Wikipedia:Help desk

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

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

Ask a question

November 22

I give you every year all that I can afford. Please stop with the incessant begathon

I give $50 a year to Wikipedia. That is all that I can afford, most years. However, ever time, in the past few months, that I try to use Wikipedia (even on a near daily basis), I am confronted with your begathon for more money. Please stop. I have given you all that I can. Please, no more of this daily of “Give us more money”. 67.83.212.36 (talk) 00:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

A legitimate concern that others have had over the years. However, if you are tired of seeing the fundraising banners, you can create an account and uncheck Preferences → Banners → Fundraising. You may still donate annually as you please, granted that this is still a "begathon" by the WMF; if you have concerns about that, see here. 2601AC47 (talk|contribs) Isn't a IP anon 00:26, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

There is no way to connect your IP address when reading Wikipedia with any financial donation you may have made to the Wikimedia Foundation. If there was, it would be a privacy violation. As 2601AC47 points out, registering an account gives you the ability to shut off the fundraising banners. Plus, it is free, quick and easy, and gives you higher levels of privacy and anonymity. Cullen328 (talk) 01:33, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Dr. Judy Mikovits page

 Courtesy link: Judy Mikovits

You have total lies about Dr. Mikovits who had the cure for aides before it killed so many. They put her in prison and stole all her research to stop her from letting the cure be known. Everything you have on her is from the "Powers that Be" that are controlling this world. You should learn the truth before putting false information on Wikipedia. I recommend you learn the truth and correct her page. She is one of the good guys but you fell for the lies and propaganda against her and posted it. 2603:8080:A00:715E:FD91:5B64:40B6:AD7C (talk) 02:02, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

I have donated to you when i can as an elderly person on a very small fixed income. But seeing that you didn't research Dr. Judy Mikovits before postimg lies, i don't know if i want to donate again unless i know you have done the research on people you have posted false information on. 2603:8080:A00:715E:FD91:5B64:40B6:AD7C (talk) 02:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

First, per the biographies of living persons, neutral point of view and verifiability policies, there's little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. To pull from them: The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and Wikipedia aims to describe disputes, but not engage in them. The aim is to inform, not influence.

Secondly, as noted in a section above, you're not obligated in any way to donate, but still... 2601AC47 (talk|contribs) Isn't a IP anon 02:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Moreover, she's subject to contentious topic restrictions by ArbCom for good reasons. 2601AC47 (talk|contribs) Isn't a IP anon 02:18, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

What Wikipedia editors do is accurately summarize what published reliable sources say about a topic, Mikovitz in this case, not what random indignant people on the internet say. Judy Mikovits has 56 references to reliable sources, and that article summarizes them. If you think that your threat to withhold financial donations will influence our content decisions, then I have a few words for you: no it won't and we don't care. Cullen328 (talk) 05:06, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

One of Five Pillars of Wikipedia is "Wikipedia is free content that anyone can use, edit, and distribute". This means you can edit, too. If you have any Reliable source about the subject, Be bold and add relevant info to the article. We are happy to present all the solid, verifiable information.
(BTW, your donation goes to Wikimedia Foundation who runs Wikipedia, not to us, authors and editors, so whether you do or do not donate does not affect our activity here.) --CiaPan (talk) 07:44, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

. . . although actually you can't edit it, not yet, anyway, as it's semi-protected. What you can do in the meantime is, on Talk:Judy Mikovits, use Template:Edit semi-protected to specify changes that would improve the article, of course citing reliable, disinterested sources for these improvements. -- Hoary (talk) 12:05, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

You can read arguments similar to yours, and refutations of them, at Talk:Judy Mikovits. Also, please see WP:FRINGE. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Could I advise you to read WP:TRUTH? In short, we are not the truth, we do not claim to be the truth, and it is not our goal to be the truth. Industrial Insect (talk) 16:17, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

And that's the truth ... but you didn't hear it here. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Template question

