Jump to content

Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cmdrraimus (talk | contribs) at 00:59, 20 December 2023 (→Clearing Up Generative/SEO Site References: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

    ↑ To top of page
    Shortcuts
    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
    Skip to top
    Skip to bottom

    December 16

    Map icons displaying incorrectly

    At Spring training#Spring training locations, there are two maps which display where Major League Baseball teams hold spring training, created using {{OSM Location map}}. Some of the marks are supposed to be File:Red pog.svg to indicate that only one team uses a particular stadium, and others are supposed to be File:Blue pog.svg to indicate that two teams use a stadium. There is a legend beneath each map indicating that red is for one team and blue is for two teams. However, all of the marks are showing up in red -- there are no blue marks for the stadiums that are supposed to have them. Can anyone advise what the problem might be? -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:49, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    The real problem is using only colours to provide map information, contrary to the requirements of MOS:COLOR. Bazza (talk) 09:52, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not going to dispute that, but as I didn't create these maps, I just want to know why there aren't any marks displaying as blue when they are supposed to be. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:58, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Alessandra Mastronardi

    Should I enter the full name or "Alessandra Mastronardi" as the title of the infobox? JackkBrown (talk) 12:11, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @JackkBrown What does {{Infobox person}} say? Bazza (talk) 13:29, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Capitalisation

    Some time ago I was told that one must write "River Po" (capitalised on "River") and "Po river" (lowercase on "river"), but how is it possible that "Valley" of "Po Valley" must be capitalised? JackkBrown (talk) 12:39, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Because it is a specific place referred to that way in reliable sources in English such as Morgan, Griffith M. (1973). "A General Description of the Hail Problem in the Po Valley of Northern Italy". Journal of Applied Meteorology. 12 (2): 338. Bibcode:1973JApMe..12..338M. doi:10.1175/1520-0450(1973)012<0338:AGDOTH>2.0.CO;2. ISSN 1520-0450. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:36, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    People here can be wrong, but you were advised that "either "Po River valley" or "Po Valley" is acceptable" on 3 December. TSventon (talk) 14:03, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    (ec) Also, "Po River" seems correct to me and various others.[1][2][3] Clarityfiend (talk) 14:06, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Jack, please. WP:PLACE. Remsense留 14:07, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Clarityfiend: I have always written "River Po" and "Po river", am I wrong? JackkBrown (talk) 15:13, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @JackkBrown: personally I would write "River Po" and "Po river". Also, "River Po and River Adige", but "Po and Adige rivers". Some disagree. I don't think it's worth worrying about, it can always be altered if one day a consensus emerges. Maproom (talk) 15:31, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @JackkBrown:. "River Po" and "Po River" are equivalent — names of geographical features — so why would you capitalize them differently? The great majority of sources, including those other encyclopedia guys[4], capitalize it. "Po and Adige rivers" is a different situation. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:54, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Clarityfiend: I have been following Maproom's advice (for several months), so to avoid having to correct everything by hand again (it would not be possible to find all the changes out of 36,000 anyway), I am asking for the help of a bot. JackkBrown (talk) 12:00, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I want to edit page

    Give me permisons Andreixs99 (talk) 12:48, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    no Andreixs99 (talk) 12:48, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Andreixs99 You have made edit requests for the article Lionel Messi, which is the correct way to suggest edits when you can't make them directly. Your first language may not be English, so you should be careful to make your suggested change as clear as possible. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:24, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Say please. Clarityfiend (talk) 14:33, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [reply]

    URL Hijacked

    On the Krankies WiKi Page The Krankies

    The URL to The Krankies official website has bee hijacked and now directs to a porn site. 51.9.57.241 (talk) 14:08, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you, I have replaced the link with an archived copy. TSventon (talk) 14:30, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, thank you for replacing the link.
    However the archived copy does not display well.
    The actual Krankies web site is https://thekrankies.com/ 51.9.57.241 (talk) 16:52, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Misogyny in crime article categories

    The fact that Category:Female rapists and Category:Fictional female rapists exist, but Category:Male rapists and Category:Fictional male rapists do not exist, is highly absurd and discriminatory. All articles of male rapists exist in these categories, while those of female rapists exist in subcategories without any valid reason. Either all articles of female rapists should moved to the main Category:Rapists, or all articles of male rapists should be moved to Category:Male rapists. Both should exist at the same category level.

    Another thing is that many women are wrongfully convicted of crimes, assault, sometimes even rape. In Category:People wrongfully convicted of rape, the only such example is Nora Wall, a former Irish sister of the Sisters of Mercy who was wrongfully convicted of rape in June 1999, by Regina Walsh (born 8 January 1978) and Patricia Phelan (born 1973). Many more cases of wrongful convictions against women may be notable, yet still not included on Wikipedia.

