Search the frequently asked questions

Search the help desk archives and other help pages

When a talk page contrib of a scientific study is brief, relevant and polite, why would it be deleted, rather than replied to and left as part of the on-going discussion?

Also, is it proper for the person deleting the contrib to use the word "stupid" in describing it, particularly referencing a scientific study?

And in another instance, an editor deleted a relevant scientific study, and cited the "M..." meaning it was a minor edit. Is deletion of opinions from the scientific community ever truly a minor edit?

To reiterate, these were Talk Page contribs, not main page.

108.52.34.161 (talk) 00:28, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I would have deleted it on sight, as a likely copyright violation, or possibly a link to malware. DO NOT post links to uploaded pdfs etc. Post a proper citation. And yes, it is possible for something which purports to be a scientific study to be objectively stupid. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:37, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I will note that RandomCanadian gave an edit summary explanation when removing that. Yes, removing talk page content is usually discouraged, but I would assume that pages related to vaccines are under heavy fire from trolls and the like, so I understand the quick-trigger reaction.

I also note that you cited a libertarian think tank for medical information elsewhere. Don’t do that again (not only is it a biased source, more importantly it is not one compliant with WP:MEDRS). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:16, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wikipedia team, I'm wondering if it's possible to publish our company details on Wikipedia? If so how can we do that. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trendzagency (talk • contribs) 13:02, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, Wikipedia is not a directory of companies. It is an encyclopedia, which summarizes what reliable, independent sources have to say on a topic. If your company has been written about extensively by reliable publications that have no connection to your company, there it may become the topic of an article. However, the Wikipedia article will need to be written by someone who is unconnected to your company and has no conflict of interest with your company, so that they can maintain a neutral point of view. --Jayron32 13:11, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Trendzagency The WP:COI guidelines are in place because it’s very hard to write new articles, let alone if you are connected to the subject. Everything has to be sourced with what others have written about the company, such as with media coverage, and the content can’t be too promotional. Also see WP:YOURFIRSTARTICLE. If after reading that you still think your company is notable enough, the only options Wikipedia gives you are to request the article at WP:REQUEST, a slow and uncertain process, or you could disclose your connection and try it yourself with the article creation wizard found at WP:AFC. Few connected people have succeeded with the latter process, since the writing is so hard, but if there’s extensive media coverage you might have a chance.. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:25, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He I recently uploaded two pictures. I want to update the person's picture so i uploaded them but now i can seem to understand how to update the Wikipedia article because it gives me a link but i insert it, nothing happens.. help Tshidi912 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 13:08, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The technical aspect of adding images to articles can be found at Help:Pictures. However, it is very likely that those uploads will be deleted shortly. There is no evidence that the creator of those pictures has correctly licensed them for use at Wikipedia; I know that you tagged them with a license when you uploaded them, but that doesn't mean the person who created them released them under that license. --Jayron32 13:15, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is it preferable to use this setting in Preferences / Time Offset, rather than your local time zone (I.E. -8 hours). How many Wikipedians use this Wiki default instead of their local time? Percent wise? --Christie the puppy lover (talk) 14:52, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I set my Wiki clock to UTC, because then it matches what is showing up in signatures and article histories. I don't believe there is any way to get data on how many people do or don't use that setting. --Jayron32 15:23, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There was recently a dispute between two editors about the date that an article was started in regards to a WP:DYK nomination. This is apparently important because new articles must not be nominated until they are some number of days old. One editor in the UTC-08:00 timezone said 23 February while another editor in the UTC-05:00 time zone said 24 February because that editor uses the default UTC time zone for wikipedia. I don't know if or how that dispute was resolved but it merely confirms my belief that because everything at en.wiki, saving/deleting/moving/whatever, is time-stamped with a UTC time-stamp, editors are best served by leaving the time zone setting at the default for the avoidance of confusion; for the avoidance of dispute. There is a template that you can put on your user page that will give you local time in a your time zone. For example, if your timezone is MST then this:

{{time|MST|df=dmy|hide-refresh=yes}} ({{time}}) → 18:25, 4 October 2024 MDT (00:25, 5 October 2024 UTC [refresh])

With that, you can see at a glance the time difference between your local time and en.wiki time. No doubt, there are pretty userboxes that do the same thing.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:27, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Christie the puppy lover: You can also enable "Add a clock to the personal toolbar that displays the current time in UTC" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. If you set another time zone at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering then you will have to mentally convert log times to UTC when it's relevant, or view the log while logged out. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:06, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to update a photo in an info box on a school page, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleyn%27s_School. I can open the info box for editing but when I click on the 'image' field there is no option to upload an alternative image.

