access-date= to the date you read the web page. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:20, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

September 14[edit]

Captcha not working[edit]

I type in what it says and it just sticks loading — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:A1C0:6D40:794B:7FB4:86CB:904E (talk) 03:34, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

How to import a file to[edit]

How to import a file to — Preceding unsigned comment added by The new Mosche (talkcontribs) 13:42, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

This is the help desk for the English language wikipedia. If you have questions regarding the Marathi Wikipedia, you need to ask there. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
@The new Mosche welcome to Tea House, this place is usually for questions about English Wikipedia not Marathi Wikipedia. Which file are you talking about? If the file is listed on Commons:Main you can use it. If it's hosted only on English Wikipedia, it depends on the copyright policies of Marathi Wikipedia. ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 12:52, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
@Shushugah: this isn't the Teahouse, this is the Help Desk. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 14:26, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Username Issue[edit]

Greetings Respected Wikipedians, I am (anonymous) I created my account 7 months ago just to upload a picture but recently I am thinking to edit Wikipedia as a hobby so created a new account User:EƎ (i know its a cool username) but after looking in my saved password log I founded my old account so I logged back into this account. So I need your help can you please change this account username to “EƎ” if you are wondering for security purposes I can give you the password of that account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain4542 (talkcontribs) 14:57, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

First, don't give us your password, that's a bad idea. Second, I'm fairly sure there's a process where you can take over that username, however I"m not familiar with it (i've really only seen it once) so it would be best to wait for another user to give you the link to this process (if it's what should be done here). Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 14:24, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Perhaps the link you're looking for is Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations? --David Biddulph (talk) 14:26, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Yep that's the one I was talking about. Thanks David! Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 14:27, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

If I have someone translate a source between languages/registers, and I make one or more edits based on that translation, would that breach our original-research/shared-accounts policies or the Creative Commons attribution requirement?[edit]

A little background:

The external-links section of 1983 Anchorage runway collision has a set of three links to court decisions which could potentially serve as productive sources about the lawsuits engendered by the crash; however, these three decisions are written in some remarkably-impenetrable legalese, and I get completely lost a few paragraphs in. Now, I know (off-wiki) a lawyer who could probably translate these documents into a less-opaque register of English for me to use in editing the aforementioned article, but I can see three potential problems with this sort of arrangement:

  • Any such edits to the article could potentially be regarded as involving contributions by two separate people (the lawyer, translating the source documents into a different register; and me, editing the article based on this translation), which one could conceivably be seen as violating the prohibition on shared accounts (see WP:ROLE and WP:NOSHARE).
  • I would be working from an unpublished translation of the source material, which could conceivably be seen as violating WP:SYNTH.
  • As two people would be involved in the process of using the source documents as sources for any edits to the Wikipedia article (see the first bullet point), but only the person whose Wikipedia account actually saves the edit to the article would be credited in the page's edit history, one could potentially make a case that this would violate the Creative Commons attribution requirement.

(All of these concerns could also apply to off-wiki translations between languages, not just those between registers of a single language.)

Are my concerns valid? Whoop whoop pull up Bitching BettyAverted crashes 16:49, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Whoop whoop pull up, I'm more concerned about the fact that court decisions are generally considered primary sources, and the fact that you find them written in "impenetrable legalese" indicates that you are having difficulty understanding them and thus should be relying on published secondary sources for their interpretations of them. (Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation.) ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 17:30, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
... a published reliable secondary source, that is, since apparently they have a lawyer at hand ready to be the secondary source. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 09:20, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

What software does Wikimedia/Wikipedia use to create maps for nations?[edit]

Hello, For maps that are considered "professional", such as most maps on Wikipedia of modern countries and Empires, I have noticed that they appear to all be made with the same software (you can look up any country, such as Russia, France, or the United States to see what I'm talking about). If anybody knows- could they tell me what software is being used to create these maps? Thank you.
TheodoresTomfooleries (talk) 19:40, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

TheodoresTomfooleries, Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps/Conventions/Area maps suggests Photoshop, GIMP or Inkscape. TSventon (talk) 22:32, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. TheodoresTomfooleries (talk) 01:39, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Gauging the relevance & appropriateness to add much info[edit]

Hello help desk. While doing secondary research prestudy on agriculture/land use in the Central Valley region in California, I have put together many notes with references that I was thinking of adding to wikipedia (thereby giving back to such a worthy site I have learned so much from too). But I'm not sure what to add or not, and so who would have good/wise guidance for me on this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kikiboddula (talkcontribs) 21:07, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