    I know that such sexism may have been noted before, and it is quite a platitude to bring it up again rather than doing something to fix it. Any improvement in these categories needs sufficient consensus, and I'm looking forward to it. — CrafterNova [ TALK ] [ CONT ] 14:39, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    See also this controversy. In my view, this is an unfortunate outcome of database-design-by-consensus, not of misogyny. Maproom (talk) 15:39, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Further see also the editing guideline at WP:CATGENDER. TSventon (talk) 15:49, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Category:Rapists isn't supposed to have people at all except in subcategories. Rapists are categorized by country like Category:American rapists which is both for men and women, e.g. Pamela Smart. The people directly in Category:Rapists should be moved to the right country category which should be created if it doesn't already exist. In addition to (not instead of) the primary organization by country, there is Category:Female rapists for female rapists from any country. There is no corresponding Category:Male rapists which would probably contain more than 1000 people. I would oppose such a category. When we have "X by country" categories for something we rarely make "Female X" and "Male X" categories for all people. Category:Female rapists is an exception because it's so rare. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:23, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Category:Rapists says "This category consists of individuals who have been convicted of rape in a court of law as well as those who are considered by most historians to have committed the crime". Counterfeit Purses (talk) 18:34, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Such messages include subcategories. The parent category can contain general articles and lists of rapists but should not have individual biographies. There is nothing special about the eight people who are currently placed improperly in Category:Rapists itself versus the maybe 1000 who are properly categorized by country. Several of the eight have no country category yet but then it should be created. Maybe they were placed in the parent category by users who are not comfortable with creating categories. Category:Rapists by nationality already has several subcategories with a single article. That's allowed in systematic categories like this. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:17, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @PrimeHunter Is it a problem if there are over 1,000 things in a category? Couldn't you just have "American male rapists" and "American female rapists"? In most cases there would be no need for the female category, but one could be created if it were needed. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 21:02, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @PrimeHunter: Commonality and rarity are relative terms and often different than how they are perceived to be.
    The thing is that misogyny is not the only problem here. The design of these categories also has hidden racism, homophobia, transphobia, and other forms of discrimination against LGBTQ+ people.
    Rape cases of female victims and intersex victims (yes, they are relevant here) are more common than generally expected because many cases remain unreported, and some cases are even covered up or censored. The same thing can be said for rape cases involving female rapists, regardless of whether victims are male or female or intersex.
    The same analogy can be applied to this controversy shared by Maproom. Women novelists and non-binary novelists are also novelists. Othering them does not help, rather it adds to the discrimination and systematically enforced invisibility of females and intersex people. Articles of novelists who are men should be moved to Category:Men novelists, just like Category:Women novelists. Category:Intersex novelists could be created too, considering notability of intersex novelists. One could say "their notability is often insufficient", but it is important to realize that intersex people's and LGBTQ+ people's notability is hindered by oppression and discrimination against them.
    Counterfeit Purses has correctly asserted that race and ethnicity are also factors that need to be considered here. This is particularly important in context of categories of people by profession. People of colour, of South American, Asian, African descent, and other underrepresented races and ethnicities are likely to be ignored in categories of people by profession, which is why a category for each race and ethnicity needs to be created.
    @TSventon: WP:CATGENDER needs to be rewritten to treat females and intersex people equally to males, and also to treat LGBTQ+ people equally to all people. The statement "Category:Female heads of government is valid as a topic of special encyclopedic interest, though it does not need to be balanced directly against a "Male heads of government" category" is discriminatory because balancing people on the same level is one of the main requirements for equality. The statement "historically the vast majority of political leaders have been male" reinforces the rarity of females and intersex people in political leaderships, demotivating them and reducing the possibility of political careers of those who are interested and capable of such leaderships. They can be more common than they are perceived to be. Articles of male political leaders should be moved to Category:Male heads of government, on the same level as female political leaders and intersex political leaders (Category:Intersex politicians has only 4 articles: Tony Briffa, Gopi Shankar Madurai, Betsy Driver, and Maria Nikiforova (an anarcho-terrorist, whose inclusion in the category seems acceptable, but the ignorance against intersex people who are genuinely good people is highly disappointing)). One could say that "there are no notable intersex people who are heads of government" but that is really just a demotivating empty statement which disregards the possibility that intersex people can be heads of government.
    The male and female and intersex categorization of people by profession is highly complicated for transgender people. Biographical articles about trans women should definitely be included in categories of women, but may also be included in categories of males, in case of pre-operative trans women. Likewise, biographical articles about trans men should definitely be included in categories of men, but may also be included in categories of females, in case of pre-operative trans men. For those trans people who choose to have sex reassignment surgery, articles about such trans men can be moved to categories of males, and articles about such trans women can be moved to categories of females. It should be noted that trans men are men who born females and trans women are women who born males", hence the main requirements are that:
