Wikipedia:Help desk

Search the frequently asked questions

Search the help desk archives and other help pages

So I was looking at my list of pages and I noticed someone had attempted to tag a link as dead on the article Some Kind of Wonderful (film).

It is for a fansite devoted to the film and has a lot of information on the movie. It also appears to have been added a LONG time ago to the article.

The website appears to be permanently down, however I found a mostly intact copy on the Wayback machine.

How can I edit this into the page without going against the RFC about the Archive, if it pertains to this instance?

Thanks,

Urbanracer34 (talk) 14:23, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Urbanracer34.

I'm sorry, but if the deadlink was to a fansite, it was almost certainly not a reliable source, and should not have been cited in the first place. The citation, and any information in the article which depends only on that citation, should be removed. ColinFine (talk) 14:36, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ColinFine Hello! It is in the external links section and wasn't cited in the main article as far as I can see. How do I change the link from a dead link to an archived one? Urbanracer34 (talk) 16:28, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Urbanracer34.

By changing the parameter url-status in the citataion to url-status=dead. If there is an archive-url parameter pointing to the archive, this will cause the citation to show that link as "archived at". ColinFine (talk) 20:51, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ColinFine Hello! I think we're getting our wires crossed. I want to make the link under "external links" point to an archived copy. How exactly do I do this step-by-step? I don't recall doing this before. Thanks! Urbanracer34 (talk) 21:20, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see, @Urbanracer34, so it's just an external link, not a citation. My answer related to a citation template such as {{cite web}}.

Simply replace the URL with the URL of the archived copy. If you like, you can make the display text (after the pipe) explain that this is an archived copy, but I don't think there's much need. ColinFine (talk) 22:17, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ColinFine I got it fixed! Thank you for the guidance! Urbanracer34 (talk) 22:36, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Urbanracer34, generally WP:ELDEAD ==External links== should be removed, not redirected to an archived copy. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:02, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@WhatamIdoing Hello! It's a website that contains a lot of information on the movie not found anywhere else on the web. Is it at all possible to keep it in the article? Urbanracer34 (talk) 15:47, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If it is a reliable source, then it should be cited to support article content. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:01, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Urbanracer34: The RFC is not about archive.org or the Wayback Machine (web.archive.org), but rather about archive.today - an unrelated website operated by a different owner (which has several mirror sites including archive.is). You can continue to use the Wayback Machine freely without issues. – Scyrme (talk) 23:11, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Scyrme Thanks for the clarification. I thought they were linked somehow. Urbanracer34 (talk) 23:36, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I was editing Mass media in Vietnam when I found some words that have been translated from Vietnamese to English, but they seem like literal more than contextual translations. Should I keep them in Vietnamese or English? EmperorChesser 13:45, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@EmperorChesser: can you give an example? The article was tagged as a rough translation on 10 June 2022, so you are not alone in thinking that the language needs improvement. TSventon (talk) 14:43, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, in the article's History section, there's this sentence: That year, during an international reception, Ho Chi Minh asked cinematographer Phan Thế Hùng: "When will you let our people watch television?"

The original quote was Bao giờ các chú cho nhân dân ta được xem truyền hình?. I just found the translation really unnatural. EmperorChesser 14:48, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What would be a better translation? TSventon (talk) 15:11, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

After I re-reviewed the translation, I think it may be a good translation already. To be honest, the original speech is difficult to be translated into another language, but I came up with "When can our people watch television?", which isn't really close to the literal translation; it will be better if both the original and the translated version are displayed. EmperorChesser 15:21, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@EmperorChesser: I don't think that sentence is particularly important, so a slightly imperfect translation is probably OK. Obviously English and Vietnamese are very different so there will often be more than one way to translate a sentence. I wouldn't add the Vietnamese version as 99% (made up statistic) of en Wikipedia readers will not understand it. However there are likely to be worse examples of machine translation, so if you can improve those you will improve the article. And if you (have time to) fix the major problems you could remove the rough translation tag. TSventon (talk) 21:51, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've got it. Thank you! EmperorChesser 06:37, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Joerg Dietz

Dietz appears at first to be a notable academic with an impressive background. In reality, he considers his wikipedia bio to be his personal play space, has edited it multiple times, and largely ignores his talk page.

His content and reference list are promotional Linked-in style content, and the references are all papers he has co-authored. I am seeking advice as to how to deal with this very common sort of content. To be quite frank, I would reduce his bio to

Joerg Dietz is a German professor at HEC Lausanne. He has co-authored several papers.

That is a little bit exaggerated, in the interests of wry humor. However, the question remains sincere! Thank you for your time Reechard (talk) 06:53, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Joerg Dietz is an excellent example of why people should not control their own Wikipedia articles. The impression it gives, at least to the undersigned, is "Joerg Dietz writes papers about vacuous bullshit such as 'contextual antecedents'. He's good at getting them published, but there's no evidence that anyone ever reads them." Maproom (talk) 10:55, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for a start I've tagged the article for G11 (unambiguous promotion) speedy deletion. We'll see if whichever admin sees it agrees, if not I think it's an open-and-shut AfD candidate. Athanelar (talk) 12:31, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I just had to laugh. There is an old joke about behavioral psychologists having unruly dogs. Well, this fellow specializes in "organizational behavior"... And no comment on how he behaves. If there is an Afd please let me know. The page deserves deletion. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 13:15, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Reechard But sentences like "In research on diversity-related issues, Dietz has the interplay of contextual and individual factors" are so informative! David10244 (talk) 06:41, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello to everybody. I am not getting an answer to my previous question.

I will put it straight: how to add a note (number, etc.) to the text of an already existing page?

Last year I contributed to WP in another European language where everything was much more at hand (tools etc.) Settignano (talk) 09:27, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Settignano If you mean a reference/cite/source, see WP:TUTORIAL. We also have something called Help:Explanatory notes. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:56, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Settignano I understand you want to add a reference to National Air Communications. If you want to reference a book you could follow the format of an existing reference. Reference 5 uses the following code

<ref>{{harvp|Bluffield||2009|page=205}}</ref> in the Activation and dispersal section

*{{cite book |last=Bluffield |first=Robert |date=2009 |title=Imperial Airways – The Birth of the British Airline Industry 1914-1940 |publisher=Ian Allan |isbn=978-1-906537-07-4}} in the references section

If you want to cite another kind of source you could use the Wikipedia:RefToolbar and then ask here how to make the new reference match the existing ones. TSventon (talk) 12:15, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Settignano: The "Notes" section in National Air Communications uses a reference system described at Template:Harvard citation year brackets. You have to edit the section where the note is used. You can edit National Air Communications#Pre-war preparations to see examples. If the note uses a source which is not already listed at National Air Communications#References then you have to add both the note and the source. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:03, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by a note? ScholarlyTome (talk) 09:33, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In some pages, after the notes (see above), there is a list of books and other written/printed documents to delve deeper into the topic. Headlines are both "References" or "Bibliography". Which is the correct one? Settignano (talk) 09:58, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There are several correct ones, more at WP:CITESTYLE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:55, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The usual heading, if I'm understanding you correctly (and if the "books and other written/printed documents" are in addition to the works cited in the article), is "Further reading". See MOS:FURTHER. Deor (talk) 15:20, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Per User talk:WhatamIdoing#Amazement I have a potential "used to know them" issue, so do not want to do anything. How does one get to show that the person who wrote the software and sent the first internet message deserve a page? Ideas and comments will be appreciated. Thanks Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 10:00, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Yesterday, all my dreams...

As with any Wikipedia article the answer is:

1. Find sources where people wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject at some length, in a reliable publication (see WP:42 for more detail).
2. If you cannot find the sources, the subject is not notable (as Wikipedia uses the word) and you should go and do something else.
3. If you can find several such sources, then an article is possible. "Forget" everything that you know about the subject, and write a neutral summary of what the sources say - even those that you disagree with.

Unpublished information cannot be used; and nothing you personally know about the subject can be used unless it has been reliably published. ColinFine (talk) 10:40, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am familiar with the criteria but whatever I do myself will by definition be biased, given that I used to know him. There is WP:RSN but no equivalent for notability. I was hoping to get some others to build the page. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 13:18, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The COI seems slight, but you can err on the side of caution by using the WP:AFC process and declaring your connection to the subject. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:04, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. After thinking about it more, and the review process, I think I will just make a redirect to the history of the internet and move on. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 15:46, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This user Dangermanmeetz seems to have a problem with me, with following proper sources content and misinterpretation. We've had an issue with edit warring, and I called helpful voices to the Akwete cloth talk page. His edits were by and large declared wrong and my alarm on his false sourcing and original research was correct. I gave sources on the talk page even to appeal to all concensus on other motifs, all to be fair. I reverted to the version that goes with what the talk page concensus was. After the talk page discussions in which his sources were debunked, which he barely contributed in, he only reappears to make an edit while chastising me for his perceived wrong.

He says that the akwete cloth wasnt only inspired/ copied from ikaki designs from aso olona. Well, that is not what the statement says, because the sources say "main", "most popular" etc, but he seems to have some problems with that. That is what he specifically tweaks while chastising me rudely, also he doesnt reverted to his previous "common" motif version and edits it to" a motif" which isnt how the source presents it, because the sources are pretty clear cut on the level of importance of the ikaki/ikakibite motif.

This isn't even like in the main paragraph of the article even if it deserves to be, but to keep peace it is placed and has been placed in the motifs section. But that isn't enough for him, he has to diminish facts.

Here is what he said when he made his edit

"Again, Dolpina continues to misrepresent history despite the fact that another user explained in clear detail that there are OTHER designs that were not gotten from Aso Olona. The user has learned absolutely nothing."

What exactly am I to do here with someone who seems hellbound on picking a fight, and not accepting reality of sourced concensus. I find his behaviour off-putting and his tone suggesting he is more interested in edit warring again. Dolpina (talk) 15:23, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Follow the process described at WP:Dispute resolution (you may have already done the first stage or two). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:36, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

... as you were both told by several people more than a week ago, @Dolpina and @Dangermanmeetz. You both need to stop fighting, or you both risk being blocked.