The right place for discussion is the talk page of the relevant article. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:12, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

What is a 'non-trivial' mention in the context of a book?[edit]

Hi, I'd like to ask for the purposes of WP:GNG what is a "significant coverage" in a book. In the case of a newspaper I would consider an article significant coverage but I'm uncertain what it looks like in a book. A paragraph? A page? Thank-you in advance, ~ El D. (talk to me) 22:15, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

El D. I have seen a couple of paragraphs suggested as "significant coverage". However as the GNG does not give a definition of "significant coverage", any attempt at one is a personal opinion rather than policy. TSventon (talk) 22:57, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
@El komodos drago: "two paragraphs", but that's a rough guide, not a rule. A two-paragraph entry in the DNB or other major biographical dictionary probably suffices. A two-paragraph description of someone's sibling in a book-length biography probably does not. You must use editorial judgement. -Arch dude (talk) 23:56, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Good article nomination[edit]

I just picked up a GA review for the article Kereru, but I noticed that the previous GA nomination was done informally on the talk page (as opposed to creating a review page) and so my review page is falsely called "/GA1". Does anyone know how to fix this? Mover of molehills (talk) 22:27, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

You could try asking at WT:GA, but I don't think it really matters - as far as I know this is just how it was done with older GA nominations. (My first ever GA, Neaira (hetaera) had exactly the same situation, and the second review is at the GA1 subpage.) Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 14:46, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Okay, thank you for letting me know. Mover of molehills (talk) 20:47, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Date range on cite web[edit]

Hi, is it possible to do some kind of date range? It is for this ref: [1] on List of nobles and magnates of France in the 13th century. All the date properties are horsed. scope_creepTalk 22:43, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

@Scope creep: Hi there! If you're just trying to cite the web page, then you could use |orig-date=1248-1254. Those years don't belong in the |date= field because the web page wasn't created in the 13th century. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk)

Saving a New Wikipedia Page without Publishing[edit]


I have a general question. I want to be able to save my newly created Wikipedia page without publishing, so that I may make edits before sending it over for review. Is this possible? If so, how is it done?

If not, what do you suggest?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Inaflashhhmarketingllc (talkcontribs)

Inaflashhhmarketingllc "Publish changes" simply means "save changes", it does not mean "publish this to the encyclopedia ". You should use Articles for creation to create and submit a draft. Please see your userpage for important information about your username and other policies. 331dot (talk) 22:58, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
@Inaflashhhmarketingllc: save your draft (using the miss-named "publish" button), but do not submit it. others can read it but nobody is likely to and certainly nobody will review it. When it's ready for review, submit it. However, first please read WP:USERNAME. You will need to abandon your current username and create a personal name instead: corporate names as other "group" names are not allowed. Also read WP:PAID. You will need to declare your relationship to the article's subject. but FIRST: read and understand WP:NCORP or more generally WP:N. Notability is teh only absolute requirement for an article. If you attempt to create an article about a non-notable subject, we will delete it and your effort will be wasted. Really. -Arch dude (talk) 00:05, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

September 15[edit]

Photograph request[edit]

I just translated the article Iso Vasikkasaari from Finnish. The article mentions the most interesting building in the Espoo archipelago: a private villa resembling an ancient Greek temple. I have seen this villa myself on a boat trip to Espoo. I did not visit the villa itself as it is on private property. However, I failed to take a photograph of it. I looked at the original Finnish article and the category on Commons and there doesn't seem to be a photograph of it either. Because of the current COVID-19 pandemic, I don't want to travel to the Espoo archipelago myself to take a picture. Is there any way I could request a picture of this specific building on Wikipedia or Commons? JIP | Talk 03:33, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

@JIP: Hi there! You could add something like {{photo requested|architecture|in=Finland|of=the private villa resembling an ancient Greek temple in the Espoo archipelago}} to Talk:Iso Vasikkasaari. You should also add {{Translated page}} to the talk page. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:52, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
@JIP: you may have better luck by making a request somewhere on the Finnish Wikipedia, or even (gasp!) by going off-Wikipedia altogether and finding someone with a local interest in Espoo, perhaps on a social media group or in the city government. -Arch dude (talk) 03:59, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
@JIP You can try Commons:File requests. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:18, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Why should we not use inequality mark in wikipedia? (><)[edit]