{{Historical Dictionary of Switzerland}} currently has in its documentaten that the |date= should always be written as YYYY-MM-DD and it's also displayed that way. Would it be possible to make it display 21 November 2024 instead of 2024-11-21? Nobody (talk) 07:27, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@1AmNobody24: The documentation seems obsolete. In ancient times we usually wikilinked dates and had a feature to autoformat such date links but it has been possible to write anything in date since the link brackets were removed in 2009.[1] It will just display whatever is written. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:12, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Sounds like it will be easier to just go change it with AWB. Nobody (talk) 12:17, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

how to better myself

and better Wikipedia. I'm a quadriplegic learning to read faster on the internet through Wikipedia and type with the keyboard on screen using the most and other devices. I joined Wikipedia to learn more and to better myself. in the why did I join Wikipedia page. I wish it would have a to better myself. or an optional type in why I join. I joined because I wanted to teach and learn at the same time remember for that I need a repository that's teaching and learning TheChrisyllabus (talk) 09:13, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@TheChrisyllabus: - I've posted a welcome notice on your user talk page. Please click on the link marked "Learn more about editing", which takes you to a page with lots of helpful links. Any questions, please ask at my talk page. Mjroots (talk) 11:38, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@TheChrisyllabus: Welcome! I know of Wikipedia editors who are blind and use screen-reading software, but not of anyone else reading or editing in your circumstances, though there must be. One of the former is User:Graham87, and he might know if there is a forum or user-group for people using various kinds of assistive technology to read or edit Wikipedia. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:02, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Not really, but you can ask accessibility-related questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Accessibility. Graham87 (talk) 16:07, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing:, I think people have missed TheChrisyllabus's point, at least as I understand it. When someone creates a new WP account, do they encounter a survey that asks "Why are you joining WP?" (I created my account long enough ago that I don't recall what I encountered.) I think TheChrisyllabus is saying that they wish there had been either a survey option saying "to better myself" or a survey fill-in option where they could have filled in "to better myself." If such a survey exists, I have no idea how the options are determined and whom to pass the suggestion along to. If such a survey doesn't exist, then clearly I've misunderstood. FactOrOpinion (talk) 17:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@FactOrOpinion: I joined Wikipedia so long ago that we didn't have to put up with such nonsense. Mjroots (talk) 10:37, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

^[Humor]When you joined, WMF's survey was filled out using chalk on a piece of slate, and then sent back by pony-expresss. Non-US folks didn't have a survey, because the ponies kept drowning crossing the Atlantic. By the time I joined, the recently-finished transcontinental railroad allowed easier submission. DMacks (talk) 00:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Submitting an article

I have done a lot of research on a person who is not the subject of a Wikipedia page, although two of his sons are. I'd like to submit the article without going through the editing training. Please advise if this is possible. Many thanks. Geoff Blow (talk) 14:49, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

As long as it's not a conflict of interest with the person in question.

To create an article, follow these steps:

1. Read Your first article carefully.
2. If you don't have an account, consider creating one (it's not essential, but it makes some things easier, especially communicating with other editors) and logging in.
3. Learn the basics of editing with the Wikipedia:Tutorial
4. Make sure the subject is notable enough to warrant a stand-alone article
5. Gather reliable sources to cite in the article
6. Make sure no article on the subject exists under a different title by typing the subject into the search box and clicking 'Search'
7. Use the Article Wizard to create a draft.
8. Create the article, including all your references, making sure you adhere to the Manual of Style and our article layout guidelines. Base the article on what the references say, rather than on what you know.
9. Once you believe that your draft meets Wikipedia's requirements, submit it for review by picking the "Submit your draft for review" button in the draft.
10. Be aware that many drafts are not accepted the first time, or even the second time they are submitted for review, for failing to adhere to our policies and guidelines. New articles by new users are particularly likely not to be accepted, due to new users' unfamiliarity with our rules. Consider gaining experience by editing existing articles before attempting to create new ones. 2601AC47 (talk|contribs) Isn't a IP anon 14:59, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Also, take it from me, the training's mostly through trial and error. 2601AC47 (talk|contribs) Isn't a IP anon 15:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Geoff Blow You're kind of asking "I want to build a house but I don't want to take classes in construction." Is there a particular reason you don't want to learn about Wikipedia first? 331dot (talk) 15:17, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

See also WP:ABOUTME. This is *very* good advice. While it may seem like fun at first to have a Wikipedia article about yourself, over a period of time many people have found that it isn't, for the reasons laid out in this essay.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 15:26, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

I think I already pointed that out implicitly. 2601AC47 (talk|contribs) Isn't a IP anon 15:31, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for this but I don't want to write about myself. The subject of the article died in 1985 but was a very high profile figure locally. I want to show his achievements but understand that the article should be neutral. Geoff Blow (talk) 17:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for this, but I have already written a lot about the subject of my article, who founded my choir 100 years ago and died in 1985. I appreciate that the article should be neutral, which I can do easily. I can list sources, compile lists for Discography, Awards, Competition achievements, Personal life etc.

