Is there a policy/guideline/essay that refers to the practice of editors 'digging in their heels' after being accused of something? Thanks in advance. Cessaune [talk] 03:17, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You might be looking for WP:ICANTHEARYOU? I just read through your draft essay so far and it seems like it might fit there, but not certain that's what you're looking for. Tollens (talk) 03:53, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You love Wikipedia because of the information you get from it. As a Wikipedia user you sometimes wonder the reason for loving Wikipedia so much ❤️."Well I felt that to until I realised that Wikipedia is giving us more and more knowledge then we had before.Be a Wikipedia user, you will really enjoy working with it.",I said when I was wondering 💛. 41.114.214.126 (talk) 06:26, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Help Desk is not for general discussion, sorry. 331dot (talk) 06:42, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not sure why to be honest. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 08:31, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Refs 7 and 10 are the same - can they be joined up please? thanks Srbernadette (talk) 07:47, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Srbernadette. Please check out the instructions at WP:NAMEDREFS. Cullen328 (talk) 07:54, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done - I've done it for you. Please study as Cullen328 says and you'll be able to do it yourself next time. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 08:37, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Should all these words be written in italics? idam, antahkarana, buddhi, ecc. JackkBrown (talk) 11:36, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

JackkBrown, please read and digest Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Text formatting#Italic_type. Is the decision now an easy one? If not, please ask at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Text formatting. -- Hoary (talk) 11:46, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A friend of mine has been permanently blocked because he is accused of being me, who received a definitive ban. I appealed on behalf of my friend to the moderator in question to explain the misunderstanding and I was completely ignored because they still think my friend is me, despite having IPs from different regions. Therefore I turn to you of international wikipedia to do justice for a victim of the Italian wikipedia. Thanks for the attention (Friend's account is Shira Otosaka) 82.50.108.129 (talk) 11:43, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is not the place for this. If it is on the English Wiki, please explain this in another unblock request. If it is on the Italian Wiki, this is not the place to do so and should remain on the home wiki. Thanks, Heart ^(talk) 11:46, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As I said in the message they ignore what I explain. Who else should I contact if the home wiki doesn't do its job, of course I'll go to the more important one to appeal 82.50.108.129 (talk) 11:50, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As Hoary points out below, there's no more important one to appeal to; in other words, you're going to have to convince the Italian Wikipedia community that a mistake was made. Perhaps you'll find the information you need in it:Wikipedia:Politiche di blocco degli utenti, but each language Wikipedia has its own policies and guideines, and its own administrators applying those policies and guidelines. So, there's really nothing anyone at English Wikipedia can do to help you or your friend. If you're unable to find the information you need yourself on Italian Wikipedia, you can try asking for assistance at it:Aiuto:Sportello informazioni. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:52, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If I understand right, you are Shin Kurogane. You are blocked at Italian Wikipedia but not at English Wikipedia. There is no "international Wikipedia". English Wikipedia has no authority over Italian Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 11:56, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Creating articles Kaffkas (talk) 12:15, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you be more specific? You can always use WP:Article wizard to also help you create an article. Heart ^(talk) 12:22, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WP:BACKWARD may be of help to you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:44, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Help:Your first article may be useful if you are planning to create your first Wikipedia Article RossDG8-Talk 20:19, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can I upload an image of the heros peninsula of antartica? I highlighted it red based on https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Antarctica_blank.svg Memer15151 (talk) 12:24, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

oops, [this image is the link]. Memer15151 (talk) 12:25, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OMG! sorry, [this image is the link]. Memer15151 (talk) 12:26, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes you can. The image is dual-licensed under GNU and CC 3.0, so make sure you attribute it properly. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 14:47, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