Edward Alleyn (talk) 16:10, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to upload the image first, then add it to the info box. There is a link in the left sidebar to the Upload Wizard. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:20, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) If you have a new photo to upload, it first needs to be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, which is the media repository for Wikimedia-based websites (including English Wikipedia, this website). Before you can upload a photo, you yourself either need to own the copyright, OR you need evidence that the person who does own the copyright has licensed it appropriately. If that is all done, then you upload the photo to commons, and replace the text in the infobox with the file name of the old photo, instead putting the file name of the new photo. Wikipedia:Uploading images will walk you though the upload process, and Help:Pictures will help you with adding pictures to articles. --Jayron32 16:22, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to do some monitoring on small wikis, however, I'm not familiar with several languages even don't know how to change the interface language.

Thus I come here and want to know how to change wiki interface language globally?

Is there the right place to ask this question? Pavlov2 (talk) 17:34, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavlov2: Over at Special:GlobalPreferences#mw-prefsection-personal you can set a language preference that applies everywhere. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:42, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much ! Pavlov2 (talk) 17:43, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The main flaw is that no simple way except editing is available to flag or challenge informations. A button should be add on each sections to allow this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.225.46.220 (talk) 19:26, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The place to contest information on an article is the article's talk page. Be prepared to provide reliable sources backing up any changes you wish to make. You can use the Edit request procedure in some cases. Cullen328 (talk) 19:42, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Cullen328 Probbably meant to link to Edit request. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:10, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected, thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 20:13, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Thanks for your interest in improving Wikipedia! You can add the {{citation needed}} template for unsourced information you want to contest. You're right that it's not easy to do so. To learn how to edit, you could view Help:Introduction and The Wikipedia Adventure. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:58, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do I search for people using specific attributes? I am trying to figure out who my teacher is for a Roaring 20's party. Character Clue # 1 My character is a woman. She was born in the U.S. but lived part of her adult life abroad until returning to the U.S. in the 20's. Character Clue # 2 My character grew up in Chicago, wanted to be a star and was married 4 times. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.49.80.2 (talk) 19:59, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Use Cat Scan to search for categories. For your specific example I'd search for people who are in both Category:20th-century American women and Category:People from Chicago. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:26, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help me please? I have researched an ancient monument in Wales called Garn Goch for 5 years. I have established a not for profit charity. I have created a website and written a 150 page book. I have the support of archaeological trusts. I have produced a deeply researched and referenced summary specifically for Wikipedia. Last year I amended the existing (and brief) Y Garn Goch page. All my additions were unilaterally and totally removed. In January I created a new page, Garn Goch, so as not to touch the existing page. I uploaded the deeply researched and referenced summary specifically for Wikipedia. It was unilaterally and totally removed.

This seems to me to be nothing but intellectual vandalism. I do not know who is doing it, or why. Nor do I know how to engage with whoever it is to discuss their issues.

PLEASE HELP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartinP991 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know ... why. The edit summaries might be a good place to start:

• Special:Diff/1053427962 — hmmm looks like someone added all sorts of commentary that should have been posted on the talk page
• Special:Diff/1061620773 — Remove text that strays way off topic
• Special:Diff/1061621028 — WP:PROMO, WP:EL and personal essay-like
• Special:Diff/1061680029 — This section is written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic. (The section was previously tagged with {{essay-like}})
• Special:Diff/1069261981 — Article already exists - please feel free to expand it. (see WP:CONTENTFORK)

Regarding Nor do I know how to engage with whoever it is to discuss their issues., that is what the talk page of the article is for, in this case Talk:Y Garn Goch.