Hello. I wonder why we cannot use inequality mark in wikipedia, although there are many non-latin alphabet wiki. For instance, in Korea internet, inequality mark is usually used to marking title -in English, Harry potter- like <해리 포터>.《 》mark is standard, but <> is more used in internet, for convenience. I already know I cannot use them in title, but is it fine in body? There are little keyword used in template with <> (br, u, etc). Actually, Korean wikipedia consist of hangeul. Reiro (talk) 10:38, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

MOS:COMMONMATH gives as the symbol for inequality. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:49, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Well, I mean... Korean wikipedia usually consist of hangeul (not english), so I wonder whether it is fine that < > mark is used in article body as highlight something (such as, like Harry Potter, <해리포터> (Harry Potter) at Korean wikipedia). If do that, is it problem? Reiro (talk) 10:53, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
In enwiki we use the {{lang}} template if including words from other languages, see MOS:FOREIGNITALIC. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:02, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
There are little keyword used in template with <> (br, u, etc). What you're describing here aren't templates; they're (X)HTML tags, some of which you may use when editing Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 12:52, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, @Hoary:. Then, is it problem if I use less/greater than mark as quatation mark with hangeul, at Korean Wikipedia? Reiro (talk) 12:56, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, is there any problem using inequality mark (< >)as quatation mark(" ") in Korean Wikipedia? --Reiro (talk) 11:27, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Reiro. Angle brackets "<" and ">" (which are also used mathematically for inequalities) are not customary for quotations in English, and should not normally be used in that purpose in English Wikipedia. If you are asking about Korean Wikipedia, then you will need to ask there: English Wikipedia and Korean Wikipedia are entirely separate projects, with their own policies and conventions. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by ColinFine (talkcontribs) 11:45, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
The term Angle brackets is usually reserved for "⟨" and "⟩" (and their derivatives). "<" and ">" are simply "less than" and "greater than" respectively. Bazza (talk) 12:17, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Yes, I mean... less than and greater than mark. Reiro (talk) 12:49, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Yes, so if you have a question about using these in Korean-language Wikipedia, please ask at Korean-language Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 12:54, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
@Hoary: In fact, there are no consensus on it. So I wonder what potential result or problem is brought if we adapt that. I do not know less/greater than mark with non-latin alphabet is fine. Reiro (talk) 12:59, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
@Reiro: the conventions for use of particular symbols in text vary by language. The non-use of angle brackets or less-than/greater-than is not restricted to the English Wikipedia. This convention is used in (almost) all English-language publications. You should compare the English Wikipedia typographical conventions to other English publications, not to other Wikipedias. Similarly, compare the Korean Wikipedia typographical conventions to other Korean publications, not to other Wikipedias. Note that other Wikipedias with latin-based alphabets use different typographical conventions than the English Wikipedia, because those languages have different typographical conventions also. -Arch dude (talk) 17:02, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you so much, @Arch dude: :) Reiro (talk) 17:10, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Cleanup/Information sidebar[edit]

Considering this page, how can the box "See the project's archives for work editors have accomplished." be rendered really centered? Currently, it is slightly offset to the right of the main box.--Hildeoc (talk) 13:31, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

@Hildeoc: Hi there! You already asked this question four days ago. The previous discussion can now be found at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2021 September 11#Wikipedia:Cleanup/Information sidebar. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 17:46, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
@GoingBatty: Yes, but, as you can see, the issue was not resolved then. So I wanted to give it another try.--Hildeoc (talk) 18:48, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
@Hildeoc: The likelihood of asking in the same place and receiving a better answer is low. Instead, you could try the talk page for Wikipedia talk:Cleanup (Wikipedia:Cleanup/Information sidebar) or the talk page for {{archives}} (Template_talk:Archives). Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 20:27, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Football teams templates[edit]

Hi there. I want to make a Medal table for the under 20, under 17, women's under 19, Confederations Cup and Futsal World Cup teams. We need a template for those teams. Or do they already exist? Where do I find them? Aquatic Ambiance (talk) 14:36, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

@Aquatic Ambiance: You can simply use Wiki Table for Medal table, Thank you! Dhaneesh 💙 Ram 15:41, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

i have a word i made up[edit]

I want to get that word out in the world, how can i do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zestu (talkcontribs) 15:13, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

@Zestu: can you deeply explain your issues. Thank you. Dhaneesh 💙 Ram 15:37, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, we don't have articles on made up words. Use social media for that. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:42, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
The idea that Wikipedia can be used that way has come up so often that there is even a specific policy that explains why attempts to include such material will be speedily deleted. Please read WP:NOTMADEUP, Zestu but don't be put off from contributing here with your new account: see also H:FIRST. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:03, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
@Zestu: Since you cannot use Wikipedia for this, I suggest you use social media or Youtube. -Arch dude (talk) 23:49, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