By the way, you can wikilink a file without displaying it by beginning the wikilink with a colon, so [[:File:Antarctica blank.svg]] displays as File:Antarctica blank.svg. (you could also put the "commons" in thus [[:Commons:File:Antarctica blank.svg]], but unless there's a file of the same name in Wikipedia, this is not necessary.) ColinFine (talk) 17:15, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What's the difference between "sources" and "references"? Page: History of East Pakistan. JackkBrown (talk) 13:52, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@jackkbrown: in this article, references are inline citations in the article, meant to support specific claims, and "sources" are general knowledge references for the article. general knowledge references are often named under different headers, such as "general references". lettherebedarklight晚安 15:23, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

People tend to use some words interchangeably: "A citation, also called a reference, uniquely identifies a source of information". I tend to think of "cite" as the in-text thing, "ref" as the ref-section thing, and "source" as the off WP-thing these point at. This won't stop me from telling someone who messed up a cite that they "sourced it wrong". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:43, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Based on Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout#Notes and references,

• "sources" contains Citation footnotes, that connect specific material in the article with specific sources and are a mixture of short citations and full citations
• "references" contains Full citations to sources, where short citations have been used in the "sources" section. TSventon (talk) 16:20, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why are my newest edits showing up as being anonymous despite me being logged in when I did the edits? Is this a glitch? It has not happened previously. MusicNinja1 (talk) 17:11, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MusicNinja1: See Wikipedia:Requests for oversight if you want the IP address to be hidden. Many users sometimes lose their login during a session. See Help:Logging in#Login issues and problems. Some users change the color of the save button when they are logged in to reduce the risk of accidentally saving while logged out. You can for example place the below in your CSS. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:53, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

#wpSave {background-color:green}

Hello, how to change the title of the article Bauffremont into House of Bauffremont ? [[User:Arx76|Arx76]] (talk) 20:01, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're asking for a "move over a redirect". That's above my paygrade, but I'm sure a better-qualified editor will do it for you. (In my opinion, the move is warranted.) Maproom (talk) 20:20, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Arx76, I can "move" (retitle) the article, but am reluctant to do so. It starts: "The House of Bauffremont is the name of a French princely family..." It continues:

• "the Bauffremonts established themselves in Burgundy and Franche-Comté..."
• "In 1448 Pierre de Bauffremont..."
• "Nicolas de Bauffremont, his son Claude, and his grandson Henri..."

and not:

• "the House of Bauffremont established itself in Burgundy and Franche-Comté..."
• "In 1448 Pierre d'House of Bauffremont..."
• "Nicolas d'House of Bauffremont, his son Claude, and his grandson Henri..."

The last two paragraphs are unreferenced; the penultimate paragraph seems to describe a mere fiction promoted by certain descendants. Perhaps sort out the article first; then decide which title best fits it. -- Hoary (talk) 22:04, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maybe "Bauffremont family"? (I get the impression that "House of [Bloggs]" is a calque on "Maison [Bloggs]", where [Bloggs] is a seller of cufflinks, perfumes, or something else with large profit margins.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:38, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Feel free to start a request at requested moves – the guidelines for doing so will be there. As Hoary has raised problems with the move, it's not uncontroversial, and should go through the requested moves process. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 05:55, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would support the move – see House of Rohan, House of Orange-Nassau, and I expect many others. Maproom (talk) 08:34, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, is there an equivalent of the tree model of Wikipedia in French, on Wikipedia in English? To see this model, consult the "Filiation" section of the "Famille de Tournebu" article on Wikipedia in French. For the moment, the only thing you can do on English Wikipedia is this (see below), which doesn't look so good.

• Grandfather
  • Father
    • Son
      • Grandson

Arx76 (talk) 20:14, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you looking for something like what you see at Louis_XI#Ancestry when you click "show"? Maproom (talk) 20:24, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Arx76: See {{Tree list}} and Help:Family trees for other options. fr:Famille de Tournebu#Filiation uses fr:Modèle:Arbre which looks similar to {{Tree list}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:34, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. It is exactly what I was looking for. Arx76 (talk) 20:37, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another question: is it possible for the title of an article to begin with a lower case letter? Arx76 (talk) 21:00, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, it can't for technical reasons (WP:Page name#Technical restrictions and limitations) but you can cause it to be displayed that way: see Template:DISPLAYTITLE. ColinFine (talk) 21:34, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Courtesy link: Draft:Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp.