what I can't do at the moment is create the hyperlinks to sources or relevant people, such as his two famous children and the most famous competitions in which he competed with the choir. I'd be very happy to submit the article and allow a more experienced editor create these. Geoff Blow (talk) 17:23, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

May I recommend reaching out to members of one of these WikiProjects who can help you in making that process smooth? 2601AC47 (talk|contribs) Isn't a IP anon 17:28, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

That's really helpful. Thank you. I'll do that. Best wishes, Geoff Geoff Blow (talk) 20:45, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

And that has yet to happen. FYI, there's this proposal that indirectly relates to what we've been dealing with here for the last 3-4 weeks. 2601AC47 (talk|contribs) Isn't a IP anon 15:22, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Understanding the correct usage of sources/citing

Hello. I'm rather new to contributing to Wikipedia and have a few questions regarding sources. I recently contributed to the article (Distributed_version_control), and as such I used a direct manual as a source. But my sources weren't direct or word for word. (E.g "This is what someone said"[1] -> https://example.com/said.pdf) but instead, it was a rephrase/overview of the source itself. An example was "It allows developers to work in independent branches and apply changes that can later be committed, audited and merged (or rejected)" where I sourced (https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v5.1/process/submitting-patches.html). Is this up to Wikipedias standard or is direct phrasing required/preferred? Please let me know, if this isn't up to what is expected I'll undo my changes.

Thank you! Oak Atsume (talk) 15:37, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

This is where reliable sources should be noted (and example.com isn't exactly a good one). If they are questionable, self-published or deprecated, than they shouldn't be used. Also of note, maybe, is whether this is non-free content. Be sure that this is fair use. 2601AC47 (talk|contribs) Isn't a IP anon 15:44, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Understood. example.com was just an example. For my case, I use direct sources such as the official kernel's documentation and sources from the git documentation itself.

My main concern is what is considered proper sourcing. In my case, I rephrased things such as "repository and work on such from a local environment where changes are tracked and committed to the local repository." While this isn't directly stated in the source itself (https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Tools-Revision-Selection), the idea and statement still stand. Is this considered appropriate? or is direct sourcing preferred? Oak Atsume (talk) 16:19, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Oak Atsume. "Direct sources such as the official kernel's documentation and sources from the git documentation itself" are of very limited value for a Wikipedia article. They may be used once an article has already been substantially written from independent sources, to add uncontroversial factual information, but the bulk of the article must be written based on independent sources, i.e. what people wholly unconnected with the subject of the article have chosen to write and get published in reliable sources. And in particular, non-independent sources do not contribute to establishing that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. ColinFine (talk) 16:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Be careful, as well, to only say in an article what the source says. We prohibit any effort at "interpretation" which approaches original research and synthesis. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:13, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@Orangemike & Oak Atsume: "what the source says" here means the facts in the source, right?

Oak Atsume, the essay Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing may be helpful. The facts should be in the cited sources. If the exact wording is used, it needs to be clearly quoted and attributed. It's preferred that editors rewrite in Wikipedia's voice and not quote sources as much as possible. A commonly cited essay here on quoting is Wikipedia:Quotations.

Other editors made a lot of notes about source usage. In the edit this topic is about,[2] for example, it is discouraged to say something like the "model allows for better flexibility" cited to a primary source. That's a subjective statement; on Wikipedia secondary sources are preferred but primary sources are fine for "straightforward, descriptive statements of facts". Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 02:14, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

I need help logging in

i need help log in 2601:587:8201:9380:C8B4:9D7B:969:A9AA (talk) 18:39, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Please read Help:Logging in and if you then have a more specific question, feel free to return to the Help Desk. Cullen328 (talk) 19:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Fixing Wikidata connection

I moved Protein THEMIS to THEMIS (protein), and now the page has an error about the Wikidata entry. I tried renaming the same named entry in Wikidata, but that didn't fix it. Does anyone know how to make this work? Dimpizzy (talk) 23:14, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Dimpizzy, this should be fixed. What you needed to do was edit the old Wikidata item to remove the link to Protein THEMIS and add a link to THEMIS (protein), so I did that. You had created a new Wikidata item, so I have merged it with the old one. TSventon (talk) 00:11, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing that! Dimpizzy (talk) 00:16, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