How to write article for Wikipedia[edit]

Hi, I am a new user on Wikipedia and i visit this site first chance. I have read some benefit articles, that are very great and interested.Now i want to write an article about my website because this is the right place to share something with each other. But my question is that how can i write a perfect article according to your rule. So, please guide me about it. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afnankhan123 (talkcontribs)

Welcome to Wikipedia. This is an encyclopedia and not the place to write about or promote your website. RudolfRed (talk) 16:54, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
@Afnankhan123: Hi there! Please see WP:NOTPROMOTION and Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 17:50, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Afnankhan123 How to write an article for Wikipedia: Step 1 - Pick a topic you know nothing (or very little) about. Step 2 - Research that topic using only sources that meet the reliable source criteria. Step 3 - Write a draft that summarizes what the sources you found have to say about the topic. For each fact or assertion in the draft provide a citation indicating which source that fact came from. Step 4 - Submit the draft to articles for creation. Step 5 - wait. AFC can take months to review articles. Step 6 - Act on any feedback the AFC reviewer left for you. Topics which you should not write about: 1. Yourself. 2. Anything you are connected to such as the company you work for, the company you founded, your website, your relatives, your band, your invention . . . etc. 3. Anything you cannot find at least 3 sources about; excluding sources produced by the thing itself (such as its website, press releases, autobiography, etc.). 4. Anything you know so much about that you have trouble distinguishing between what is "general knowledge" and what requires a citation. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 18:27, 15 September 2021 (UTC)


Please review this page the sources are reliable, independent and notable so Please undelete it from wikipedia. As the sources the subject is notable and I know that this page was created by a blocked user but it is for wikipedia please review it don't see that the wikipedia page is created by a blocked user only see the contents. Thankyou for advance and please help and reply me as the sources of that Page Is the subject is notable or not Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh (talk) 17:25, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

I've blocked the OP as a sock of HARSH VARDHAN SHARMA "TARA". --Blablubbs (talk) 19:16, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Deletion Discussion Result Mismatch[edit]

I was doing a WP:BEFORE for CommandN and noticed that the previous AfD appears to have ended with Delete but the talk page says No Consensus. Why is that the case? Should I continue my BEFORE or is this a zombie article that just needs to be deleted? TipsyElephant (talk) 18:54, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The article was originally deleted in 2005 per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CommandN. That deletion was overturned and relisted at deletion review, and the relisted discussion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CommandN (2nd nomination)) was closed as no consensus. There was no procedural error. But this is all ancient nonsense from over a decade ago, so even if there has been a procedural error it would still have been appropriate to just ignore the error and keep searching, and AfD the article if you think it is non-notable by 2021 standards. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:04, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
@TipsyElephant: Per the deletion log, the article was deleted in 2005 as a result of the AfD [2]. Looks like it was recreated and deleted a few more times since then. Continue with BEFORE if you want to take it to AfD again. RudolfRed (talk) 19:08, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Image thumbnail over 100 MP error[edit]

Hi! The image File:Hayden Bridge, Spanning McKenzie River at Southern Pacific Railroad (moved from Springfield, Lake County, OR), Springfield, Lane County, OR HAER ORE,20-SPRIF,2- (sheet 3 of 4).png on the page Hayden Bridge (Springfield, Oregon) is having issues with displaying. The error text says that this is because it is over 100 MP. Could someone help me with this? Thanks! Tyrone Madera (talk) 19:04, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Tyrone Madera, your question is about an image, and the image is hosted not by Wikipedia but by Commons. So I suggest that you ask at commons:Commons:Village pump/Technical. -- Hoary (talk) 21:42, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Hoary, Thanks! Tyrone Madera (talk) 21:46, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikilnk to log search results?[edit]

There is Special:Log which allows searching the various WP logs. After a search, is there a way to Wikilink the results? I found this entry in the deletion log:, but I can't do Special:Log?type=delete&user=&page=CommandN. Apart from linking the full URL as I did in a previous post, is there a Wikilink for something like this? RudolfRed (talk) 19:12, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: I don't think you can wikilink to logs by target. You can only link to them by performer (e.g. Special:Log/create/RudolfRed) or to individual log entries (e.g. Special:Redirect/logid/2040801). – Rummskartoffel 22:20, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Remove article.[edit]

I am Teea Goans. Someone created a wiki page some years ago without permission. Please remove it.

