Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 (OOUI JS signature icon LTR.svg) on the edit toolbar.

January 13[edit]

Translation wanted[edit]

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

@JIP: Those are both options. You can't use a machine translation directly, but you may start with a machine translation and then edit it to good quality. See WP:TRANSLATE for guidance on how to translate articles, including how to attribute the source article. Alternatively (or in addition), there is Wikipedia:Translators_available, which lists Wikipedia editors who are willing to help translate articles. If you can find one for the language you are interested in, you can post on that editor's talk page to see if they will help you. RudolfRed (talk) 04:23, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. I found that the Lithuanian article seems to be more comprehensive than the Russian one, so I think I can start with either trying to contact a Lithuanian translator or trying to Google Translate it and fix the translation errors myself. JIP | Talk 04:33, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
The new article is available here: Grey peas. Feel free to fix any translation errors or otherwise fix the article. JIP | Talk 02:15, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

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

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

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

Hi Rizosome, there will be three things you'll see on xtools for any specific article, "top 10 by edits", "top 10 by added text" and "authorship". The first two are pretty self explainatory - the first is the amount of edits users have, for example on that one, one user has 151 edits. The second is the total amount of bytes added from these contributions.
Authorship is the ratio of the current article that is written by each user. So, 30% of the current edition of the article is written by the first user (along with how many bytes that is). Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk ? contribs) 15:56, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

When will you be able to fix it?

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

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

The error I want fixed

... is that all charts everywhere are missing.

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

We've answered this already. As PrimeHunter said:

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

Tenryuu ? ( ? ? ? ) 03:14, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't understand what this means[edit]

FYI C Merging section with above. Tenryuu ? ( ? ? ? ) 19:42, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

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

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

It means you must enable JavaScript to see graphs on Wikipedia. There is no other solution. RudolfRed (talk) 04:03, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict)It means that you must enable JavaScript to see the graphs. The developers have removed the server-side code that was trying to build and serve the graphs dynamically to browsers that have JavaScript disabled. Presumably, that server-side code was either too processor-intensive or too buggy to justify continued support. Thus, this inability is not a error, it is a deliberate decision on the part of the developers. -Arch dude (talk) 04:05, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Most web browsers have Javascript enabled by default. If you can't see the graphs, either you are using a (rare) non-Javascript browser, or you have disabled Javascript on your browser. --ColinFine (talk) 11:55, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

List of all people[edit]

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

Thank you!

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

You must have a lot of time. There is no real benefit to having a single, gigantic list. (The One List is just as bad as the One Ring.) Lists of people breaks it down into lots of more manageable sublists. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:45, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Per WP:SALAT: "Lists that are too general or too broad in scope have little value, unless they are split into sections." Clarityfiend (talk) 06:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Charles. The Biography WikiProject manages about 1.8 million articles about people through templates and categories. You can browse their subcategories on their project page [[1]]. Orvilletalk 07:06, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
@Charlesaverill: Your list will have 1.8 million or more entries, which if printed one per line will occupy about 32 thousand pages or about 32 large volumes if printed. Any reasonable use of such a list would use a database. We already have that database. It's called Wikidata. Go to Wikidata and create a query for all items that are an instance of "human" and that have an entry on the English Wikipedia to create your list, or learn to make more specific queries to actually get specific information. -Arch dude (talk) 17:04, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
@Charlesaverill: Wikidata can be intimidating (at least to me). Go to its main page at d:Wikidata:Main_Page and look around from there to get started. You will probably eventually arrive at d:Wikidata:SPARQL query service/A gentle introduction to the Wikidata Query Service, where you are guided through some queries. Pulling out just the ones with an English Wikipedia article is more advanced, but will look something like ?wp schema:isPartOf </>. -Arch dude (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Declined Article Submittion[edit]

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

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

Help with watchlist/recent changes display[edit]

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

@Girth Summit: Disable "Group changes by page in recent changes and watchlist" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rc. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:25, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Sweet - that worked - thanks PrimeHunter! Roxy the dog, this should sort it. GirthSummit (blether) 11:27, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Noted. Also, many thanks. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 13:21, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Happy dog here. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 13:38, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
(I unlinked the potentially damaging link above so people don't accidentally create a problem for themselves, despite the warning. No offense intended.) [AlanM1 (talk)] 06:38, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Public url[edit]