Umimmak (talk) 23:31, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MartinP991: It seems like a lot was removed when the article was turned into a redirect, but the article already existed. The info you wanted to add should be merged. I started a discussion on the talk page, to discuss what could be merged. Pinging @Onel5969: as a courtesy. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:52, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it appears you have a COI conflict, based on your above comments. Please see WP:COI on how to ask to have material added to the article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:54, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is official criteria for semi-protection, but is there official criteria for the others anywhere? Or just any rough criteria at all? InterstateFive (talk) - just another roadgeek 00:50, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@InterstateFive: Wikipedia:Protection_policy is the offical policy for all types of protection. RudolfRed (talk) 01:11, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! So I"m curious about the oxford comma. Wikipedia's policy on Oxford commas is very vague and simply says that it be consistent through the article. However most of the time when I see someone add or remove an oxford comma, I don't know if it being there (or not) is consistent in the article because there's no easy way to search for it. I'm mainly asking because a user in this edit removed an oxford comma and I have no clue if it's constructive or not. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:37, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Blaze Wolf:I sometimes search for ", and " in the page if I want to see if Oxford commas are being used, and consider getting 0 matching items an indication, albeit not infallible, that they are not. Determining the reverse is a bit more difficult. I have reverted the edit you referenced as it appears Oxford commas are used elsewhere in the article, and there was no edit summary. Bazza (talk) 12:25, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Blaze Wolf: If someone adds or removes a serial comma, I'd let them do it; even if it is unconstructive, it's easy to undo (without leaving a notification), and a copyeditor can just go through the entire thing if you feel like using the {{copy edit}} template to grab our attention. Bazza 7's suggested string is helpful for a quick skim. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:29, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When a template is substituted, the wikitext is copied onto the page. Does this create a copyright issue? I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk | contributions) 01:45, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No. Almost everything on Wikipedia is released under CC BY-SA licence. Why would there be a copyright issue?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:12, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Shantavira: I mean, the wikitext is copied without giving attribution to where it is from. This page says that when copying content from a page, attribution should be given. However, substitution does not say where the text that was substituted was taken from. I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk | contributions) 01:41, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright applies only to creative work. Please provide an example of where you think creative work is included in a substituted template.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:19, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. Are templates creative enough to be copyrighted? I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk | contributions) 17:31, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I edited Jordan Peele's wikipedia page to include his appearances in Epic Rap Battles of History. It is factual that Jordan Peele performed on the youtube show twice in 2013 Torrieth (talk) 02:46, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I took a preliminary stab at helping on this user’s talk page, but I’m editing on a phone - something I seldom attempt because it’s nearly impossible - so if someone could help out further I’d appreciate it. I don’t think I did a great job. —Floquenbeam (talk) 03:49, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I was the person who reverted your edit. I did it from the angle of if it didn't have a source, was it really notable to be in the article. I only reverted your portion on "Jordan Peele has not commented on if he will appear in future Epic Rap Battles of History videos." portion. Sea Cow (talk) 04:03, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Where do I request a renewal for my subscription? Clarityfiend (talk) 08:36, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Clarityfiend: via TWL. ––FormalDude talk 08:39, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clarityfiend The specific link for this is [1], then on the right hand side, there's a link "Has your account expired? Request renewal". Joseph2302 (talk) 12:28, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And note, I volunteer for TWL but am not the person who qualifies people for that resource. Usually they will see the request within a few days but then there can be an uncertain amount of time before it gets okayed on the Newspapers.com side. You can ask over on TWL talk pages if you have more questions, but just wanted to set expectations appropriately. Jessamyn (my talk page) 20:25, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Everything is accurate and easily verified. I am William Browning Spencer. A friend started this a long time ago, but I went to great pains to insure its accuracy. Is this an objection to one or more of the links? I am completely baffled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WilliamBSpencer (talk • contribs) 10:14, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WilliamBSpencer Wikipedia articles(not "pages") require more than links, they require citations. This guide to citations should be helpful; in general, however, you should avoid direct edits on the article about you, instead making formal edit requests(click for instructions) detailing changes you feel are needed. If you just want to add citations, however, that is probably all right. 331dot (talk) 10:19, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• @WilliamBSpencer: 331dot explained what is needed, but not why. First, we cannot take your word that you are who you claim you are (per a famous cartoon, on the internet, nobody knows you’re a dog). Second, even if we could, the subject of a biography article is not the best person to write it; not only do they have a tendency to paint themselves in a flattering light, their memory might be faulty, etc. Third, even if you could convince Wikipedia editors that the article is entirely true, accurate, balanced etc., we want readers to be able to check that themselves - an idea that is summarized as "verifiability, not truth". Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 11:23, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A banner has been put on the top of my Wikipedia page that is false. It says that the page was created or edited for undisclosed payments. I have NOT paid anyone to create or edit this page: Ivan Misner

I have asked an associate who claimed to have editing status to see what she could do to update my page. She tried and was unsuccessful. She was NEVER paid in any way.

