MyWiki:Help desk/Archive 71

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 65←Archive 69Archive 70Archive 71Archive 72Archive 73→Archive 75

AfD tag issue – needs correction

Hello,

The current AfD tag on this article Aditya Jha has a malformed “page” parameter (“Aditya Jha (Aditya Jha (2nd nomination) nomination)”) so the AfD template on the article has a malformed link. Nesting has made the template expand awkwardly.

It should point to: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aditya Jha (2nd nomination).

Could an experienced editor please help correct the tag?

Thanks! Buddhimatta (talk) 09:39, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

@Buddhimatta fixed includes copyedits 🐍 Thilio🤖 09:48, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
thank you very much! Buddhimatta (talk) 09:51, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

How to verify sources more quickly?

Hello - I am the nominator for Talk:Kızılırmak Delta/GA2. As you can see the reviewer @Alpha Beta Delta Lambda has spot checked about a fifth of the sources and found a few problems. Obviously reviewers are not expected to check all sources as doing so manually would take a very long time. Is there any tool I could use which would flag sentences which the cite might not verify so I could just check those manually?

Or indeed a tool which would flag surprising sentences so I could just check those? I tried asking Le Chat by Mistral AI but I could not figure out how it could do more than explain to me how to manually check sources.

Any other lateral thinking ideas welcome too Chidgk1 (talk) 08:52, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I asked claude.ai (you may need an account to use it, but the chat log below should be public).
It has some specific ideas to help with Kızılırmak Delta: (chat log). Asking better questions or using other language models may be better, claude is obsessed with exact figures yet can't refer to citation numbers correctly. Also make sure you don't use mobile Wikipedia urls, it can't read them.
In a different chat it mentioned the SIDE tool (research paper) which I don't believe is publicly available but may be on the right track. Commander Keane (talk) 09:39, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
I would avoid LLMs to help you analyse sources. qcne (talk) 09:41, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Profile Posting

How do I post my profile on Wikipedia Sibalplus (talk) 14:40, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Olusiji Balogun

Who is Aremo Olusiji Balogun

[Draft article removed]

Sibalplus (talk) 14:40, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Please see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Wikipedia is not really interested in how you describe yourself, but may, if you meet the notability criteria for politicians, summarise what independent, reliable sources say about you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:47, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

IP Issue -

Hi Admins,

I hope you're doing well. I wanted to share a concern with you regarding my Wikipedia account.

I created this account with the intention of contributing positively to Wikipedia, strictly following the site's guidelines and policies. My goal is simply to enjoy editing in my free time, as I find it both fun and educational. I love spending time on something that increases my knowledge especially in history and helps me better understand how Wikipedia works.

I initially created this account using my office IP address, where I sometimes edit during my free time. Recently, I received two user tags WikiGnome and WikiSloth which made me very happy and motivated me to contribute even more. I was so proud that I shared these tags with my colleagues.

However, today I noticed that two of my coworkers created new Wikipedia accounts using the same office IP. This has made me a bit nervous, as I’m worried their activity could affect my account. Unfortunately, someone from this IP created a live article that led to the IP being blocked for a few days.

I just want to make sure that my account remains in good standing. Could you please advise me on what I can do to protect my account, especially considering the shared IP situation? I have no connection to the other accounts and want to avoid being affected by any misuse from others on the same network. Jameskida (talk) 23:20, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Jameskida, and welcome to the Teahouse.
One of the advantages of creating an account is that it is more anonymous, in that the IP address you are connecting from is hidden. There are only a few editors who have been entrusted with the ability to even see the IP addresses that logged-in users are connecting from (the right is called checkuser, and they use it only to investigate plausible accusations of sock puppeting). So you should have no worry about your colleagues connecting on the same IP. ColinFine (talk) 15:21, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
Ahhh.. Big relief thank you thank you so much for the response. Jameskida (talk) 16:33, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Rude

A user named "Fabrice Ram" wrote a rude reply to my comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Equipment of the Belgian Air Component. What do I do? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 04:46, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Ignoring it is the most dignified (non-) response. -- Hoary (talk) 08:34, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
@Hoary if the user keeps on doing that, then we take action? ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 13:52, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
Yep. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:24, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
@Firefangledfeathers: THANK YOU!!! In 2009, it spins around the Wikipedia logo|120px ~Rafael! (He, him) • talk • guestbook • projects 15:27, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Correct way to escalate (vandalism -> logged out editing)?

I've encountered a user who's been making non-constructive edits and who I'm almost positive is the same as the IP (v6) who made the same non-constructive edits to other parts of the same article within minutes. When I warned the logged-in account, they responded with word salad from yet another IP, so I'm guessing their IP rotates.

It feels a little drastic to jump straight to SPI or AIV, but I can't seem to find an appropriate next-level warning template for the logged-out editing, and am looking for pointers as to next steps.

Looking for help about the general purpose course of escalation (as opposed to asking anyone else to step in just yet), but can provide the specific account / interactions here if that's more appropriate.

Thanks! -- Avocado (talk) 17:34, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Many new editors forget to log in, so it's not necessarily a sock puppet, even if it is the same editor. Such a case (as opposed to the use of multiple accounts) warrants SPI only if one person is really pretending to be more than one.
Please see WP:DR for further guidance. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:14, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
Yeah, that's why I'm wondering if there's some sort of a "hey, you need to stay logged in so you don't get pegged for sockpuppetry" warning template. -- Avocado (talk) 14:45, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
{{uw-login}}. You may find WP:Twinkle useful for locating and applying such templates. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:51, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
Thank you! Yes, I had been using Twinkle but apparently didn't use the right search term. Much appreciated! -- Avocado (talk) 15:00, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Notability and Redirect

 Courtesy link: Blue light bandits

Where can I get help regarding the notability of a subject? Specifically, an article I spent some time creating (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Blue_light_bandits&oldid=1301328494) - based on an interesting subject that I could not find on Wikipedia - was haphazardly forwarded with a redirect by a more experienced editor than myself. Another editor suggested I could just "revert" the forward, but I want to make sure I'm doing things in good faith, as I'm learning the ropes.

