Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome to the help desk. This place is meant for questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia. (Am I in the right place?)
  • For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
  • Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
  • 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 four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your post. Alternatively, you can click on the signature icon (Wikipedia edit toolbar signature icon) on the edit toolbar.
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

December 1[edit]

University ranking RfC[edit]

A few months ago I found an RfC detailing whether or not articles about universities should have its ranking in the lead. I believe that consensus was to keep it out, but I've been unable to find this. Does anyone know where this is? I've removed a few rankings from a few leads but worry that I've made a mistake if I cannot find the RfC. —Panamitsu (talk) 00:22, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Panamitsu: Wikipedia:College and university article advice#Rankings links to WP:HIGHEREDREP. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:55, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am having trouble with Citations from a website through a proxy[edit]

I am editing an article and for the first time I have decided to use some information from some of the databases that my University provides me. However when I click to publish my edits I am given a warning about proxies. I was wondering what to do?

Thank you for your time,

Wnettles03 (talk) 03:24, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Wnettles03. It may be useful to read Wikipedia:Open proxies. If you need more information, Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) is the best place to ask. Cullen328 (talk) 03:30, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
User:Wnettles03, if you're citing sources available to you only through your university's subscription, you shouldn't use the URL from those sources when citing them, since these will be proxy addresses only usable when logged in to your university's computer network. You can just copypaste the citation information instead. Many publishers have a "cite" button (sometimes a double inverted comma like ) that will copy a formatted citation into your clipboard. Folly Mox (talk) 13:14, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixing disambiguation links[edit]

After closing the requested move at Talk:Rebase, Estonia and converting the redirect into a disambiguation page. I am having trouble fixing the links. At Vana-Kuuste, the template {{Adjacent stations}} will not target the right page after changing Rebase to Rebase, Estonia. Lightoil (talk) 05:07, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Lightoil:  Done. {{Adjacent stations}} works by turning the name into a link through Module:Adjacent stations and the specific list for Elron Module:Adjacent stations/Elron, where the station's destination link can be changed relatively easily. I assume you were trying to just change Rebase to Rebase, Estonia in the template in the article, which causes the template to output a link to Rebase, Estonia (railway station), which is the default behavior of the template when it isn't listed there. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 05:20, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Melecie thank you for your help. Lightoil (talk) 05:56, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article is getting declined.[edit]

How to improve and where to improve so that it does not get disapproval.

Draft: Jitendra Sharma Karmja (talk) 08:20, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft:Jitendra Sharma has a common problem, because it looks more like a CV or LinkedIn profile than an encyclopedia article. There is also a likely conflict of interest situation here. The article needs to be a lot more neutral and based on secondary sources.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:59, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Providing proof to Wiki[edit]

Dear All,

I am currently writing a Wikipedia article for my employer. He would like for it to include information about his perosnal life, such as the names of his parents, spouse and children. And while I have no issue with finding sources that talk of his business ventures and public life, there isn't a single one where the afore-mentioned personal information is mentioned.

He is willing to provide a birth certificate that states the name of his parents, as well as those of his children and the certificate of his marriage in order for Wikipedia to approve this information. Alternatively, his English lawyers can validate the information touched-upon in the article. Do you think this would in any way suffice?

Thank you in advance for your help! Jandos.azerbay (talk) 09:25, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jandos.azerbay, you don't just have a COI, you are paid for this work. Please read Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure carefully and do what it says. And here in en:Wikipedia, you are creating not Бейсенбаев, Эмис Кельгенбаевич but instead Draft:Nurlan Bizakov. Readers will hope that your biographee has a satisfying family life, but they're unlikely to be much interested in it. So skip any mention of it, particularly as what en:Wikipedia regards as reliable sources would have to be cited. By contrast, a question more likely to be on readers' minds is instead: How would somebody whose work experience was just four years as an employee of Jambyloblgaz manage to found his own company? And additionally, how was it that "He made his fortune in a diverse range of business activities?" (Which business activities would they have been? After all, most business ventures fail, and only a tiny few produce owners of multiple racehorses.) -- Hoary (talk) 10:25, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You might also want to read WP:BOSS. Bazza (talk) 10:59, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jandos.azerbay: In addition to all the advice above I strongly suggest you forewarn your boss about why an article about him isn't necessarily a good thing. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:53, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixing the citation styles to fulfill the template on International Criminal Court[edit]

reference info for International Criminal Court
unnamed refs 260
named refs 69
self closed 70
bare ext link refs 7
cs1 refs 366
cs1 templates 367
cs1-like refs 1
cs1-like templates 1
cs2 refs 1
cs2 templates 1
sfn templates 7
rp templates 5
uses ldr yes
cleanup templates 3
dead link templates 1
webarchive templates 33
use xxx dates dmy
cs1|2 df dmy 9
cs1|2 dmy dates 97
cs1|2 mdy dates 2
cs1|2 ymd dates 124
cs1|2 last/first 94
cs1|2 author 1
List of cs1 templates

  • Cite book (19)
  • cite book (2)
  • cite journal (4)
  • Cite journal (8)
  • Cite news (17)
  • cite news (34)
  • Cite press release (2)
  • cite SSRN (1)
  • Cite web (193)
  • cite web (87)
List of cs2 templates

  • Citation (1)
List of cs1-like templates

  • cite Q (1)
List of sfn templates

  • Sfn (1)
  • sfn (6)

Hi all

I've been doing some work on International Criminal Court article and there is a template on top saying the article has an 'unclear citation style' however I'm not really sure what this means or how to fix it. Could someone who knows please take a look? The only thing I can see is one 'general reference' which could just be integrated as a normal reference easily (although if it was just that I don't understand why a template was added.