My questions are:

1. How can I have this false banner removed?

2. How can I have a legitimate qualified editor update the page (for example there are citations needed that I can provide).

I would really appreciate someone's help.

Ivan Misner — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misner (talk • contribs) 17:40, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Misner I would correct you in that it is not "your Wikipedia page", but a Wikipedia article about you. You are welcome to offer suggestions for changes on the article talk page, including stating that you did not pay anyone to edit, in the form of an edit request(click for instructions). Note that an employee is considered a paid editor even if not specifically paid to edit. There is no such thing as a "legitimate qualified editor"; we're all editors. 331dot (talk) 17:56, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Misner: If you founded a company and asked "an associate" who has any professional relationship to the company to do something, then that would constitute "paid editing" by our definition (WP:PAID). If you have any other relationship with "an associate" to whom you made such a request, then the associate has a "conflic of interest" by our definition. (WP:COI). The associate should clarify the nature of the relationship on the talk page, whatever it is. -Arch dude (talk) 18:03, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Ivan Misner TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:49, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Queens Gateway to Health Sciences Secondary School has two talk pages:

• Talk:Queens Gateway to Health Sciences Secondary School
• Talk:Gateway to Health Science High School

Evidently there were originally two separate articles, but Gateway to Health Science High School was blanked and redirected to Queens Gateway to Health Sciences Secondary School as they cover the same subject, leaving an orphan talk page. How should this be dealt with? Ruбlov (talk) 18:29, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Similar situation at Talk:Jacob Riis Park Historic District. Ruбlov (talk) 18:32, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Rublov: Thanks for the heads up. Just add the {{Talk page of redirect}} template to the top of the redirected article's talk page. See how I did it. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:46, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thank you. Ruбlov (talk) 18:52, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do I add a new listing? I’d like to add a breast cancer support group — Preceding unsigned comment added by BosomFriendsBfd (talk • contribs) 19:54, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

With non-routine, in-depth, independent news coverage from outlets with editorial oversight and identifiable authors. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 20:16, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@BosomFriendsBfd: Hi there! Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, especially when you are part of the group you want to write about, and therefore have a conflict of interest (COI). To learn how to edit, you could view Help:Introduction and go through The Wikipedia Adventure. I suggest spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. When you're ready to create an article, you would gather independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of the group, and determine whether you meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you first should declare your COI on your user page. Then follow the instructions at Help:Your first article, and be prepared for a process that may include months of waiting, rejections, and rewrites, before an article is created. If you are successful, then you could never edit the article directly due to your COI, but could submit edit requests on the article talk page. Hope this helps. GoingBatty (talk) 20:42, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note OP has been indefinitely blocked for promotion and violation of our username policy. CodeTalker (talk) 21:16, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi How do I add spouse to right hand side of wikipedia page? I was married to Tommy May 12, 1990-96.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Mikal_Ford