And this isn't about being right or wrong (I haven't even looked at your arguments). It's about behaviour: it takes two to fight. ColinFine (talk) 17:39, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Good evening. This might not be the right place to talk about this, but anyway... Why are Total Drama, 6Teen and Stoked in the list of adult animation of the 2000s? All three aired on a kids channel (Teletoon) and also on Cartoon network, even if they were censored there. Canadian rules are just less strict. ~2026-24671-3 (talk) 17:51, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also, is Dark Justice more softcore or Hardcore? The list says softcore, the article on Dark Justice itself says hardcore. Unfortunately, this might not get answered, considering how obscure Dark Justice Is.~2026-24671-3 (talk) 17:52, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @~2026-24671-3.

The answer to a question about why something is in a particular article is nearly always because some editor decided it was appropriate to put it in, and nobody has since decided to take it out.

It is possible that there has been a discussion about it, but I would expect to find that on the talk page Talk:List of adult animated television series of the 2000s, and there is nothing there.

I suggest you post an item on that talk page, saying something like: "I don't believe ... belong in the list because ..., and I would like to remove them".

Then either somebody will come and argue the matter with you, or if nobody objects in, say, a week, you can remove them from the list yourself. As always, especially when removing material from an article, be sure to give a brief explanation in your edit summary. ColinFine (talk) 21:33, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I had a draft deleted a few months back, and I want to get retrieve it and see whether it's worth working on. Who can I ask to undelete it? Blackballnz (talk) 01:54, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Any admin can undelete. The typical place to ask is WP:REFUND, assuming the reason it wasn't deleted didn't involve a full discussion. Are you talking about Draft:Tourist Hotel Corporation (New Zealand)? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:59, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's the one. Blackballnz (talk) 02:10, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have undeleted it. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:14, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Blackballnz (talk) 02:21, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Como empiezo la biografía del psicólogo Mauricio Sibilla? Maria Gabriela Marianetti gaby1962 (talk) 07:40, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is the English-language Wikipedia. Any biography hosted here will have to be written in English. See Help:Your first article but note that creating new articles is very difficult for inexperienced contributors, and frequently results in failure and frustration. Would you perhaps be better off trying the Spanish-language Wikipedia? [1] AndyTheGrump (talk) 07:48, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

psicólogo destacado mendocino, aportó en varias áreas de psicología,aporte a libros,investigación sobre conceptualización en palomas y etología,publicados en Psicologí abstract y presentados por el destacado profesor de Psicología Profesor Carlos Fachinelli en Bohum,Alemania.Sibilla uno de los primeros en trabajar en computación para niños en el (CPA)Centro de .Luego de graduarse,fue un pionero en equinoterapia para niños con diversos problemas neurológicos y psicológicos. Pericias psicológicas y consultor de empresas.Su dedicación al bienestar de los demás lo llevó a realizar consutorio en Clínica Psicológica y asesoramiento de empresas..Es muy dedicada y vasta su trayectoria,muy estimados por su comunidad.Dedicó su vida a la psicología hasta su muerte el 10 de enero de 2025.

Maria Gabriela Marianetti gaby1962 (talk) 08:08, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No-one here is going to write an article, in English, based on the above biographical notes.

If you wish to talk in Spanish, about an article in English, you may find Spanish speakers listed at WP:EMB.

If you would like to suggest an article in Spanish, please ask at es:Wikipedia:Café/Archivo/Ayuda/Actual. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:26, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MY wikipage has been deleted.

Philip Shishov

This page does not exist. The deletion, protection, and move log for the page are provided below for reference. 14:08, 10 November 2025 Explicit talk contribs deleted page Philip Shishov (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip Shishov (XFDcloser)) (thank)

Please restore it, I did not request any such thing Batbaqna88 (talk) 07:57, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Explicit Batbaqna88 (talk) 08:01, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip Shishov. Whether you requested deletion or not has nothing to do with why the article was deleted. Per the note at the top of the AfD discussion, you can ask for it to be restored, but note that unless the subject can be shown to meet the necessary criteria (e.g. through significant coverage in secondary sources) it is liable to be deleted again. And also note that if you are Shishov, you need to read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.AndyTheGrump (talk) 08:02, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, what can I do if there are two articles that talk about the same thing? 1 and 2 Moyojnr (talk) 12:15, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mark them for merging; or boldly merge them, if you feel able. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:39, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Asia Rose Simpson's Correct Age And Birthyear According To The Eat Bulaga's Segment The Age Is Right Which Is 18 Years Old And 2007 But Not Yet Announced The Birthmonth Of Asia Rose Thank You For This Questions Gabby121995 (talk) 12:36, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reliable source for this, please? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:37, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just a heads up, english generally isn't spelt with capitals at the start of every word. It makes sentences hard to read mghackerlady (talk) (contribs) 22:43, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

i'm aware of Special:Contribs being a shortcut to Special:Contributions, and of Special:CA being a shortcut to Special:CentralAuth. my question is: are there any more shortcuts like this? there is Help:Special page § Alphabetical order, which does list shortcuts, but i added the CA shortcut to the list, so there might be more not in the list. ltbdl (master) 16:00, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if there's a comprehensive list, however I do know of Special:MakeSysop → Special:UserRights, and Special:PermaLink → Special:PermanentLink dot.py 16:15, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, Special:WhatLinksHere doesn't seem to work for Special pages so there doesn't seem to be an easy way to check for redirects (and I'm not sure that these shortcuts work as redirects anyway).

I was able to find a list of aliases at MW:Special page names. However, the list doesn't seem to be up to date. Some of the aliases don't work, even when trying variations with/without spaces or variations in capitalisation, and others are missing (Special:CA for Special:CentralAuth). That said, it did include some that were not already listed (eg. Special:Users for Special:ListUsers).

I suspect there's an up-to-date array of aliases ($specialPageAliases) located in MessagesEn.php, but it's probably only accessible to admins. May be worth asking over at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical).

As an aside, I'm not sure adding shortcuts to that list as regular entries is a good idea, since it pads out the list with non-unique entries. If it were to include shortcuts, it may be be better to include them as subpoints, like:

• Special:Contributions
  • Special:Contribs

That way they're distinct from the main entries and kept together rather than scattered around according to alphabetical order.

I do think making an open list of shortcuts/aliases is helpful though, since these pages can't be edited to add {{shortcut}}. – Scyrme (talk) 17:05, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I asked over at (technical). – Scyrme (talk) 17:14, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Got a very helpful reply which provided a link to an API query which gives the up-to-date list. Here's a summary of aliases and shortcuts, omitting aliases where the only difference was upper case was changed to lower case:

List of aliases and shortcuts for special pages

List of aliases/shortcuts for special pages Special:AccountSecurity Special:Manage Two-factor authentication Special:OATH Manage Special:OATHManage Special:OATH Special:Two-factor authentication Special:OATHAuth Special:AllMyUploads Special:AllMyFiles Special:AutoblockList Special:ListAutoblocks Special:AutomaticTranslation Special:MinT Special:Block Special:BlockIP Special:BlockUser Special:BlockList Special:ListBlocks Special:IPBlockList Special:Book Special:Collection Special:ChangePassword Special:ResetPass Special:ResetPassword Special:CentralAuth Special:GlobalAccount Special:CA Special:CiteThisPage Special:Cite Special:CollabPad Special:Collab Pad Special:CommunityConfiguration Special:CommunityConfig Special:Contributions Special:Contribs Special:DeletedContributions Special:DeletedContribs Special:DeletePage Special:Delete Special:DownloadAsPdf Special:ElectronPDF Special:EditChecks Special:Edit checks Special:EditPage Special:Edit Special:EmailUser Special:Email Special:EntityUsage Special:EntityUsageData Special:GlobalBlockList Special:ListGlobalBlocks Special:GlobalBlockWhitelist Special:GlobalBlockStatus Special:DisableGlobalBlock Special:GlobalContributions Special:GlobalContribs Special:GlobalUnblock Special:RemoveGlobalBlock Special:GlobalUserRights Special:GlobalGroupMembership Special:IPContributions Special:IPContribs Special:ListFiles Special:FileList Special:ImageList Special:ListDuplicatedFiles Special:ListFileDuplicates Special:ListGroupRights Special:UserGroupRights Special:ListUsers Special:UserList Special:Users Special:Log Special:Logs Special:LonelyPages Special:OrphanedPages Special:MassGlobalBlock Special:MultiGlobalBlock Special:MostLinkedCategories Special:MostUsedCategories Special:MostLinkedFiles Special:MostFiles Special:MostImages Special:MostLinkedPages Special:MostLinked Special:MostTranscludedPages Special:MostLinkedTemplates Special:MostUsedTemplates Special:MyContributions Special:MyContribs Special:MyUploads Special:MyFiles Special:NewFiles Special:NewImages Special:OAuth Special:MWOAuth Special:OAuthManageMyGrants Special:OAuthGrants Special:OAuthConsumerRegistration Special:OAuthRegistration Special:PageHistory Special:History Special:PageInfo Special:Info Special:PagesWithBadges Special:QueryBadges Special:PagesWithProp Special:PagesByProp Special:PendingChanges Special:OldReviewedPages Special:PermanentLink Special:PermaLink Special:ProtectPage Special:Protect Special:Random Special:RandomPage Special:RecentChangesLinked Special:RelatedChanges Special:SiteMatrix Special:WikimediaWikis Special:Statistics Special:Stats Special:TemplateDiscovery Special:Template Discovery Special:TemplateSearch Special:ContentTranslation Special:CX Special:Transcode statistics Special:TranscodeStatistics (An exception to the usual pattern where it'd be expected the page would be located here, but on ~enwiki it isn't) Special:Transcode Statistics (Rare exception where the page isn't located at the capitalised version) Special:TimedMediaHandler Special:UncategorizedFiles Special:UncategorizedImages Special:UnconnectedPages Special:WithoutConnection Special:WithoutSitelinks Special:UnusedFiles Special:UnusedImages Special:UserLogin Special:Login Special:UserLogout Special:Logout Special:UserRights Special:MakeSysop Special:MakeBot Special:Version Special:Versions Special:WantedPages Special:BrokenLinks Special:WikiSets Special:EditWikiSets