Thanks very much

John Cummings (talk) 09:26, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

John Cummings, the "Footnotes" aren't footnotes; they're references. There's a long list of "Further reading". I have no comment on the quality and citeworthiness of what are listed, but with one exception the list gives no indication of why anyone should read any of these or what within anything listed they should pay particular attention to, and so the list is almost useless. The exception is the reference to Luban. Within the article, find the assertion that would be backed up by the reference to Luban, and turn add an indexed, conventional reference to Luban. Delete the rest of the "Further reading". -- Hoary (talk) 10:40, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@John Cummings: The reason for the template was in a comment next to it. I am its author, I do not remember why I did not use |reason=. Anyway, I re-added the template and put the reason in the parameter. Janhrach (talk) 15:12, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Janhrach thanks very much for the explanation, I did some work on it before but have no idea how to fix the stuff you've outlined. Do you know a way of highlighting just the problematic references? Also what would be a good enough resolution? Just redoing the refs using the cite tool in VE? Also do you know if there are any places I can make a request that this stuff gets fixed by a tool? I could do it manually but I won't if there is a smarter way of doing it and I can spend my time improving the content :) Thanks John Cummings (talk) 07:01, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@John Cummings: Unfortunately, there is no good tool to fix the references of this type. The problem is that IAbot added archive links to the references some time ago. I usually fix this type of references manually, like wikitext. The tool in the VE has a problem – the only thing it can use from non-template is the URL – archive links (this is problem on dead links), access dates (problem when the URL changes), and titles (problem on PDFs) are discarted. Anyway, this is a low-urgency issue. Janhrach (talk) 17:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I can’t log in. My question is How much money in subsides been given to Bomdardier in its life span in Canada? (talk) 15:33, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there! I presume you're asking about Bombardier Inc., and I don't see the answer in the Wikipedia article. If you feel this information should be added to the article, you can talk to other editors interested in this company by starting a new topic at the article's talk page: Talk:Bombardier Inc. GoingBatty (talk) 15:49, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You can also try asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:14, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"What links here" for a specific section/anchor?[edit]

There in an anchor mid-section in Magnetic resonance imaging that was previously not functioning because HTML markup was put into the id field of the anchor. I fixed it, but in doing so, it would technically change the anchor id from "T<sub>2</sub>[…]" to "T2[…]". I would prefer not to break any links that point to this specific anchor, if they exist. Barring going through every single entry in the What Links Here special page for MRI, can I filter those by ones that have a particular anchor? Kimen8 (talk) 18:01, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Kimen8: insource:"T2" linksto:"Magnetic resonance imaging" doesn't find attempts to link the old anchor. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:40, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. I will retain that search query. I often forget about the advanced search operators. Kimen8 (talk) 18:42, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Kimen8: It appears some of the special characters were interfering with the search syntax. insource:"T sub 2 sub-weighted" linksto:"Magnetic resonance imaging" looks more correct but still finds no attempted links. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:52, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see. Thank you again. Kimen8 (talk) 18:59, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]



Hi, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse! I'd appreciate it if you turned off your caps lock key in the future, as it comes across as shouting. We at the teahouse have nothing to do with the fundraising, which is handled by the Wikimedia Foundation which runs Wikipedia. You may reach them at However, you can disable the fundraising banners by registering an account and disabling them in your preferences. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 18:39, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If "letters" means emails then see donate:FAQ#Why have I received a fundraising email even though I have already donated recently? I don't work with fundrasing and have no access to inside information so I cannot say how closely that answer is followed. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:44, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please also understand that there is absolutely no way that anyone on Wikipedia can detect whether or not someone using the device currently having a particular IP has (already) donated. Firstly, most IPs are now dynamic, so your device's current IP is likely not the one it had yesterday or will have tomorrow – it likely was and will be someone else's; secondly, multiple people may be sharing the same device; and thirdly, the Wikimedia Foundation, to whom donations actually go, does not link donations received to the IP they are received from (if that even applies, since after all one can, I believe, post a cheque). This is in part to ensure impartiality in editing – we cannot know who has donated, so we cannot be influenced by what might be perceived as bribery. {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 22:18, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would like to add the template circa and remove the full stop from the first caption (for MOS:CAPTIONS), but in non-visual mode I cannot find the image (first time this has happened to me); where is it? JackkBrown (talk) 21:35, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JackkBrown: It the line directly below the {{short description}} template, as [[File:Arabischer Maler der Palastkapelle in Palermo 004.jpg|thumb|right|250px|Arabic painting made for the Norman kings (c. 1150) in the [[Palazzo dei Normanni]], originally the emir's palace at Palermo.]]. Note that you can edit captions and insert templates in the VisualEditor if you prefer. GoingBatty (talk) 21:54, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@JackkBrown: You use the mobile site where both infoboxes and lead images can be displayed later than they appear in the wikitext. The code is at the top. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:56, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Pregnant person"[edit]

Is there consensus for whether "pregnant woman" should be changed in articles to say "pregnant person"? I thought I had seen something somewhere about this, but can't seem to locate it now. Kimen8 (talk) 22:02, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I did manage to locate WP:GENDER which seems to indicate that "pregnant women" should be preferred. Are there other guidelines? Kimen8 (talk) 22:06, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Here is the relevant page in the NIH style guide, for what it's worth. It appears that it was updated just last month. I'll just put the whole policy here, {{xt}} use mine:

Both pregnant women and pregnant people are acceptable phrases. It is not always necessary to avoid the word women by substituting phrases like birthing people, or people with uteruses, especially in public health content. Gender neutral terms like pregnant patients, pregnant people, birth parent, or other wording as applicable (e.g., pregnant teens), present an inclusive alternatives. Use judgement and context to determine whether to use pregnant women, pregnant people, pregnant patients, or other inclusive descriptors. Specific phrasing like people with uteruses can be helpful when writing NOFOs or advertising studies to ensure only eligible participants are enrolled for the specific research conducted.
Using more limited and specific language is sometimes important. For instance, if discussing a study that only involves pregnant cisgender women, gender-specific language (pregnant women) would be most accurate to reference that study’s findings. If the word women is preferable, but transgender and nonbinary people are also referenced, phrasing like women and other pregnant patients can provide an inclusive alternative.