I found 100's of articles on the subject - and it would appear to meet obvious standards of being verifiable WP:V with significant coverage of reliable sources WP:RS (e.g., News24, TimesLIVE, IOL, BBC, Reuters). It was forwarded to Police impersonation, which is not a sufficient resource, as it lacks clear references to this specific type of criminal and gang, which is a precedent already set. Crime in South Africa is not specific enough, as this has been established as a specific gang, like Hells Angels - or more famous bank robbers of which there are many. The US has an entire grouping of List of gangs in the United States, whereas, despite South Africa currently having a huge issue with criminal activity, Category:South African gangsters, only Rashied Staggie, Lee McCall, Allan Heyl are listed.

It appears to be a specific and named gang activity, not merely a generic instance of police impersonation. It is subject of sustained and in-depth coverage, which is comparable to other documented gangs in Category:South African gangsters. And it's also of continuing relevance, with recent incidents reported as recently as last week and still actively discussed on social media. (See https://www.tiktok.com/@behindthescreamss/video/7530270290857692422) It was an accessible, centralized, well-sourced resource applicable to a useful encyclopedia for journalists, researchers, and travellers.

I'm lost though. I love some educated advice on what to do next. I'm frustrated that my work was knee-jerk removed without so much as a discussion. Thanks in advance for any help! Quepenamivida (talk) 19:49, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Quepenamivida
I think you have two choices, if you wish to pursue this.
Either take this as an instance of WP:BRD, and open a discussion with the editor that changed your article to a redirect - probably on the talk page of the article they redirected it to, but don't forget to ping them.
Or, you start again, using the WP:AFC process. You can copy the text from the old version that you linked to above to a new Draft, and then submit it for review. ColinFine (talk) 22:17, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
Thanks! I believe I tried your first suggestion and failed, so I will move to the second suggestion. Really appreciate it! Quepenamivida (talk) 22:59, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
Third choice: Another, uninvolved, editor (in this case, me) thinks the article should not have been redirected , and restores it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:04, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing - I really appreciate you. I'll keep working away on the article to make it excellent and continue to include more information and facts as notable sources report them. Thank you! Quepenamivida (talk) 21:25, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Can the "Digital Eel" page be restored?

I noticed that the page for the indie computer game developer "Digital Eel" has been removed. It's strange not to see it here because it has so much history. Can I find out why this was done, and how the page might be reinstated? Btw, I'm a co-flounder, I mean co-founder. Thanks. Wigandbean (talk) 02:46, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, Wigandbean, it was "soft deleted" as the result of this "AfD". The reader is almost invited to request its restitution (and given a link for doing so); but NB you'll need to have prepared "the reason you wish to have the article undeleted". As it happens, the article did have almost two decades of history, but that counts for naught. Try instead for something like "I have found several reliable, substantive, independent sources. Among these are: (i) [details], (ii) [details], and (iii) [details]. If the article is restored, I undertake to [details]." -- Hoary (talk) 04:43, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
Hi User:Wigandbean,
"The article on Digital Eel was deleted after a community discussion because editors found there wasn’t enough coverage in independent", reliable sources to meet Wikipedia’s general notability guideline.You can see the deletion log here.
Since you’re a co-founder of the company you have a conflict of interest when editing, this doesn’t mean you can’t help but it does mean you should avoid directly writing the article yourself. Instead, you can, Collect significant, independent, third-party sources (example, in depth news coverage, interviews not arranged by your company, reviews in notable publications). Work in your user sandbox to prepare a draft and request review from uninvolved editors via Articles for Creation. If new independent coverage exists since the deletion, you can also request undeletion so an admin can review whether it now meets the guidelines. 🐍 Thilio🤖 🐍 Thilio🤖 04:54, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
Thanks Thilio. Appreciate your attention very much.
I don't understand what happened or why. I understand, generally, reasons for deletion but I don't see specifics about this particular page. I must admit that I don't understand the terminology or process either. Still, I requested an undeletion though I am unsure what to do or specifically provide to help-- I don't know (or can't discern) what the offense was. Wigandbean (talk) 00:48, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
The article has been restored as Draft:Digital Eel. What you need to do now is show that the subject meets the requirements outlined at WP:GOLDENRULE. There is additional guidance on suitable sources at WP:NCORP.
When you have done that, submit the article for review, via the process described at WP:AFC. If the reviewer deems it ready, they will publish it to "mainspace". If not, they will give you further advice. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:22, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
Thanks so much. Will dig in. Wigandbean (talk) 23:57, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Andy Stafford