November 23

Scraping Wikipedia for AI Training

It is ok to using scraper to scrape Wikipedia for AI Training? 6D (talk) 04:56, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi 6D. If you want to download a large number of Wikipedia pages, please do not use a web crawler, as the servers use considerable resources to convert wikimarkup to HTML. If you're downloading a small number of pages, leaving a small delay (at least a second per request) might be considered more reasonable, see also the page about database downloads, which has more information about this and how to get a database download instead. You are legally allowed to use content under the CC BY-SA 3.0 licence. You can also reach out to the Wikimedia Foundation's Machine Learning Team (mw:Machine Learning) if you think there's anything you can contribute back. Alpha3031 (t • c) 06:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

It will get IP blocked if you scarping too fast? 6D (talk) 06:25, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

It is possible that you might get blocked or rate limited. You will be able to do AI training much faster if you use Database download instead. TiggerJay (talk) 06:47, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

sir dr raj shekhawat has a famous celebrity and political backgroud but have not any wiki pedia page he also karni sena president this should be fixxed

sir dr raj shekhawat has a famous celebrity and political backgroud but have not any wiki pedia page he also karni sena president this should be fixed 2402:A00:408:1B0D:8024:1C3A:D4EB:EB6E (talk) 05:02, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

You can request that an article be created over at Wikipedia:Requested articles, alternately you can consider writing the article yourself. TiggerJay (talk) 06:45, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

How do I make a proper bulleted list in a blockquote?

At Design Law Treaty#Legal provisions, I am unable to make the first bullet being displayed as a bullet (and not as a "*") without putting a <br> before it.

Could someone please show me how to? Veverve (talk) 11:54, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Change the text on {{blockquote}} to use a {{flowlist}} template:

{{Blockquote|text={{flowlist|

Don't forget to add the {{flowlist}}'s closing }} before those of {{blockquote}} Bazza 7 (talk) 12:12, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Watchlist filter

Hi, how can I hide the changes by one user on my watchlist? I've searched the available filters, is there a script? Cheers. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 19:51, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

As far as I know there is no built in way to filter on a specific user other than your own contributes. Perhaps someone else can chime in on a custom, unofficial script to accomplish this. TiggerJay (talk) 03:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

I found this work on a user filter from 2017, it seems to have been abandoned. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 09:11, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

FWIW Nimbus227, whatever the third word of your custom sig's usertalk linktext is, it's wholly invisible on my device (I use the dark mode gadget). Please consider restyling it to comply with MOS:CONTRAST. Folly Mox (talk) 11:11, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

I've modified it, visible in dark mode on PC and mobile devices for me. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 11:46, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Confirming I can see it as well. Folly Mox (talk) 12:15, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Chester Braddock deGavre

I am trying to edit my draft. I cannot edit it. Can you please tell me why?? Robert T. deGavre (talk) 21:18, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Robert T. deGavre. What do you mean when you say you can't edit it? What actually happens when you try to edit Draft:Chester Braddock deGavre? ColinFine (talk) 21:21, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Chester Braddock deGavre

Here you are. Please note it's currently in draftspace - the non-public holding place for incomplete and work in progress articles - and isn't likely to be published and moved to mainspace in its current state. Departure– (talk) 21:21, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Yo i got a question on how to make a page?

. PostRhythmRecords (talk) 22:19, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

@PostRhythmRecords Very few folk here respond well to "yo", but I will attempt it. Please read HELP:YFA. I have one caveat, which is your user name. It suggests that you are a business. If it is then you will need to consider changing it, the more so if it reflects your business. You will also need to comply with WP:PAID if writing about this putative business. In any case you may not promote that business 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:30, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @PostRhythmRecords. While "make a page" is not a completely wrong description of what we do here, using it suggests that (like many people) you have a misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is and how it works.

A better description is "write an encyclopaedia article about". An article should be a summary of what independent published sources say about a subject, and little else. 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 entirely 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.

It is also the case that trying to create a new article before you have spent time learning about Wikipedia's policy and practices is often very disappointing and frustrating. 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.

Judging from your username, as FiddleFaddle says, I would advise you to read WP:BOSS, WP:COI, WP:PAID, and WP:Username policy straight away. ColinFine (talk) 22:59, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

November 24

Please remind me—how should I deal with an anonymous reversion of an edit of mine?