@Ltbdl: Not all of these are shortcuts but hopefully this is helpful. – Scyrme (talk) 18:12, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

that's perfect, thanks all for the answers! ltbdl (hug) 18:20, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I've gone ahead and updated Help:Special page § Alphabetical order to list shortcuts/aliases. That page also already listed some links which redirect to other special pages, but which are not aliases of one another according to the list given by the API. I've left them in, but haven't labelled them as shortcuts/aliases. – Scyrme (talk) 22:11, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is more of a long-cut than a shortcut, but there's also Special:Logs > Special:Log Sugar Tax (talk) 17:19, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Today's_featured_article and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_article pages are not the same for unauthorized users (like in incognito browser mode without logging)? Petsernik (talk) 17:56, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Now are equal, but it wasn't Petsernik (talk) 20:23, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Caching? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:54, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I occasionally use the mobile app to make suggested edits by adding short descriptions and images. However, another user recently left me a message on my talk page saying that when I added an image, caption, and alt text, I introduced unknown parameters. Here's the edit where they fixed my mistake. [2]

I'm trying to understand what I did wrong and how I can prevent it from happening again. I was using the pre-written fields on the mobile app (a field that says "caption" and typing in a caption, and the same for alt text). I wasn't manually putting in parameters or using the source editor. How can I make sure I'm using the correct parameters when editing on mobile like this? Should I go back and fix all the other image edits I've made on mobile?

Thanks for advising! Hawksquill (talk) 19:05, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Hawksquill: Infoboxes have different parameter names. For example, {{Infobox person}} does use alt and caption. The feature apparently isn't coded to match the used infobox. I don't know whether there is a way to avoid the error. It was reported at mw:Talk:Wikimedia Apps/Android Suggested edits#Article images introduces wrong parameter for image_alt in October. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:48, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I see, how annoying. Thank you for explaining! Hawksquill (talk) 14:17, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Diff/1339648128

Hello, I am new to Wikipedia. I would like to ask whatgeneric naming refers to as when I was editing Birmingham City Council it was stated something likeyour edit is deleted due to detected generic naming

Thanks, Zakariah Hayat Khan (talk) 19:16, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Zakariah Hayat Khan, the message asks you to correct errors in your edit, it hasn't been deleted. First and last in a reference template should be human first and last names, if it is useful to add an organisation as an author, you can put the whole name as "author", rather than splitting it between first and last. Category:CS1 errors: generic name has a list of words like editor which should not be entered in the first and last fields.

In your edit the problems are likely to be |last2=correspondent |first2=Neha Gohil Midlands in the Guardian reference and |last=Council |first=Birmingham City in the www.birmingham.gov.uk reference. Both strings can be removed as they don't provide any extra information. You could also replace |website=www.birmingham.gov.uk, which duplicates the url, with |website=Birmingham City Council. TSventon (talk) 19:37, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for explaining Zakariah Hayat Khan (talk) 19:45, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going improving an article that has a decently high number of article splits. Specifically, it is a city, and has many sections common to cities (e.g. History, Transportation), but also corresponding articles (e.g. History of [City], Transportation in [City]). I'm trying to shepherd the article through a GA nomination, and think the main article meets criteria, but am unsure whether the splits also need to be brought up to the main standard.

I despair about how much time it is taking to go through and verifying a single 300-citation article, let alone going through these splits and not just verifying, but building out and image-adding. I'd prefer not to if not necessary, but don't want to waste a GA reviewer's time given the backlog on noms.

If there is a general policy, I was not able to find it on a casual look on the Good Article page. Any guidance or a redirection to ask my question there would be appreciated. Kwkintegrator (talk) 02:35, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Kwkintegrator, let's imagine that the city in question is Ottawa. Supposing for a moment that it is so, are you asking whether it's true that

"The article Ottawa has a section titled 'History'. This has a hatnote: Main article: History of Ottawa. In order for Ottawa to be promoted to GA, would History of Ottawa first have to be promoted to GA; and likewise for other articles (such as Geography of Ottawa) similarly pointed to by hatnotes atop other sections"

? If this is what you are asking, then "yes" would greatly surprise me. Where have you read a suggestion that this is so? But perhaps I have utterly misread your question. -- Hoary (talk) 07:17, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Kwkintegrator, I agree with Hoary. A Good Article assessment is an assessment of that article and not in any way an assessment of related articles. I would also like to point out that there is no need to frame your question as a hypothetical. Evasiveness is not helpful. When you are asking a question about a specific article, please furnish the title of the article. Cullen328 (talk) 07:47, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Kwkintegrator, are you perhaps thinking of attempting to have Ottawa (or wherever) promoted to "featured topic", or simply confused by the notion of "featured topic"? -- Hoary (talk) 08:15, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Hoary@Cullen328 Ottawa is absolutely the article in question. Just figured for the specifics were not particularly relevant, apologies for the inconvenience. Your phrasing of that question is pretty close, I suppose the only thing I'd change is that I'm not asking about the status of the "History of Ottawa" page needing to get to GA status prior to "Ottawa" receiving GA status.

The succinct question is then: "The article Ottawa has a section titled 'History'. This has a hatnote: Main article: History of Ottawa. In order for Ottawa to be promoted to GA, is the quality of the articles corresponding to these section titles taken into account?"

To answer another good question, I have never seen a suggestion that article splits that are linked out to need be maintained at the same quality. The question stems from my own reasoning that someone might see the relationship between Ottawa and Geography of Ottawa as hierarchical/subsidiary, and thought I'd look for an answer proactively.

To answer the last topic of discussion, I am not looking to attempt to get Ottawa to featured topic status. The question is very much limited only to the Good Article process. Kwkintegrator (talk) 13:55, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The answer is no. Outside of glossary links (where links should actually exist on the page being referenced) we don't look at other pages. We would, however, expect some sort of summary of the article in the main article. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:09, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have started to archive my talk page (first manually, now through a bot) to hide old warnings as it may be less impressionable as an AfC reviewer. Now, I want to be able to sort them chronologically, with the first being 24-25 as I had rarely any edits and conversations in 24, and then yearly from then onwards. However, I am finding it difficult to do so with the following aspects:

1. My main talk page only says "Archive 1" and "Archive 2" without the year in parentheses, despite page moves. I do not know what will fix this. 2. Now, when I click on the links, it goes to the old page name set to &redirect=no. I was hoping someone here would know how to resolve that as well.

Cheers - Youshouldchooseausernamethat (Youshouldtalk) 08:29, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Youshouldchooseausernamethat: Try something like {{archives|list=[[/Archives/2024-25|2024-25]], [[/Archives/2026|2026]]}}, telling the {{archives}} template exactly what to display. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:37, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I edited an article to remove promotional tone and added reliable sources to improve neutrality and verifiability.

Could you please clarify how maintenance templates are typically removed after improvements? Is there a formal review process or are they removed as editors verify the changes?

Thank you.

CoreMedia. GPD editor (talk) 13:01, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @GPD editor.

Each template has a link learn how and when to remove this message. In most cases any editor who thinks that the problem has been addressed may remove the template. ColinFine (talk) 13:29, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you think the issue is solved, and you have no conflict of interest in the article, feel free to remove the template. If someone disagrees, and restores it, follow our Wikipedia:Dispute resolution process. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:30, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@GPD editor Do you have any kind of professional relationship with CoreMedia? 'GPD editor' sounds like the sort of username we see from content writers at marketing firms. Athanelar (talk) 15:02, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Thank you for your message.

I do not have any direct relationship with CoreMedia. I was asked by a third party to help improve the article by removing promotional language and aligning the content with Wikipedia’s neutrality and sourcing guidelines.

My intention is solely to ensure the article complies with Wikipedia standards.

Please let me know if any further adjustments are recommended. GPD editor (talk) 15:21, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"I do not have any direct relationship with CoreMedia. I was asked by a third party..."—This implies that you have an indirect relationship, and/ or are acting on behalf of someone with either a direct or indirect relationship, with CoreMedia.

You are required to declare any CoI which includes any payment, reward, or other benefit before you edit further. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:37, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So i am looking to add info to an article about a family member Charles Burson, so the source is just general family knowledge. how should i list the source EitanKam (talk) 18:15, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but personal knowledge is not an acceptable source; a source must be published somewhere in a reliable source that can be verified by the public. Anyone can claim to be anyone here, so we require sources. 331dot (talk) 18:18, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please make a redirect for the 2026-27 NCAA Division I Men's basketball season article please. ~2026-11836-06 (talk) 22:11, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

By "2026-27 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball season", perhaps you mean 2026–27 NCAA Division I men's basketball season. (NB I know little about sports and nothing about sports involving balls; thus I am likely to make mistakes.) This doesn't exist, so I suppose you want a redirect from it. But you don't specify the desired target. Anyway, why not simply make the redirect yourself? -- Hoary (talk) 22:30, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please make a redirect for the 2027 NCAA Division I FBS football season please. Super Bowl Fan (talk) 22:14, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Super Bowl Fan: Hello (I'm surprised that's not an account name that was already taken!)

You'll want to go Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Redirects to request creation of redirects. MEN KISSING (she/they) T - C - Email me! 22:20, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Super Bowl Fan Actually, since you're auto-confirmed, I think you should have the ability to create pages, which would allow you to create redirects.