I started a draft article about a high-profile US case law : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Georgia-Pacific_Corp._v._United_States_Plywood_Corp., which is still a good law, i.e. the controlling precedent. However, this article was not approved for posting. I am not sure, what can be done to improve it, and I would like to invite other editors, with expertise in the US Patent Law and in wiki rules to work on improving this draft. Walter Tau (talk) 01:00, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Walter Tau, you've been asked to provide more evidence for the "notability" of the subject of Draft:Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp.. Rather than asking here for help/advice, it would be better to ask at WT:WikiProject Law. -- Hoary (talk) 01:10, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you very much for your reply. The notability is stated in the beginning:

According to Google Scholar on 2023-04-13, this decisions has been cited 2212 times, making it the highest cited decision of US Federal courts in 1971.

There must be some other issues. I may not be experienced enough to understand them, and I ask for clarification. At any rate, contributions from other editors would be very welcome. Is there a process to invite other people to work on the draft? Walter Tau (talk) 01:18, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Stats don't matter. It's why some YouTubers with tens of millions of subscribers get AfD'd, often with deletion. Such as SSSniperWolf. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 01:55, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Walter Tau: Tacking on to Hoary's response, understand that the term notability (which I'll call wikinotability) has a distinct meaning on Wikipedia compared with elsewhere. You should find reliable sources that discuss the law in-depth. Primary sources can be helpful but they don't establish the wikinotability required. They can sometimes impede the review process when the reviewer is trying to evaluate the sources cited. If you can find three that'd really help whoever's reviewing the draft. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:15, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

thank you for clarifying this. I misunderstood the "notability criterion". I added 3 references from law journals, that discuss this case. What would be the next step? I feel strongly, that this topic is important, and I would like to bring attention of more experiences users to make this article better. Walter Tau (talk) 01:45, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Must I repeat myself? Rather than asking here for help/advice, it would be better to ask at WT:WikiProject Law. -- Hoary (talk) 01:58, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have no view on whether the subject is notable. But I have a comment on the draft. It doesn't start at the beginning. What had the defendant done that induced the plaintiff to sue it? Without knowing that, the rest is of no interest, at least to a non-lawyer. Maproom (talk) 14:19, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So I was under a previous username (Haseo9999) when I created a few pages pertaining to OS X and macOS. I have since switched to my current username.

I was looking for page creation logs and I know for a fact I created MacOS Mojave, MacOS High Sierra, and OS X Mavericks by going back in the edit history and the numerous notifications I've received from them throughout the years. The initial edit on each page only shows my current username rather than my previous one.

The page curation log only says I created MacOS Catalina. That is false.

Is this lack of data because I changed my username? Urbanracer34 (talk) 02:11, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Urbanracer34. The edit history of MacOS Mojave shows that it was created on June 4, 2018 by your current account, Urbanracer34, with an edit summary of "rough, but it's a start". Cullen328 (talk) 02:20, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. Thanks for responding. I know about the Mojave page is listed as created by me, but in the creation log on wikipedia it is the only one listed period. I also created MacOS Mojave, MacOS High Sierra, and OS X Mavericks under my previous username and they don't appear in the creation log. Those are the ones I'm concerned with. Urbanracer34 (talk) 02:23, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I apologize as I was wrong... MacOS Catalina is the only one in the creation log, not the others.