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

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

Requested Correction for Article Titled 'Starving Time'[edit]

Hi,

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

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

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

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

Left leaning, anti conservative[edit]

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

Sounds like Conservapedia might be a better place for you. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:38, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
(ec) Articles are protected from editing in order to prevent disruption. Wikipedia is a private organization that is free to have whatever content on its computers that it sees fit, just as you are permitted to have whatever rules you wish within the four walls of your residence. Wikipedia is not a free speech forum. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state. If those sources are being summarizes incorrectly, or you have independent reliable sources with additional information, please offer them as an edit request on the article talk page, but be aware of WP:FRINGE and WP:UNDUE. If you are just here to push conservative talking points, you are going to have a difficult time here. If you are interested in civilly collaborating with others regardless of political viewpoint to arrive at a consensus as to what an article should say, you will be welcome. 331dot (talk) 15:40, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

How to suggest a picture be edited[edit]

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

Unfortunately, we cannot do anything about that. It looks like jerseyjoeart dot com was Rime's former website, but it has since moved. However, the web address is not a watermark, but rather part of the graffiti itself. So, it would be like changing the signature on a painting. In general, we cannot alter photos except in very specific circumstances. ? ?l Cid of Valencia talk 15:59, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
I wonder if it might be acceptable to simply crop enough of the right edge of the photo (which in any case does not appear to show 100% of the original artwork) to obscure the full address? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.40.9 (talk) 23:41, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

Resolved

Updating spouse details marriage & divorce info[edit]

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

Adeline unicorn The only reference you provided was a link to Kylie's website. We need reliable, independant sources for the information. Think magazine or newspaper articles, or books. We also need more specific links to the information. For example, if the information you are citing is not on the main page of the website but a subpage, cite the specific page. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 19:38, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
I've started a discussion at Talk:Troy Hunt, Adeline unicorn (n.b:which you were free to do yourself), so MichaelMaggs can give some granular explanation or else back down. As far as I know, the celebrity's own website is an adequate source for uncontroversial info.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:46, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Quisqualis yes, it is an adequate source for uncontroversial info, but you still need to cite the part of the website where the information appears. The information Adeline unicorn was trying to source does not appear on the homepage for Ms. Hunt. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 20:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC)


January 14[edit]

sfn template question[edit]

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

@Aza24: I suggest reading up on template documentation (for example, Template:Sfn) if something isn't rendering properly. Using your example, the first two unnamed parameters are for the first two authors' last names. The template does not appear to be able to take anything for date other than 4-digit strings for year (<year> C required; four-digit year; may have a lowercase disambiguation letter). Tenryuu ? ( ? ? ? ) 00:28, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
A ha! I've read up on the documentation like you suggested Tenryuu, and discovered a solution, using |ref=CITEREFFANYE and then [[#CITEREFFANYE|Fan Ye 5th-century]]. So not a real sfn ref, but appears the same way, which is all that matters. Aza24 (talk) 01:21, 14 January 2021 (UTC)


an article on Tongan/Uvean pre-European history.[edit]

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

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

Six pages is rather specific. I would read up on Your first article and run the content through Wikipedia's Articles for Creation process, as if you had it off of the site, there's a high chance that formatting may not be up to Wikipedia standards, and the sources used may not be reliable enough to establish the subject's notability. Tenryuu ? ( ? ? ? ) 01:33, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
You will also need to avoid original research (see WP:OR) RudolfRed (talk) 01:37, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Makaronopizza[edit]

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

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

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

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

JIP, maybe it's eligible for deletion due to copyvio? The recipe is taken from the external link provided practically verbatim. Tenryuu ? ( ? ? ? ) 02:19, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
@JIP: A draft is a work in progress. Unless there is a major issue such as copyright or BLP, leave it alone. RudolfRed (talk) 02:20, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
I'll leave it alone for the time being. Someone will probably come along later to handle it. JIP | Talk 02:31, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

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

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

Does this violate the rules?[edit]

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

Barring any issue with the original Wikipedia article (copyright etc..), you're allowed to copy any content on Wikipedia, but must attribute to it. If you didn't, you can make a WP:DUMMYEDIT and mention the name of the Wikipedia articles you copied from. Shushugah (talk) 03:34, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
See WP:Copying within Wikipedia - David Biddulph (talk) 03:36, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

