Wikipedia:Help desk

Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)

• For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
• Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
• If your question is about a Wikipedia article, draft article, or other page on Wikipedia, tell us what it is!
• Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
• For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
• New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners (but please don't ask in both places).

Ask a question

See More

Can't edit this page? ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

Assistance for new editors unable to post here

The help desk is frequently semi-protected, meaning the help desk pages cannot be edited by unregistered users (IP addresses), as well as accounts that are not confirmed or autoconfirmed (accounts that are at least 4 days old with at least 10 edits on English Wikipedia).

However, you can still get direct assistance on your talk page. ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

There are currently 0 user(s) asking for help via the {{Help me}} template:

Expansions to the article "Angeln"

Hi, there is an article about the region of "Angeln" in Germany. It is one of the regions from where the Anglo-Saxons moved to Britain, and it is the ultimate root of the word "English" and "England". I tried to expand the article several times, but there is one user, namely @Zacwill:, who keeps deleting everything I write. On 14 June 2024, they deleted all my expansions. Please compare the versions of June 14, 2024, 18:02, and June 15, 2024, 01:35. When I tried to discuss every single topic individually on the talk page with them, they had no convincing arguments for their deletions, apart from that they don't think that it adds anything to the article. They also came up with the argument, that it is not sourced. But they also delete things which obviously don't have to be sourced, like the "infobox settlement". After a while, they did not respond on the talk page anymore. I thought it was because they really don't have any arguments, and began to add content again today. Only after a few minutes, they again deleted everything I added, but still didn't reply on the talk page. It comes across as destructive editing to delete everything that someone adds, instead of trying to add sources. I would need a third party to try to solve this dispute. That user is the only one, who opposes and constantly deletes my expansions, and I have the feeling that they are not neutral and want to keep the article about Angeln as small, unimportant and ugly as possible. Their short answers on the talk page also give the impression that they are not interested in a discussion at all. I need a third party to solve this. Ephesos21 (talk) 17:15, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

(The Angles moved from there to Britain not the Anglo-Saxons.) Ephesos21 (talk) 17:37, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

@Ephesos21:, @Zacwill: is right about not adding uncited material, see WP:BURDEN, part of the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy, All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution. I would suggest finding sources before adding information. TSventon (talk) 19:39, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Something can't be right here. He also deleted very long-standing content, and not just my alterations. The whole article is practically unsourced. If i would do the same now, and delete everything that is not sourced, the article would be gone. I think, it is Wikipedia standards, to be able to write content without having to source every tiny fact. Only if it is an obvious lie, it should be deleted at once. All the other things would have to be tagged, and enough time would have to be given to find sources. Apart from that, this doesn't explain why he also deleted the "infobox settlement". This would be the first thing i'd like to restore, and there are no new facts which would have to be sourced. And this deletion of the infobox is an indicator that his only aim is to delete as much as possible, to keep the article short and the topic unimportant. So first i want to know, if he is allowed to delete the infobox with no new content in it that would have to be sourced, and second i'd like to know why it should be ok, that he alters the intro, parts of which were there since decades, and replaces it with a new self-written, much shorter intro, which is also not sourced. Thirdly, which rule prevents articles, which are not properly sourced from being completely deleted? Ephesos21 (talk) 02:59, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

No, it's quite right. Again, you ought to read WP:V. More sources in the article would be nice -- Wikipedia is always a work of progress -- but that doesn't justify adding more. But no, removal isn't just for "obvious lies." In any case, once material added was disputed, the WP:ONUS was on you to discuss the additions. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 06:47, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

I think, if i write too long texts here, and also on the talk pages, the info is so much that i don't get appropriate answers. The user deleted the "infobox settlement" and it includes nothing which has to be sourced, and he simply deleted it because he doesn't like it. But i want to include it. Ephesos21 (talk) 07:18, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Please follow the process at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:45, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Page missing Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas

Hi, I created the page Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas long ago, but I can't seem to find it. It has been converted into a Redirect. When I check the History of the Redirect page, I don't see any of my changes, as if I never interacted with the page. Can someone please help me find it or any reason the page has been removed? I can't seem to find anything as the Talk page of Redirect page is inaccessible. Thanks! Waonderer (talk) 21:10, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