Greetings and felicitations. An edit of mine was reverted by a MAC-address user. How do I deal with this, please? —DocWatson42 (talk) 05:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

I see that you posted about this on the article talk page on 1 November to look for consensus, which would have been my first suggestion. It would be helpful to explain the reason for the edit on the talk page, was your edit a manual of style correction? TSventon (talk) 05:33, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

On the talk page, you should cite Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Dashes, which explicitly recommens "An em dash is unspaced on both sides". Maproom (talk) 09:06, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

On an unrelated note, please be aware that it was reverted by an IPv6 user, not a MAC address, they look similar but are indeed different things. TiggerJay (talk) 20:35, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

I would be happy to donate by check, but do not use electronic methods of payment. Please let me know how to donate. My email address is <redacted>. Thank you.

I would be happy to donate by check, but do not use electronic methods of payment. Please let me know how to donate. My email address is <redacted>. Thank you. 208.254.116.194 (talk) 06:04, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

See donate:Donate by mail. But do note that the Wikimedia Foundation generally has more than enough money. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 06:12, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Template:Antisemitism sidebar

Can we get a few eyes over at Template talk:Antisemitism sidebar#People section (Nov 2024) Moxy🍁 07:18, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Appears to be well at hand. Does it need EC protection? 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 17:47, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Citation template

It seems that the preferred way of referencing has changed over time. For instance, I started up earlier this year the WP article titled, "American Junior Red Cross." I used the old referencing method. What is the purpose of inserting retrieval dates? They serve no purpose when links go to depositories like HathiTrust. The content in printed newspapers and magazines can't be updated. Is the current citation template now preferred in all instances? Should my references at "American Junior Red Cross" be rewritten? (The only reference there using the standard template is not mine.) Thanks. JimPercy (talk) 14:14, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

JimPercy, |access-date= is entirely unnecessary cruft when applied to print sources. Not only are you not required to add it, but you can remove it or comment it out from citations to print sources if you prefer. It tends to get added to everything by scripts that don't know any better. Folly Mox (talk) 17:08, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Relevant discussion at Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 91 § Do we need |access-date ? (November 2023). Folly Mox (talk) 17:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

There is guidance on changing citation styles at WP:CITEVAR, which starts by saying Editors should not attempt to change an article's established citation style, merely on the grounds of personal preference or to make it match other articles, without first seeking consensus for the change. TSventon (talk) 17:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for both replies. I know that an article's citation style should not be altered. But some people might still think that modernization is in order. That discussion page was interesting. I will have to go over the different thoughts again later. Someone said something about how there should be a template that automatically deletes access dates for magazines and newspapers. JimPercy (talk) 21:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Struggling with merging and moving articles in relation to the Emily Prentiss article.

I have been struggling with merging and moving the Emily Prentiss article. I have a draft for Emily Prentiss (a Criminal Minds character) that I'd like to move to mainspace, but the only way I know how to do that would be to copy and paste the content onto the current page for Emily Prentiss, which serves as a redirect to the List of Criminal Minds characters. However, I think I might have accidentally messed that up, and now I'm confused on what to do.

Here are the links to the articles in question if someone can help:

List of Criminal Minds characters

Emily Prentiss

Emily Prentiss (Criminal Minds)

Draft:Emily Prentiss DocZach (talk) 17:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @DocZach. I'm not seeing why this character meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability; but if you think she does, the way to proceed to move a draft over a redirect is to post a request at WP:RM/T. ColinFine (talk) 17:37, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Retain or remove citation indicators in quoted text?

Example article text:

There are "two ways to go about this¹ that deserve consideration",¹ one of them "far more preferable for enlightenment purposes (Gergen, 1990) than the other low-information approach."²

The direct quotes from two cited sources each use different citation indicator styles, one with superscripts the other with parentheses.

My question is, for readability, can I remove one or both of the citation indicators, ie: ¹, (Gergen, 1990)?

Thanks! Tsavage (talk) 19:54, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

@Tsavage, it looks like the the parenthetical reference is part of the quoted material rather than a citation in Wikipedia, while the numbers are for Wikipedia citations. It might help to know what article this is from to see the context. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:34, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. There's no particular context, it's a general question, with a made-up example. I'm referring to citations as they appear in quoted material, not citations created in Wikipedia.