How to find articles to edit?[edit]

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

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

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

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

It looks like you've been adding unsourced content to Axel Addy which was removed because Wikipedia requires reliable sources. Also it looks like you might have been editing an article about yourself which you absolutely should not do. --Paultalk❭ 11:46, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Actually, editing an article about oneself is only strongly discouraged, not strictly prohibited, as the policy provides an example of what is allowed. The OP is now blocked, but for readers passing by, content addition in such cases are best done through edit requests on the article's talk page. Tenryuu ? ( ? ? ? ) 12:07, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Tenryuu, Axeladdy is only soft-blocked, pending verification that the person using the account is indeed Axel Addy. --ColinFine (talk) 12:50, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Repeated Warning Message[edit]

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

Hello Tima93Lb. The problem is that you have treated the page as if it was an article that you could edit. It is not, it is simply a page listing other articles which have been marked as being about Youth organisations based in Lebanon. You need to go back and revert all your additions on that page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:32, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Alright, so, you should never (practically never) edit pages marked Category: - instead, you should only edit articles which are actually articles. I will move your edits to a Draft page. See Draft:Youth organizations in Lebanon. Make your edits there. See Wikipedia:Articles for creation for info on getting your article published. Cheers ? ?l Cid of Valencia talk 13:34, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

wikipedia[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Off topic. ? ?l Cid of Valencia talk 13:47, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

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

----
The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Suppressed files blocking export to Commons[edit]

There are four public domain files, here, here, here and here, that I'm trying to copy to Commons using the "Export to Wikimedia Commons" tab, but I'm getting this message on Commons: "Can't import file because at least one of its revisions contains a suppressed file". Can the suppressed files be un-suppressed, or the revision in question deleted? Thanks. Bruce1eetalk 13:49, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

So it looks like these files were reduced in resolution as non-free cover art at some point; since then, they've been determined to be too simple for copyright. However, the auto-export tool must see the reduction as a sign that this is not actually a free piece of work. There may be some work around or trick but if I were you I would just re-upload it on Commons and then have the version here deleted. Or, just consider not exporting it, as I can't really see any valid use of the cover art within the public domain. ? ?l Cid of Valencia talk 14:16, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
@El cid, el campeador: Thanks for your reply. The option to simply manually upload the image into Commons and tag the local copy for deletion was my first consideration. But my concern was that the file's history here would be lost. If the history isn't important, then I'm happy to do that. Bruce1eetalk 15:08, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
@Bruce1ee: - Yes, that's a good point. Personally, I say: it's a public domain image and the original uploader did not create the image, so there is no harm in just doing it that way. But, I don't want to lead you down a garden path, so I would suggest posting this inquiry at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. I imagine an admin will be able to help you there. There is precedent for file revisions being undeleted for transfer; see Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2019_June_26#Suppressed_file_blocking_a_Commons_move_via_File_Importer_extension. Cheers ? ?l Cid of Valencia talk 16:18, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
@El cid, el campeador: I'll take it to Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. I see there are already a handful of requests to undelete previous file revisions. Thanks for pointing this page out to me. Bruce1eetalk 17:19, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
@El cid, el campeador: That worked, thank you. This discussion can be closed. Bruce1eetalk 06:34, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

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

I am pretty sure it's not template like already discussed [2]. Why this section not getting scanned by "Who Wrote That" addon? Rizosome (talk) 14:17, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

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

Collapse family tree by default[edit]

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

Have you tried |collapsed=yes instead, Hildeoc? That doesn't work for me in preview but I wonder if it will when saved. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:47, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
I edited the template code so that the template auto-collapses. The code I used was collapsed=yes.? ?l Cid of Valencia talk 16:49, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you both very much for resolving this issue! Best wishes--Hildeoc (talk) 22:02, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Libra (astrology)[edit]