+ EDIT: I found an image that I had used on the original page when I created it. Image: File:Gazette_notification_by_Govt._of_India.jpg. This doesn't help me. Maybe it is useful to someone who wishes to help me. Waonderer (talk) 21:17, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Waonderer, you can see the history here. (It's the history of "Samvidhan Hatya Diwas"; that is, of "Samvidhaan Hatya Diwas" with one "a" fewer.) Please do not attempt to restore the article without first getting agreement to do so. -- Hoary (talk) 22:04, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind help. Yes, I always discuss before making significant changes. Apparently others don't. Shouldn't @Ratnahastin have had the courtesy to discuss the page before removing content and turning it into a Redirect? Waonderer (talk) 13:54, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Per WP:BOLD, no. But you can start a discussion about reverting that step, using the process at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:02, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Editing random pages

when I have some time I like to review and eventually edit random pages. I cannot seem to find that page anymore. Can anyone help please? Ermanno Shire (talk) 13:08, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Special:Random will bring you to a random article that may or may not be in need of improvement. Alternatively, you can use Special:Homepage to find articles that you may be more interested in that are in need of improvement directly instead of relying in the roll of the die. Departure– (talk) 14:13, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

See also Category:Articles needing attention, from where you can navigate to subcategories more closely aligned to your interests and skills. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:59, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Gian Maria Aliberti Gerbotto

I've noticed that the article Gian Maria Aliberti Gerbotto, which was cancelled last October on it.wiki, has been translated and published on en.wiki. Thea20071, who created the article, is the daughter of the subject (she has declared so on her italian userpage) and she tried many times to publish the article after its deletion, against it.wiki's policies. The subject clearly doesn't meet the notability standards for it.wiki.

I think the article should be cancelled, but since I'm not familiar with en.wiki's guidelines and procedures I wanted to know the opinion of more experienced users. Thank you for your help! .agrimensore. (talk) 08:08, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

The usual place to discuss such matters on this project is WP:COIN, but you are required first to discuss the matter and attempt resolution with the editor concerned, on this project. I can see that no such discussion has taken place.

I also note that, though the CoI was not declared on this project, the article was published by an independent editor though the AfC process; and that the subject is a Knight of the Order of Merit of the Italian Republic, and hence sufficiently notable to warrant an article on this project.

You should also notify editors when you mention them here or on any noticeboard or similar page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: thank you for your reply. I need to ask confirmation about the notability issue. The subject is indeed a Knight of the Order of Merit, but only on the 4th class: is that really enough to prove notability? 33,442 people have been awarded that title.

@Thea20071: I'm mentioning you now since I didn't do it before. .agrimensore. (talk) 14:31, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

I have given the article a quick copy edit to improve the English, but it would benefit from further work. TSventon (talk) 08:14, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

"Voluntary" bans

How do voluntary topic ban exactly work? I assume the process goes something like this: User:Example does some prolonged disruptive POVing on Generic American politican and gets warned by multiple editors on their talk page. User:Example is reasonable though and recognizes the disruption they've caused, so they spell out in text I'd agree to a voluntary topic ban regarding American politics, skipping the creation of a huge thread at WP:ANI.

Is this topic ban still logged at WP:Editing restrictions and considered an official ban (i.e User:Example edits Generic American politician again causing them to actually be blocked)? Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 17:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

"voluntary topic ban" is self-contradictory. If it's a ban, it's not voluntary, by definition. The user is simply saying "I will voluntarily avoid...". If they then do not avoid, blocks are likely if the edits are problematic, but not guaranteed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:10, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Well, I looked at WP:Editing restrictions again and immediately found a section for voluntary restrictions including topic bans, so I guess I just needed to look a little harder. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 19:20, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Most of those look like restrictions that the user agreed to as part of a conditional unblock/unban/similar. jlwoodwa (talk) 00:31, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Filtering out reverted edits in RC

Is it possible to only show tagged edits that haven't been reverted in Recent Changes(e.g. only showing edits with "possible vandalism" but not "reverted" tags)? Currently I have reverted edits highlighted to visually distinguish them, but I'd like to be able to hide them altogether if possible. Taffer😊💬_(she/they) 18:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