I have just tried to enter a profile about myself on your website. All the information is 100% accurate. However when I look at the way it is entered compared to other footballers there are no boxes that the information appears in. Is this something you edit and change once verified Andy Stafford 11 (talk) 06:30, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Andy Stafford 11. What you have written in User:Andy Stafford 11/sandbox is nowhere near close to an acceptable encyclopedia article. It is entirely unreferenced which is a violation of policy. Please study Your first article. Writing an autobiography is highly discouraged and almost never successful. Please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Cullen328 (talk) 06:47, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
[EC] User:Andy Stafford 11, you created an article draft in your "user page", User:Andy Stafford 11. Though well-intentioned, that's an improper use of the user page, which is instead where you, as a contributor, may if you wish write about yourself as a contributor. I've therefore moved it to User:Andy Stafford 11/sandbox. You can, if you really want to, do preliminary work on it there. However, attempting to write an article about yourself is rarely a good idea. (And if you succeed, the result will be outside your control.) Additionally, attempting to create an article about anything when you don't already have considerable experience of editing existing articles is hard work indeed. So I suggest that you let your draft sleep for a couple of months while you look for articles on footballers you know and -- using reliable, published sources (and not your memories, however clear, what the person wrote in email to you, etc) -- correct and augment those articles. You'll then have a clearer idea of what's involved in an article about yourself, and will be far better equipped to embark on a draft for it (if that's what you'll still want to do). -- Hoary (talk) 06:50, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Andy Stafford 11. I'm afraid that, like many people, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is.
If there is ever a Wikipedia article about you, it will not be for you to tell the world what you want them to hear. It will summarise what people unconnected with you have chosen to publish about you - whether you like what they say, or not. You would not own the article, you would not control it, and it may contain material you did not want it to. See WP:PROUD.
In addition, User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst ColinFine (talk) 10:20, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
@Andy Stafford 11 Adding to the above, consider asking for help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. If an article about you is possible, someone there might be interested in making one. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:21, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Joseph Blakesley

Joseph Blakesley

I think ref number 3 is wrong - is it a journal? - please fix if you can, thanks 49.184.232.220 (talk) 11:11, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

I don't know why you'd think it was a journal article. Perhaps "Cite web" first brings to mind conventional web pages and other things written for the web; this letter is of course different, but it's published on the web and there's no hint here that it's a "digitization" of something previously published elsewhere, so "Cite web" seems appropriate. (Does something else seem wrong?) -- Hoary (talk) 12:28, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Limtsui spread misinformation on battle of yultong

Limtsui kept changing chinese victory instead philippine victory in battle of yultong which mostly sources said Filipino Won that battle! Can you lock this after change filipino victory and reverse Limtsui and lock the battle of yulton in respect the soldier of filipino who fought for south korea. Majority on source filipino won the battle! NitetriciaHD (talk) 23:52, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

[Courtesy link: Battle of Yultong]
NitetriciaHD (and Limtsui), this is a dispute over the content of an article, it cannot be resolved here on the Help desk. If you are unable to discuss the matter with the other editor(s) involved (on the article's Talk page and/or your own User talk pages) and reach a consensus (and I agree this does not seem likely) you will need to follow one or more of the procedures described on the Project page Wikipedia: Dispute resolution: good luck!
As to the actual facts, I will only observe that many military engagements do not result in a "victory" for either side, so it is not always possible, let alone necessary, to specify one in the Wikipedia article.
Please, both of you also note that article talk pages and edit comments are strictly intended for discussions and summaries about improvements and edits to the article itself, not for engaging in provocative exchanges about other unrelated matters (particularly ongoing events occurring 74 years after the article's subject) – doing so will not help to resolve the factual (or interpretive) dispute in question. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.210.150.115 (talk) 02:39, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
Understandable! But Limtsui not! Even I use reliable sources Limtsui kept going. NitetriciaHD (talk) 02:46, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
Note: NitetriciaHD is temporarily blocked for 31 hours. Fabvill (Talk to me!) 04:08, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

I need help with getting vine video taken down in everywhere

Theres a church where they fake emotion (seems that way though I would call if I knew where this was)and stomp on the ground with arms giddy and running in place. I believe the video ( I would test it in court but I can't get emotion to be other than "a motion" and the video absorbs way too much emotion with emotes already being used in keyboard. I don't believe the people in video are black. Reviewer6161 (talk) 23:30, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

This is the Help Desk for the English-language Wikipedia. We have no control over Vine videos, or of anything else not hosted on Wikimedia Foundation servers. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:35, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Account recovery

I forgot my password and my WikiPedia account is linked to an email address from a domain that no longer exists. What are my options? 98.195.137.176 (talk) 20:24, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Not many. This scenario usually means that access to the account is lost and you will have to create a new account. There is a small possibility of recovery if you can find a browser on which you are currently logged in. See H:RP.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:24, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Hudon's Bay History

There is only one Hudson's Bay Staff house still in existence - and it is in Moose Factory Ontario - the ground floor is now a museum with many interesting artifacts and such and the second floor has 6 rooms for travellers along with shared kitchen, laundry, lounge and bathroom - 198.251.52.200 (talk) 01:59, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

I think you're saying that what's written in some article is mistaken. Please revisit that article, and once there look for and click on the link labeled "Talk". You'll arrive at the article's "talk page". On the talk page, describe the mistake. If at all possible, cite a reliable, published source for your suggested correction. -- Hoary (talk) 06:33, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
The Hudson's Bay Company remains at Moose Factory are mentioned in that article both in the last paragraph of the "History" section and the first paragraph of the "Attractions and tourism" section. Is it that you think they should be mentioned somewhere else? Deor (talk) 13:16, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Do we use internal links to sections in Wikipedia articles? So that you can jump from the lead to the relevant section? Polygnotus (talk) 13:20, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Sometimes, but rarely. Can you give an example of where you think one might be needed? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:25, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing No, because the one I happened to stumble across was not needed in my view. Polygnotus (talk) 13:29, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
OK, can you give us the link to that one?
Generally, if you see something that you think isn't needed, be bold and change it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:34, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

the film Desiree

I would like to see the film Desiree 2600:1005:B08F:23A2:E046:2C5D:52E:787 (talk) 23:20, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

This isn't something with which we can help you. -- Hoary (talk) 23:29, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Maps

Not really sure what my question is, but I'd be grateful for any thoughts on this situation.

As a result of an AFD discussion it was proposed that another article be merged into List of Shakespearean settings, and I've been working on performing the merge, including adding everything necessary to the list so that now it's (nearly...) comprehensive. Something I've inherited from the existing page are the three maps which can be seen there. One thing that is odd about them is that whoever prepared them was clearly much better informed than they could possibly have been from either of the articles which are now merging (since the maps contain correct information which the Wikipedia pages didn't), and made much more accurate use of the information than the articles did.