Remsense 22:49, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To me it looks like it proscribes pregnant men and women as confusing, which I agree with, but doesn't comment on pregnant people. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 22:52, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Problem with template Infobox Russian city[edit]

There is something wrong with the template "Infobox Russian city". The article Yakutsk is showing the reference for the population estimate as "Unable to format this reference". However, the reference is not actually found in the article. The infobox has been there since 19 March 2007, and viewing that version is showing the reference as "Unable to format this reference" even though there are no ref tags in that version of the article. What is wrong here? JIP | Talk 23:01, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JIP: The error contained a link to this documentation, which indicated that there is a problem with the associated Wikidata item. Specifically, the documentation states "The reference to be displayed has to have at least title (P1476) and reference URL (P854) properties." The "population" entry for 2018 had three references, including one URL with a title and one URL without a title. The URL without a title was for a spreadsheet that's no longer online, so I removed it. I then reloaded the Wikipedia article and the reference now looks good. GoingBatty (talk) 23:24, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's always a wikidata issue... Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 00:07, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Word "prosciutto" on the Italian cuisine page[edit]

Is there a function that allows me to know how many times the word "prosciutto" is repeated on the Italian cuisine page and precisely where? JackkBrown (talk) 23:55, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Use the find feature in your web browser, likely ctrl+F. Remsense 00:01, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Remsense: I work from my mobile phone. JackkBrown (talk) 01:03, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That would really be helpful to know on initial request. Also, I am not sure what category of 'function' you were requesting, since it would be highly variable depending on platform. Hoping you use the Wikipedia mobile app, there is a "find" button that does this also, for me it's at the bottom of the editing window. Remsense 01:08, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@JackkBrown, telling us that you are using a mobile device is slightly helpful, but we also need to know whether you're using the Wikipedia app or a browser, and if the latter, which browser you're using. Most mobile browsers have a "find in page" function or something similar, but the details differ between browsers. CodeTalker (talk) 05:25, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Remsense: Finally, thanks to you, I have discovered a very useful tool with which I can search for all dubious words without having to read the whole article (note: Wikipedia app). JackkBrown (talk) 09:12, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm happy I could help! Remsense 19:23, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

December 2[edit]

IP user's cannot use Thank feature?[edit]

I understand that WP:THANK cannot be used to thank an IP user for their edits. While logged out earlier today, I saw that the "thank" link does not show up at all in the page history. Are IP editors prevented from giving thanks? Help:Notifications/Thanks only says You can only thank other registered users I don't see anything there that says IP users can't send thanks. Is this behavior intentional or something I should report to WP:VPT as a problem? RudolfRed (talk) 00:21, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Other registered users makes me think that it's working as intended. --Onorem (talk) 00:24, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It also says, "To thank other users or see the thanks you have received, you must be a registered user and be logged in." - So, yep. --Onorem (talk) 00:28, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Missed that part. Thanks! RudolfRed (talk) 00:31, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Correcting errors while avoiding COI[edit]

If the subject of a biographical article also happens to be a Wikipedia editor, how can that person address factual errors in said article? Thank you. Sylvan1971 (talk) 00:57, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mention it on the talk page with disclosure, and point to reliable sources that are not close to you, because those are what Wikipedia writes based off of, not anecdote or scuttlebutt. Remsense 01:09, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Sylvan1971:However, since the article is about a living person (you), you or anyone else may delete anything that is not cited to a reliable source: see WP:BLP. You may not directly add new information or "correct" existing information, because as you say you have a COI. request such changes on the article's talk page and add {{edit COI}}. -Arch dude (talk) 03:42, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted content[edit]

My draft is all gone Nahla17 (talk) 03:31, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nahla17: I don't see any other contributions on your account and I don't see any messages on your talk page. What was the exact name (or URL) of your draft? GoingBatty (talk) 03:49, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I take it from contributions at c:File:Personal pair.jpg that this is in reference to Draft:Derby Shoe, for which no log entries exist. Nahla17, there are a couple things that could have happened here: if you had the editing interface open for a very long time without publishing an edit (usually 24 hours or more), the editor software will lose its cache and be unable to publish your changes. If you were doing too many other things with your browser or your device in general, your browser may have unloaded the tab with the editing interface open, losing your progress (I've had some pretty complicated and time-consuming edits lost because I tabbed into my messages app to reply to a friend about something).
The editing software built into Wikipedia does not automatically save input. If you're planning on making big, time-consuming edits, it's good practice to draft them offline in a separate app that will autosave your work, and copypaste that into the editor, or get into the habit of tapping "Publish" every so often. Folly Mox (talk) 09:33, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A second bit of advice would be to edit the existing article Derby shoe rather than writing a new article on the same subject. Folly Mox (talk) 09:40, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can someone fix the error in reference no. 5 of this article? Thankyou.zoglophie•talk• 08:07, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Fixed. Janhrach (talk) 10:26, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Misleading image formerly used for illustrating a FA[edit]

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

I have filed a deletion request at Commons on File:Australiformis Distribution.png. The image is still used on some internal Wikipedia pages relating to its usage as an illustration to a FA. Could somebody look into this? Janhrach (talk) 10:37, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, it's a rather ridiculous map. The one "keep" "!vote" at c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Australiformis Distribution.png makes no sense to me. Yes, it still appears in three pages of en:Wikipedia. (None of the three is an article.) But what is this "looking into" that you're asking for? -- Hoary (talk) 11:44, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Janhrach you could ask at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article whether the file should be removed from their pages. A link to Talk:Australiformis#Incorrect distribution map would provide context. TSventon (talk) 12:41, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, I will. This is what I meant by "looking into this", Hoary. I had no idea where should I bring this up. Thanks for the suggestion. Janhrach (talk) 13:55, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

How can I object to my profile being removed?[edit]

This recent action was part of a personal attack that was motivated by "shorting stocks". Is there a recourse?