I think clicking the exclude tags button applies to all the tags, so there's no way to specifically see edits with one tag and not the other. The only workarounds I know of are using the ORES edit quality predictions (very likely good etc.) and only viewing latest edits, both of which are filters, not tags. HansVonStuttgart (talk) 07:03, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Youtube

Youtube is described as "usually not an acceptable source" -- but what about the case of a video where an amateur interviews a notable person? It seems to me that's a reliable source because it's the celebrity himself doing the talking (not the channel owner, or some other intermediary). The fact that the interview takes place on a platform where fakes can occur seems irrelevant since it's an actual first-person interview, and therefore you're getting the information straight from the horse's mouth, with no manipulation. Could an exception be made in a case like that? If not, why not? Thanks and happy editing, Chillowack (talk) 19:17, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Youtube is a self-published source and should be treated as reliably as the person who upload it. AI deepfakes do exist on YouTube and for that reason among others I'd say don't use it in that context. This is better asked with full context at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard if you have any further questions. Departure– (talk) 19:20, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help. Chillowack (talk) 02:21, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

@Chillowack Also Wikipedia has very little interest in what someone wants to say about themselves. We report what secondary sources report from a neutral point of Vew. See WP:42. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:12, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

How do I create a Wikipedia new content page?

I wish to start a list of democracy dies/ trump enablers individuals. A list of names with brief bio and actions they did/ are doing to end USA and keep opening for global edits and additions Does it help I am a monthly $ donor to Wikipedia? I edit mostly in pop/art content. So I am very new to starting a content page LAURANG2020 (talk) 23:37, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

You should probably read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, and the WP:NOTADVOCACY section in particular.. Your proposed list is highly unlikely to be accepted. And no, donating money (which goes to the WMF, rather than Wikipedia specifically) confers absolutely no advantages regarding contributing content. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:45, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

LAURANG2020 Also be aware that editing about post-1992 American politics has special rules; I'll notify you of these on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 09:58, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Editing Bamboo - Close Paraphrasing

Hello. While finding an uncited source for Bamboo, I found the source, but the statement was directly plagiarized from the source. I want to rephrase the sentence to avoided close paraphrasing or plagiarizing, but the excerpt of the text is so short that I am having trouble rephrasing it. Should I keep the phrasing as it is or does anyone recommend for me to change it. And if so, how?

This is the source

And the plagiarized sentence is "Most are native to tropical and warm temperate regions, but you’ll also find some in cool mountainous areas and highland cloud forests."

Evilrh104 (talk) 18:34, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Evilrh104 if you find text from Wikipedia online, it is possible that Wikipedia copied the other site, and also possible that the other site copied Wikipedia. The PDZA blog is dated September 18, 2024 and the sentences in Wikipedia seem to be older than that, so it is unlikely that we copied them. Unfortunately if PDZA may have copied us they should not be used as a source for our text. TSventon (talk) 19:26, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. Would you suggest that the sentence be removed entirely? Evilrh104 (talk) 21:13, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

@Evilrh104 There must be better (more academic) sources for that sentence but it needs to be changed anyway, as we don't address the reader as "you": see MOS:YOU. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:52, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

@Evilrh104, don't remove it. The mention of cold mountain regions came in the earliest versions of the article before the Wikipedia became so concerned about sources, as Bamboos are found in diverse climates from cold mountains to hot tropical regions. It would be a mistake to go into articles and just remove material which was added back then. Since the statement is true, either just leave it or add a source yourself. StarryGrandma (talk) 22:52, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Excluding Biographies

Hi, I would want to view all the Wikipedia articles excluding biographies, is this possible? MiniMikeRM (talk) 00:48, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Realistically, no. It would take you years. DS (talk) 01:35, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

There may be some way to view every article excluding the ones in the "people" category. I'm no expert though. MallardTV ^{Talk to me!} 02:03, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

@MiniMikeRM You may be interested to see Wikipedia:Contents/A–Z index and Wikipedia:Size of Wikipedia. Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:49, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Question about the capitalization of a word on a title