Please respond when the page is removed at <redacted> or further action will be taken.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitabuddy (talkcontribs) 15 September 2021 20:02 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not need your permission to have an article about you. If you have some edits to suggest you may place a request at the article's talk page along with {{edit request}}. Also read WP:NLT RudolfRed (talk) 20:07, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
What exactly is "further action"? Wikipedia does not take kindly to legal threats. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 20:26, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
"Further action" could mean following these steps. Whether this would be warranted is something I haven't yet considered, but it's worth a thought. Because, although GoingBatty has started to tinker with this article, it remains very poor. -- Hoary (talk) 21:55, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
"Tinker" is a good description. The article needs the promotional language stripped out and more references. GoingBatty (talk) 22:48, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
More tinkering, GoingBatty. Note that quite a few of what references are provided are (via Wayback) to the subject herself. -- Hoary (talk) 23:24, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Actually, that statement about not taking "kindly to legal threats" itself sounds, if not like a threat, then like a preamble to one. It might be that the "no legal threats" rule here is well thought out and reasoned, but whenever it's actually raised, it often comes out sounding as if Wikipedia is somehow above the reach of, and not subject to, any kind of law. I suspect, though, that if some competent court finds a solid case against Wikipedia--for whatever--all of Wikipedia's policies and rules forbidding that won't matter a jot.
And in any case, if someone comes here and finds something about him or herself that s/he'd rather not see, and DOESN'T know what Wikipedia is about, s/he could be excused for supposing that it's an office building full of paid researchers writing an online encyclopedia (as, I suppose, traditional paper encyclopedias have traditionally been), and that there's therefore someone on the top floor responsible. Uporządnicki (talk) 00:57, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
AzseicsoK, I think you're right that people sometimes respond unnecessarily combatively to perceived legal threats. Obviously, we can't stop people taking the Wikimedia Foundation to law if that's what they choose: what the no legal threats policy says is that if they choose to do that, they may not also edit Wikipedia, and they will therefore get blocked from editing until they remove the threat. Kitabuddy, I notice that nobody has yet pointed you to AUTOPROB, which will clarify what is going on and what your options are. --ColinFine (talk) 09:43, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Public holidays[edit]

Poster advertising women 's day — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:05, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Did you have a question about Wikipedia? GoingBatty (talk) 20:12, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

September 16[edit]

Edit button on a template[edit]

How do I create a template (in my own User space) that features a relatively prominent "Edit" button, please ?

( The template I wish to add the edit button to is: User:BushelCandle/Template:Ethiopia )

--01:22, 16 September 2021 (UTC) BushelCandle

Do you mean like the little edit buttons you get on nav boxes and the like? The easiest way of making one of those is to use a link to the special page like so: Special:edit/User:BushelCandle/Template:Ethiopia. A couple of things to note though:
  1. If you're going to be using this in articles it needs to be in template space, not your own user space
  2. If the template is just going to be a copy of the existing infobox it'll probably end up at WP:TFD at which it'll probably be deleted as a single use template that includes article content. (talk) 01:48, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your very prompt reply !
Yes, I do mean similar to the little edit buttons you get on nav boxes and the like - but perhaps a little bit more prominent ?
At Talk:Ethiopia#Images and other non-text elements there have been complaints that our Ethiopia article is too large. At the time, I was wrong to not take these complaints seriously since I did not realise until very recently that this humongous size caused problems with both displaying and editing on low memory mobiles.
I thought that if the Infobox and other clutter could be moved into a template it might be less daunting for new editors to edit the more important body text and reduce edit warring over flags and other non-important elements in the infobox (there is high ethnic and religious strife amongst many casual editors with this article right now).
1) If the experiment were to gain consensus, the template would end up in template space - where it would only presumably be used on the one country article of Ethiopia
2) It would replace the existing Infobox template and some other elements. My first experiment seems to have worked the way I expected. --02:19, 16 September 2021 (UTC) BushelCandle
@BushelCandle: You can add | footnotes = {{navbar|User:BushelCandle/Template:Ethiopia}} to produce . See {{navbar}} for other display options. But I agree with the IP that an infobox template for a single article could easily be deleted. There has been consensus to keep them for elements (Category:Infobox element per element) but that's the only examples I know. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:45, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
@BushelCandle: I was going to suggest a split, but it looks like most of the article sections are allready split into their own articles! Looking at the article as it stands I would be tempted to do a bit of trimming, most sections act as introductions to other articles so should only really be a brief overview. There's also quite a lot of repetition in some sections and a few images and tables that I'm not sure of the relevance of, for example the "economy" section contains treemaps for both 2014 and 2019, I don't think having both is really necessary. Likewise the plot of Human development index over time seems misplaced, it's a compound index including lots of measures it's not strictly an economic measurement, and I don't think a line chart really adds much over the raw data. I would also be tempted to remove the table of "Share of world GDP" since it isn't really critical information and it isn't discussed in the article prose. Just going over it and cutting out some of superfluous material would probably help a lot. (talk) 02:47, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for all the helpful suggestions !
I seem to have made some progress using the {{Navbar-header}} template with my current version but I still would like to make 2 improvements:
1) get rid of the remarked out text and blank lines: "<!-- Please do not remove the 9 blank lines below this text since they position the v-t-e buttons correctly -->" right at the end of my experimental template while retaining correct button positioning
2) expand the tiny "v-t-e" hint to a larger and more prominent "view-talk-edit"
Is this possible ? --03:56, 16 September 2021 (UTC) BushelCandle