  • So my first question is how can I find out about the provenance of these maps - where they came from, whether they were extracted from reliable sources, how I can be certain they're not copyvios etc.?

And what I now think is that it would be ideal to have maps that reflect the current, more comprehensive, state of the page. In that regard my two questions are:

  • Is there some sort of app that I can use to create a map reflecting the information in the list? I'm not very keen on this idea since although I'm a very experienced Wikipedian this would be my first venture into amateur cartography.
  • Alternatively is there some kind of project within Wikipedia which specialises in this kind of thing, who I could approach to commission some new maps for the page?

Any thoughts gratefully received. AndyJones (talk) 12:50, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

The answer to your latter question is WP:Graphics Lab/Map workshop. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:27, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
The Commons pages for those maps show that they were created by András Bereznay. You could try asking him for a few more such maps - though he had a falling-out with Commons in 2018, and may not be keen on contributing again. If you want to try this, it's probably best that you ask him through me. And as Andy says, if he chooses not to help, the Map workshop is the best place. Maproom (talk) 14:49, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
Brilliant. Thank you @Pigsonthewing: and @Maproom:. If I go ahead with that I'll draft something up in a sandbox and let you know. AndyJones (talk) 12:30, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Article quality ratings

On a WikiProject page I see a table listing the number of articles in that project by quality rating such as “stub”, “start”, C, B, etc. what are the criteria used to place articles into these categories? Johnosaunders (talk) 03:34, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Johnosaunders see Wikipedia:Content assessment#Grades Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 04:04, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
They have to be reviewed to meet certain criteria; it gets specific and intense for good and featured articles. The criteria are things like quality of sources, length, detail, prose, etc. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 17:28, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

VJ Day

Someone forget its VJ Day today? 75.112.153.123 (talk) 16:38, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

See National Liberation Day of Korea, which is the link in the "on this day" section of the main page. Pedantically, it is not VJ day today but its 80th anniversary. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:52, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
Yes, you forgot to nominate it for commemoration on the main page. Next time, you may do so by following the guidance at WP:Selected anniversaries. Be sure to give adequate notice.
Don't worry, though, we forgive you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:16, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Of Speedy Deletion

Hello, friendly people (hopefully). I was wondering if an article being an autobiography counts as a criterion for speedy deletion? I looked at WP:SD, but I can't tell if autobiography would be part of G11. It would almost certainly constitute a COI, but I don't know about an SD criterion. Thanks, CoroneC0rnix-64 (talk). — Preceding unsigned comment added by CoroneC0rnix-64 (talk • contribs) 21:42, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

CoroneC0rnix-64 No, G11 is for unambiguous advertising or promotion. An Autobiography may or may not qualify for deletion under G11, a neutrally written autobiography based on independent, reliable sources would not. TSventon (talk) 20:52, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
While rare, we have some very good articles that historically started out as autobiographies. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:10, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

How to cite a reference source in the Notes list?

I have written a draft article with both both a lower-alpha note list (usually bio information about a person mentioned) and the usual reference list to sources. I use template "efn" to insert alpha notes. I would like to cite references at the end of some notes, to show where I got the bio information from. The efn template does not have a field for this. I tried doing it in edit source by inserting a cite template at the end of the note but that didn't work either. How do I make a reference at the end of a note? Preferably in Visual Edit. LPascal (talk) 02:01, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

@LPascal: I do not know how to do this in visual editor. In source editor, place the ref inside the efn, within the text field. Place the cite template inside the ref tags. Here is a worked example from the SpaceX Dragon 2 article:

{{Efn|Mikkelsen was born in the [[United Kingdom]], but is now a citizen of [[Norway]]. She wore the flag of Norway on her spacesuit during the spaceflight.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Bjørnstad |first=Nora Thorp |date=December 2, 2024 |title=Jannicke Mikkelsen blir første nordmann i verdensrommet: Her er det første bildet |trans-title=Jannicke Mikkelsen becomes the first Norwegian in space: Here is the first photo |url=https://www.vg.no/nyheter/i/vg8515/jannicke-mikkelsen-blir-foerste-nordmann-i-verdensrommet-her-er-det-foerste-bildet |access-date=March 10, 2025 |work=VG |language=no}}</ref>|group=crew}} -Arch dude (talk) 03:18, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

@Arch dude: Thank you so much for your help. I was able to add references at the end of my notes using your example. However it does not work the same as in visual editing. Mainly, I can't re-use an existing reference and have to add a reference as though it is a new one and it then appears as a repeated reference in the reference list. It's also very wearing on the eyes and difficult to edit in source code. I did find eventually that I could do the reference in the Efn template if I pasted in the raw source code at the end of the note in the efn template for the note field. However this is all very fiddly and time consuming and it would be great if the template creators could have an additional field in the EfN template that enabled me to insert a reference just like the Visual edit reference template. Thanks again, I have learned how to do something new but as it's so painstaking I may avoid referencing notes in future.LPascal (talk) 07:27, 26 August 2025 (UTC)


Where should I place the unblock template?

I'm trying to create "unblock" template., but I don't know where to put it.