Hi, there is a video game called "The Legend of Heroes: Trails through Daybreak", my question is about the capitalization of the word "through". On every single official page about the game, the word "through" is not capitalized, but according to Wikipedia manual of style, prepositions that contain five letters or more letters should be capitalized. Would this apply as an exception to the rule or not? JJJAGUAR (talk) 01:14, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

So, by "official page", are you referring to pages that aren't part of Wikipedia? Wikipedia has pages with The Legend of Heroes: Trails Through Daybreak and The Legend of Heroes: Trails Through Daybreak II, and you will note that these abide by the "manual of style" rule that you have cited. Fabrickator (talk) 01:50, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

I was referring to official pages from the game creators (I don't see how Wikipedia pages would be considered "official pages" of any kind). And my question was precisely whether the current articles are well written. JJJAGUAR (talk) 01:58, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

@JJJAGUAR: Why in the world would you consider Wikipedia Manual of Style as being pertinent to the style used on "official" pages that have no connection to Wikipedia? Fabrickator (talk) 02:21, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

First of all, tone it down. I'm not going to talk to someone like that. This is a question, not an argument. And second, it's incorrect to say that those pages have "no connection" to Wikipedia. Almost all of Wikipedia's information about that game comes from those pages, including the name of the game itself. So it's a perfectly normal question to ask whether this specific case could be an exception to Wikipedia's Manual of Style, since the manual itself mentions some exceptions within it. JJJAGUAR (talk) 05:01, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Also, does the five letters rule apply only to the article name or also to every mention of the game in the artible body? JJJAGUAR (talk) 02:08, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

For an absurdly long debate on capitalising a preposition in a title, see this.   Maproom (talk) 07:35, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

That one is different though, the original title, according to the creators, has the preposition capitalized, so there is no disparity between Wikipedia and the original name. JJJAGUAR (talk) 05:11, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

JJJAGUAR, Wikipedia is under no obligation to follow the capitalization preferences of the companies which, or the companies whose products which, it describes. -- Hoary (talk) 05:19, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm well aware of that, but I didn't ask if Wikipedia is under "obligation" to do it, I asked if this could be considered an exception, since Wikipedia's own Manual of Style include a section for "Potential exceptions" for its capitalization rules when there's enough "reliable sources" about it. Actually, the person above mentioned an article that, as far as I know, is currently an exception to those rules ("Star Trek Into Darkness"). JJJAGUAR (talk) 05:47, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps, JJJAGUAR, you might ask at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters. -- Hoary (talk) 08:33, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. JJJAGUAR (talk) 17:30, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Merge proposal

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 propose merging Bhopinder Singh into Bhupinder Singh Thakur. These two articles are on the same person. Since there are more content and references in Bhupinder Singh Thakur article, I am requesting the Bhopinder Singh article to merge into Bhupinder Singh Thakur. Behappyyar (talk) 07:02, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

@Behappyyar To do this, please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Merging. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:14, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Bhupinder Singh Thakur, which was started yesterday, should be merged into Bhopinder Singh, which was started in 2007. TSventon (talk) 10:21, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Well, it’s not an absolute rule. Exceptions might apply if:

• The newer article is significantly better written or sourced.
• The older article has serious issues (like POV, original research, etc.).
• The topic was split unintentionally, and the newer version is better scoped.

Behappyyar (talk) 11:00, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

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

Broken reference1

Hello,

Can anyone help me debug the code of this reference?

{{cite news |last= Clerkin |first= Bridget |date= 2012-03-09 |title= Israeli martial arts takes hold in Bordentown |work= Times of Trenton |location= New York, NY |publisher= Advance Publications Inc. |page= B8.

Thanks in advance. Phenomenon 10 (talk) 11:59, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Missing closing }}. Add that.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:12, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Phenomenon 10 (talk) 23:50, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Broken reference2

Can anyone help to debug this citation?

Kahn, David (2008). Advanced Krav Maga—The Next Level of Fitness and Self-Defense. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press. ISBN ‎978-0312361648. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: invalid character (help)

The ISBN is correct. Phenomenon 10 (talk) 12:02, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

There is an invisible left-to-right-marker character between the space character and the '9' at the start of the isbn. Remove that.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:09, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you again. Phenomenon 10 (talk) 23:52, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Why 'Help-desk' is semi-protected?