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by WandaLouise (talk • contribs) 22:57, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WandaLouise We can't just take your word for it, as (while I believe you) we have no way of knowing if you are who you say you are. If you have an independent reliable source with this information, please offer it at Talk:Thomas Mikal Ford. 331dot (talk) 23:24, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted the editor's addition to the article body, since it was unsourced. I can't find a substantiating source with a simple Google search. Sorry - we don't know if this is a hoax or not, and want the encyclopedia to be reliable. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:38, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@WandaLouise: As an ex-wife, you would have a conflict of interest (COI) and therefore should not be editing Ford's article directly. First, you should declare your COI on your user page. Then post your suggestion on the article's talk page with an independent reliable source and the {{edit request}} template, or use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 04:25, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Any idea why the radio button for "Show map of Tamaulipas" shows up near the upper left corner of the map in the infobox at 2010 San Fernando massacre? Seems to occur on Firefox and Chrome. Is this a template problem? Thanks, Brycehughes (talk) 04:09, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Brycehughes: Hi there! I see the same issue with Chrome. If you don't receive a good answer here, you might want to post your question at Module talk:Location map. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:35, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Brycehughes: It can be fixed with {{location map|Tamaulipas#Mexico|float=center}}. The default is float=right to work with stand-alone maps. Apart from the button issue, it also gives poor alignment of the map in the infobox. Maybe all uses in infoboxes should have float=center and the documentation should say so, but I don't know the template well enough. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:37, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Pls let me know how to write articles — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4040:D18:6C09:C575:5837:D935:A8B0 (talk) 08:30, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Writing a WP-article that isn't quickly deleted is difficult if you have no experience in how to edit and what is demanded per WP:s rules (there are quite a lot.) WP:TUTORIAL is a good place to start. On how to start an article, pick a topic that meets the demands here: WP:GNG, otherwise you are wasting you're time. Then move on to Help:Your first article. Good luck! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:40, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not exactly sure where the discussion of Featured Picture nominations takes place, I do not see a link at Wikipedia:Featured pictures. But anyway, how was there a consensus, in the current geopolitical situation, to show a picture of a Soviet rocket? I am not saying that showing the picture means Wikipedia is taking a stance on this issue, of course, NPOV also applies to controversial topics. But then, I guess, NPOV does not necessarily apply to the selection of content for the main page. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 09:52, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Toshio Yamaguchi: Pictures are nominated for featured status at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, but you apparently refer to "Today's featured picture" on Main Page. Wikipedia:Picture of the day#Guidelines says: "Featured pictures are currently selected in roughly the order in which they were promoted". File:Soyuz TMA-13 Edit.jpg was promoted to featured picture status 9 July 2020‎ at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Soyuz TMA-13. It was added to Template:POTD/2022-03-05 on 20 February 2022, four days before the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The timing is just a coincidence. The March schedule is at Wikipedia:Picture of the day/March 2022. I don't know whether pictures are sometimes removed due to the timing. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:32, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Does seem like a bad coincidence though, maybe we should have considered pulling it before it went live (and running it at some point in the future instead). I can definitely see why a photo of a Russian rocket wouldn't be popular right now... Joseph2302 (talk) 10:33, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It may be too late but Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors is the place to request changes to content which is already on the main page. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:41, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seems I am not the only one who finds this choice kind of poor, see Template talk:POTD protected/2022-03-05. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 20:13, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, me too, a very inopportune time for a photo like this, How can someone be so . . . I dunna want to say it . . . . so ill-advised. And I suspect it is not a single person decision, so who all thought this would be good???!!!???? Dr.gregory.retzlaff (talk) 20:49, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a brand-new user who just signed up today. Could someone possibly give me some pointers on how to get started? It will not be difficult for me to manage the web because I am a computer engineering student. Just point me in the right direction. Signing PlayOboe (talk) 11:06, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PlayOboe If you need a tutorial, you may use the new user tutorial. If you want to look for areas to help out, the Community Portal is a good place to start. 331dot (talk) 11:08, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Another query: for my semester study, I need to do some extra-curricular assignments. Is it possible for me to write some Wikipedia content and submit it as a university assignment? Is it possible to have a senior editor assist me? Signing PlayOboe (talk) 11:11, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PlayOboe If that is your motivation in creating Wikipedia content, that is up to you, but you would have to ask your professor if they would accept Wikipedia writing as an assignment. You are welcome to continue to ask for assistance on this page or at the Teahouse; if you want a mentor to advise you specifically, you may be able to find one at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user. 331dot (talk) 11:17, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help and time. I'll take my time to understand everything and will do all you say. See you again. Signing PlayOboe (talk) 11:28, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just a word of caution PlayOboe - some tutors expect assignments to include original research and/or your comments on/analysis of the subject, which are NOT acceptable on Wikipedia. Please read No original research, Synthesis and Neutral point of view. Furthermore, Wikipedia is Not a web-host - articles are OK but essays are not - best of luck - Arjayay (talk) 21:06, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all, I've used the last few days to look around and try to familiarize myself with this place, and so far, it's been going alright. Nevertheless, one thing that does confuse me is that there seem to be separate systems for picture (or media file in general) upload on both the English Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Commons. Could someone shed some light on this for me? I can only assume that this is at least in part due to international copyright law, but I'm not really an expert on the matter, once things go beyond the obvious ground rules.