John Nosta JohnNosta (talk) 13:31, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

...that was 11 years ago? ltbdl (talk) 13:34, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wikipedia is not a social media site, we don't have profiles here. There's a thing call user page, where any registered user can create and edit for themselves; and there's articles about particular person, which seem to be what you are referring to. The article about you was removed in this AfD discussion, and since the discussion has already closed you can't contribute to it anymore. If you disagree with the deletion outcome, you can bring it up at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Please do not recreate the page unless you can address the concerns brought up in the discussion. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 14:08, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is the Heart of Illinois Down Syndrome Association notable. MagicalPrince863 (talk) 15:41, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, there do not seem to be enough in-depth coverage of the organization from reliable and independent sources. Books and news articles only have passing mentions of the organization, and other things such as the organization's own website, social media presence and profiles in databases do not establish notability. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 19:18, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


RE: Mark Smith, novelist. 1935-2022. Hello, I am the widow of Mark Smith and would like to expand and update his description. The source of the details is the writer himself, compiled before his death. Is it possible to just use this text to replace the one that now appears? ˜˜˜˜ Kathy cone smith (talk) 17:22, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Certainly not. Wikipedia relies upon information already published by reliable sources such as books and magazines. An autobiography, most especially one that was never published by a source which does factchecking, is no substitute. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:04, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See WP:AUTO for why this isn't a good idea for a Wikipedia article.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:19, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Kathy cone smith: Please do publish this biography somewhere. You have many choices. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not one of them. We do not have a paid editorial staff or other means to independently verify your statements, or even to verify that you are who you say you are. Our entire content creation model must therefore be centered on the use of published reliable sources. -Arch dude (talk) 18:25, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Courtesy Link: Mark Smith (novelist).
Kathy cone smith, belated condolences for your loss. Our existing article about your late husband could certainly benefit from expansion, but Wikipedia is strict about including only facts that have already been published in Reliable sources, and citing the facts to those sources. Unfortunately this excludes unpublished information known to a subject's family/friends/associates, and even to the subject themself where alive. Wikipedia is quite strict about this, to protect subjects' interests: see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, which also applies to recently dead persons.
Your best course would be to find what facts, not yet in the article, do appear in published sources, and list those on the article's Talk page along with the fullest possible bibliographic details of the source pieces, and internet links where they are available (although offline printed sources are perfectly acceptable – libraries can access almost anything ever printed).
If you can do that, then disinterested editors can assess the material and add it if appropriate. It would be preferred if you didn't add it to the article yourself because you have an obvious Conflict of interest and because editing articles according to Wikipedia's procedures is harder than it looks for those unpracticed in it. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 10:01, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]



Trust this note finds all well there,

Regarding "donations" to this site: It has been my practice to contribute here, however, serious questions with doubts as to credibility have come to light. Certain language usage creating an awareness which seems political in nature, rendering an intended slant to details being sought. This is not appropriate as (a so called information source of any reliablity) for just the facts.

Additionally, and very significantly, why might donations be needed for a misinformation arm of government agencies be warranted, Please?

Thanks, God Bless🙏🏻🕊🤔 2603:6080:4F04:C00:CCD6:3B1B:9053:F93D (talk) 20:19, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Donations have nothing to do with content. If you have donation questions, please email If you have suggestions to improve an article, start a discussion on that article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 20:30, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wikipedia is run by the private non-profit Wikimedia Foundation and doesn't have ads or sell user information. Nearly all editors are volunteers from around the World but there are computer costs and a paid staff doing different things like making the software and maintaining servers. The English Wikipedia has around six million articles written and edited by thousands of volunteers. There are hundreds of other language versions with their own articles and editors. The Wikimedia Foundation which receives donations is also running several other Wikimedia Projects. There are tens of millions of total pages. Everybody can find something they don't like. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:41, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is quite possible, likely even, that some Wikipedia content is improperly influenced by agencies of various goverments. But I don't see how donations are relevant to this. Us volunteers (and for that matter paid government agents and other abusers of our policies) don't see any of the money that is donated. Maproom (talk) 23:32, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Experienced Wikipedia editors place great emphasis on specificity. In a project so vast, we cannot act on vague, non-specific complaints. Cullen328 (talk) 00:04, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Blocked" message on mobile web only, not on mobile app or desktop[edit]

I'm logged into my account on my PC and on my phone (on home wifi) via mobile web and the iOS app. On mobile web only, when I try to edit a page, I get an error:

You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Block will expire in 3 years


There are multiple blocks against your account and/or IP address

I know I'm not blocked because I have made edits on my phone using the mobile app, and I've made edits using my PC, all on the same network. Is this a technical fault with the mobile site? Thanks! White 720 (talk) 21:35, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

False alarm! Per H:B, I noticed that my phone had Private Relay enabled, although the Wikipedia mobile app seems unaffected by it. Turning Private Relay off removed the "blocked" message. Sorry about the confusion. White 720 (talk) 21:38, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I also noticed this problem when trying to edit on Safari. I’ve turned off Private Relay and it now allows me to edit. TrottieTrue (talk) 15:08, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confusing situation[edit]

User:Le Loy and User talk:Le Loy appear to refer to two different editors. Unsure what's gone on here, but clearly something needs to be done. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:56, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks like Le Loy redirected their userpage to User:Ле Лой. I assume it's the same person who has a Latinized username for enwiki. However, they appear to switch between editing from the two accounts, which may be problematic. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 22:00, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
User:Ле Лой created User:Le Loy [1] but it's confusing to redirect the user page of an active account to another account. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:10, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, I have 2 accounts, one has over 100,000 edits and lots of flags on it in RuWiki, so I kinda switched to the other one which is pretty new, just 10,000 edits there and no flags. I try to use Le Loy exclusively but I assume occasional edits from Ле Лой are fine as per WP:SECURESOCK? "Contributing to the same page with clearly linked, legitimate, alternative accounts (e.g. editing the same page with your main and public computer account or editing a page using your main account that your bot account edited) is not forbidden."
I am a CheckUser in RuWiki so I am aware of the issues sockpuppetry presents :-) Le Loy (talk) 12:52, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
An unlinked "I’m Le Loy" on User:Ле Лой seems insufficient to me when both accounts make edits. I recommend you either state it clearly with links like User:PrimeHunter or a userbox at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Wikipedia/Related accounts. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hope this resolves the confusion. Le Loy (talk) 21:20, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Le Loy: Thanks. The shortcut is WP:SECURESOCK but we usually only say "sock" when other accounts are used deceptively or for disallowed reasons. Otherwise we just say alternative account. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:30, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I know, it's a joke. Le Loy (talk) 00:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

December 3[edit]

Does the 2017 wikitext editor work on mobile?[edit]

ibid. seems useful for adding citations Mach61 (talk) 01:24, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