If you'd like to do it yourself, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Redirect#How_to_make_a_redirect. MEN KISSING (she/they) T - C - Email me! 22:24, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How do a person translates a spanish or Japanese video and how can I do that? ~2026-11868-07 (talk) 02:14, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this a help desk for Wikipedia, so we probably can't help. You could try a Google (or similar) search and/or ask Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language, which can deal with more general questions. TSventon (talk) 02:58, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean creating subtitles for videos see commons:Commons:Timed Text. MKFI (talk) 10:05, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any tips or suggestions to shorten a lead paragraph? I noticed that this article I looked at has a lengthy lead, which looks bulky and has people not want to read it. I try not to cut too much content in the lead since some of it is why people look articles in the first place. TyronesEditsPages (talk) 03:02, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

TyronesEditsPages, there is some guidance at MOS:LEADLENGTH, which says The leads in most featured articles contain about 250 to 400 words. "barbershop music" has a lead of 372 words, which is quite long. The lead should summarise the content of the remainder of the article, so you could look for information which is only present in the lead and move it to a relevant section. An example could be the detail about bass, lead, baritone and tenor singers. TSventon (talk) 03:18, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I did took a look at MOS:LEADLENGTH before. I know a majority of Wikipedians aren't fond in the niche genre but still, is there any ways to have content still there without removing a lot of it in the lead? I could use my sandbox to try something since some information in the lead is already mentioned in the body paragraphs leading forward. TyronesEditsPages (talk) 03:24, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have developed a draft at Draft:Soul (2027 TV series) which is currently more comprehensive and cited than the existing Draft:Spirit (TV series) (imo). Because there is a one-way interaction restriction in place—specifically, the creator, Aidillia, of the other draft is restricted from interacting with me—I want to avoid any appearance of a conflict or a tussle over the content. Could a neutral editor please review both versions and merge the higher-quality content and citations into a single draft? I want to ensure the best possible version of the article moves forward while strictly respecting existing interaction boundaries.

Note: I already asked this to admin Ivanvector earlier on his talk page but still no response. ꕥ 𝙳.𝟷𝟾𝚝𝚑 ꕥ ^{→𝙼𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚐𝚎 𝚖𝚎←} 04:22, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Spirit (TV series) is presently a redirect to Draft:Soul (2027 TV series) which seems to have been done by Aidilla themself. Athanelar (talk) 15:02, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Reference help requested. How do I fix citations when the author is just Reuters, and doesn't specify actual names?

Also when manually citing, how do I format with multiple authors? I think it might be introducing a citation error. Thanks, Apixie701 (talk) 05:03, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Reuters", "QQ.com Staff [Anon.]", "English, 36Kr", "Sina Finance Staff", and the like fail to specify the actual author(s), Apixie701. If this is all the information that you have for the authorship of a source, don't use any of "last=", "first=", or "author=". Don't attempt to specify the author(s). For something written by two identified humans, follow the pattern "first1=Karl | last1=Marx | first2=Friedrich | last2=Engels". You'll find this explained in Template:Cite book (and the others: Template:Cite journal, etc). Happy editing! -- Hoary (talk) 07:01, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

PS To say that a news story came to (for example) a local newspaper via Reuters (and thus wasn't locally produced) can be helpful, Apixie701. And the citation templates offer agency= for this purpose. Template:Cite news tells us that the agency= field is used for The news agency (wire service) that provided the content; examples: Associated Press, Reuters, Agence France-Presse. Do not use for sources published on the agency's own website; e.g. apnews.com or reuters.com; instead, use work or publisher. May be wikilinked if relevant. The template documentation also helps with A news article released by a news agency and having no credited author. -- Hoary (talk) 11:06, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am 85 years old and would like to create a personal page that will allow people to look me up. Somehow, someone has already done that in the Spanish version of Wikipedia and it contains inaccurate information. Would you be kind enough to assist me in this endeavour. Thank you Orade1944 (talk) 06:00, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The general rule is that people should not create articles about themselves on Wikipedia. Your first article offers help and explains why this is undesirable.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:54, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not social media. The best place for people to look you up would be a social media account or a personal website. Your age is not relevant. Please also note that having posted this request here, you may receive messages offering to create an article for payment. Please see WP:SCAM. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:20, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Wikipedia doesn't allow people to make pages for themselves. Wikipedia summarises what reliable sources say about topics, so unless you're notable enough to have significant coverage in said sources (think the NYT, CNN, or more domain specific sources of a similar prestige) it's unlikely someone will decide to make an article for you. I suggest you be weary of people telling you they can make you one for a price, that kind of thing isn't allowed and scammers like to browse the helpdesk to prey on ignorant but otherwise good meaning people like yourself

If you want people to be able to look you up, you can make a profile on a social media or have someone make you a website (or make one yourself, if you'd like to learn) mghackerlady (talk) (contribs) 22:52, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have reliable sources showing that Ramchandra Paikaji Potdukhe was MLA in 1962 for Chandrapur constituency. His name is missing from the list. Can an editor please verify and update? I can provide references Spbot30 (talk) 07:58, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is not clear which list you are referring to, but the best place to ask this would be the talk page of that article. You will need to supply a reference from a reliable source. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:15, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question about the appropriate non‑free size for a Reuters photograph used in the Andrew Mountbatten‑Windsor article. The file is the widely circulated image of him sitting in his car as he left Aylsham police station. It was not uploaded by me, but I noticed that it is currently at 387 × 258 px (146 KB), and I wanted to check whether that is too large for a modern non‑free press photograph. My understanding is that non‑free images should generally be reduced to around 250–300 px in width, with a much smaller file size, to comply with NFCC. ItsShandog (talk) 13:11, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is rather large, ItsShandog. See Wikipedia:Non-free content/Image size calculator to calculate and implement the appropriate reduction. Incidentally, see WP:FfD/2026_February_23#File:Andrew_Mountbatten-Windsor_arrest_photograph.png for whether this use of the photograph would be "fair". -- Hoary (talk) 23:01, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently working on a list article in my userspace. Where it says under a ship name to "see another ship name", is it possible to link so that clicking on the link takes you to the relevant entry? As the list is currently in my user space, I take it that if it is possible, the links will need to be changed once the list is in mainspace. If that is the case, I just need to know how to do it, and will save the creation of such links once the list is in mainspance. If anyone can show me an article where this is done, it would be appreciated. Mjroots (talk) 16:45, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Mjroots See WP:Anchors CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 16:53, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Thilio: Ah, I think I've got it. Use {{Slink}}. Looks like I can use it in user space and it'll still work after a move to mainspace. Mjroots (talk) 17:24, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Mjroots: Yap, you're good to go :) CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 17:35, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Funny how anchors are the solution to a problem involving ships mghackerlady (talk) (contribs) 22:54, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Very good, Mghackerlady, very good indeed. Mjroots (talk) 19:25, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Article: Liberty City Seven this article contain false and outdated information and is causing harm to the Bio of Narseal Batiste. How can this article be deleted ~2026-12154-79 (talk) 17:11, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Liberty City Seven article will not be deleted, since the subject is notable by our definition. Any statement in the article that is supported by a cited reliable source will remain in the article. If such a statement is outdated or false, the updated or true information can be added if there is a cited reliable source. Your best approach to do this is probably to raise your issues on the article's talk page at talk:Liberty City Seven. -Arch dude (talk) 17:38, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Upon updating the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linaria_altaica page, I had found an image to upload of this species. The source in question is in this site: https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/106477171 and through the image i send in attachment, it has a Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). However, the image got removed by INaturalistReview Bot, who sent this message:

" File:Linaria altaica.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Bot license review not passed: iNaturalist author is using Cc-by-nc-4.0: https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/106477171 Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing."

Was this removal correct? If so how should i do better next time, and if not how can it be reversed?

Thank you for the help.

File:ExplanationForUploadingIssue.png

MikePT97 (talk) 17:14, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Files on Commons are licensed under CC_BY_SA, which permits commercial use. When you uploaded the file there you violated its Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license. It's not that you used it commercially yourself, but by relicensing, you told the rest of the world that it's OK to use commercially. -Arch dude (talk) 17:24, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I see, so which license code should i look for when uploading internet images to Wikimedia? MikePT97 (talk) 17:28, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

See Commons:Licensing -Arch dude (talk) 17:50, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I'm new to updating information and need to know several things...1) how do I add additional references for verification of an event. I also need to update the name of the page to reflect the correct name of the organization and do I need to add the registered trademark of the organization? Any help would be great... GiacomoNeilsen (talk) 18:01, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please see requested moves(but also see WP:COMMONNAME, we don't necessarily use official or legal names as article titles). You don't need to add a trademark. 331dot (talk) 18:06, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I appreciate this GiacomoNeilsen (talk) 18:13, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @GiacomoNeilsen. See referencing for beginners.

If you're talking about Miss Star International, then adding more sources would be very welcome, provided they are independent sources. It looks to me as if few if any of the existing sources meet all the requirements of WP:42 - that is, most of them do not appear to me to be indepedent secondary sources. ColinFine (talk) 18:51, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Having just noticed your declaration as a paid editor (thank you for making it!), I will add that you should not be editing that article directly at all, but should be making Edit requests instead. --ColinFine (talk) 18:55, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Colin. GiacomoNeilsen (talk) 19:05, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to add a page for a new bridge. It is a special bridge - one of the only new pedestrian suspension bridges in the U.S. -87.8145 -87.8145 PH Chase (talk) 18:56, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a good idea, a cursory search suggests it has received enough coverage to suggest it may qualify as WP:Notable, and if you find at least three Reliable sources conforming to all the requirements summarised at WP:Golden rule, you are most welcome to do so. You might like to read Help:Your first article. Good luck and happy editing! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 19:54, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

how can I cancel a monthly donation ~2026-12036-56 (talk) 21:19, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@~2026-12036-56: See "Manage your regular donation" near the end of https://wikimediafoundation.org/give/donor-frequently-asked-questions/. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:44, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to restore access to archives after moving this page to Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/Society, social science, and economics from Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/Society. The archives are under the former name. I would like to either provide a link to the old archives or move the other archives to the new name. How do I do that? Where can I go to get help with this? Interstellarity (talk) 21:49, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Interstellarity: Given that the archives will also include the religion, philosophy, mythology, and culture, I don't think the archives should be moved to the new name. Melozone crissalis (talk) 21:51, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a {{archives}} box to provide access to the old archives from before the split. I also changed the bot configuration so it makes new archives as subpages of the new talk page rather than adding to the old archives. – Scyrme (talk) 22:04, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The move was reverted so I reverted the changes to the bot config, but I've left the archives template in and done the same for Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/Religion, philosophy, mythology and culture. – Scyrme (talk) 22:09, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I've commented out the banner I added to Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/Society as it's redundant while it's at that title. You can restore it if it's decided the talk page be moved again. – Scyrme (talk) 22:12, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having lots of trouble formating footnotes. For example:

1.  {{cite web}}: |archive-url= requires |archive-date= (help); Check date values in: |access-date= (help)

Roger Pilon (talk) 21:58, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: User:Roger Pilon/Roger Pilon revision draft

I'd recommend not writing about yourself. In terms of references, you need to use the right parameter. So, the |URL= parameter should just be the url. |website is just the name of the website... Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:13, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you're pasting entire references into a single parameter. You need to move the information to the correct parameter. For example only the title should go after |title=, only a URL link should go after |url=, etc.