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

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

Pinging Aloha27 whom I assume is who is being discussed since we don't have a Aloha57. In general "I learned it in middle school" is about as far from an acceptable source as you can get - I had a primary school teacher tell me that drawing on my hand would give me ink poisoning, didn't make it true though did it. --Paultalk❭ 16:28, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
We cannot accept "common knowledge". We require a source. If it's truly common knowledge, then you can find a source. It this specific case, go to the Wikipedia "Rome" article you mentions and find the source that it cites, and then cite that same source for your correction. Since citing sources is a little bit complicated, you may prefer to just make a note on the article's talk page. (And yes, it's like requiring a source for the date of the declaration of independence: we do that too.) -Arch dude (talk) 16:23, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
I must disagree with part of what Arch dude wrote. The source given in the "Rome" Wikipedia article is
  • Kinder, Hermann; Hilgemann, Werner (1964). Dtv-Atlas zur Weltgeschichte (in German). 1. Dtv. OCLC 887765673.
You can only cite sources you have read. To cite this source, you will have to gain access to it and read the relevant page(s). This means you will have to understand German. You will probably find it easier to find a different source. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:59, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
I concur: I should have said "read and then cite". As Penance, I found better ref: "Technical Chronology and Astrological History in Varro, Censorinus, and Others", Classical Quarterly, N.S. 35 (1985), p. 454-65. -Arch dude (talk) 17:23, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Pinging Paul Thank you for the heads-up. I suggested to the user than discussion would best be started at the Libra Talk page in my comment here. The user did not choose to do that. Thus far, the same advice and reasoning has been given as I submitted. I see nowhere in the user's history of EVER editing the Rome page. I shall forthwith head to that page and see what needs to be done, if anything at all. Regards,   Aloha27  talk  17:00, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
A rather simpler source for Rome's foundation date (although less academic) is "this one".. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:27, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
And now I'm really embarrassed. There was no contradiction in the first place. The Libra (astrology) article states that "the Moon was said to be in Libra" not that the Sun was in Libra. Since the date of the founding of Rome is widely agreed to be April 21, but there was debate about the year, the moon may very well have been in Libra. Furthermore, mapping such ancient calendar dates to the modern calendar is problematical anyway, so "April 21" could be anywhere in a two-week window from today's April 21. -Arch dude (talk) 17:35, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Since there is ample evidence that there were only 360 days in a year before 747 BC, why not just let it all go? I suggest that there is literally no point in trying to work out what happened within a 2-week period approximately 2,773 years ago. I speak as one who, like Isaac Newton, has made an extensive study of the subject of astrology, and that includes the Babylonian Amizaduga tablet. You are welcome to leave your time, date and place of birth as proof that you don't care a hoot. At least no-one mentioned alchemy. MinorProphet (talk) 17:35, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Yep. Astrology is not a science. It is important only because humans have believed in it for thousands of years and have wasted enough paper and ink on it that it is notable by Wikipedia's definition. I just thought it was interesting that there was no contradiction in the article. -Arch dude (talk) 01:55, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Article about Dr. Vladimir Lumelsky[edit]

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

Can you please link to the draft? I cannot find it. 331dot (talk) 15:49, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
I guess you refer to User:Shurm. That is the user page for your account. It has not been submitted and nobody has viewed it. See Wikipedia:Articles for creation for a way to submit a draft. Try to include references to satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (people). PrimeHunter (talk) 19:33, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Different answers/information.[edit]

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

Same reason that you might get different responses when you ask two people who are completely unrelated to each other and have no affiliation apart from the fact that they happen to use the same software for something. --Paultalk❭ 16:09, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
There is a separate Wikipedia project for each language. Each article in each language is written by different volunteers and there is no formal co-ordination or co-operation among the volunteers. If you see a discrepancy, please make a note of it on the talk page of the article ere on the English Wikipedia, and I assume that the other projects would want you to make a note on their article's talk pages also. If you are asking about questions on the various help desks, then different wikipedia projects have different rule and different volunteers answering questions. -Arch dude (talk) 16:14, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Why is there is no "pornography" in this category?[edit]

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

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

Klete Keller photo error[edit]

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

20080903 Nastia Liukin responds to Oprah Winfrey.JPG
Can you identify the real Klete Keller on the image shown here? JIP | Talk 17:34, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
(ec) Welcome to the Teahouse, Hunter.hoj. There has been a lot of editing to the Klete Keller page recently, so I'm unsure whether the current very poor photograph is correct or not. The best place to discuss this is on the article's Talk page, pinging the editors who have recently been working on that article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:36, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
I have removed the photo pending discussion. Since the ID of Keller is unsourced and it is cropped from a larger photo, I think we should err on the side of caution and remove the photo until we determine whether it actually is him. ? ?l Cid of Valencia talk 17:38, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Add - there is an ongoing discussion at Talk:Klete_Keller#Picture. ? ?l Cid of Valencia talk 17:41, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Wrong citations[edit]