After following the instructions on the linked page and opening the editor, I can confirm that the 2017 wikitext editor does not appear to be compatible with the mobile skin Minerva. Folly Mox (talk) 02:13, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Name lisakhanya (talk) 10:18, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
But if you want to use it on mobile, just click on “Request desktop website” wherever it is on your browser. Safari has the option when you click the AA button. Equalwidth (C) 08:41, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Referencing an online archive artifact[edit]

What is the correct way to reference an online archive artifact? In particular, I want to reference the artifact on this page at the Brown University Computer Science archive. Paul C. Anagnostopoulos (talk) 02:07, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Paul C. Anagnostopoulos, here's the syntax I would use:
{{citation |mode=cs1 | publisher= Brown University Computer Center | date= 1978 | url= | id = TM034-01 | title= The Segment System | series = Technical Memorandum }}
This produces:
The Segment System. Technical Memorandum. Brown University Computer Center. 1978. TM034-01.
Someone with deeper knowledge about the citation templates may show up with a better suggestion; I chose {{citation}} over {{cite web}} so you can refer to specific pages within the document ({{cite web}} does not support page numbers). Folly Mox (talk) 02:23, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
({{cite web}} does not support page numbers). <O RLY? owl meem />:
{{cite web |website= Brown University Computer Center | date= 1978 | url= | id = TM034-01 | title= The Segment System | series = Technical Memorandum |page=13}}
"The Segment System". Brown University Computer Center. Technical Memorandum. 1978. p. 13. TM034-01.
Page 13 was just a number pulled from a hat...
Trappist the monk (talk) 03:52, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Welp, looks like I'm wrong again! I feel like at some point {{cite web}} didn't support page numbers, but my poor record for which citation templates support which parameters is already well established in the literature. Thanks for the correction, Trappist the monk. Paul C. Anagnostopoulos, Trappist's syntax is superior to my proposal, so you should probably use that instead. Folly Mox (talk) 04:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ref number 10 is in red - please fix if able to. Thanks Srbernadette (talk) 08:41, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Srbernadette  Fixed. there was a new line (line feed) character that separated "20" and "23" in the date which was causing the error. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 09:03, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Two (small) doubts[edit]

"North-eastern" or "northeastern"? "Po river valley", "Po River valley", "Po River Valley" or "Po river Valley"? JackkBrown (talk) 11:20, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JackkBrown: For the first, see MOS:COMPASS. Bazza (talk) 11:28, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bazza 7: perfect, I'll leave it at that; the article (History of Islam in southern Italy) is most likely written in British English, not American English. JackkBrown (talk) 11:48, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@JackkBrown: With regard to your second question, either "Po River valley" or "Po Valley" is acceptable, but the others are not. Deor (talk) 15:18, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello, I would like to donate to Wikipedia but I don’t know if my information will be kept safe from hackers or if the donation campaign is fraudulent. Please comment. Thanks. MarieGisbertAnne (talk) 12:38, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MarieGisbertAnne Firstly, the money doesn't go directly to Wikipedia. It goes to the Wikimedia Foundation. I'll let you decide whether that makes the campaign "fraudulent". (and is the money well-spent? cough. cough.) I can't comment on the security of the servers, but I generally respect the WMF on that front. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 16:27, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@MarieGisbertAnne: There are usually donation campaigns in December. If you are worried about donating to scammers who insert a fake donation link somewhere then click "Donate" in the sidebar to the left when you are at the website If the sidebar is hidden then first click a hamburger button ☰ at the top left. It would be difficult for a hacker to take control of that link and it would quickly be discovered and fixed. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:52, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Graph isn't showing up[edit]

Hey, the graph at the second section at Prevalence of tobacco use. Isn't working. Can someone please fix it? Thanks, Aquatic Ambiance (talk) 16:17, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See mw:Extension:Graph/Plans. TLDR: It is a big problem and is being worked on. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 16:18, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Getting help to review[edit]

Hi I have been working on a page of a Swedish book author but the references I have are to Swedish media outlets. When originally creating the page, I had the page "proposed for deletion" due to lack of references. I asked the person who proposed the deletion what to do when the references are in other languages. They suggested fixing things in "Draft" form, then submitting it to review. I am currently still editing it, BUT, once it is finished, how do I submit it to review? Kelevyam (talk) 19:29, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Karin Dahaan
I've added a template to the draft that includes a button to submit it once ready. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 19:33, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Maddy from Celeste: Draft:Karin Dahan might be the correct draft. The draft you mentioned seems to have the person's name misspelled in the draft title. GoingBatty (talk) 19:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah. Well, I've done it for that one too. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 19:47, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I ask here so as not to make a mistake: in one part of the text it says "Greek-Catholic Churches", my doubt is as follows: By clicking on the link (on the words "Greek-Catholic") the page is Eastern Catholic Churches, but according to the text the wikilink should be Greek Catholic Churches. JackkBrown (talk) 21:01, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JackkBrown: Greek Catholic Churches is a redirect to Greek Catholic Church, which is a set index article. If you would like to discuss whether readers clicking on the words "Greek-Catholic" would be better served by ending up at Greek Catholic Church instead of Eastern Catholic Churches, you can discuss this on the article's talk page: Talk:Prothesis (altar). GoingBatty (talk) 21:16, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

how to insert missing title of a magazine reference[edit]