If you're still having a lot of trouble, there are tools which will help you format references correctly. If you click the link ">Cite" above the editing area it will open those tools. If you're using the source code editor (not the visual editor), then you have to open the "Templates" menu after clicking ">Cite", and choose one of the templates in the drop down list. This will produce a form you can fill out to insert a reference. – Scyrme (talk) 22:21, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the specific error you mentioned here, it looks like that's because you have the name of a publication or website in |archive-url= instead of a URL link. Such information belongs in a parameter like |website=, |magazine=, |work=, or |newspaper=. The |archive-url= parameter is for a link to a website archiving service like the Wayback Machine. – Scyrme (talk) 22:29, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Roger Pilon: If it helps, you can find a list of what each parameter is intended for at Template:Citation § Description. – Scyrme (talk) 22:33, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The user batbaqna88 asked for a page to be restored, claiming it was "theirs" (presumably being the subject, as the account has no past contributions or contributions other than asking for Philip Shishov to be restored). Shortly after, a temp account made a string of edits on the article. This seems to me like someone with a COI abusing sockpuppets to edit an article about themselves, but am not entirely sure how to proceed mghackerlady (talk) (contribs) 22:41, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There are instructions for how to initiate an investigation at WP:Sockpuppet investigations. – Scyrme (talk) 22:44, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

what year in the Chinese Lunar Calendar correspond to 2026?? Kind Regards Bob Chinsky ~2026-12129-43 (talk) 23:40, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There's no universally accepted calendar era for the Chinese lunar calendar. There's a table with some of the various historic/traditional ones used at Chinese calendar § Epochs which includes a conversion for the current year. – Scyrme (talk) 00:27, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What is it i tried enabling and disabling it and it seems to be doing nothing whats wrong i am on desktop no adblock or any extensions ~2026-12164-98 (talk) 00:34, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@~2026-12164-98: It appears it just shows a birthday mascot called Baby Globe on some articles like Wikipedia. See https://wikimediafoundation.org/wikipedia25/wikipedia-mascot. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:47, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please cancell my subscription ~2026-12178-91 (talk) 01:45, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to assume this has nothing what-so-ever to do with Wikipedia, as we do not use a subscription model. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 01:47, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They may mean they have recurring regular donations set up.

The bottom of this page has instructions on how to cancel:

https://wikimediafoundation.org/give/donor-frequently-asked-questions/

If this is not about donations to Wikipedia, this help desk can't help you. You can usually cancel any repeating payments/direct debits via your bank. – Scyrme (talk) 01:53, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My recent changes page is stuck. It won't show any new edits past this edit. All tools like AntiVandal don't work. Toast1454_TC 02:16, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed this too. It seems to happen when enabling the quality prediction filters (likely have problems, very likely have problems, etc.). Day Creature (talk) 04:17, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Any idea how to fix? Toast1454_TC 13:06, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Got recent changes working, AntiVandal still frozen. Toast1454_TC 13:08, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In relation to Combination eating utensils, I have a question about how certain headings should be formatted and which is best. For the Knork and Spife sections, would it be fine to include the subheading "Historial" under each, to include the historical versions and predecessors, or is that too much subdivision? SonOfYoutubers (talk) 06:44, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's a judgment call, as there is almost nothing about subsections at MOS. I note that both sections fit on one screenful on my 15" laptop, but clearly that's just an observation, not a guideline. What are your thoughts, pro & con? Mathglot (talk) 10:50, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathglot In terms of pros, it helps organize the paragraphs better and it helps differentiate between what people usually consider as "knorks" and "spifes" (aka modern perception of those utensils) vs. historical examples that still technically constitute as "knorks" and "spifes" per their literal definition. In terms of cons, there isn't a terrible lot of information under each section, so as I said, I'm unsure if it might be too much subdivision. SonOfYoutubers (talk) 01:29, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you do decide to subdivide, be aware of a technical limitation in the MW software: there cannot be more than one section with the same exact name in an article. DMacks (talk) 13:09, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes there can; though they will have different anchor links. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:37, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you can create them, they just won't work properly in some contexts. That's...not desireable behavior even if there is a work-around. That's why Help:Section says don't do it. DMacks (talk) 21:31, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@DMacks @Pigsonthewing I think, if I decide to subdivide, I could fix this by simply specifying "Historical spifes" and "Historical knorks", or I could alternatively say "Spife predecessors" and "Knork predecessors", but this implies evolution so I'm unsure. SonOfYoutubers (talk) 01:31, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

While you are thinking about section heading names, have a look at MOS:NOBACKREF. It's a guideline, so if the obvious/best headings aren't compliant, then they aren't; but it's something to consider. Mathglot (talk) 01:40, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathglot Both seem compliant I think, besides the reference to a higher-level heading, but it does fulfill the "make it clearer" exception if there are concerns with technical limitations of identically named sections. SonOfYoutubers (talk) 01:47, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Diff/1340242209

can someone assist with how to fix this? Thank you! Thanks, MoorePenWiki (talk) 18:05, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

remove the comma.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 18:10, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, I hope I did it correctly. MoorePenWiki (talk) 18:24, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MoorePenWiki: In reference #13, you'll see the error stating "Check date values in: |date= (help)". Click on that "help" link and scroll down to the table marked "Examples of unacceptable dates and how to fix them", and note this row:

Comma in month and year

|date=February, 1900

|date=February 1900

So, as Trappist the monk mentioned, you can resolve the issue by removing the comma, i.e. changing |date=November, 1982 to |date=November 1982. GoingBatty (talk) 02:25, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: User:Karen Anderer/sandbox

I created a wikipedia article/page for Robert Allen Nelson (Artist) per the request of his wife. This artist is extremely renowned and it has become problematic that I can not get this published. Can anyone help? Karen Anderer (talk) 18:32, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You have not submitted it for review. To do so, place {{subst:submit}} at the top. Nononsense101 (talk) 18:42, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help! Karen Anderer (talk) 18:58, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The draft is now at Draft:Robert Allen Nelson. Draft space is the preferred location for draft submission and can be accessed via the Article Wizard. Please see your user talk page for important information. 331dot (talk) 19:17, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Karen Anderer.

Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost exclusively 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

Essentially nothing that you know about Nelson, and nothing that his wife has told you, belongs in the article unless it is verifiable from a reliable published source (and, in most cases, a source wholly independent of Nelson). - see WP:golden rule.

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 know you created your account more than six years ago, but you never made any edits until you created this draft) ColinFine (talk) 22:58, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You’ll have to find a couple of more sources, and it needs to read more like an article (it can be challenging to write a user article so Wp:first article might help) The Grenadian Historian (Aka. Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a) (talk) 20:06, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

We read: I created a wikipedia article/page for Robert Allen Nelson (Artist) per the request of his wife. So, Karen Anderer, you have what we call a conflict of interest. Please read and digest Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. This artist is extremely renowned -- This surprises me. (The renown of an extremely renowned person would have reached me, no?) -- and it has become problematic that I can not get this published. Where's the problem? Wikipedia is in no rush. ¶ An actual problem here is that little effort has been put into formatting this right. So a reviewer can (a) decline it; (b) accept it and ignore the fact that it's a mess; (c) reformat it themselves. Given these three choices, I'd unhesitatingly plump for (a). A second actual problem is the uninformativeness and unhelpfulness of what I presume are intended as references. Three among these are, verbatim: (School of Art mourns passing of Dr. Robert Nelson, former instructor and artist, 2021) and "Untitled" by Robert A. Nelson, n.d.) and (Faculty News, 1997). Precisely what is each of these? How may an energetic researcher locate and consult each of these (either in a research library or on the web)? -- Hoary (talk) 22:57, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:Referencing for beginners—your draft is mostly lacking citations, which are needed before it can be published. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:31, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have just reverted a vandalism, blatant disruptive attempt and ignoring and removal of sources at the Ogiri page. The issue is that it is more periodic than persistent vandalism amd attempts have been made before, gets reverted only for another one to try days, weeks or months later. It's a pattern of close vandalism though, meaning days to weeks now. I want to request for the page to be locked by an admin to help prevert another wave of vandalism attempts. Dolpina (talk) 21:01, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Dolpina:, an admin here may be able to help, but if not, and in future, you can ask at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. TSventon (talk) 21:08, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks, I'll go ask there now. I'll keep that in mind for next time. Dolpina (talk) 21:14, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to force a full stop to stay with a sentence when the sentence ends with a symbol? The fourth paragraph of the "Quantum Mechanics" section of the "Bra-Ket Notation" entry has a full stop that is first on the next line, when it should be hard tied to the prior character, in this case a |.