The instructions say to add it to the "bottom". Does this mean I should post it at the very bottom of my "User talk" page? Am I not allowed to post it as a "reply" to the "Administrators"? Autisticattitudes (talk) 07:49, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, put it at the very bottom of your user talk page. You are of course welcome to reply to admins at any point in the process, but please don't use the reply tool to request a new unblock with the template. You may want to try using Wikipedia:Unblock wizard instead of faffing around with the template yourself. -- asilvering (talk) 08:51, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Minha Conta Foi Bloqueada Com Expiração Infinita

Oi, Então Minha Conta (Eduardo Gabriel569) Foi Bloqueada Com Expiração Infinita Porque, O Meu Outro Nome (Matos Edições) Foi Inadequado Ou Seja Impróprio. Mas Como Eu Sou Um Novo na Wikipédia, Eu Não Entendi Nada e Acabou o Que Acontecendo Né. Então Poderia Me Ajuda a Desbloquear Minha Conta?. Eduardo Gabriel569 (talk) 16:33, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

You are not blocked on English Wikipedia, which is the only place that this help desk relates to.
You are blocked on Portuguese Wikipedia, and the information about how to appeal the block is on your User talk page in the Portuguese Wikipedia pt:Usuário(a) Discussão:Eduardo Gabriel569 ColinFine (talk) 16:48, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Is it appropriate to integrate the source's text into each footnote?

On articles such as USS Columbia (1836), USS Raritan (1843), and especially USS Minnesota (1855), footnotes also incorporate the blocks of text that are referenced from original sources. I bring this up because this text is hard to read, impacts the formatting of the entire article, and had been slightly changed from the original source due to the integration of bracketed words and wikilinks. Would I be in the clear to remove them and insert standard footnotes, or is this a protected method of citation? GGOTCC 03:07, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Those citations use |quote= in {{Cite book}} or other citation templates, which is a standard method. The replacement of irrelevant parts by ellipses ("...") is also common.
You may, of course, edit the quotations, but I suggest you discuss on talk pages before doing anything radical. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:29, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
I do not think it appropriate. en.wiki articles are supposed to summarize their sources. If a direct quotation absolutely, positively, must be included in an en.wiki article, place the quotation in the article body, or in a separate §Footnotes section, and cite it; leave quotations out of the §References section.
Quotations should be brief, especially if you must use |quote= in a cs1|2 template; this quotation (permalink) is not brief. Long quotations like that can certainly run afoul of the publisher's copyright (not in this case because Naval History and Heritage Command is a US Government entity). Because this particular source is freely available online, there is no need to quote it so extensively, if at all.
Quotations require citations; citations do not require quotations.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:34, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

"...verse this book bible chapter correction?"

Revision bible catholic English standard Jeremiah 38:10 edit The Ethiopian, verse this book bible chapter correction? 131.106.76.134 (talk) 12:25, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

If you have a question about using Wikipedia, please ask it. -- Hoary (talk) 12:30, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Infobox for journal articles

Hi, I added an image of the front page to A Symbolic Analysis of Relay and Switching Circuits, but it's currently using {{Infobox book}}. Should it use something else for a journal article? —Matrix ping mewhen u reply (t? - c) 16:13, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Why? A Symbolic Analysis of Relay and Switching Circuits is a thesis, not a journal. Since there isn't an {{Infobox thesis}} template, {{Infobox book}} is a suitable substitute template, isn't it?
—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:48, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
@Trappist the monk: it is, just wondering if there is something even better :) —Matrix ping mewhen u reply (t? - c) 20:51, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Operation EAGLE CLAW

We were going to rescue 53 American hostages not 52 hostages. This is a repeated error. On 24/25 April 1980 there were 53 American hostage at the US Embassy in Tehran, Iran. Richard I Queen was released for medical reason on 11 July 1980. Queen was later diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. On 20 January 1981, there were 52 hostages released after 444 days of captivity.

I was a member of the rescue force, and I am in Wikipedia SGM (Ret.) Mike R. Vining, U.S. Army. 8.48.88.154 (talk) 21:04, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, but we need a reliable source that can be cited, in order to include that in any article here. Do you know of one? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:16, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
There are several, which I will add to the article e.g. Department of Defense, but all that is really needed is a number change. Uncontroversial statements don't need to be sourced, and the unsourced 52 is mentioned only once. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:59, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Symbols in tables

Hello,

I'm trying to reduce the number of reference calls to citations that are cited more than 50 times in a table. But I'm pretty new to tables, so I don't have many prototypes to borrow from.

MOS:LEGEND suggests that we present information with symbols such as "an asterisk (*), a dagger († ‡), or another typographical symbol accessible to those using screen readers." Looking at the choices of symbols we have, this makes a very short list. Too short for what I need.

Would it be allowed to use strings of letters such as "NYT", "PP", "WM" or even "([Author], [date])" or "[First author] & alii]"? Using acronyms is pretty standard in humanities, but I know I should not invent them for wiki's sake.

Thanks! Selbsportrait (talk) 16:32, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

@Selbsportrait: What's wrong with repeating references? It's the most helpful for readers (as they do not then have to decode any symbols or letters), and once reference has been named, then {{{1}}},
Lova Falk, you were wrong not to wait at least a week for a consensus. So, undo what you've done, keeping copies if you wish, and have another shot at seeing where the consensus is. Maproom (talk) 17:53, 2 September 2025 (UTC)
I strongly disagree with the suggested remedy. I think @Lova Falk made a mistake in not waiting but she subsequently expanded the total content across the original and 5 satellite articles by over 10,000 words, all carefully cited. Furthermore, to revert her work now would be at cross-purposes to the community discussion underway now at the AfD. A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 15:13, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation Help

I added a disambiguation to the Harvest Moon (Video Game) page which linked to the Harvest Moon (Neil Young Song) and this was deemed unconstructive. Maybe I just don't understand disambiguation's yet, but for future reference, what would be wrong with that kind of edit? MainlySpoons (talk) 15:52, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Your edit would make sense if you edited Harvest moon (disambiguation) or Full moon(where Harvest moon redirects). People who end up at Harvest Moon (video game) are not likely to be looking for the song; unless you can provide evidence that this is indeed a significant issue. Quite frankly there are probably already too many disambiguations on the video game article. 331dot (talk) 15:56, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
You were left a notice intended for people who vandalise Wikipedia. Your edit, while others may disagree with it (that's how Wikipedia works), was not vandalism, and the notice should not have been used. I have advised the editor concerned to that effect. Thank you for your contributions, and please do not let this unfortunate incident deter you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:07, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
@MainlySpoons: Your edit wasn't unconstructive so the warning was wrong. You just didn't appear to know our general rule WP:NOTAMBIGUOUS to only use hatnotes when the full title including parentheses may be confused with something else. The title Harvest Moon (video game) indicates it's about a video game so a hatnote to a song is not considered necessary, but there are hatnotes to other video game articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:13, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
I appreciate all the replies. I will keep them in mind when editing in the future! MainlySpoons (talk) 17:24, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Mobile editing in Wikidata