My understanding right now (which could be wrong), is that superscript and parentheses are equivalent citation styles, both intended for exactly the same purpose of pointing to a footnoted source; although the parenthetical style provides extra information (eg: author, year), that is not intentional, it's not meant to add to the text. Tsavage (talk) 22:08, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

This wouldn't be the correct place to ask a question for things that are outside of Wikipedia. But if you were thinking about bringing a quotation into Wikipedia, then inline citations that are part of the quote itself, such as Gergen above, could be kept as they are the quoted source materials reference. However the superscript reference would be replaced with a natural wikipedia based reference tag. TiggerJay (talk) 22:36, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

|| the superscript reference would be replaced with a natural wikipedia based reference tag

If the source text uses citations in the superscript number style, are you suggesting that I recreate those citations in the quoted material in Wikipedia?

All I'm asking is whether it is accepted practice to remove the citation indicators, regardless of what style they're in, when quoting material in the text of a Wikipedia article? Tsavage (talk) 01:26, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@Tsavage, I think the answer is likely to depend on the details of a particular article, so it would be better to come back with a real example if you find one. Wikipedia only uses Brief quotations of copyrighted text, see Wikipedia:Non-free content#Text, so putting the content into your own words may be preferable. TSventon (talk) 04:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. There's no "real example", I'm trying to find out if there's a Wikipedia convention for this situation. I think the general, or at least safest, answer is to preserve citation indicators in quoted text, in order to fully represent the source. Which is what I'll do! Tsavage (talk) 11:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@Tsavage, I agree that preserving citation indicators is safest. The question is somewhat obscure, so you could try the WP:MOS talk page when you have a real example. TSventon (talk) 11:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Searching Wikipedia with Regex with Capture?

I have a more complicated use case, but I'm wondering whether any of the message of searching Wikipedia would allow for searching *with* capture, so for example if I'd like to find pages where AAA Pan BBB Pan CCC would be found because it is Pan in both places, but *not* AAA Pan BBB Pot CCC because Pan and Pot are different.

(Actual use case, looking for pages with entries like [[Omega Psi Phi|Omega Psi Phi fraternity]] so regex would be /\[\[[A-Z][a-z]* [A-Z][a-z]* [A-Z][a-z]*\|\1 / ) Is Cirrus my only option (or would even *that* allow it)

Naraht (talk) 22:56, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Cirrus doesn't support it, no - its regex engine is frustratingly impractical for anything even a little more complex than toy examples. And I'm not aware of any other way to search wikitext without expending a huge amount of effort, namely, downloading a dump of mainspace, either importing it into a sql engine or parsing it yourself or with WP:AWB, and searching that. —Cryptic 23:25, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Request a query. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Would tell you to come back here or WP:VPT. "Quarry does not have access to page content, so queries which require checking wikitext cannot be answered with Quarry." We'd be able to see pages with links to Omega Psi Phi, but not the text it's piped to, or even that it's piped. —Cryptic 07:58, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@Naraht: See Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser#AutoWikiBrowser_and_searching_for_pages_with_capture_regex. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:21, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

HelpedNaraht (talk) 13:52, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

November 25

Dara Huang

Re number 5 is not quite right. Please fix - I cannot do this, sorry. Srbernadette (talk) 03:00, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@Srbernadette Fixed. There was a special character in the date parameter, and the date was incomplete. Sandcat555 (talk) 03:47, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Automated edit count?

Would anyone know if it's possible to automate the edit count figure on my user page? Sandcat555 (talk) 03:50, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

perhaps with a bot or something? Sandcat555 (talk) 03:51, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

I could have sworn this was possible, but the best I can find for you right now is Template:Editcount. -- asilvering (talk) 04:35, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Various stats for your account are available here: https://xtools.wmcloud.org/ec/en.wikipedia.org/Sandcat555 and are usually up to date (occasionally there can be a lag of a couple of minutes). Feline Hymnic (talk) 12:06, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, but that won't automate the edit count on someone's userpage. -- asilvering (talk) 16:44, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

(untitled)

I gave you $110 a few years ago. Seeing that you're constantly begging for a $2.75 "donation", I should be exempt for the next 33+ years. 2600:1700:F100:6520:FD88:3207:2D2:B365 (talk) 07:36, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia has no way to link donations to a specific account or IP address. You are not obliged to donate, and if you don't want to, you can always close the annoying ads. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 07:45, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

One of the problems with IP editing is that you do get to see regular messages asking for donations. If you are logged in as a user, you can avoid this.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:51, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

You both read my mind; FYI, see what I said above about concerns over donations. 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 13:20, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Help with NPS sources

Hello,

NPS nomination forms have a section for "representation in existing surveys," as seen here on the bottom of the first page. What does this mean? Does it have something to do with a broader area-wide geographic survey, or a more specific historical site survey? Thanks so much!