Never mind. I just moved it inside the </math> tag, and it fixed it. Hooya27 (talk) 21:45, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Use {{nowrap}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:28, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'm trying to finish a translation cleanup at Béla Rákosi, but got stuck at the Works section. The first three books are translations that I can't find the original titles or language of. I found sources that name the original authors, including scans of the title pages of the translated books in online antique book shops, but none of those sources list the original titles or language. How would I note this in the list in the article? Also, would it be worth providing an English translation of the titles (the originals are probably in German). Then there's the fourth book, which upon further research turned out to be a 22-page booklet published as an issue of a periodical which had each of its issues written by a different legal scholar. These were later collected into volumes, with the one that contains Rákosi's issue being available online at [3]. Can I even keep calling that a "book"? Should it stay in the list or, alternatively, should the list itself even be there in the first place? Some insight would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! Drake178 (talk) 22:34, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Drake178 as a start, I have translated the first three titles into German, done an internet search and put my suggestions onto the talk page. For a format, you could look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists of works#Books in languages other than English. TSventon (talk) 01:30, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TSventon thank you. Unfortunately, I've read that before coming here. All the examples there involve situations where English is one of the languages, and they don't match my context. There is one list item in the linked Nabokov bibliography that is French to Russian, but as my luck would have it the book itself has an enwiki article and is linked instead of listing the original title. I also thought about going over the bibliographies of the German authors to find the matching works, but I thought it would be original research to do that without citing a source that makes the connections. However, if that is actually acceptable, then I'll gladly give that a shot. Drake178 (talk) 22:33, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Drake178 as to the (possible) original titles, I thought that they might help you find evidence which would confirm my conjectures, but that was probably optimistic. I agree with Mathglot that the original titles are not vital.

The MOS examples are Russian titles with English translations and it should be possible to use the same format (without the Romanisation) for Hungarian titles with translations into English. TSventon (talk) 00:23, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TSventon that is very helpful, thank you! Drake178 (talk) 01:02, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Drake178, the original language is not required, just a nice-to-have. If the book you are using to source facts in a Wikipedia article is a reliable source, it is irrelevant what language it was translated from. The governing policy here is Wikipedia:Verifiability: given enough time and energy and your citation, could another editor locate that exact book and see that what you wrote at Wikipedia really is supported on page 379? If yes, then just cite the book you used: author, date, title, publisher, language, and page number. If you can, add isbn or oclc, title translated into English, edition, and url if available. You don't have to mention that it is a translation, but you can if you want. If you don't know that information, then leave it out; it is not required. Mathglot (talk) 06:16, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathglot I guess I'll take that first sentence and roll with it. The rest of your reply, unfortunately, has no relevance for my questions. I'll concede that I probably wasn't clear enough (in my defense, it's a rather nuanced issue). Thank you anyway! Drake178 (talk) 22:39, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Two wiki people have tried to help me and I am still askew on my COI proposed edits of the biography of Jordan Harrison (dramatist). As you will see if you look at the Talk I have tried to submit a few times. This is the first of two sets of proposed changes based upon the recent changes in my son's career. They are straightforward. Will someone look at this and school me on what I am doing wrong?

thanks David Harrison David S Harrison (talk) 23:55, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your mistake appears to be that you're using AI to try to format your edit request, and because AI generally has no idea how things should be formatted here, your edit request is not actually tagged as an edit request.

In order to make an edit request, you should add the text {{edit COI}} (including the curly brackets) to the top of your request.

Below that text, you propose a change to be made to the article in a "Change X to Y" format. Keep it short and simple and someone will be more likely to get to it. Don't propose a full rewrite of the article as you currently are doing. Make one small request, wait for someone to do it, then do another. Athanelar (talk) 00:26, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hi David S Harrison. You should try to use Template:Edit COI or the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard (ERW) when posting an edit request on the article's talk page due to a conflcit-of-interest. Using the template or ERW will add the talk page to a category page for talk pages where COI edit requests have been made. Those Wikipedians answering such requests use this category page as guide to find such request; otherwise, it they would essentially be searching for a needle in a haystack of more than seven million articles, hoping to eventually come across one with an edit request. There are instructions on how to use this template on its documentation page or you can just follow the instructions at each stage of the ERW. Finally, if you want some additional guidance on making the types of edit requests that are considered "good", please take a look at Wikipedia:Edit requests. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:29, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

ok I will do it thanks. Once I propose a change I can't tell what I need to click to complete the submission ~2026-12375-40 (talk) 00:33, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ~2026-12375-40. You should probably try using Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard if you're unable to figure out how to use the {{COI edit}} template. I believe the ERW is pretty much an automated process and only requires you answer certain questions; it should format the request the way it needs to be formatted. In addition, if you're the same David S Harrison that posted the original question in this discussion, you probably should log in to your account and then make the edit request. While it's not expressly prohibited for users to edit while WP:LOGGEDOUT, it can be confusing to others, particularly given the fact that you've already posted several times at Talk:Jordan Harrison using the "David S Harrison" account. Finally, it would also be a really good idea for you declare your conflict-of-interest as explained in WP:DECLARECOI. You can do this by posting a brief statement on your user page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:06, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okay this is all very helpful. I will use the wizard, propose edits one at a time, make sure I am properly logged in and make certain my conflict of interest is clear. I expect/hope that this will be my last question/problem. David S Harrison (talk) 05:14, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

should be simple, if a little on the long side, though i'm not sure if this shouldn't be on commons instead

if the owner of a visual work (like a game or series) allows the use of or skips the middle man and uploads an image of it (like a frame of gameplay or of an episode) for a pre-existing article, that still has to be under a compatible license. that much is clear. however, i'm bad at finding more specific info, so i'll take it here for safety's sake

• what would be the compatible license(s)?
• of those, assuming that that's at least one but not all of them, which would allow for the image to be unaltered (that is, uncompressed)?
• does it need to be specified that the license only applies to what it's applied to, or does that just come with the license(s)?
• would this be any different for the work's cover aside from maybe having to switch some nouns around in a license or two?
• would it even be a good idea to do that unless an editor asks?
• would it even be a good idea for an editor to ask?
• if it's unavoidable, would the compression be necessary if the resolution and/or image "quality" are respectively low or grainy enough that it wouldn't change anything?

i haven't specified that this is purely theoretical because i don't actually know if it is this time (。﹏*) consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 02:07, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Consarn.

Copyright is complicated, and Wikipedia's approach to it is also complicated.

Rather than trying to answer your questions one by one, I'll try and lay out the issues, and see if that helps.

One of the fundamental goals of the Wikipedia approach is to provide a freely reusable resource; so almost all of the text and many of the images in English Wikipedia are licensed under the license CC-BY-SA - which allows the material to be freely used, reproduced, and altered, by anybody, for any purpose (commercial or not), without requiring permission, as long as certain conditions (mostly about attribution) are met. Some of the images are actually in the public domain - which means that nobody has any copyright in them and they can be used freely without even requiring attribution.

Wikimedia's repository of resources - Wikimedia Commons - requires that anything uploaded to it is free to use in that way. When a copyright holder chooses to upload their work - and is willing for it to be licensed in that way - they can upload it (eg using the Upload wizard) and release it under CC-BY-SA as they do so. Alternatively, they can send an email releasing an image that somebody else is uploading: see donating copyright materials. And material that is already publicly licensed appropriately can be uploaded to Commons by anybody. (For example, some images on Flickr explicitly bear the CC-BY-SA licence; and the US government has decreed that all images published by the federal government and its agencies are in the Public Domain).

Notice that there is nothing about compression or resolution about this.

Ideally according to Wikimedia's principles, there would be nothing more to say; and for some Wikimedia Projects (eg German Wikipedia), there is no more to say: they allow only freely reusable materials.

But English Wikipedia (and many other Wikipedias), in order to allow more articles to be illustrated, made a decision to apply a form of the doctrine of Fair use, and permit non-free images to be used in certain circumstances. This is an entirely separate process from the normal only-freely-licensed use, and does not require permission from the copyright holder. Images to be used in this way must be uploaded to English (or whichever) Wikipedia, not to Commons; and their uploading, format, and use are strictly limited by the non-free content criteria. That is where questions of compression and resolution, and where the images are used, come in.

You can find more detail in WP:Image use policy.

Does this help? ColinFine (talk) 10:48, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you would like an example of a freely-licensed screenshot of a non-free video game, I contacted the developer of Tactical Breach Wizards with a request for a freely licensed image and they uploaded it at File:Tactical-breach-wizards-screenshot.jpg. The instruction page for how to do this at commons is c:COM:VRT/CONSENT.

The default license for this sort of thing would be CC-BY-SA 4.0. It only applies to whatever they specifically agree to release under that license.

As images are freely licensed, they would not need to be compressed to be low quality to comply with fair use. ScalarFactor (talk) 15:37, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The transition to temporary accounts happened during my semi-wikibreak in late 2025, so I'm slowly getting used to them. But a question I've always had is as follows: If a TA gets blocked indefinitely, and since TAs only last 90 days, wouldn't that mean they could start vandalizing again under the new TA? Does autoblock stop them? TheTechie^[she/they] | talk? 04:17, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely sure, but IP addresses usually have their leases change in less time than that, so I don't think there's going to be much of a difference in the amount of vandalism.  Emily * Emi-Is-Annoyed  _{(message me!)} 08:11, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Realistically, very few people have fixed IPs, so it makes not that much difference in practice. If someone really wants to come in on another IP (or a throw away account) they will regardless of the technical limitations on them. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:52, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Diff/1340351331

Qwerfjkl flagged my edit on Dying_Inside_To_Hold_You (diff Special:Diff/1340351331) for a "generic name error."

However, this appears to be a false positive — the references already use the correct author/editor names from the sources, not placeholders.

Could you please review and confirm that the error flag can be dismissed?

Thanks, Miss Tinapay (talk) 06:25, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There were several generic names provided as authors; but more important was the fictional nature of many of the pseudo-references. I did read on the article's talk page that "This page should not be speedy deleted as unreviewed LLM content, because this is for entertainment purposes only." Wikipedia articles are provided for encyclopedic purposes; I for one was not at all entertained to discover that one after another of the pseudo-references was mere fiction. -- Hoary (talk) 07:49, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So, I was unaware of infobox parameters, which I cleaned up after a discussion about preview warning containing unnecessary infobox parameters. How is the preview really important? I was curious when I stepped into university computers. Ahri Boy (talk) 10:21, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Ahri Boy.