Goofy from Mickey Mouse[edit]

Can you tell me why it says the goofy is a dog under the description. He is literally married to cow you can see the horns I don’t know how this makes sense and I do not believe that goofy is a dog just because they named him dawg in the original maybe Walt just had him be a stoner and named him dawg Because that’s something a stoner would say. Can you please fix this goofy is a cow not a dog if it is so that he is a dog can you please put facts on it other than what he is named.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:282:1900:e70:9593:fb39:16cf:11e0 (talkcontribs) 16 September 02:31 (UTC)

Hello, if you read the Wikipedia page here it states he was originally named 'Dippy the Dawg'. If you are seeing the results of a Google search and their information panel, Wikipedia has no control over what they display and you would need to contact them via the 'feedback' link at he bottom of the pane. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.) Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 02:58, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia articles are based on published reliable sources, not original research by the editors or readers. The infobox in Goofy says:

Species Anthropomorphic dog[1]


  1. ^ Rachel Berman (November 24, 2015). "The Disney Dogs: Every Cute Canine From The 54 Animated Classics". Retrieved December 7, 2017.
The source is on an official Disney website PrimeHunter (talk) 02:59, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
It's unknown what manner of animal Goofy is, and it's debated. If you'll recall the (fictional) kids in Stand by Me debated it, 35 years ago. The above page is just some person. Yeah it's a page hosted by Disney, but it's not clear how much if any editoral oversight is exercised, and it's certainly not any kind of offical word from the Disney organization, of which the writer is not an employee I don't think.
Pluto's a dog, this we know. Goofy and Pluto have some similarities but are quite different in other ways. Cartoonist Art Babbitt said in 1934 "One is dog, the other human." Snopes says he's not a cow but won't definitively say he's a dog. Disney has kinda-sorta tended dogways mostly but AFAIK hasn't come down definitely on the matter. Bill Farmer, the voice of Goofy since 1987, says "He is not a dog. Pluto is a dog, but Goofy seems to be in the canine family in the same way that a wolf is not a dog, but they also are in the canine family. I think Canis Goofus is the technical Latin term for what Goofy is. He’s just Goofy."
If our article states definitely that he's dog, that's wrong, and you should go fix that, use the refs above and there are others (the Snopes has a link to Babbit). It should be stated as being debatable, and both sides given. I don't know if "cow" has any standing or is just a WP:FRINGE opinion. He was shagging Clarabelle, but half the cast of... well never mind about that. Herostratus (talk) 05:03, 16 September 2021 (UTC)


Ref number 13. looks incorrect - I am sure it is - please fix if you can. Thank you (talk) 04:04, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

You deleted two closing curly braces (i.e. }}) in this edit, which I fixed. I might suggest since you've been here a while that you create an account, which affords a number of conveniences. – Anon423 (talk) 09:05, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
@Anon423: They have an account but do not use it very often. This editor is very well known to HD regulars (6 years +) and there have been a number of discussions; I can point you to some if you are at all curious as well as the account name, but not sure if there are issues with giving that out. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 10:19, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

History of my serches[edit]

I was searching Brit tv shows that a friend had suggested earlier this year. But I lost the list, and I can't contact my friend. Perchance is there some way of pulling up my serches from the past? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Burnarz (talkcontribs)