I also created MacOS Mojave, MacOS High Sierra, and OS X Mavericks under my previous username and they don't appear in the creation log. Those are the ones I'm concerned with. Urbanracer34 (talk) 02:30, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Urbanracer34, the first edit to MacOS High Sierra was on June 5, 2017 from your current account with a similar edit summary. If you renamed your account instead of abandoning it and registering a new account, then all of your old edits will be attributed to the current account name. Cullen328 (talk) 02:35, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Cullen328 Yes, my account is renamed. I just went through the Page creation log and it only shows I created MacOS Catalina. It should list the others as well. That is why I am here: Where did they go? Urbanracer34 (talk) 02:39, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Urbanracer34 I believe the page creation log (Special:Log/create) is a relatively new log type, being introduced some time after I registered in 2017. Page creations before the introduction of the page creation log are not logged. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 04:33, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Victor Schmidt mobil I guess that explains it. Thanks for the insight. Urbanracer34 (talk) 14:47, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Urbanracer34: I don't know how the page creation logs works, but according to xtools, you have created 5 pages https://xtools.wmcloud.org/pages/en.wikipedia.org/Urbanracer34 I found this by going to your contributions page and clicking the link at the bottom. RudolfRed (talk) 02:53, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@RudolfRed AHA! I didn't even know about this! This is exactly what I am looking for! Thank you very much!

I don't know why there is a disconnect between the page creation logs and xtools but there is clearly one. Hopefully they can fix it long term. Urbanracer34 (talk) 02:57, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Urbanracer34: The page creation log was created in mw:MediaWiki 1.32/wmf.7. The English Wikipedia got it 7 June 2018. You created MacOS Mojave 4 June 2018 so it missed the new log by three days. xtools has listed page creations since long before 2018. I'm not sure how they are found but it may require examining all your edits. I don't expect the page creation log will retroactively add old log entries from before the log was created so the "disconnect" is probably permanent. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:59, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@PrimeHunter Good to know. Thanks for the insight. Urbanracer34 (talk) 16:21, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bring back the 'Starlight Tours' Wikipedia page. People need to know what the RCMP are doing in Canada. Thank you. 216.36.162.61 (talk) 04:42, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Starlight tour redirects to Saskatoon_freezing_deaths which doesn't mention the RCMP but does describe some actions by Saskatoon_Police_Service. RudolfRed (talk) 04:47, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

and how to get it back on Wikipedia 216.36.162.61 (talk) 04:47, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And Starlight tours redirects to it also. Meters (talk) 04:49, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I checked, and "Starlight Tour"/"Starlight Tours" (as the IP capitalized it) weren't existing redirects. I've fixed that, so now those (plus Starlight tour and Starlight tours as mentioned above) redirect to Saskatoon freezing deaths. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contribs)} 05:26, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also, I was wondering what the IP was talking about, and apparently it's related to people from SPS attempting to erase the part about starlight tours... from 2012 to 2016. It's been put back in the article since then. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contribs)} 05:31, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

on august 2016, the article starlight tours was proposed for a merge into saskatoon freezing deaths. after no objections were raised for 6 months, the merge occured.

if you wish to start an article on this topic again, you will need to demonstrate that the topic is notable by wikipedia's standards, by finding at least three reliable sources that cover the subject significantly, and basing the article off those. lettherebedarklight晚安 05:35, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lettherebedarklight, the thing is, there's already an article on the subject... the thing is, Saskatoon freezing deaths is pretty much the same thing as "starlight tours", so I see no need to unmerge. restored original statement LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contribs)} 05:42, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

starlight tours was merged into saskatoon freezing deaths. (edit conflict × 2) liliana edited her message after i replied. anyway, i was giving general advice for creating an article. lettherebedarklight晚安 05:44, 5 June 2023 (UTC) (edited 05:49, 5 June 2023 (UTC))Reply[reply]

Ah, makes sense why there would be this concern then. As I said in my updated message, though, the Saskatoon freezing deaths article seems to cover the starlight tour practice well enough. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contribs)} 05:46, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Greetings, does someone more adept with image placement know how to fix this problem at TRAPPIST-1? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:46, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: A simple solution would be to move the wide image to immediately under the "List of planets" section heading, giving a diagram followed by a table and orbit image.

You might consider replacing the wide scrollable image with {{scalable image}} (same parameters). It is less discernible but can be clicked to enlarge as normal.