I'm just asking, why is this 'Help desk' is protected within semi-protection, as I have already saw it? Isn't this page is no longer in protection in May 12, 2025? I hope any Wikipedia users can answer my question. Thanks. Rizky Juliandief (talk) 12:22, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Many of the help pages are the target of an abusive user, and need to be protected from new users and unregistered users to prevent the abusive user from posting. 331dot (talk) 12:31, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Template:Quote box

Is it possible to get two quotes in the same box, do you think? Something like, using the code at the template page:

{{Quote box |quote = Cry "Havoc", and let slip the dogs of war. |author = William Shakespeare |source = Julius Caesar, Act III, Scene I. |quote2 = He is a wearer of only one stocking. |author2 = William Shakespeare |source2 = Twelfth Night, Act II, Scene III. }}

Obviously that doesn't work. Thoughts? —Fortuna, imperatrix 13:32, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

@Fortuna imperatrix mundi You can place one box inside another, which might do what you want with a bit of tweaking:

Cry "Havoc", and let slip the dogs of war.

William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act III, Scene I.

He is a wearer of only one stocking.

William Shakespeare, Twelfth Night, Act II, Scene III.

Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:03, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, Mike Turnbull, although to be honest I wouldn't know how to tweak it, I suspect. Still, thanks anyway! —Fortuna, imperatrix 18:32, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

@Primefac: Any thoughts, perchance...? —Fortuna, imperatrix 11:04, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Cry "Havoc", and let slip the dogs of war.

William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act III, Scene I.

He is a wearer of only one stocking.

William Shakespeare, Twelfth Night, Act II, Scene III.

For tweaking, what I had in mind was something like this which is just a <br> different than my previous version. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:12, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

@Mike Turnbull , fantastic, many thanks! (And thanks for coming back too!) —Fortuna, imperatrix 11:14, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

and if you don't like the second box, you can further tweak that using the more advanced features mentioned on the template page, to arrive at yet another version. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:21, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Cry "Havoc", and let slip the dogs of war.

William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act III, Scene I.

 

He is a wearer of only one stocking.

William Shakespeare, Twelfth Night, Act II, Scene III.

• @Mike Turnbull That second one squares the circle almost, it looks even better without the other box insde. Not wanting to push it, but... do you think it's possible so that both bits of text are justified to the same left margin, rather than indented as now? Thanks very much for your help, this is a learning curve! —Fortuna, imperatrix 15:57, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Problem with possibly racist wording

While editing Sacred Heart, Minnesota I noticed the following: "all but three of the white men in the area were killed, as were many of the white women and children. 22 whites were taken captive"

While I can understand the need to clarify between the European American settlers and the Native American perpetrators of the massacre, I feel the wording used is problematic. While I've tried my best to change the wording, I'm still not sure what more I can or should do. Anyone have any advice?

P.S This link shows when it was added to the article https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1194251526&oldid=1165900584&title=Sacred_Heart%2C_Minnesota If that helps. Data Devourer (talk) 00:37, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

I see litle reason to assume racism, and none to justify an accusation of vandalism. Maybe "settler", or "of European ancestry", or "colonizing", would be better that "white". But some such term is needed. Maproom (talk) 07:51, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, that helps clear things up. Data Devourer (talk) 21:24, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Middleton family

Middleton family

QUOTES: In the "Parents of Michael Middleton" section - Peter Middleton is quoted. Please place the quote in the way it is normally done - indented - on wikipedia pages.

Also

in the "Nursing and welfare" section Caroline Middleton is quoted - please structure the quote in the way this is usually done on wikipdeia.