  • @Burnarz: If you accessed the pages from a web browser, you can look up your browser history, assuming you did not delete it. (The keyboard shortcut is ctrl+H in most desktop browsers; the history is there in mobile browsers too in some menu.)
If you accessed the pages from the application, the tabs might still be open, but if you closed them I believe you are out of luck. (This is from a quick test on my phone; possibly I missed some button in a submenu.)
From the Wikipedia server side, this might be technically possible (by looking up the http logs for a given IP address etc.) but realistically it is not going to happen. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 09:55, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
In the Android app, press the "Search" button on the bottom bar (not the search bar near the top) while on the start page to see your history. – Rummskartoffel 13:00, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Vital records[edit]

Hi WikiEditors,

Can anyone please explain why Wikipedia uses no direct citations of Vital records (or whatever you wish to call them)? They are absent even from biographical articles. Is the issue one of being a 'primary source'? If so, would that be fixed by reference to copies on genealogical websites? AFAICS, there is no appropriate citation template.

Regards RAClarke (talk) 10:53, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

RAClarke Yes, government documents/records are considered primary sources. It doesn't matter if they are from the government itself or a third party. 331dot (talk) 11:18, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
  • I somewhat disagree with 331dot here. Primary sources can still be used for non-controversial information, and dates / places of birth etc. are unlikely to be points of contention. The reasons vital records are not used, in my opinion, are rather that (1) they rarely provide useful information and (2) what they do provide often goes against the spirit, if not the letter, of WP:BLPPRIVACY (when it comes to living or recently-deceased persons).
I did cite such a source at Henry_Darcy#Early_life, to support the spelling of that person’s first name (which is not totally uncontested). It is somewhat questionable, but no better contemporary sources were available when I looked. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 12:30, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Tigraan is absolutely correct; please excuse my poorly worded answer. 331dot (talk) 13:00, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi WikiEditors[edit]

Thank you for your clarification. At a rough estimate, about 60% of claims on Wikipedia regarding life events include no supporting inline citation. Where citations are included most point to sources whose general reliability may be adequate but which themselves indicate no source for the event.

What is your recommendation in the case where I believe a claim to be in error but for which I can find only a primary source, or a source as above. The individual concerned died in 1842. Is 'original research' avoidable in this?

Regards RAClarke (talk) 15:01, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

If it was an 1842 death, a trawl through historic newspapers might be beneficial. There are many online now. Mjroots (talk) 15:58, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello, RAClarke. If the information is unsourced, then anybody is entitled to remove it (though it's preferable to find a source and add it). If the only source you can find is primary, then as long as it is uncontroversial factual data, you can use that source. The problem comes if the information which you believe to be wrong is in an apparently reliable source. In general, if two reliable sources give different answers, the article should just report this fact, and not attempt to adjudicate between them. In my opinion, if the information is suitable for taking from a primary source, then that approach would also be appropriate if one of the sources was primary. --ColinFine (talk) 16:08, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestions. I am still going through - Wikipedia:List of online newspaper archives . Three references so far, though not to the place of death, unfortunately.

The existing claim, though plausible, is unsourced. I will try flagging a 'citation required' and see what happens. Apparently, an academic work of biography is upcoming. This may supply a usable reference.

Regards RAClarke (talk) 17:52, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

OK. Panic over. Jackson's Oxford Journal. Nice, if a little costly. Thank you Mjroots.

Regards RAClarke (talk) 19:25, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Need help to write a biography[edit]

I am looking for assistance to write a biography of a living religious personality, he is one of 500 influential Muslims however there is no information about him on Wikipedia. He is very different from mainstream religious concepts and has significant opposition due to him challenging the normal religious concepts.

So looking for help.

This is his website — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

You have asked this here and at the Teahouse WP:TEA. Please stick to one venue to save extra work by the volunteers here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:53, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
IP you have received a response at the Teahouse. Please do not ask the same question here because as Mike Turnbull said, it gives the volunteers extra work. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 (talk) 14:51, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Viewing history[edit]


I lost all my viewing history on my device. How can I recover past history?

If you're referring to what pages you've looked at that isn't something related to Wikipedia but the browser you're using and the device. However if you're talking about the edits you've made to articles those will all be under Special:Contributions for your account. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 (talk) 16:25, 16 September 2021 (UTC) vs[edit]

What is the difference? hydnjo (talk) 16:29, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

One is the mobile view, one is the desktop view. You can switch between them at the bottom of the page. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 16:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
You'll see .m. denoting the mobile site all across the web, FYI. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 16:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Along with the above, unless an editor has specifically made the desktop page show, most links coming from a mobile web editor will be en.m Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 (talk) 16:36, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks folks hydnjo (talk) 16:50, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Authority control transclusion trouble[edit]