Thanks in advance! Doctor Duh (talk) 16:41, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doctor Duh: Your speculation is correct. Oversimplifying, to be placed on Commons, a file must be "free to use" anywhere in the world by our definition of "free to use": this means it may be restricted by a copyright license that is no more restrictive than CC-BY-SA. Almost all WMF projects (separate language Wikipedias, etc.) permit the use of Commons files, but technically each WMF project is governed separately and sets it's own rules. The English-language Wikipedia permits the use of any Commons file, but it also permits the use of files under a "fair use" justification under US law as we interpret it. These files cannot be placed on Commons, so we have a separate repository for them. Our "fair use" rules are conservative to make sure we stay well within the boundaries of "fair use" practice in the US. The WMF servers for these files are in the US. -Arch dude (talk) 17:06, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doctor Duh, good question. Basically, Commons is the place to put "free" (per license or age) images, like images you take yourself with your own camera and are willing to "donate". Some images published by governments fall into this category, hence all the nice pics of US presidents. WP, on the the other hand, is the place for "fair use" (WP:NFCI) images, like a book cover, a logo, a fictional character, people that are dead but not since a very long time, etc. Hope this helps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:07, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for your very helpful responses. Creative Commons licensing and the broader concept of how blatant plagiarism will get one into trouble aren't totally foreign concepts to me, but the duality of systems tripped me up a little. Doctor Duh (talk) 17:12, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doctor Duh: Please be careful. Plagiarism and Copyright violation are two different things and are only loosely related. Copvio is copying of copyrighted material without permission. It is a violation of copyright law whether or not you attribute the source. Plagiarism is copying without attributing the source, whether or not the material is copyrighted. It is not by itself illegal, but depending on circumstances may be fraud, and is a violation of academic norms that can result in academic sanctions. So: always attribute your source, and always check the copyright. -Arch dude (talk) 18:50, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Arch dude: Noted, thanks. I guess WP:COPYRIGHT would be the place to start reading up about it some more, correct? Doctor Duh (talk) 18:55, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doctor Duh: Only if you are desperately interested in the details or if you are unsure in a particular situation. Our rules are complicated because we try very hard to follow the law, and copyright law is an absolute nightmare. -Arch dude (talk) 19:00, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, this much I do know about it. Your advice is welcomed, and I will proceed with care. Doctor Duh (talk) 19:03, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is it different articles for different language versions of wikipedia? Not translations relative to most spoken language of same article bulk? I am needing to back up articles about lots of different nations and I already have english wikipedia backed up, I am now wondering about these questions because I want to get the other ones backed up too if the other languages include more on each of those pertaining nation territories. Please confirm this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.73.141 (talk) 17:47, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles on the different encyclopedias are developed independently: there is no particular intent for them to contain identical information. Even when isn article starts out as a translation from one Wikipedia to another, the articles will generally diverge as they are modified independently. -Arch dude (talk) 18:54, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The same subject can have very different articles across languages due to each project's policies and guidelines. For example, what might be permissible on the French Wikipedia may not be allowed on the English Wikipedia, which is one of the things translators need to be aware of when translating across different languages. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:17, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. Just don't rely on the languages section to the left to provide you with different versions of the article. You have to be creative and skilled to find native articles from other languages. For example if you search for Falkland Islands and you then look for Falkland Islands and you look for the spanish version on the navbar to the left, you'll be directed to [2] . But if you look for Islas Malvinas on the spanish wiki, you will find [3]. The explanation here is related to the WikiData attempt to unify articles across languages, and an incompatibility between English and Spanish visions, which led to a split into two articles, one of the isles according to the English and one of the isles according to the Spanish speaking nation. This is the most egregious example, but you will find more subtle cases everywhere.

Similarly if you look for Blue in English, or Celeste on Spanish wiki, none of them will redirect you to italian's Azurro. Instead, each three of these colours will redirect to their own page, creating 9 pages total. In order to find out the concept azurro if you were not already familiar with it, you would have to do something like lookup Sky, then look for the italian version, and then look for references to its colour in the page. If you do this for some languages, you will also find out that some versions will describe the sky in a greenish colour.