Thanks Srbernadette (talk) 01:53, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Srbernadette, simply use <blockquote> at the start of the quotation and </blockquote> after the reference that I presume immediately follows the quotation. -- Hoary (talk) 03:45, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

...or use {{Blockquote}}, which does the same thing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:08, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Add topic button

How can i include the Add Topic button in my document? This help desk also has an Add Topic button.Whatback11 (talk) 08:18, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

@Whatback11 To which "document" are you referring? A "new section" tab is automatically added to Talk pages. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:43, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

@Whatback11: "Add topic" is part of "Enable quick topic adding" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing. If you have it on some pages then it must already be enabled and there is no more you can do. It's only available on pages meant for discussions. Not drafts if that's what you want. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:18, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Above the header of this page is an “Add topic” button, which seems to be a syntactical way to add it. Whatback11 (talk) 13:38, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Mentally fatigued

I wrote an article on Predicativism, philosophical topic, after a lot of research and mental fatigue, I wrote an article in most jargon way possible in my knowledge. I did everything to cite every single source and even edited to meet every WK criteria. The page about the predicativism, opposite of Impredicative and I have used every thing possible to make it right.

An editor, with what they say "I am 1000 year old editor and I have voldemort stick of death" deleted the 18000 characters article and did not even bother me to at least ask where i can fix or improve it. Yeah yeah, I that got you have experience of how to maintain this platform safe but WK is not your personal property (thanks to CC license) nor you are supposed to have experience on how to write a deep and good article on maths and philosophy which I have. Because the person @Onel5969, (I am not targeting anyone) I dont think have even knowledge on subject of precativism or he even knows what is it.

I dont know how to act, I am already depressed and find few times to use my curiosity of life to put it in words. I want to just get help if I can. Please I need somebody who is not mixed up because most of "admins" are family type so even some of them act injustice their family member will help him.

Lets say I am wrong in my defense please do not cancel me, I am just an editor. Please use your authority in a way that a serious editor respect not turn against you.

P.S. I am sorry if i sound noisy, the moment i am writing it i am feeling very sleepy (I havent slept for two days). Wh67890 (talk) 13:44, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

You seem to be suffering some distress. We can sympathise, but we can't really help. Please see meta:Mental health resources. I hope you soon feel rested. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:48, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Haha! Well you missed the real problem. Also when i said Mental fatigue I meant that I feel hurt from the editor behaviour not seriously ill. Wh67890 (talk) 13:58, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

You wrote "I am already depressed... I havent slept for two days". If I've misunderstood that, and things are not that bleak for you, I'm glad.

As to your feelings about editor behaviour, please follow the process described at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:17, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

He is not responding and simply reverting his edit wont make things easier. I want a third party here. Forget the depresson part, I am here because the deletion was not accurately done. If he has problem with editing criteria, he could have pinged me or not.

I am here for third party, because in WK the idea of trying to talk face-to-face does not fly. Wh67890 (talk) 14:23, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

If you want a third party opinion, you can go here. I also advise you to read WP:AGF and keep it in mind. CoconutOctopus talk 14:24, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

I respect for your humble approach on health issue and I appreciate it but right now its not about me but for WIkipedia. Wh67890 (talk) 14:24, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Wh67890.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia.

I realise that you did not in one sense create this article; but this is relevant because, as people often do who have not spent a lot of time learning what Wikipedia is and what it isn't. you have put great effort into producing something that is not a Wikipedia article; and by replacing a redirect you circumvented the articles for creation process, which is very strongly advised for new editors.

I entirely agree with @Onel5969 in pointing you to WP:ESSAY, and I would also mention original research.

A Wikipedia article should be a summary of what reliable independent sources have said about a topic, and very little else. It should not contain any argumentation or conclusions, except possibly for summaries of the arguments or conclusions advanced in a single cited source (It should not even combine the argumentation or conclusions of more than one source, as that would be synthesis, which is a form of original research and not permitted).

Your version of the article may have salvageable parts, but in particular the "Critical evaluation" is absolutely not appropriate for any Wikipedia article. (Note that your version is not lost: it is still in the history, so you could recover it and see if any of it is suitable). ColinFine (talk) 15:34, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

So you mean the better option is to delete the person's hardwork and not upgrade or improve the article? And I dont see any strong reason for restricting new editors for editing Wikipedia. I think you mean the experience and I have quite a experience onto that subject. I have actually reverted his edit and I am going to improve it rather than let somebody who have 0% knowledge about the topic delete it.