I don't really understand what you're asking.

"Preview" is helpful in order to check whether the edit we've made actually has the effect we intended. We don't have to use it - we could always commit our edits, and then (often, in my experience) would need to go back to correct them.

Does that answer your question, or am I missing what you're asking? ColinFine (talk) 10:53, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ohh... Got it. I was exhausted after cleaning up unnecessary infobox parameters, citations and replying to the parameters issue. Ahri Boy (talk) 10:56, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

sociology book s ~2026-12474-81 (talk) 12:06, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Umm... Please read WP:NOT before answering. Your reply may be incoherent. Anyways, if you are here to edit, please read Help: Introduction. Ahri Boy (talk) 18:16, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

~2026-12547-01 (talk) 15:40, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What assistance are you seeking? 331dot (talk) 15:48, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

We are a group of students from the University of Art,Tehran, Iran, seeking help to create a biography for our professor "Andre Galestian". He is a prominent Iranian-Armenian pianist,musicologist and strategic economist.

Unfortunately, during the January 2026 protests in Iran (month Dey of Iranian year 1404), professor Andre Galestian was severely injured in his right hand and right shoulder by pellet guns, which has forcibly ended his career as a performer and educator. We are deeply concerned that his academic and artistic legacy is being erased due to the current situation in Iran.

He meets Wikipedia's Notability criteria through several published works and research papers on the official Art Magazine of Iran. His profile is published on Iranian most famoust scolars database "ElmNet" (ElmNet means: science network) and his academic papers are listed there. His academic works are published in Iranian- Armenian bilingual "Ani" magazine as well. You can find his profile and papers by a simple search in English or Persian or Armenian on the Internet.

The Internet connection here is very limited, unlogical censored, strictly filtered and monitored by the government, we took a risk hoping to save the memories of our professor who we have no news about him anymore. We don't know if he is alive or not. We are sending this message to you via a VPN through an Armenian server because Wikipedia is not accessible here in Tehran.

Please help us.

We are a very persecuted nation.

We are a group of girl students of the University of Art here in Tehran, trying to save the name of a dominant professors name of this country who was our professor as well and did much for this country (search his name on the Internet please).

Thank you very much indeed for your time and solidarity. ~2026-12322-38 (talk) 16:50, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Would be better to WP:DRAFT an article. We can help finishing your draft in case you might be busy protecting yourselves. Ahri Boy (talk) 18:20, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to start drafting an article at Draft:Andre Galestian. You must cite a reliable source (which need not be in English) for each statement made there, and the subject must meet the criteria at WP:42.

But we do recommend that you gain experience by editing existing articles first. I have left some introductory links on your talk page Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:22, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@~2026-12322-38 also please read WP:COI CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 18:35, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thank you very much for your time and solidarity.

Here you will find the biographies of the most well-known Iranian Armenian musicians (in English), including professor "Andre Galestian" and even a clip of an interview of professor Andre Galestian (and professor Vartan Sahakian) with Iranian National Television (live broadcast, some years ago, with English subtitles), and also there is another clip at the end of the article that shows the place of birth and date of birth of most famous and dominant Iranian Armenian musicians (in English) including professor Andre Galestian, the article is published by the website of Iranian Database of Conferences:

https://payameconference.ir/?p=5168

Here is another interview with professor "Andre Galestian" as a well-known university professor and scholar (and professor Rasoul Moradi) in English, by the official and government-run news agency of Iran, which is the biggest news agency of the country:

https://en.irna.ir/news/84330051

Above mentioned interview is published by MMN ("Media Monitors Network" which is located in California, USA) as well:

https://mediamonitors.net/shahnameh-maintains-backbone-of-iranian-culture

Here is an article (in English) published in Art Magazine of Iran by professor Andre Galestian (the author is professor Andre Galestian):

https://artmag.ir/en/3102/role-of-armenians-in-the-development-of-iranian-music

You can find 41 articles of professor Andre Galestian here (it is the website of Iranian Science Network):

https://elmnet.ir/author/%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%AF%D8%B1%D9%87-%DA%AF%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D8%AA%DB%8C%D8%A7%D9%86?pn=2

Also, you can find 5 articles here (it is the website of a well known database of Persian articles published in Iranian magazines):

https://www.magiran.com/author/profile/449727/%D8%A2%D9%86%D8%AF%D8%B1%D9%87-%DA%AF%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D8%AA%DB%8C%D8%A7%D9%86

Here are two of the many podcasts of professor Andre Galestian in the major of commerce, economics and international imoprt/export (first one is the website of a well-known school of business in Tehran and the second one is the website of a well-known Iranian scientific journal (the meaning of the name of the journal is: Electronic Journalism):

https://hamyartp.com/%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%87%DA%A9%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%87%D8%A7%DB%8C-%D8%AA%D9%88%D8%B3%D8%B9%D9%87-%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%A8%D8%B7-%D8%AA%D8%AC%D8%A7%D8%B1%DB%8C-%D8%A7%DB%8C%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D9%88-%D8%A7%D8%B1-3/

and

https://rooznamenegarielectronic.ir/?p=760

At the end, if you search the name of professor "Andre Galestian" in Persian or Armenian, or even in English, you can find many more, but please hurry, it seems that the Iranian government is deleting everything regarding to the people who participated in January 2026 peaceful protests in Iran and we could find a few of many of the articles and interviews of professor Andre Galestian. The Iranian regime killed at least 32,000 people, the protesters, innocent people (as the President of the United States of America said), and we took very serious risk to save the name and the valuable works of our professor, the valuable works that he made during the years of his career (we do not know if he is alive).

Professor Andre Galestian is (or was) a music historian who did much to save the names, biographies and works of many departed Iranian musicians and now it is our duty, his students, to save his name (we wish he is alive and pray for him).

You can find his biography in English via first link (website of Iranian Database of Conferences). Please watch the clips as well, they have English subtitles. You can gather much more information about him via the other links. We tried to send only the links from most reputable websites of the country.

Please be informed that the most of the websites here in tehran are banned by the government, even Wikipedia, and we are now using a VPN which connecting us to a server located in Yerevan, Armenia and we do not know when it will be disconnected too.

Thank you very much for your time and solidarity.

Please pray for us, please pray for Iran.

A group of girl students from Art University, Tehran, Iran. ~2026-12606-67 (talk) 06:58, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Internet Archive can help archive these links you've provided. So no need to worry about content being censored. In the meantime, archive.is (see WP:ATODAY for more info) is deprecated because of a malicious code that break requests from end users. Ahri Boy (talk) 07:39, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much indeed, God bless you all.

Meantime, the links and the references which we mentioned above, contain biographies of some of the well known Iranian professors and some of the most dominant Iranian musician of the recent three centuries (19th, 20th and 21th centuries) who have the most influence on Iranian music which may be helpful for enrich or maybe complete Wkipedia's information in this regard.

Please pray for Iranians, please pray for Iran. We are livinig in one of the most critical periods of Iranian history, which is perhaps one of the most sensitive periods in the history of the whole Middle East.

God bless you.

A group of girl students of University of Art, Tehran, Iran. ~2026-12322-38 (talk) 09:47, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If someone creates an account with their email address as user name, shall that account be blocked and oversighted? Xzkdeng (talk) 14:40, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Policy in that area does not allow email addresses as usernames that do not identify a specific person, but they don't need to be oversighted. 331dot (talk) 15:47, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Diff/1340397717

Thanks, Tellmethetruth555 (talk) 16:05, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Tellmethetruth555, reference 8 has an error "External link in |website= " because you put |website=https://www.oneindia.com rather than |website=www.oneindia.com.

reference 10 has an error "|last= has generic name" because you put |first=D. C.|last=Correspondent. First and last should be used for human first and last names, information like D.C. Correspondent can be omitted. TSventon (talk) 16:21, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The former should be |website=OneIndia (or whatever the website is actually called); not a partial URL. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:34, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've been making good‑faith edits to help improve the Disappearance of Lisa Dorrian article, but another editor has been reverting or changing anything I do without providing any explanation in edit summaries or on the talk page. We previously discussed some edits to the lead on the talk page, where I explained that I was simply trying to help improve the article, but they didn't seem interested in discussing any changes. Eventually I gave up on that discussion because they were essentially insisting that I should not change anything. Since then, they have continued reverting or altering certain things I do, and from their pattern of behaviour it appears they do not want any changes made to the page because they originally created it.

It's very difficult to have any discussion or build consensus with someone who seems to want to control everything about the page. I understand that per WP:OWN, no editor "owns" an article, regardless of who started it, and all pages are collaboratively maintained. I'm trying to contribute constructively, but the lack of any explanation for the reversions makes it impossible to understand their objections or move forward collaboratively. I have actually checked their talk page and it seems another editor has these concerns also and has said it to them but they don't seem to have made a difference.

Could someone advise on the best way to handle this situation and what the appropriate next steps are in terms of dispute resolution?