I don't know if this is the right place to ask, but adding statements to Wikidata entries in mobile mode seems impossible unless we switch to desktop mode. Since I am sparingly getting desktop time nowadays and I have a tremendous amount of data to add, what to do? Desktop mode in mobile doesn't always give a good view. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:11, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

The Wikidata devs are working on a mobile editing interface; a prototype version is currently being tested; see d:Wikidata:Usability and usefulness/Item editing experience/Mobile editing of statements. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:12, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
@Kailash29792: Maybe you just mean "Desktop mode on a small screen" but for the record, there is no "Desktop mode in mobile". There is just a desktop version and a mobile version. The desktop version is the same when used on mobile devices and a PC. Mobile devices just usually have smaller screens which cause layout differences (sometimes large differences due to responsive layout), but a small browser window on a PC should show the same. The bottom of both versions have a link to switch to the other version no matter which device they are shown on. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:29, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
Andy answered my question, so I'll leave it at that. Thanks. Kailash29792 (talk) 00:44, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Move file to Commons?

Hello! For the this file, File:Grand Rapids Downtown Market logo.png, would it be appropriate to move it to Commons? It is simple geometric shapes and text, but I wanted to check before moving forward. Thank you! WMrapids (talk) 12:58, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

No. Commons does not host non-free media. Everything on Commons is either public domain or has a free license. Even though the logo is simple shapes and text, the unique arrangement of shapes might cross the line to make it non-free. Also, the two shapes at the top with the metaball-like melded joint isn't "simple", that's a rather complex curve. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:56, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
@Anachronist: I'll nominate it for deletion then. Thank you! WMrapids (talk) 01:11, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

how do i know if i'm auto comfinded

i can't seem to find it would anybody help me? ArchieMan45 (talk) 00:29, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

ArchieMan45 According to Special:UserRights/ArchieMan45 you are autoconfirmed. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 00:33, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
OK thank you ArchieMan45 (talk) 14:16, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Election infobox

How much does a candidate or party Need to Have to appear on the infobox?

I want to help by creating some election Pages but i Don't Know what candidates to include in the infobox Tino il nabbo oopo (talk) 14:09, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

There is the Wikipedia:Five percent rule for many elections, although it doesn't apply to parliamentary elections, which are handled on a case by case basis. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 16:23, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Mar a lago

Your locked article mentions the 1997 suit against palm beach but does not state the settlement. Restrictions were largely lifted after the suit settled. Thanks for providing the world standard for reference material. 99.131.53.41 (talk) 16:12, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

You can suggest changes to that article at Talk:Mar-a-Lago. It will be helpful if you can provide a source (WP:RS) for any added content. It's possible the source is already in the article, but not certain. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:33, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Conflict of interest – Jonathan Sorrell

I am a very junior employee at Rathbones' PR firm and I edited the wikipedia page not knowing that I needed to declare a conflict of interest. Jonathan Sorrell is no longer the president of capstone and is now the CEO of Rathbones – is there any way of changing the page please? I am reporting myself for a conflict of interest.

So Sorry!!!!!! Terrible mistake I have been greatly chastised by my employer please could someone help me?

Best wishes, Poppy


Jonathan Sorrell Poppyhawkins (talk) 15:08, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

@Poppyhawkins I made an update to Jonathan Sorrell. I also edited your userpage a little: [1]
For future use, WP:EDITREQUEST might be helpful, but you are welcome to come here again. WP:COIADVICE mentions some stuff you can do yourself, but in general, doing what you just did is what you should do. Thanks for the update! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:40, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
Oh and btw, if you see him you can mention WP:A picture of you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:10, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Platforms

Just for my personal edification, what are the basic platforms used to access Wikipedia? Here's my current best guess, which I know would bear much improvement:

  • Windows desktop/laptop ← I use this exclusively
  • Apple desktop/laptop
  • Apple/iPhone mobile
  • Android mobile

I'm looking for distinctions only when they make technical differences to us. For example, can "Apple/iPhone mobile" and "Android mobile" be combined into "Mobile"? ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 20:30, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

1. Google :)
2. ChatGPT / Gemini / Alexa / Siri etc
Those never arrive as traffic 'at' wikipedia, but they are probably the vast majority of all 'uses of wikipedia'. When looking at what actually arrives:
3. Mobile Web (70% of all pageviews)
4. Desktop (30%)
5. Mobile App (tiny)
6. Kiwix (might actually be bigger than our own Mobile App), but also Kindle and other e-readers
7. game consoles etc etc
You can find some details here: https://analytics.wikimedia.org/dashboards/browsers and https://stats.wikimedia.org —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 21:14, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
Mandruss, I use the desktop site on my current Android smartphone, which messes with the statistics. Last time I checked, traffic analysts assume that I am sitting at a desk. Which is only true about 1% to 2% of the time. Cullen328 (talk) 05:21, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Hyphenated ethnic/nationality identity