While adding a name to an edit and attaching a web refeence to the name I neglected to add the name of the Magazine, how do I add that name? NOVEM171 (talk) 21:53, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@NOVEM171: Which article? there are multiple ways to create a ref, so to help, we need to see how you tried to do this. -Arch dude (talk) 23:01, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi. Thanks.
Here is the page I would like to edit.
I would like to insert my name with a link to a personal page.
However. As I begin this process I created the user page: with the user name: NOVEM171 believing that an anonymous name was what was expected to create the personal page: Dennis Balk.
Have I made an error?
Should I create a Dennis Balk "User" and then title my page, Dennis Balk.
Am I allowed to create the additional, correct, page if I've made a mistake?
Sorry if this is too confusing.
Any help would be great.
Best. NOVEM171 (talk) 23:23, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@NOVEM171: Hi there! Are you referring to this edit to the Colin de Land article? I suggest reviewing WP:EASYREFBEGIN to learn how to add a reference. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:01, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you! NOVEM171 (talk) 23:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@NOVEM171: you should not add your name to that "list" at all, unless you are notable enough to have an article in Wikipedia like the other folks there. A Wikipedia article, not your user page. To have an article, you will need to first establish that you are notable as an artist by Wikipedia's definition. See WP:NARTIST. Once you are certain you are in fact notable, please come back here and we can help you past all the other horrible hurdles. -Arch dude (talk) 23:44, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Arch dude. Thanks for the quick reply and clarification, I appreciate it. I am definitely at the level of notable as well as a name that belongs on the list I brought to your attention. I cover all the bases within the WP:NARTIST you passed to me. What might be the next step? Do I need to establish my qualifications with you? Or, should I proceed by writing my article based on the other articles I've seen on Wikipedia? I'd like to include all the appropriate citations and external links. Would you be willing to help me with this? Past all the horrible hurdles? Best. DB NOVEM171 (talk) 01:46, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@NOVEM171: Excellent. First, carefully read WP:AUTO. Then, read several articles about similar subjects (the list you wish to add yourself to is a good start) to get a feel for the appropriate tone and format. Then, proceed to WP:YFA and follow the instructions there to create a draft article. when you are happy with the draft, submit it for review. I must reiterate: notability is mandatory. You need to find multiple substantial material in published reliable sources. The tedious details of formatting the references can be intimidating, but for now you can just add the URLs (if on the web) or a complete citations if not. Put a note on my talk page if it's too much, but the guys who review drafts are better at this. -Arch dude (talk) 02:21, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@NOVEM171: Note that those published reliable sources that demonstrate notability must be independent from you, so don't rely on things you wrote or your website or interviews. GoingBatty (talk) 03:03, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@NOVEM171 In the rush to create an article, you should realise that there are a number of very good reasons wp:Why an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing . Anything you might do or say in your later personal life will be likely added to the article (with reliable refs, of course), and you will have essentially no say about the article's contents, critical or not. MinorProphet (talk) 14:36, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for that note. The more time I consider your notes and advice I'm reevaluating my approach to this. I do still wish to post an article of my name, but I am assessing and gathering my independent references in published material. I do have those, they exist, I'm assessing the extent to which they support the article. Can I get back to you? Thanks a million for your notes. DB NOVEM171 (talk) 15:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ref number 18 is in red and I cannot see what I did wrong. Please fix if you have the time, thanks. (talk) 23:24, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Frederick William Hervey, 2nd Marquess of Bristol" is not a url. I also don't see the need for two sources for a minor family relationship. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:16, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

December 4[edit]

annoying template[edit]

why is the board in Xiangqi § Modern play not displaying correctly? ltbdl (talk) 01:36, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Probably because the footer is currently using this: local footer = args[67] or pargs[67] or '' (the value assigned to {{{67}}}) which just happens to be the leftmost cl on the board. Should be local footer = args[93] or pargs[93] or '' so that the footer reads Initial arrangement of figures?
Trappist the monk (talk) 02:06, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thanks! ltbdl (talk) 02:12, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ref number 19 was a blog -which we cannot use. Please remove it - I cannot on my device. thanks (talk) 03:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

minus Removed. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 05:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Please can someone with a very good knowledge of Latin check out this edit. My ancient schoolboy Latin suggests the editor has failed to recognise a simple plural verb and wrongly made it singular. But I also have vague memories of impersonal constructions (like 'methinks') where singular is correct. Bjenks (talk) 04:39, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Bjenks: Hi there! In case you do not receive a response from a Latin expert here, you may want post the question on the article's talk page, and ask the editors at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Latin to join the conversation on the article talk page. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bjenks another place you could try is Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language. Quaelibet appears to be correct, as "Vivant membra quaelibet" gets over a thousand hits in Google books and "Vivant membra quaelibent" only four. I think quodlibet and quaelibet are both forms of the pronoun wikt:quilibet#Latin, but I am not an expert. TSventon (talk) 10:46, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bjenks Yes, Lesgles's edit was correct. Although the -libet looks like a verb, it's not conjugated in the various forms of quilibet. Deor (talk) 17:59, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is something wrong at that article. It does not allow me to remove bold letters from a section title. tgeorgescu (talk) 06:32, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh, that's bizarre. Remsense 06:35, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Remsense: It says "[c867a72e-ac5d-4b74-ad11-bd9084c0a12d] 2023-12-04 06:43:31: Fatal exception of type "Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError" " tgeorgescu (talk) 06:44, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Tgeorgescu, I'll point some people who might be privy to this here. Remsense 06:46, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Worked just fine for me, although some below didn't. Edit's done, either way. Queen of Hearts ❤️ (no relation) 07:06, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Error message when editing[edit]

I'm trying to edit a page,[2], and get an error message I've not seen before, [3228d684-e259-477d-a359-db71698e5abd] 2023-12-04 06:47:33: Fatal exception of type "Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBTransactionSizeError". Any advice? Thanks. KJP1 (talk) 06:46, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see the editor above is getting the same issue. KJP1 (talk) 06:50, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
From what I've read initially, this plus the above report is an internal production error that's just cropping up. A ticket is being filed at WP:Phabricator, and it will be handled from there. Thanks for reporting! e: ticket here. Remsense 06:50, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Database error when trying to edit an article[edit]

I posted this on the talk page of the article itself, but then thought this might be the better place to ask. Essentially, I'm trying to fix a minor problem with an article, and being greeted with an error message. More detail is in my post on the article's talk page, but I'll paste the error message itself here for ease of reference:

[bb5ad4fc-e7b2-411b-92a8-78201adada13] 2023-12-04 06:39:17: Fatal exception of type "Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError"

I Googled the error message, but mostly found people who were trying to do more esoteric things with MediaWiki software, not edit a Wikipedia page as I was trying to do.