Thank you but your help is an excuse not an actual help. Wh67890 (talk) 15:57, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

No, @Wh67890, the better option is to accept that what you are trying to do, worthy as it may be, is not what Wikipedia does, and either start again and produce an article which does conform to Wikipedia's policies (and, again, I would very strongly advise you to use the WP:AFC process); or find a different outlet which will accept the kind of article you want to write.

I also advise you that edit warring is a very quick way of getting yourself blocked from Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 16:15, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and moved your article to a draft to allow you to work on bringing it up to Wikipedia's standards in a more suitable location whilst avoiding risks of an edit war. Once you believe it to be ready I strongly reccommend submitting it through WP:AFC. CoconutOctopus talk 16:31, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

They aren't completely correct to delete your page, it should've been moved to draftspace or your Special:MyPage/sandbox and explained why. However, whenever you make an edit on Wikipedia, it will always be there in the page history. Even if the entire page is deleted, you can still get it WP:REFUNDed. Next time, don't be so stressed out when your edit is reverted because you can always just find it, it is not deleted but hidden. Furthermore, your article does not meet the standards of Wikipedia in the sense that it contains original research and that it does not cite your sources correctly. This is entirely fine and is to be expected of someone who is new to Wikipedia. As others have stated, you could do other things to become more familiar with Wikipedia. However, some editors like yourself are motivated by certain topics or articles. If you want to immediately make an article, you should read WP:YFA to learn how to create your first article and WP:PERFECT to learn what a perfect article is. Easternsahara (talk) 22:48, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Thats exactly what I was trying to say, "Why delete it?". The article was neat in its own standard, but yes I agree it did not meet certain Wikipedia term (and i respect it), I read it again and yes it is bit akward. But there must be a forward look on how to fix it rather than deleting it without any liability, mostly because a person put an effort into it.

Thankyou so much for understanding and yes I will fix every possible issue and try to publish it through WP:AFC as many people recommended it. Have a good day!! Wh67890 (talk) 02:07, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Some admins on Wikipedia may be rash sometimes. They both tend to follows rules but sometimes they don't give explanations to new editors, this can be very frustrating. If you have anymore questions you can keep coming to the teahouse or ask your mentor, have a good day/night. Easternsahara (talk) 02:43, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much but people keep posting humility filled comment, this is very frustrating and uneasy as I am not used to such discussions. Wh67890 (talk) 03:11, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Article already exists in draftspace, however, article gets recreated in article space

So if an article is already being drafted in the draftspace, but another user (could even be the same user) created another article with the same name in the article space, what action should be taken? Do we merge these together? Justjourney (talk | contribs) 15:29, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

That is tangentially discussed here. Merging the articles is certainly one option and easy if one/both pages have a single primary contributor. Otherwise, a more complicated history merge might be required. – macaddct1984 ^{(talk | contribs)} 17:42, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Need assistance on talk page

Hi all. I'm having troubling getting rid of a preformatted text from an archive bot on the site which left a notice on my talk page. I'd like to leave the archived pages up for later review, but it's basically just creating a running style box that won't end, and just keeps moving further and further to the right with each new addition. You can see for yourself at my talk page here. Let me know if you have any questions. In short, all I need is someone to separate those three styles boxes/headers at the bottom from each other into different header sections on the page. All my best and appreciation in advance.

Regards - CSGinger14 (talk) 17:22, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Additionally, it would be fine to keep the archived articles all under the same banner. It might prompt the bot to put it there in the future. Really I just need the bottom header, the gift, to be separated as I can't find any way to make any new additions without it falling under the styling box.

Thanks again - CSGinger14 (talk) 17:25, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

The problem was |} not being there, closing the style thingamabob (can't remember what its called). fixed it for you :) Trim02 (talk) 17:29, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

It's called a table, me Trim02 (talk) 17:33, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Reference link of actor's works

Hello, can I use same article/interview of actor as reference link, confirming he indeed was in several works in his/her wikipedia article and add it as ref link at several works at his/her Wikipage?

Or I need to use several different reference links?

It is just this actor is supportive one and don't have many reliable sources. Илона И (talk) 22:46, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

@Илона И: As a rule, credits do not need a citation barring an uncredited or pseudonymous appearance; the credits listing itself would instantly verify their participation. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 22:49, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

@Jéské Couriano so roles of actor doesn't need reference links?