Hello, I’m wondering what determines the use of a hyphenated ethnic and national identity when editing. For example, if a person was born in Canada but their parents were both born in Germany, would they be considered Canadian-German? Does this depend on their ties to the country, for example if the person was born in Canada but currently resides in Germany? Your input is much appreciated! 20m00 🗩 02:11, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Dunno about Canada, but in Australia, a person born in Canada with parents born in Germany would just be considered Canadian. For a person born in Canada but residing in Germany would just be Canadian, unless they formally become a German citizen. HiLo48 (talk) 03:14, 5 September 2025 (UTC)
The place you're from comes first, then the place you're to. So a German-Canadian is a German person who then became Canadian, or a Canadian person with German heritage. -- asilvering (talk) 03:24, 5 September 2025 (UTC)
20m00, in the lead sentence of the article, only citizenship should be mentioned, and only as verified by reliable sources. So, if reliable sources refer to a person as a dual citizen of Canada and Germany, then that descriptor may be appropriate. But simply having German ancestry, a German name, speaking German and being interested in German culture is not enough for the lead sentence if the person is not a German citizen. If well referenced, such ethnic aspects can be mentioned later in the article. Cullen328 (talk) 07:30, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Police misconduct in England

Category:Police misconduct in England

This is unlikely to be comprehensive. However there needs to be a link to misconduct by the West Yorkshire Police (WYP), in connection with the wrongful conviction of Stefan Kiszko. It was asserted in a TV documentary, that when the truth came to light, the WYP circulated a message to its staff, not to use the forensic scientist who, from the outset, had proven Stefan's innocence. In other words, the police were and may still be, keen to carry on convicting people who are innocent. I don't know if that was investigated and stopped, e.g. by HM Inspectorate of Constabulary. I will submit FoI requests on the issue.

I lack the necessary computer knowledge to post any details on Wikipedia, hence this message. 92.22.148.243 (talk) 06:28, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Murder of Lesley Molseed.   Maproom (talk) 07:12, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
Search for "Stefan Kiszko", and Wikipedia takes you to "Murder of Lesley Molseed". Are you suggesting the creation of an article titled "Misconduct by the West Yorkshire Police"? That's unlikely to happen, but scrupulously referenced and written material about this could be added to the article West Yorkshire Police. Adding it would only require elementary computer skills; it would however require nontrivial skills of evaluating sources, summarizing the best ones, citing sources, neutrality, avoidance of editorializing, etc. I suggest that you first practise such skills on articles about matters that aren't contentious; once you've acquired these skills, you can be more ambitious. -- Hoary (talk) 09:18, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
I think OP was suggesting that we add Category:Police misconduct in England to the article (My bad; I trimmed the subject heading and forgot to reinsert the full text, which I will do now); but that would not be appropriate without cited content on the article showing that misconduct was proven.
Whether suitable sources can be found needs to be discussed on the article talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:45, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
My recommendation is very simple. There is no need for references to be searched for and provided under the title of, 'Police misconduct in England'. Details of the Stefan Kiszko scandal are all over the internet. His name simply needs to be added with all the others, under the Wikipedia subject title of 'Police misconduct in England'. Could someone please do that, in the public interest and in the name of justice? 92.18.161.228 (talk) 16:22, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
There IS a need for sources and to suggest there isn't doesn't bode well for this request. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:29, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
No; see also WP:V. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:55, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
No. There are many reliable sources on the Internet. There are many (probably far more) utterly unreliable sources on the internet. This means that "All over the internet" is an unreliable source.
If you think something should be added to an article, it is up to you to find (and cite) a reliable source for it. ColinFine (talk) 08:51, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Question about my sandbox draft review

Hello, I have contacted you before with this question/issue and haven't received any reply. I noticed it is not yet live on Wikipedia, and I wanted to understand the reason. I recently created a draft article in my sandbox titled “Solitaire Moissanite Ring” and submitted it for review. Could you please let me know if the topic does not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines, or if there are issues with formatting, references, or neutrality? I would really appreciate any feedback on how I can improve the draft to meet Wikipedia’s standards. Thank you for your time and guidance. Best regards, Loosemoissanite (talk) 11:00, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

@Loosemoissanite I looked at the first 5 refs in your draft User:Loosemoissanite/sandbox. One is just a startpage of something. One is Wikipedia, see WP:RSPWP. None of them even mentions the subject, "Solitaire Moissanite Ring", see WP:N. WP:LLM may be of interest to you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:06, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
Hello, Loosemoissanite. In what way did you submit the draft for review? To do so requires that the page contains a template with a big blue "Submit for review" button that has to be clicked – I can see no evidence that your sandbox draft has ever contained the template and, therefore, has been submitted.
I suggest that you instead create a new WP:Draft through the standard Wikipedia:Articles for creation procedure, which will automatically include the submission template. You can paste your sandbox content into it, and then blank your sandbox to avoid possible confusion between the two (something that does happen).
I notice also that you previously asked a similar question on the Talk page of the sandbox. Unless you drew attention to it in some way, there is no reason for any other Wikipedia editor to have been aware of it, unless they were already engaged in dialogue with you on that talk page (no-one actively monitors all of the millions of User, Draft, Sandbox, Article or other Talk page on Wikipedia, although many may be on interested persons' Watch lists). Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.98.196 (talk) 12:12, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
I think submitting the draft by putting {{subst:submit}} at the top of it is better than making a new draft. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:17, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
@Loosemoissanite You did not submit this sandbox page for review, so no editor has seen it.
I have submitted it for review and moved it to the proper location at Draft:Solitaire moissanite but please take the advice of @Gråbergs Gråa Sång qcne (talk) 13:24, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Loosemoissanite.
This is probably not what you wanted to hear, but: User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst ColinFine (talk) 08:57, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

publishing a profile on Wikipedia

how to publish a profile on Wikipedia James Ginono (talk) 14:16, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

@James Ginono What do you mean by a profile? Your use page or a page about someone or yourself? MallardTV Talk to me! 14:30, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
i wanted Creat draft biography for James Ginono Burure James Ginono (talk) 16:34, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