The large "Orbit Comparison" image might be moved to the image-less "Planetary system" section, where a comparison with Solar System orbits is first mentioned. There is enough text in that section to accommodate such a large image, and would get round the "so much to show and not enough room to show it" dilemma. Bazza (talk) 09:03, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I added a category which I thought already existed. So I decided to create it in a way I'm not used to. However when trying to add a parent category, I did something wrong, and now I can't work out how to move it.

This is the category I created Category:Crime in North Yorkshire

This is the category I want to make a parent category, not a page Category:Crime in Yorkshire Danstarr69 (talk) 11:27, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Danstarr69: I fixed it by removing the initial colon. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:30, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello.

I am in the process of updating The Twentieth Century Society article and would like to create a category for all the buildings that have featured on their Risk List - there are 30 articles that would fit the category so far, with 10 more buildings added every two years.

I am thinking the name would be C20s Risk List but I am not sure what parent category to use. The closest equivalent I can find is Category:Buildings at Risk Register for Scotland but that seems to link to the article Buildings at Risk Register for Scotland.

Could I do the same? Have Category:C20s Risk List refer to The Twentieth Century Society?

I've not done this aspect of editing before, so would appreciate any pointers. Thank you in advance!

BJCHK (talk) 12:06, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

BJCHK, any new category should correspond to a defining characteristic of the articles in it, see WP:CATDEF. The category could be called Category:Structures on the The Twentieth Century Society Risk List or Category:The Twentieth Century Society Risk List. Category:Buildings at Risk Register for Scotland and Category:Structures on the Heritage at Risk register are similar, presumably Category:Buildings on the Buildings at Risk Register for Scotland was rejected as repetitive. There is also a disambiguation page, Buildings at Risk Register. The category name should match the main article name, rather than using an abbreviation. One parent category would be Category:Heritage registers in the United Kingdom. The text of the category page could refer to The Twentieth Century Society. TSventon (talk) 12:56, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you so much @TSventon! Incredibly helpful. I'll get on that now BJCHK (talk) 03:23, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can anyone help me improve this page? It doesn't look good at all. JackkBrown (talk) 13:03, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JackkBrown: Hi there! I added WikiProjects to the article talk page. I suggest reaching out to the editors in those WikiProjects for assistance. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:34, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

how to post article Prince Smarty (talk) 13:42, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Prince Smarty: See WP:YFA. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:53, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Prince Smarty. I observe that every single edit you have made appears to be an attempt to promote yourself or your website. Please note that, unlike most places on the Internet, Wikipedia is not for promotion, and attempts to use it in this way are usually unsuccessful, and can be frustrating and disappointing for the editor trying to do it.

If you or your website meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability - which basically means that several people wholly unconnected with you have chosen to write at length about you/your website, and been published in reliable sources - then there could be an article about you or your website.

Such an article would not belong to you, or be controlled by you. You are permitted to try and create it yourself, but you are likely to find it very hard, because you will have to forget most of what you know about the subject and write only from what those sources say (even if you very much dislike what those sources say).