Thanks, 2601:189:8180:3C80:7413:B2B:3C63:DB03 (talk) 06:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aha, looks like somebody else already had the same issue, and posted while I was writing my post. Thanks for the info, @Remsense. Do you have any idea of a timeline on the fix?
2601:189:8180:3C80:7413:B2B:3C63:DB03 (talk) 06:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In the meantime, I've done a very hacky fix. Queen of Hearts ❤️ (no relation) 06:56, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
2601:189:8180:3C80:7413:B2B:3C63:DB03, the ticket has been filed by someone who's more used to this process than I am so far—here is the ticket. They (Novem Linguae), idly guessed that it wouldn't be an instant fix.
I doubt it will be a matter of hours and days, and rather just a matter of hours, if that helps. Totally guessing though.
Remsense 06:58, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks both! I guess I'll keep my fingers crossed.
2601:189:8180:3C80:7413:B2B:3C63:DB03 (talk) 07:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@2601:189:8180:3C80:7413:B2B:3C63:DB03, @KJP1, @tgeorgescu, it seems like it was a small database hiccup: the backend server had a spike in response times, but it seems to have gone back down now. Tentatively, you all should be good? Remsense 07:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Unfortunately not - just tried again on the same page and got this, [1c06c105-bf1e-48ad-8f50-f7f3f2e2e731] 2023-12-04 07:11:28: Fatal exception of type "Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError"] KJP1 (talk) 07:12, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, well. I would say at this point, the place to check will be the associated Phabricator ticket. I hope you can resume editing ASAP! Remsense 07:16, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problem - I'll just have to be patient. Thanks for taking a look. KJP1 (talk) 07:19, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would it be helpful if I updated here when the error cropped up on a new article, for data / reproducibility purposes? Or would that just clutter up the page with information that's not particularly relevant to solving the problem? 2601:189:8180:3C80:7413:B2B:3C63:DB03 (talk) 15:37, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unable to edit[edit]

I am having trouble publishing edits on Wikipedia. Whenever I attempt to publish, I get an error message saying, "Error, edit not published. [28056456-4629-4f53-81a1-d11cc48181e3] Caught exception of type Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError". NiteshTALK 08:38, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nitseh003 Is there a certain article this occurs on? Did you have trouble making this post? 331dot (talk) 08:50, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, this didn't happen in just one article; initially, this error occurred on the article 2023 Telangana Legislative Assembly election article, and then I encountered the same error while editing several other articles. However, I didn't have trouble making this post. NiteshTALK 09:05, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Other users have run into this as well, and the site's technical people are working on it. See phab:T352628. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:57, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
John of Reading Same here. Been getting this exact error message repeatedly. Any update/timeframe for this to be fixed? hundenvonPG (talk) 13:45, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@HundenvonPenang: No, I'm not technical enough to understand the problem! But it's been marked as a top priority problem on Phabricator. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:48, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I appreciate it. hundenvonPG (talk) 13:51, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Categories and templates[edit]

Hi, I've just started editing and I've been finding uncategorized pages and adding categories using HotCat. However, the lists of uncategorized pages mostly consist of templates. At first I was just ignoring them because I wasn't sure what to do with them, but now I see that HotCat doesn't even allow you to add categories. Can they just be ignored? If so, is there a way of filtering them out from the list of uncategorized pages? Orange sticker (talk) 09:51, 4 December 2023 (UTC) Orange sticker (talk) 09:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Orange sticker: Which list of uncategorized pages? Please always be specific and link any page you refer to or want help with. Special:UncategorizedPages appears to only have articles. Category:All uncategorized pages is mostly templates. We call it a category and not a list when the page name starts with "Category:". You can find articles there with incategory:"All uncategorized pages", or use the "Search in" box to pick namespaces. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:01, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! I didn't know about Special:UncategorizedPages - all the links in the Community Portal take you to Category:All uncategorized pages which is difficult to navigate. Orange sticker (talk) 11:05, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Orange sticker: HotCat avoids templates because they are tricky. Categories for the template itself should be inside <noinclude>...</noinclude> or on a documentation subpage which is transcluded inside <noinclude>...</noinclude>. Otherwise the categories will also be added to pages using the template. Categories for pages using the template are often added in complicated ways which depend on the parameters or namespace where the template is called. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:36, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Database error when editing[edit]

I'm trying to edit a page List of Rick and Morty characters, and get an error messages:

  • [2c398c0a-dfe6-4750-a41a-010c7639fc59] Caught exception of type Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError
  • [6d4253f4-cafc-409c-b4bc-b98bfcd6cb3c] Caught exception of type Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError
  • [717bf950-0131-4b2e-a4cb-615e59bd0309] Caught exception of type Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError
  • Server returned error: HTTP 500.

etc. Lado85 (talk) 11:49, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Same. If I reload it tends to work, but there is definitely something amiss.  Mr.choppers | ✎  11:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This seems to be related to the questions above. I'll add the Phabricator link. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:33, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bad reverts[edit]

Editors have been reverting clear improvements for reasons that have nothing to do with actual content. For example, the Mark Geragos article states that Geragos requested a pardon on January 20, 2001. First of all, he requested it months or years earlier; anyone who knows about U.S. politics knows that a pardon would not be requested on that date. Rather, that is when it was granted by the outgoing president. Furthermore, the cited source does not mention Geragos at all. This was fixed, but reverted repeatedly. To top it off, the page was (extended-confirmed!) protected to keep the flawed version in place. The same thing has happened at Charles Ingram, where events are presented out of order for no good reason. Porter and Jick includes details in the intro which are not found in the body, and contains other problems that will become apparent if you look at the sources. All three of these pages, and a few others that you can find by following certain users' editing histories, could be greatly improved simply by undoing the reverts. Again, these reverts had nothing to do with actual content.