How come Barack Obama and Narendra Modi have a link #invoke:Authority control rendered at the bottom (above the cats)?--Hildeoc (talk) 17:42, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

I have a feeling it's not supposed to actually show #invoke:Authority control. THere are some other pages that have it rendered correctly. I'll take a look at them to see what might be causing an issue. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 (talk) 18:44, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
@Blaze The Wolf: No, it's not supposed to show that, it's because the page has hit the template limit, see below. (talk) 18:47, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Yep you're right. I would remove some templates but I don't know what templates need to be there and what can be removed. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 (talk) 18:49, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
@Hildeoc: The pages are too large and they've gone over the template limit. To prevent DOS attacks mediawiki will only allow pages to transclude 2Mb of content while expanding templates, if the page gets larger than that any additional templates will not be transuded into the page and will instead be replaced with a link to the template or module. If you look in the HTML source code for the final rendered page you'll see a report on the various parser limits. For Barack Obama it is:
Extended content
NewPP limit report
Parsed by mw1334
Cached time: 20210916183501
Cache expiry: 86400
Reduced expiry: true
Complications: [vary‐revision‐sha1]
CPU time usage: 10.344 seconds
Real time usage: 10.866 seconds
Preprocessor visited node count: 47639/1000000
Post‐expand include size: 2095499/2097152 bytes
Template argument size: 315939/2097152 bytes
Highest expansion depth: 21/40
Expensive parser function count: 59/500
Unstrip recursion depth: 1/20
Unstrip post‐expand size: 2260829/5000000 bytes
Lua time usage: 6.084/10.000 seconds
Lua memory usage: 19902062/52428800 bytes
Lua Profile:
    ?                                                                940 ms       14.4%
    Scribunto_LuaSandboxCallback::gsub                               620 ms        9.5%
    recursiveClone <mwInit.lua:41>                                   580 ms        8.9%
    Scribunto_LuaSandboxCallback::callParserFunction                 540 ms        8.3%
    dataWrapper <mw.lua:668>                                         480 ms        7.4%
    Scribunto_LuaSandboxCallback::match                              400 ms        6.1%
    <mw.lua:690>                                                     280 ms        4.3%
    Scribunto_LuaSandboxCallback::find                               200 ms        3.1%
    Scribunto_LuaSandboxCallback::getAllExpandedArguments            200 ms        3.1%
    init <Module:Citation/CS1/Date_validation>                       140 ms        2.1%
    [others]                                                        2140 ms       32.8%
Number of Wikibase entities loaded: 1/400
Transclusion expansion time report (%,ms,calls,template)
100.00% 9103.177      1 -total
 45.29% 4122.687    533 Template:Cite_news
  8.89%  809.138    118 Template:Cite_web
  6.41%  583.620      1 Template:Infobox_officeholder
  5.78%  525.956      2 Template:Navboxes
  2.93%  266.639     26 Template:Cite_book
  2.18%  198.782     23 Template:Cite_journal
  2.09%  190.392     17 Template:Infobox_officeholder/office
  2.05%  186.372      1 Template:Birth_date_and_age
  1.51%  137.735      2 Template:Inflation

<!-- Saved in parser cache with key enwiki:pcache:idhash:534366-0!canonical and timestamp 20210916183501 and revision id 1044721533. Serialized with JSON.
You can see the page has hit the limit on Post‐expand include size. To solve this you need to make the article smaller by removing some templates or splitting some content into other articles. (talk) 18:46, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

How can I make my page go live?[edit]

How can I make my page go live? I added my references.


Dr. Gena Ross— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Gena Ross (talkcontribs)

Dr. Gena Ross Your page was "live" in that people could see it if they know where it is; however, it was promotional and had to be deleted. If you want to write an article to formally make it a part of the encyclopedia, you have made some errors. Your user page, the page you edited, is not article space and not searchable by search engines. It is not a place to tell anything and everything about yourself, but it is a place to tell about yourself as a Wikipedia editor or user. If you want to write an article about yourself, this is strongly discouraged, see the autobiography policy, as people naturally write favorably about themselves. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state, showing how the topic meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. In your case, you would need to meet the definition of a notable politician. Typically, a mere candidate for office does not merit an article. If you win the general election, then you would. Wikipedia has no interest in helping your campaign; we just summarize independent sources.
New users cannot directly create articles, and must use Articles for Creation. If you truly feel that you merit an article, that is what you should do- but this, again, is strongly discouraged. 331dot (talk) 20:08, 16 September 2021 (UTC)