Tenryuu has pointed you at your first article, and that is a good place to start. But I suggest you also read WP:NOTPROMO (already linked above) WP:PROUD, and WP:BACKWARD. ColinFine (talk) 15:52, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just created an article Slavery and Slaving in World History: A Bibliography and need help italicizing its title which is the title of a published book. The article hasn't been reviewed yet, but it should pass the "muster" as a stub. I'd appreciate advice or help from a more experienced editor on adding italics to the title. Thanks. Allreet (talk) 19:08, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done DonIago (talk) 19:22, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Perfect. Thanks. Allreet (talk) 19:42, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm considering whether the Italian language page dedicated to Paola Cortellesi is valid in terms of sources and information; is there any gossip information? I have not found any. JackkBrown (talk) 20:44, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JackkBrown: Your question is unclear. You ask about the Italian language article but link to the English Wikipedia. Are you asking about it:Paola_Cortellesi? RudolfRed (talk) 22:28, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@RudolfRed: no, I'm asking if it's possible to proceed with the notice of expansion of the article in en.wiki; I'm not sure that the sources in the corresponding page in Italian language are completely reliable. JackkBrown (talk) 22:47, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JackkBrown: There is no {{Expand Italian}} on Paola Cortellesi, at least as far as I can see. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 00:01, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Skarmory: I meant whether it's correct to add this template. JackkBrown (talk) 01:08, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JackkBrown: In that case, I think only include it if you're sure there's information that meets English sourcing requirements in the Italian article that is not in the English article. Whoever translates it can make the determination from there about what content is acceptable to add. If you don't think there's (much) material in there that can be added, it's probably not worth adding the template. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 04:52, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why is it that on the page "Riccardo Rossi (voice actor)" the paragraph "Personal life" is a subsection of the paragraph "Biography", while on the page "Laura Boccanera" the paragraph "Personal life" is not a subsection of the paragraph "Biography" and is after the paragraph "Dubbing roles"? JackkBrown (talk) 21:48, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Because different editors made different choices about article structure, JackkBrown. Cullen328 (talk) 21:55, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why are there blasphemies (insults towards God) on Wikipedia? Mario Magnotta; paragraph: "Prank calls". JackkBrown (talk) 22:17, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia is not censored for any reason. 331dot (talk) 22:22, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As an aside, paragraphs and sections are very different things. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:36, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Content disclaimer. And "someone thought it was a good idea to put it there." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:24, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Prank calls are blasphemous? In which religion? Clarityfiend (talk) 10:54, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Clarityfiend: I think JackkBrown is referring to the quoted "Porco Dio" and its English translation. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 11:00, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is there a possibility of implementing a dark mode feature? 2600:4040:5032:1D00:1D3E:7F9A:EFF3:E0A1 (talk) 23:40, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes - see WP:Dark mode. GoingBatty (talk) 23:44, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I asked this question first to the person who made the article deletion, over at User_talk:Liz#Cleanup_after_article_deletion?, but got no response. An article I previously worked on, Conversations_(software)#See_also, now has a red See also link. Search found it was deleted and you were closer. It still exists in several articles.[1] I know in the time I wrote this I could have deleted them all manually, but isn't there a process to check and fix such things as part of a deletion, similar to cleaning up after a move? Better, a bot like I see going around changing or deleting categories? If not, should there be, and where should I suggest it? Thanks. -- Yae4 (talk) 10:38, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

When one deletes an article, there's a certain amount of judgement involved with regard to dealing with links in other articles. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Administrator instructions says that a deleting admin should

Go to Special:WhatLinksHere on the deleted article and delete any redirects that point to the deleted article, using speedy deletion criterion G8. Also, if the AfD has shown no current scope to have an article on the subject, edit articles to remove redlinks to the deleted page; use your discretion over whether to delete the text altogether, e.g. from lists. Likewise, remove links found on category and portal pages; links on user and talk pages can be ignored, as can some WikiProject pages. (my emphasis)

Sometimes this procedure isn't always carried out with complete thoroughness, but I see no way in which it could be handled by a bot. I agree that redlinked entries for deleted articles shouldn't appear in "See also" sections, so whenever you see one, you should just remove it. Redlinks elsewhere in articles should be dealt with individually; they can be delinked, but if there's a possibility that a useful article could be written, they can be left alone. Deor (talk) 14:34, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Broken links are irritating, to me. A bot that unlinked them in-body, and deleted them in See also, would be a good start. Thanks for your answer. -- Yae4 (talk) 19:45, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've gone ahead and taken care of that. I will admit, when I delete an article I usually skip the checking "what links here" step - mostly because often most of what links there is lists of pages for deletion (For example - User:SDZeroBot/G13 soon sorting or User:SDZeroBot/AfD sorting, etc.); but also because I tend to be pretty tolerant of red links in the body of articles, and just because an article about X was deleted today, doesn't mean a better version can't be written 2 years from now. However, red links don't belong in See Also, or in pages that are lists of links to other articles, and that particular deleted article is less likely to be recreated in an acceptable form than, say, an article about an actor who has only had a small role in one movie but in 2 years might be an Oscar winner. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:06, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Dispute Resolution Noticeboard wizard has inserted a new dispute resolution into "Iran and_the_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine" rather than creating a new dispute.