If you want a Wikipedia article about yourself, organization, company etc the answer is you don't. See Your first article for advice on this. User pages should not be used for this either.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 14:42, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

i wanted Creat draft biography for James Ginono Burure James Ginono (talk) 16:35, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
James Ginono, please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY which advises that Writing an autobiography on Wikipedia is an example of conflict-of-interest editing and is strongly discouraged. The purpose of your user page is to tell other editors about you as a Wikipedia editor . Cullen328 (talk) 16:40, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

User:James Ginono should be a draft article, but it would have little chance of being accepted in its current form.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:35, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

what should i do so that it is accepted James Ginono (talk) 18:55, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
Are you writing about yourself?
You need to not post a resume, you need to summarize what independent reliable sources choose on their own to say about Mr. Burure. 331dot (talk) 18:58, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
could you kindly assist James Ginono (talk) 19:04, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
Again, are you writing about yourself? 331dot (talk) 09:15, 5 September 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @James Ginono. It is extremely unlikely that anybody here will be willing to put in their voluntary time to help you write an article about yourself - not impossible, but very unlikely.
Part of this is because a major part of the work of writing an article is finding the substantial independent reliable sources (see WP:42) that are a non-negotiable requirement in order to establish that the subject is notable in the special sense that Wikipedia uses the word. Most of us are not notable in this sense, even if we may be important, or influential, or popular, or famous.
If you do meet those criteria, then it is likely that at some point somebody will choose off their own bat to write an article about you. (It will not be your article, you will not control it, and it may at some point contain material that you do not like. See WP:PROUD) If you do not, then there is no point in anybody investing any time in trying to do so.
My personal view is that anybody who tries to create a Wikipedia article about themselves (or their company, or their band) is here for no purpose other than promotion, which is forbidden anywhere in Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 09:17, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

How to submit sandbox article for review?

I watched a video that said I should use the "Submit your draft for review" button OR the "more" button but neither of those buttons appear for me? Thanks in advance for your advice.

Thanks!

Jen HCBLaw (talk) 17:31, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

I have moved the draft to draft space(the preferred location for drafts) at Draft:Savala Nolan and added the appropriate information for you to submit it. However, your draft is completely unsourced. We need to know where your information is coming from, please see Referencing for beginners. The draft also reads like a resume, it should not merely list her accomplishments, it should summarize what independent reliable sources have chosen on their own to say about her, showing how she is a notable person. 331dot (talk) 17:37, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
Thank you so much! I did copy the format and tone of a few others, which were also very "resume" ish. I will dig around for some other wiki pages for inspiration. Will work on my referencing too. I appreciate your quick response. HCBLaw (talk) 18:05, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
Hello, @Jen Jones - Henderson Center. Unfortunately, we have thousands and thousands and thousands of articles which, if they were submitted for review today, would not be accepted; but few volunteer editors want to spend their time trawling through these to improve or delete them. Do not assume an existing article is satisfactor unless it is a good article or a featured article. (See other stuff exists)
Please note that if you are in any way employed by the Henderson Center and working on an article related to it, then you are regarded as a paid editor, and you must make a formal declaration of that status.
User:ColinFine/PractiseFirst ColinFine (talk) 09:27, 5 September 2025 (UTC)
If you use the Article Wizard, the submission information is provided. Though a sandbox can be submitted, an actual draft is better. 331dot (talk) 17:40, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Draft and its redirect

I made "Draft:A", and "A" is a redirect page. To move from "Draft:A" to "A" in the future, I saw some people remove "A" (which is redirect) for this reason. Thus, how can I request administrator to delete kind of these redirects? Or should I open discussion for it? I have searched about this but I failed. Camilasdandelions (talk!) 17:11, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

@Camilasdandelions: you can use Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests to request publication of "Draft:A", where "A" already exists a redirect page. TSventon (talk) 17:19, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
@Camilasdandelions: It is a *little* more complicated, If the redirect page "A" has only been created with any other edits, then in some cases, it can be moved over top of without a problem. If it has some activity (like the addition of categories, and some templates) then Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests will be easy. If "A" has a complicated history (particularly if A used to be an article and was turned into a redirect as an alternative to deletion) then the next step can be in WP:RFD, but there are not many that are *that* ugly.Naraht (talk) 19:20, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
@Camilasdandelions: another case when deletion might not be appropriate is if "A" is a redirect page for an artist called A and you are creating an article for a different A, perhaps a biologist. In that case it could make sense to move the redirect page to "A (artist)" and update the incoming links. WP:RMT is for uncontroversial moves, if the move is not straightforward, WP:RM is better. TSventon (talk) 11:37, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

User information

I have taken over a job, where I am responsible for updating info on our Wiki page. I was given no details about a log in of any kind. DO i need this to make basic changes? 70.74.180.251 (talk) 18:16, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

It's not required that you have an account, but it would be better if you did as it is much easier for you to make the required disclosures. You must disclose your status as an employee tasked with editing Wikipedia, see the paid editing policy. You should also review conflict of interest and how to make edit requests. In most cases, you should make requests on the talk page and not edit the article about your company directly. I would also suggest that you read WP:BOSS, and have the superior that assigned you this task read it, too.
I would suggest that you think of it less as "our Wiki page" and more as a Wikipedia article about your company. This may change your mindset a bit. 331dot (talk) 18:22, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
Hello. It sounds as if people your company have a common misconception that a Wikipedia article about them is in any way theirs or controlled by them.
It is not, and it may be edited by almost anybody in the world except somebody associated with the company - who are welcome to make edit requests, but should not normally edit the article directly. ColinFine (talk) 09:30, 5 September 2025 (UTC)
Is that South Alberta Light Horse? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:50, 5 September 2025 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://70.231.62.181/index.php?title=MyWiki:Help_desk/Archive_71&oldid=24941619"