(Yes, I know this probably isn't the right place for this, but I don't see where else to go, all things considered.) (talk) 12:18, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Block evasion is the reason given, if anyone else reads this. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 12:28, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


while editing the page National Democratic Alliance (India), error Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError prompts out while publishing my edits how to fix the issue? Lionel Messi Lover (talk) 12:38, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't think it's just you (see two sections above). I'll see if there is a phab ticket for this. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 12:41, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We have a ticket out at [3] for it. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 12:45, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Lee Vilenski - Lee, do the tech people have any estimated time to resolve this? It's still happening as at 12:51, and it's bloody annoying if you're stupid enough to do a block of work before trying to save - like I just did. KJP1 (talk) 12:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, It's pretty annoying and only happening in one article in my server .i.e. [[National Democratic Alliance (India)]] Lionel Messi Lover (talk) 13:33, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Database error when editing article[edit]

I keep getting errors when editing the article List of Asterix volumes. The error message is something like this:

Database error
A database query error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software.
[820db32b-6ad2-4f6b-a1ec-4b3ee71b322c] 2023-12-04 13:43:10: Fatal exception of type "Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError"

What is going on here? JIP | Talk 13:44, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JIP: The technical people are working in it. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:46, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes. It appears that I am having this issue too. Does anyone have any idea on when this will be resolved? Scorpions1325 (talk) 16:32, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Database error[edit]

I also do have problem at Lady Marmalade - [de19c027-f6b5-4f70-9c3f-4bb8500f636c] 2023-12-04 13:47:30: Fatal exception of type "Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError" --- Cat12zu3 (talk) 13:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Cat12zu3 This is a known problem, being worked on: see section immediately above this one. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:56, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is there a PROD] log?[edit]

I know how to access lists of pages currently proposed for deletion, but not how to see a list of redlinks of successfully deleted pages. I know Twinkle has a feature like this but it isn't retroactive. Mach61 (talk) 14:10, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The history of User:DumbBOT/ProdSummary is about as good as you're going to get. —Cryptic 14:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There's Category:Proposed_deletion. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can we allow a user who claims to be the same person person as the Biography of a Living Person upload a photo of themself onto it?[edit]

Can we really trust someone just to upload a picture of themself onto Wikipedia, imagine if Elon Musk were so brazen as to make a Wikipedia page for himself and upload a photgraph of himself there from his cellphone? I don´t know the policy, on this somehow it just sounds sketchy, I ask this question because this is what exactly happened in the case of Kenny Smith, whose current infobox photo was uploaded by a user who is now banned for being Kenny Smith. I just wanted to be extra sure. StrongALPHA (talk) 15:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@StrongALPHA There are two steps in placing an image into a Wikipedia article. The first is to upload it to Wikimedia Commons with a suitable license. We want to encourage notable people to do that, and there is no conflict of interest in their doing so. The second step is to place the correct image code onto the article so the picture appears. That's where the COI is relevant. Ideally, the person who updates the article to include the image should be independent: and of course they need to check that the image is appropriate and of the person it is supposed to be. WP:ASFAQ specifically encourages article subjects to add photographs. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:32, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Right place to ask for category creation that requires an administrator's approval?[edit]

I submitted a request at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects and categories. Is that the right place, or is there a more appropriate forum lurking somewhere? Clarityfiend (talk) 16:12, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Clarityfiend given your edit count you could have just created the cat directly. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 17:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The requested category is fully create-protected, meaning only an administrator can create it. The protection log summary says "please contact any administrator if you need to create this category", so I would recommend that Clarityfriend contact any active administrator and make a case for creation. A post at WP:AN would also be reasonable. Speaking just for myself, I would need a lot of persuading, and I would want to know what counterarguments there are to counteract the consensus at the last CfD. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:11, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If university[edit]

If university scholoars, or anyone references your information, or provides links, does Wikipedia allow this? As this is what is done in education where you reference or provide links to backing up information or a quote or landmark 2A00:23C7:B881:3D01:AD1B:C2BC:9A34:BA1C (talk) 16:55, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Once you click "publish changes", the edit belongs to Wikipedia. People can link to Wikipedia all they wish. Wikipedia shouldn't really be used in a scholarly work, but if it was, it would need to be cited. Anyone can use Wikipedia information for any purpose with attribution. 331dot (talk) 17:01, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"belongs to Wikipedia" is inaccurate. Wikipedia does not have more right to the edit than others but when you make the edit, you release it with Wikipedia:Text of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. This allows Wikipedia and everybody else to share it if they follow a few rules like giving attribution. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:43, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's true of course, but I find it helps people to explain it that way, especially when some think that they can remove an edit they made just because they don't want it here any more. It's not exclusively up to them once they click publish. 331dot (talk) 17:57, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
IP editor. See WP:REUSE. Wikipedia itself isn't a reliable source but the sources our article cites should be reliable, in general. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:01, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Database error[edit]

I'm trying to edit List of political parties in Japan and I get this error message each time:

Database error

A database query error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. [c5116397-4b0d-47d7-a3c5-83098b85fb5b] 2023-12-04 17:38:53: Fatal exception of type "Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError"

What should I do? Can anyone else fix this please? Helper201 (talk) 17:41, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Helper201Please see the 7 different threads about this further up the page - Arjayay (talk) 17:45, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit undone[edit]

According [this article], India who hosted the 2023 ICC cricket world was under sportwashing and the source that has been put up for it is an opinion piece done by the [(the website heading itself says that it's an opinion and not a news)]. According to the byrules of Wiki, opinions can't be used as sources on wikipedia. And The Guardian is full of opinions against India. 2. All the cricket playing full members are supposed to host at least ICC event this decade. It's not like India went ahead and forced everyone to award them with the tournament. It has a democratically elected system which decides the hosts. Therefore, my edit should be considered and not be removed. - My edit [[4]] (talk) 18:25, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have asked much the same question on the teahouse. Please ask questions only in one place. Let's deal with this one there. Wikipedia:Teahouse#Opinion based Edit which I removed was undone --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:41, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Diagrams in Chess Defense[edit]

Hi 😊 I'm a chess learner. Mostly topics discussed about in chess are in two parts: Chess openings (King's Gambit etc) And Chess Defense ( Sicilian Defense etc) Opening belongs to white and defense belongs to black. The diagrams of all chess topics on Wikipedia are white side down and black side up. I just want that discussing defense the illustrative diagrams must be black side down for easy understanding. Thanks 😊 Dr.Nixami (talk) 18:50, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Dr.Nixami, I agree with your point but I don't think that this belongs here. The Help Desk is for questions and this would belong better on a talk page, perhaps Talk:Chess? Best regards, TypoEater (talk) 19:00, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why was this template present? JackkBrown (talk) 19:04, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]