How did this happen?

How can this be fixed? Bart Terpstra (talk) 14:26, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How do I input a random image's description as the caption. (e.g. the image description of File:Evolution of a Tornado.jpg is This image is created from eight images shot in two sequences as a tornado formed north of Minneola, Kansas on May 24, 2016. This prolific supercell went on to produce at least 12 tornadoes and at times had two and even three tornadoes on the ground at once. I want to automatically insert the description to the caption, but I can't find the command to do so. ▶❓◀ 💬📜 16:08, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm pretty sure there's no way to do this automatically. Note that MOS:CAPTIONS says Keep in mind that not all this information needs to be included in the caption, since the image description page should offer more complete information about the picture. Also see the section MOS:CAPSUCCINCT on that page. ColinFine (talk) 16:31, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've read through a lot of the help/support/how to's etc. and understand one shouldn't update their own company page due to conflict of interest, however what is the best way to have it updated? Hire a 3rd party marketing firm, or? Any suggestions appreciated. Thanks! Calavarces (talk) 16:41, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We don't have a single company page on Wikipedia, we have articles about notable companies. You can request edits on the talk page with the template {{edit request}}, see WP:Edit request for more details. Theroadislong (talk) 16:47, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would very very very strongly advise against hiring anybody to edit Wikipedia on your behalf. Many of those who offer such a service are scam merchants. If they are honest, they will explain to that they cannot guarantee that they can make the article read the way you want it. While you are welcome to make edit requests, as Theroadislong said, such requests will be reviewed by an uninvolved editor, and actioned only insofar as they decide the requests are consistent with Wikipedia policy (eg all information must come from a reliable published source; most of the information must come from a published source entirely independent of your company; the language must be neutral and not promotional - and because of your conflict of interest you are likely to find it hard to judge what is promotional).

In short, Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 22:38, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello!

A small group of users have been engaging in (what seems to me to be) a range of clearly policy-violating behaviors over the last couple days. I would like to follow policy as closely as possible in dealing with this, but reading Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution and Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_requests/Guide, I'm confused about how to proceed.

There are a bunch of content disputes at the heart of the matter, and I attempted to resolve them via the Third Opinion process — however, the other user in question brought in friends to post some insults in the thread, and then edited the 3O page to claim that since there were now more than two parties involved, it was invalid. One of those friends then preemptively archived the entire talk page discussion. This makes it clear to me that this is no longer just a content issue, but a case of WP:TAGTEAMing to dodge a good faith attempt to follow process.

The guide lists five steps; the first (discuss on the talk page) has been tried and broken down utterly as described; the next three are described as being for content disputes only; and the only one that is for conduct disputes (ANI) is repeatedly called out as a last resort, only for "chronic" issues, etc. So what is the right venue for escalating a conduct issue that doesn't rise to the ANI level yet?

The only other suggestion I've found in reading through the documentation about this is to approach an individual admin personally. I would be okay with this approach, but it doesn't appear in that guide so I'm not sure if it's actually the right idea, plus I have no idea how to go about finding the right one. I would like to find someone who has experience and interest in parsing through large and nuanced discussions/edit histories, rather than someone who is just going to try to make the problem go away as fast as possible.

Thanks for any advice!

— Personman (talk) 17:05, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think in practice the place to go is ANI – that "last resort" thing is not followed too often, and ANI is even mentioned in {{uw-disruptive3}}, a warning that is often issued to brand new users. You can probably try an individual admin as well; someone more involved in dispute resolution than me would probably know better (I try to stay as far away from disputes as possible). Skarmory (talk • contribs) 04:18, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I sent this email twice to "permissions-en at wikimedia.org" but have not heard back. Should I be sending it elsewhere?