I thought it needed bcs in list of roles someone put tag Citation needed.

Or we need to add this actor in Cast list of this work at Wiki and put reference link here? Илона И 23:14, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Site guidelines on ongoing legal cases

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.

---

Hi all. I was planning on making a page of a case currently working its way through the courts that has received several judgements from the Supreme Court as of the past several days. I haven't been able to find any specific site guidelines that point to whether or not current cases can be discussed, but I know that normally information on pages for elections that haven't occurred and (potential) candidates for those elections is supposed to be kept to a minimum. If anybody could shed some light on this it would be appreciated.

All the best - CSGinger14 (talk) 23:39, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

@CSGinger14 You don't say which country, but as long as you have decent non-primary WP:RS to work with, you should be good. A current example is Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation where the Delhi High Court said "Hey, WP can't write about our ongoing court case!" but the India Supreme court said "Yes they bloody can!" Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:00, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

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

Question about user

Hello! I was on SWViewer and saw this user created. User:STRI-Library
This user claims the following
This is the official account of the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute Library and Archive (STRI), based in Panama. It is operated by library staff for the purpose of curating and improving content related to STRI, tropical science, and knowledge production in the tropics. How exactly should they verify that they are in fact the official account? Do they even need to verify? Thanks! Cooldudeseven7 _talk^contribs 13:53, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

The account is likely unusable per Wikipedia:ORGNAME Bremps... 14:05, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Cooldudeseven7: the name STRI-Library implies that the account is shared by a team, which is confirmed by the user page. This is not allowed under Wikipedia:Username policy#Usernames implying shared use. I am not aware of a requirement to verify identity. TSventon (talk) 14:09, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! I am putting a warning using Twinkle on their userpage right now... I will try to get this to UAA, as this appears to be a blatant policy violation. _talk^contribs 14:29, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) WP:UAA says either leave a warning or go to UAA, not both simultaneously. I think a warning was reasonable as all they have done is create a user page. TSventon (talk) 14:41, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! the warning has been placed. Cooldudeseven7 _talk^contribs 14:42, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I thought that there should be a guide to which welcome mesages to give new users, but I couldn't find it. TSventon (talk) 15:12, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

@TSventon: Edit: I have created a template here based off of {{Welcome}}. Does it work as a warning? Should it replace the warning template or just go alongside it? I also added a parameter for adding reasoning and examples of violation. Just wanted to check if this works before I add it to the page. Cooldudeseven7 _talk^contribs 16:02, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

@Cooldudeseven7:, I prefer {{Uw-coi-username}} because it explains what the problem is and what the user needs to do and doesn't move on to general advice about editing, which is not relevant until they deal with the immediate issue. However, I don't regularly welcome new users so perhaps someone else will chip in or you could ask for feedback at Wikipedia talk:Welcoming committee. TSventon (talk) 16:45, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Alright. Should I keep the current username warning or the COI template? Cooldudeseven7 _{talk/contribs} 16:52, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I would leave the page as it is and keep it on your (and Naraht's) watchlist. The Uw-coi-username includes a link to the paid editing policy and the conflict of interest guideline, which {{Template:Uw-username}} doesn't. TSventon (talk) 17:04, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! Cooldudeseven7 _{talk/contribs} 17:16, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm definitely assuming good faith here, and it looks like they would want to work on both enwiki and eswiki, so I left an additional note.Naraht (talk) 15:29, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I agree that we should AGF and that adding a human written message was helpful. TSventon (talk) 15:41, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

IABot not working?

Hi all. I am trying to use #IABot, but it isn't archiving all references on some pages, like 2025 Pakistan Super League and X Dekho. Can anyone please help, why this happens and how to resolve? Thank you! M. Billoo 14:59, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

password

hi, I just got a notification and email that says "there have been multiple failed attemtps to log into your account.'...I also got an email that indicated a temporary password was given...since then I went to Help:Login notifications and changed my password, do I need to report this somewhere? Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:56, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

No, if you changed your password (and used a strong one) that should be enough. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:21, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 18:27, 20 May 2025 (UTC)