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

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

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

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

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

@Patrick Neylan: Murgatroyd49 is correct in that Wikipedia only reports what reliable sources say for verification, which means information can be wrong, in which case a better source that uses GT should be sought. Doing the conversions by yourself would constitute as original research. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.) Tenryuu ? ( ? ? ? ) 20:46, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
If a source is obviously wrong then it is NOT a reliable source. DuncanHill (talk) 21:40, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
In that case that information should be removed without replacing it with GT in the absence of an appropriate source. Tenryuu ? ( ? ? ? ) 22:12, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Edit an article[edit]

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

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

Template:Redirect with multiple redirects[edit]

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

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


20 years of Wikipedia!

January 15[edit]

President Donald Trump's Wikipedia has been vandalized[edit]

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

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

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

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

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

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

Machine-translated source?[edit]

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

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

Correct Template[edit]

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

@Maineartists: First, start by stating what do you think is wrong with it? Then, we can help you find a suitable template. Also, it is better to work to improve the article rather than just template it and hope somebody else does it. RudolfRed (talk) 02:30, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Really, RudolfRed? Come on. Don't be glib. You can see exactly what is wrong with that article. Absolutely no content except a list from IMDB. I know it's better to work on an article, but I have no interest or time. Do you? That's why WP has templates. If you don't want to help, move on. This is why I use the Teahouse. Maineartists (talk) 17:18, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

George Floyd[edit]

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

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

Wikipedia logo needs update[edit]

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

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

/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_topics/Punic_Wars[edit]

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

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

Issues with my Archive Box[edit]

I want to use my archive box as a banner on my talk page, but using banner parameter breaks it style. Compare non-banner version[3] with banner one[4]. As you see, the banner version moves icon and search bar to the left and turns Archives into 'Archives:". Any solution? Keeping the archive box on top of my talk page, making it large, plus keeping its center alignment style/format. --Wario-Man (talk) 12:07, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I have the suspicion the developers are currently working on self-made overflow handlers to tables (as if the browser ones don't suffice), causing all sorts of messy stuff, including breaking most table layouts and anything dependent on it (such as most of the boxes on wikipedia) Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:47, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
@Wario-Man: Is [5] what you want? PrimeHunter (talk) 16:35, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: Thanks but it's still not similar to what I want. Search archives button should appear below the search bar. As I said, I want a banner version of this. Same style/format but appearing on top of my talk page and be larger. --Wario-Man (talk) 17:42, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
I have added |search-break=yes.[6] PrimeHunter (talk) 18:22, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. Cheers! --Wario-Man (talk) 19:02, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

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

Hi there,

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

/wiki/Alan_Smith_(RAF_officer)

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

Hugh Dundas: /wiki/Hugh_Dundas Johnnie Johnson: /wiki/Johnnie_Johnson_(RAF_officer) Douglas Bader: /wiki/Douglas_Bader

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

Your sincerely

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

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

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

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

To OP: Hums4r, please don't ask the same question in multiple places. That makes following discussion hard.
To readers: the same question was asked at Wikipedia:Teahouse#Looking for someone who might be interested in creating a article with me on 'KashBook'. --CiaPan (talk) 16:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Defamation of US leaders in their Wikipedia pages[edit]

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

Hi IP, this is the general help desk for Wikipedia editing, so we can't help with article specific issues here. Consider using the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard if you can't edit the page, making sure you can give good reason for these comments to be removed. ? Ed talk! ? 17:01, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Maybe government officials that egg on crowds with unfounded lies to go and storm a capitol building should be distrusted. In any event, Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state, and they use the term conspiracy theory. 331dot (talk) 17:04, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

why is wikidata employee count not shown in infobox company[edit]

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

@ClementSeveillac: You didn't set the new value to preferred. I have done it (on the top left icon when the entry is edited), and set the old value to normal.[7] The infobox pulls the preferred value but will only show it if has a source other than Wikipedia. The former preferred value had Wikipedia as source. Google now shows the new value. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:19, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Got it, many thanks! -- ClementSeveillac (talk) 18:24, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Interlanguage links[edit]