I hereby affirm that I Jonathan Jacoby, the sole owner of the exclusive copyright of https://israelandantisemitism.com/ and have legal authority in my capacity to release the copyright of that work.

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the following free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen.

Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Jonathan Jacoby Copyright holder May 28, 2023

-- Jonathan Jacoby Jonathanabujj (talk) 17:54, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jonathanabujj The simplest way to accomplish what you are trying to accomplish would be to change the copyright notice on your website, which currently reads, "© 2023 Jonathan Jacoby. All rights reserved." to say something along the lines of:

"The text of this website [or page, if you are specifically releasing one section] is available for modification and reuse under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts)."

You can read more at this link. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 19:28, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks! Jonathanabujj (talk) 19:39, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Jonathanabujj. In addition to copyright, there coould be other concerns related to the content you want to use from your website. Many websites are written in way that's not really neutral enough for Wikipedia's purposes or otherwise has WP:TONE or WP:UNDUE issues. It's also quite possible that the website itself wouldn't be really be considered reliable for Wikipedia's purposes. So, even though the content you want use may be OK from an copyright standpoint, it might still have issues for other reasons. The subject matter that your website covers seems potentially contentious given the diverse nature of the Wikipedia community; so, please just don't assume automatically assume that you have the right to use the content as long as it's licensed correctly. Although Wikipedia encourages us to be WP:BOLD, it might be best for you to be WP:CAUTIOUS is trying to use the content and seek to establish a consensus to do so on the relevant article's talk page first. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:44, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What is the easiest way to search for "Óscar Madrazo" without getting hits for "Oscar Madrazo" or vice versa?(one has an accent on the O, the other doesn't)Naraht (talk) 18:47, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%22%C3%93scar+Madrazo%22+insource%3A%2F%C3%93scar+Madrazo%2F&ns0=1

—Trappist the monk (talk) 19:12, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Sir, Namaskars. I have added some information about Ramakrishna Mission Ashrama, Gwalior and its departments. I wish to ensure that all the additions fall under the prescribed norms of wikipedia. Please guide. Rkma Gwalior (talk) 19:56, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You edited your sandbox. The best way to submit a new article is to use Article Wizard. Your text would not be accepted as it is completely unsourced. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Writing a new article is challenging, and we usually recommend that people first learn more about Wikipedia by editing existing articles and using the the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 20:03, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Rkma Gwalior: Hi there! Are you referring to the edits you made to the List of Ramakrishna Mission institutions article? Or are you referring to User:Rkma Gwalior/sandbox (which 331dot mentioned above)? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 20:07, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rkma Gwalior, your recent edits to List of Ramakrishna Mission institutions added several direct external links to the text of the list. This contravenes Wikipedia:External links.   Maproom (talk) 21:38, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why is there the (incomplete) sentence "Central Base Section" (without any meaning inserted here) at the end of the paragraph "Background"? Page: American logistics in the Normandy campaign. JackkBrown (talk) 22:51, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The best place to ask this would be at Talk:American logistics in the Normandy campaign. 331dot (talk) 22:56, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@331dot: I just asked there too. JackkBrown (talk) 23:11, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Answered there (and here). Go right to the source and ask User:Jnestorius. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:57, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The "Roman Catholic Diocese of San Diego" page displays a coat of arms that is very outdated and few know how it got on WP. We have been using a different one since 1990 and would like to add that to the page. 66.185.171.99 (talk) 23:00, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is File:Roman Catholic Diocese of San Diego.svg any better? --DB1729^talk 23:49, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh wait, that's the one in the infobox. Are they (the other being at top right) both outdated? --DB1729^talk 23:53, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Someone recently added the one at the top. Do want that one to go in the infobox instead? Looks like it's low resolution only thing. --DB1729^talk 23:59, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]