In short, there are vastly different articles mostly because the boundaries of what articles cover are usually not exactly the same, so don't look for exactly equivalent concepts, keep an open mind, and you will find these vastly different articles.--TZubiri (talk) 23:20, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is it different articles for different language versions of wikipedia? Much more discussions pertaining to different nations each relative to english version alone by getting the others? Not translations relative to most spoken language of same article bulk? I am needing to back up articles about lots of different nations and I already have english wikipedia backed up, I am now wondering about these questions because I want to get the other ones backed up too if the other languages include more on each of those pertaining nation territories. Please confirm this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.73.141 (talk) 17:49, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Different language-editions of Wikipedia have different articles, and the Wikipediae are not segregated by nation, but by language. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 19:03, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone else having issue with RefToolbars autofill options? Everytime I try to use them it breaks the tab, everything below the address bar is just blank and I have to back out of editting. I've posted at WT:RefToolbar as well. LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmission∆ °co-ords° 20:40, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore me. After playing around, and just about to write another comment it's started working again. LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmission∆ °co-ords° 21:16, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

how do i write a story to be published on wiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by Porterbowman28496967 (talk • contribs) 21:37, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Porterbowman28496967. This is possibly just a matter of nomenclature, but: we don't have "stories" on Wikipedia, whether you mean fiction or news reports. What we have is encyclopaedia articles: neutrally written summaries of what independent reliable sources have published about a subject. Since every article should be based almost entirely on such sources, if there are no suitable sources then an article is not possible: the Wikipedia jargon for this is that the subject is not notable. So writing an article begins with finding suitable sources - only when have they been found is there any point in even trying to create a draft.

Since finding and identifying suitable sources is something that new editors typically do not have the skill to do easily, I always advise new editors to spend a few months improving some of our existing six million articles, and learning about sources, before they try it. But when you think you are ready to try, please start by reading your first article, which will show you how to create a draft that you can work on and get it in shape before submitting it for review. ColinFine (talk) 22:14, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I typically add references to articles inline. But I also see some articles where there is just a list of references in the references section. Since I am creating a stub, this might be especially useful, since not all references are used, I'm just marking them as relevant for expansion.

I would appreciate an edit into the article Draft:Maria Mendeleeva to make the references presentable in this fashion.

Thanks!--TZubiri (talk) 21:49, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TZubin. While Wikipedia policy does not strictly require references to be inline, in my experience reviewers require this. You can see why: if the references are not inline, then the reviewer must do much more work finding where particular information comes from - work that the writer could have done before submitting.

Personally, I don't understand why anybody would create a stub in 2022: to my mind they are a feature of the early days of Wikipedia, before we had drafts and AFC. I would rather see a draft remain a draft and get expanded before submitting it. But I don't think everybody agrees with me. ColinFine (talk) 22:21, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the goal would be to mine those references and inline them. Perhaps the header could be changed to "further reading" to highlight the lack of inline references.

I remember an argument from the Cebuano Wikipedia mass editor Lsjbot, who proposed that creating stubs would encourage users to edit, as it is simpler to edit an existing article than to create it. Aside from the technical difficulties of creating an article, precreating a stub (and filling it with references), prehandles any policy blockers that new users might have a harder time navigating, like notability arguments.

So yeah, at least for that reason, I think stubs are still very useful to increase beginner collaboration.--TZubiri (talk) 22:31, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think that argument is seriously bad. If creating a stub encourages editors to expand it, why do we still have thousands and thousands of stubs? I would actually like us ot have measures that discourage people from creating new articles, and funnel themn into improving - or deleting - existing ones. ColinFine (talk) 23:02, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This wiki wide discussion is already well documented in the lsjbot page and Cebuano Wikipedia page, check that out if you are interested. It's out of scope to debate it here. I just removed the <ref> tags and changed it to "Further reading." Thanks.--TZubiri (talk) 23:29, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I want to filter articles in a category (optimal with deepscan) by the growing page length in a specific time range. For example showing me all articles in Category:2022 that have grown over +1000 Bytes in the last week. Optimal would be a pagehistory connnection (or a similar ui) that show me what is new. I tried it with the quarry but it doesn't work like I thought about it and maybe more experienced users here know some better tools to do it. Thanks for helping --Noobius2 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 00:27, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just wanted to point out that there is an error on the page for Ken Griffey Jr., as the infobox is not formatted correctly and only displays as text. Both {{ }} brackets are present, and I was unsure how to approach fixing it without reverting an edit. Thanks. – GriegMachine8