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

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

@Turner Street: I have changed it [8] to {{interlanguage link|April Grace|de}} per Help:Interlanguage links#Inline links (links in the text of the article). PrimeHunter (talk) 17:23, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: Thanks, that's it. I obviously wasn't looking hard enough on that page I linked. Turner Street (talk) 19:29, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Putting text in columns for printable version[edit]

Hello,

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

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

@Marino108LFS: I'm not aware of this capability - the only changes I know of are changing the display skin, by clicking on preferences (link on top right menu bar). You could make a technical request at Wikipedia:Village pump. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:46, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
@Timtempleton: The no-print and no-display options make me think of defining a printable version of the wiki page where the text in the glossary is being placed in two columns, just as all dictionaries have being printed. Marino 21:09, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

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

Hello,

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

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

@Glvatiekas: Is this what you're looking for? Wikipedia:Dashboard#Requested edits TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:04, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
And this Wikipedia:Edit requests? TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:08, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Since the user is asking for a "Dark Mode" I think this would something for the wishlist. Anyone know how to wishlist an item? RudolfRed (talk) 21:05, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
RudolfRed, it could be an item for WP:VPP? I would've suggested the Community Wishlist Survey over at Meta, but that concluded recently. Tenryuu ? ( ? ? ? ) 22:25, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Glvatiekas, dark mode has been requested many times in various locations over the years, including on Phabricator and in the annual Community Wishlist. The W?F Community Tech Team started m:Community Tech/Dark mode but found that it was either too hard or they hadnt enough resources. User:MusicAnimal says a major technical barrier is that server-side dark mode may hurt the caching layer [9]. (I dont understand how having an extra skin Vector Legacy Vector + New Vector Vector doesnt hurt the cache, but Im not a dev.) In the most recent wishlist, Community Tech declined to consider it for inclusion. To make it happen, we would need to convince W?F that investing money in a proper dark mode is a more important branding effort than investing money in, say, changing the name of the Wikimedia Foundation. If youre on iOS and only interested in reading main space articles, then the Wikipedia app has some nice themes in dark, black, and sepia. Pelagicmessages ) C (09:48 Sat 16, AEDT) 22:48, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Glvatiekas, when somebody asked this here last June, there were a couple of answers that look as if they might be helpful. --ColinFine (talk) 23:44, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
I normally use Apple's "Smart Invert" accessibility feature at night, but Ive just installed Volker's user script to try out. (To give fair credit: Alex Hollender, Carolyn Li-Madeo, MusikAnimal, and Jdlrobson also contributed to that.) It just does a colour invert-and-rotate rather than being a fully designed-for-dark scheme, but looking at the CSS, they have put a fair effort into defining exceptions for the colour-flip, which might be an advantage over browser plugins or system-level transforms. Pelagicmessages ) C (14:36 Sat 16, AEDT) 03:36, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

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

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

@Alienhouse: I modified the text a bit to make it fit better, and to provide context, although I can't read the source either and have to take it at face value. Thanks for pointing this out. Symbol redirect vote2.svg Courtesy link: teamwork TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:42, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

What happened to all the Entertainment Weekly links?[edit]

Lately, every time I've seen an Entertainment Weekly article used as a source on Wikipedia, the link hasn't worked. In all of these cases, I've still been able to find the articles through google; they've just been moved to different web addresses, and unfortunately, the old urls aren't redirecting to the new ones. Does anyone know what caused this? I realize that it's Entertainment Weekly's fault and not Wikipedia's, but I'm curious if this is something a bot could fix or if I'll just have to fix each of these links as I come across them. --Jpcase (talk) 23:12, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@Jpcase: If the new urls are in a predictable format compared to the old urls, then one option is to request a bot to update all the old links to new links. Another option is to see if the material was archived, and point the urls to the archive (see Wikipedia:Link_rot#Internet_archives RudolfRed (talk) 02:11, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

January 16[edit]

Creating an article[edit]

Pls how do I create an article on Wikipedia.  Preceding unsigned comment added by Are you guys okay (talk ? contribs) 02:59, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

@Are you guys okay: The place to start is at WP:YFA, which will show you all the steps and then you can use the wizard there to create a draft for review. Creating a new article is not an easy task for a new user. The usual advice is to start with working to improve existing articles instead, and then when you have more experience work on creating a new article. RudolfRed (talk) 03:34, 16 January 2021 (UTC)