Thanks for any help. ItsShandog (talk) 18:59, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to a message left on my talk page from the OP. I don't think @WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker is acting in bad faith, however I would urge them to provide rationales for any reversions they make (which they failed to do here). 11WB (talk) 19:37, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at that exact reversion, it would appear as though they reverted it because I initially missed a word, which I then added in a follow‑up edit — but as you can see, they reverted that as well. ItsShandog (talk) 20:04, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

ItsShandog this seems to be covered by Wikipedia:Dispute resolution#Follow the normal protocol. If I WP:AGF on both sides, you have copy edited the page and think your edit was an improvement, WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker reverted your edit and presumably doesn't agree. You could start a discussion on the article talk page and explain why your edit was an improvement, then the other editor should explain if they disagree. TSventon (talk) 20:49, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

We are having a discussion about it now, but as I've said, this isn't the first time. We already had a discussion about the lead before on the article talk page, where I explained my reasoning, and there wasn't really any proper discussion from their side other and it ended with "leave it as it is". ItsShandog (talk) 21:01, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@11WB i reverted edits as they just had "ce" instead of a summary of changes and only difference was words deleted (i.e.) removed info without explanation WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker (talk) 20:13, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really see this as "kicking up a fuss". This isn't something that's happened once — it's been several times now where any edit I make to try and improve the article is changed or reverted. I've only ever been trying to help the page read more encyclopaedically. When I put "ce" in the summary, it was because I was copyediting the wording across the article. Yes, I could have been clearer, but it wouldn't have made much difference because the edits would still have been reverted. That's how it comes across: when you make changes, they're fine, but when anyone else tries to improve the prose, it's treated as wrong. From my perspective, it feels like it has to be your way or no way, and that makes it difficult for other editors to contribute constructively.

And if you were genuinely concerned about the lack of detail in my "ce" summary, I don't understand why you didn't mention that in your own revert summary. Your revert didn't say anything about missing reasoning — it just undid the edit. That makes it hard to believe the issue was the summary rather than simply not liking the changes.

This also isn't the first time we've had this issue. We already discussed the lead before, and I explained why the article title "Disappearance of Lisa Dorrian" means the lead should follow the standard event-based structure used across disappearance articles. That wasn't a personal preference — it was based on advice from an experienced editor who works and creates these types of pages. Your response then was that "40,000 people viewed it without issue", which isn't how article improvement works. Editors are supposed to collaborate to improve pages, not keep them frozen because they were the original creator. ItsShandog (talk) 20:47, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ItsShandog looking at the McNally article you have essentially tweaked the grammar slightly ? is that what the "ce" changes are about ? if so you are not really improving the Lisa Dorrian article by adding more info but just want it written in the grammatical style you prefer, and as grammar style is subjective with no right or wrong i have no idea why such a fuss is being kicked up ? WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker (talk) 20:30, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The article had a template saying the wording needed to be improved because it read like a news report, so I carried out copyediting across the article to fix that. The changes were to make the prose more encyclopaedic and clearer, not to enforce a personal grammatical style. All the information was kept; the wording was simply improved in line with what the template was asking for. ItsShandog (talk) 20:40, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ItsShandog no no thats cool, but what needs changing on Lisa Dorrian ? cant understand why random bits of text deleted ? WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker (talk) 20:43, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My involvement has personally ended. All I'll add here, as a neutral party, is that @ItsShandog was only copy-editing, which is almost always non-controversial. Unsure why those edits specifically needed reverting as only a single word was changed. I think this may have caused @ItsShandog to perceive this as a continuation of the previous OWN issues that were previously highlighted. I don't think anybody acted in bad faith, and this could be easily resolved with improved communication through the use of edit summaries and article talk pages. 11WB (talk) 21:16, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're looking at the edit revisions but not actually reading the article text itself. Nothing was deleted at random. All the information is still there — the dates, the age, the suspects, the searches, the lines of inquiry, and the fact she is considered missing, presumed dead. The only thing that changed was the wording, because the original sentences were long, repetitive, and written in a news‑report style. My edits were standard copyediting to make the prose clearer and more encyclopaedic. The facts are identical; the sentences are just cleaner and easier to read. That's why it's important to look at the actual article, not just the revisions, because they makes small wording changes look like big removals when the meaning hasn't changed at all. The reason I changed the wording is because the original text genuinely read like a news report. It used phrases like "in her vanishing", "interrogated", "no trace was ever found", and very long, layered sentences with multiple "being" clauses. That's the tone and structure you see in journalism, not in an encyclopaedia. My edits were simply to remove that news‑style phrasing and make the prose more neutral and concise. No information was removed — just the way it was written was improved. ItsShandog (talk) 20:53, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ItsShandog, @WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker. I've moved the discussion from my talk page to here, as this is the more appropriate of the two venues to have this discussion. Thanks. 11WB (talk) 21:11, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. ItsShandog (talk) 21:14, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ItsShandog fair enough but the page has been reviewed by others without issues being raised at all regarding the style of writing so we can agree we have a difference of opinion regarding grammatical styles and leave it at that WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker (talk) 22:00, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So how do we actually resolve this and get consensus on what the edit should be? ItsShandog (talk) 22:44, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ItsShandog edit it and if i dont object we can leave as is, now i understand your reasoning i doubt we will have any issues going forwards WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker (talk) 23:15, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker: Hi,

For clarification: "ce" is a common shorthand for copy-editing in edit summaries, and is almost always sufficient to explain those sorts of edits.

"No-one else is complaining about this issue" is not a very strong rationale to revert such edits. See WP:SILENCE: if you have a notion that a particular wording is fine based on the fact that nobody has objected to it yet, then that notion dissolves once an editor decides to reword it. If you wish to revert such edits, you'll want to provide a stronger justification than "nobody objected to it" for why the former version is better than the latter version in your edit summary. MEN KISSING (she/they) T - C - Email me! 22:49, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Station WDAE has such a logo displayed on the WDAE wikipedia page. The station simulcasts (runs identical programming 24/7) on co-owned WDAE-FM. I (and another wikipedia user) have attempted to add the WDAE logo to the WDAE-FM page. It has been removed several times by a compliance bot, with this violation: "No valid non-free use rationale for this page." Here is the logo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wdae957logo.webp As you can see the logo includes both 95.7 FM and 620 FM, so it is appropriate to be used on both WDAE and WDAE-FM wikipedia pages. Can you please insert this logo in the "| logo = " place in the "Infobox Radio Station" section of the WDAE-FM wikipedia page? Amos1001 (talk) 22:06, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wdae957logo.webp is not a freely available file, Amos1001. As there is, I quote, "No valid non-free use rationale for [WDAE-FM]", the file may not be used within WDAE-FM. (And if you keep attempting to add it anyway, without a good-faith attempt to follow the necessarily strict rules for using a non-free file within an additional article, then you risk getting in trouble for disruptive editing.) If, however, you believe that you have a valid non-free use rationale for its use within WDAE-FM, then you are free to write this rationale and to append it to the content of File:Wdae957logo.webp. Once you have done this satisfactorily, you may use the file within WDAE-FM. -- Hoary (talk) 23:53, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I hope that i did this correctly. If not, feel free to delete my additions. Amos1001 (talk) 00:18, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

please let me know if i did it right. i'm apparently too stupid to understand how this works, but i've attempted to give the non-free use rationale for WDAE-FM, just below the use for WDAE. Is there something more I should have done? Amos1001 (talk) 00:23, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, but I don't understand the matter of dates. Example: "Logo of WDAE 95.7 that will be used on February 25th." Given that we're now in late February, I'd guess that this means Feb 25, 2026 (which where I happen to be typing was yesterday) ... but do you need any of this material about dates? (I don't think that the non-free use rationale for this film ad or this portrait mentions date(s)of appearance(s) on Wikipedia.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:02, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

WDAE started using the logo on Feb 23, 2026 when they changed their FM from 95.3 (which was a low power, 250 watt translator station) to 95.7 (which is a full, 100,000 watt station).

FYI: iheart (the owner of the stations in question) changed the call letters of WRUB to WDAE-FM on Feb 23. At the same time they moved the format from low power W237CW (95.3) to WDAE-FM (95.7)

and created a new logo with the image 95.7 to replace the old logo with the image 95.3.

I put the date as Feb 25th because that is today's date, and the date I'm attempting to add the logo to the WDAE-FM page. It's already on the WDAE page, started on Feb 23.

Yes, today is still Feb 23 here in USA Eastern standard time (GMT -5).

I don't guess any dates were needed. Is it ok as it stands?

Thank you for your help. Amos1001 (talk) 01:15, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• February 25, 2006 here. typo

Amos1001 (talk) 01:20, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't immediately see anything wrong with it, Amos1001. Keep it on your watchlist for a time, so if anyone raises an objection, you'll know of it and can respond quickly. -- Hoary (talk) 04:56, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo. I would like to go to the mobile version. Problem is that i just... Can't. Even if i'm using a phone and having the opinion to use computer layout set to no! What could be causing this and how to finally go back? ~2026-24671-3 (talk) 22:11, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Check at the bottom of the screen, where there's the links 'Privacy policy', 'About Wikipedia' etc. At the end of that is a button to swap view. If you're on desktop view, the button will say 'Mobile view.' This button overrides your browser's desktop mode setting. Athanelar (talk) 22:34, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! ~2026-24671-3 (talk) 06:23, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The current article under the title of "Ungrading" is about a book which covers information on the topic about Ungrading. I want to create a article on the general topic of Ungrading instead of just this book. I feel like the title of "Ungrading" deserves to be about the overall subject and not a specific book. How should I go about changing the title of the current article so that I can create a new article with the title of "Ungrading". Jacksonkeil (talk) 02:20, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'd reword that, Jacksonkeil. I'd say that the article Ungrading is ostensibly about a particular book, titled Ungrading, that is itself about ungrading. It cites the book -- but to say nothing. It cites a review of the book -- but, again, to say nothing. Here's the nugget in question: Multiple books [which unfortunately go unspecified] have discussed this concept. In Ungrading: Why Rating Students Undermines Learning (and What to Do Instead) Susan D. Blum, a professor of anthropology at the University of Notre Dame^[2][3] writes about this concept. That's it! So the editor (and/or primary author) of Ungrading writes in it about ungrading -- well well! Is "ungrading" a synonym of a term that already gets an article that isn't as uninformative as this one? If so, tell us the synonym. If not, is there substantive, secondary material from reliable sources about what is sometimes or often called "ungrading"? If so, I warmly recommend converting the stub about the book to a decent article about the concept. -- Hoary (talk) 04:51, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Reference help requested. what is error regarding date? Thanks, Prathyushanindian (talk) 10:01, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]