JuxtaposedJacob (talk) | :) | he/him | 09:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Signature

Hello, I'm trying to make my signature but it can't be fixed. Here's what my signature should look like: Garudam ^Talk!

But as you can see it's currently messed. Please someone tell me how it can be fixed? And what error I'm making in this syntax: '''<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman;">[[User:Garudam|<span style="color:black">'''Garudam'''</span>]]^{[[User talk:Garudam|<span style="color: gray;">'''''Talk!''''']]}</span>''' (talk) 12:23, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@Garudam: Select "Treat the above as wiki markup" below the signature field. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:53, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter I did exactly but it shows some syntax error like "span" '''<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman;">[[User:Garudam|<span style="color:black">'''Garudam'''</span>]]^{[[User talk:Garudam|<span style="color: gray;">'''''Talk!''''']]}</span>''' (talk) 12:54, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@Garudam: You are missing two </span> as the message should say. Adding them should work: '''<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">[[User:Garudam|<span style="color: black;">'''Garudam'''</span>]]</span> '''<sup>[[User talk:Garudam|<span style="color: gray;">'''''Talk!'''''</span>]]</sup>. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:03, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

That helps @PrimeHunter Thanks. Garudam ^Talk! 13:08, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

John Perrot Quaker - Add image

Hi, I have uploaded a copyright free Wikimedia Commons image of the above but am struggling to incorporate it in the article. Your help would be much appreciated, I used to be able to do this but I'm getting old! https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:John_Perrot_Quaker.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Perrot_(Quaker)

Horatius At The Bridge (talk) 12:53, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@Horatius At The Bridge: I have added it to {{Infobox person}} with |image=.[3] PrimeHunter (talk) 13:09, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks PrimeHunter

Horatius At The Bridge (talk) 13:37, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Margaret Greville

There are two pages about Margaret Greville. I am a Research Historian - as a Volunteer at Polesden Lacey. I have written a book also which is the Maggie Greville Story. I have researched for more than thirteen years the history of Maggie Greville, her father William McEwan and Polesden Lacey. I wish to change the existing article totally.It contains misinformation. It is not correct. I have a huge number of references to prove my research. How can I remove the existing article and provide a new article which tells the truth, and is far more interesting? 13truthknown (talk) 14:11, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@13truthknown You do not start a new article, you improve the existing one, one bit at a time. A WP-article on any subject is meant to be a summary of reliable sources (WP:RS) on that subject, and if you wish to make edits that can "stick", you need to understand what sources are considered reliable around here, and guidance like WP:SELFCITE. You need to know how to add references correctly in the WP-environment, this is essential, WP:TUTORIAL has a start on that.

My suggestion is: start small. Make a few edits, see what happens, then make a few more. If other editors react, WP:COMMUNICATE. Do not throw out existing sources in favor of your book. If your book is WP:SELFPUB, don't use it as a source at all. Hope this helps some. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Btw, if you meant there are two WP-articles about Margaret Greville, which is the other one, please? That might need fixing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@13truthknown Incidentally, Wikipedia doesn't claim to give readers the truth (see that link). Instead, by policy, we ensure that facts in our articles can be verified from the sources we quote. The article on Margaret Greville was first created in 2007 and has been improved incrementally by many editors since then, which is why you should follow Gråbergs Gråa Sång's advice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:08, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@13truthknown, as has already been said, a self-written book, particularly if self-published or published by a vanity press is never going to be an acceptable source. If you have access to proper independent verifiable sources, by all means use them to improve the article, but no original research please Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Margaret Greville, 6th Baroness Willoughby de Broke is a different person Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Username

Help please every username I offer has been taken no matter how random Gnasher24 (talk) 16:06, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Gnasher24, you already have a Wikipedia account (your username is @Gnasher24). So unsure what you are asking here? qcne (talk) 16:13, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Also, WP has over 116 million registered user-accounts, that's quite a lot of taken user-names. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:15, 25 November 2024 (UTC)