    Regardless of rarity and commonality, either all biographical articles should be in the main categories, or the main categories should be only container categories, containing subcategories of all genders, sexes, sexualities, races, ethnicities, etc. in which the relevant articles should exist. I think the main purpose of ethnic and racial categorization is to find underrepresented genders, sexes, sexualities, races, ethnicities, in order to improve articles about them, but the only on the condition that the main categories should be only container categories without biographical articles though they may contain non-biographical articles. — CrafterNova [ TALK ] [ CONT ] 10:45, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Maproom: There is misogyny in the design of these categories. To say that there isn't, is highly absurd. Misogyny has existed since ancient times, long before these categories were created, so the "database-design-by-consensus" was a result of misogyny, and was actually biased consensus including very few females, if not none at all. — CrafterNova [ TALK ] [ CONT ] 06:02, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @CrafterNova I see there is also a category "people convicted of rape" with corresponding categories like "Brazilian people convicted of rape". I'm not sure of the distinction between "rapists" and "people convicted of rape". By that I mean that there are a few ways to distinguish between "rapists" and "people convicted of rape" that spring to mind, but it is not clear which is being used or if there was any thought given to defining the categories. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 19:32, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Counterfeit Purses the text you copied suggests that "Brazilian rapists" should contain "Brazilian people convicted of rape" plus Brazilian people "who are considered by most historians to have committed the crime". A spot check suggests that the content of "Brazilian rapists" is more random than that. TSventon (talk) 20:19, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @TSventon So "Brazilian people convicted of rape" is a subset of "Brazilian rapists"? That makes sense, although I'm not sure why you would want a separate, specific category. I was only pointing out the "people convicted of rape" category because it is not gendered, which was part of the initial complaint. There isn't a "women convicted of rape" category and a "men convicted of rape" category, just a "people" category. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 20:58, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Counterfeit Purses, Category:Brazilian rapists contains a subcategory Category:Brazilian people convicted of rape. Based on a spot check, the contents of "Brazilian people convicted of rape" seem to agree with the category name, so it is possibly more useful than the "Brazilian rapists" category, which in practice is less well defined. There could be a "women convicted of rape" category within the "people convicted of rape" and "Female rapists" categories, but as things stand it would be very small. We have "Female rapists" because most members of "Rapists" are male as explained in WP:CATGENDER. The guideline can be changed, the paragraph about sport was added here in 2011. TSventon (talk) 21:28, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Counterfeit Purses: Not all people convicted, of rape, are rapists. Many people are wrongfully convicted of rape. One could say "mostly males are wrongfully convicted rape" which is a misogynistic statement. Though rare, females are also wrongfully convicted of rape, such as Nora Wall, which is only one person. There have been many more cases of wrongful convictions against females which remain unreported due to less notability. Wrongful convictions against intersex people and LGBTQ+ people also happen, but are ignored, again due to less notability. The thing is, like rarity and commonality, notability is relative, depends on what is socially perceived to be notable, and perception of notability varies from one reliable source to another. Notability is not absolute, and cannot be measured as such. Content published by perennial reliable sources is generally notable, but the constraints here are:
    • heterosexual cisgender male domination in the companies and organizations that are considered reliable sources and publish such content, and
    • discrimination and oppression against women, intersex people, and LGBTQ+ people.
    The need of segregation, on basis of race, of articles about criminals, is quite unclear to me. Categorization of biographical articles of people by professions is understandable, because one purpose can be to find articles of people having underrepresented genders, sexes, sexualities, races, ethnicities, etc. in particular professions in order to improve those articles. I think that improving articles about criminals should be necessary only to the extent of increasing representation of their victims, to improve articles about the victims, and to make their voices be heard. The rest — I think that the notion of articles about criminals somehow being "biographies" is futile. These articles should be written as deterrents to decrease crime rates, not to condone crimes. — CrafterNova [ TALK ] [ CONT ] 11:08, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @CrafterNova You're right. Not all people convicted of rape are rapists, since some of the convictions are later overturned. I'm not sure how saying that "mostly males are wrongfully convicted of rape" (which I don't think anyone here said) is misogynistic, but feel free to explain it to me on my talk page.
    You should probably start a discussion somewhere more central. Perhaps Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)? Counterfeit Purses (talk) 20:17, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Counterfeit Purses: I consider it misogynistic, and it is difficult for me to understand anyone else's counter-reasoning. It is a sexist statement because gender, sex, and sexuality of any wrongfully convicted individual do not matter, rather what matters is justice for all regardless of these factors.
    I will start discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy), and I hope consensus is reached for improvement in policies, starting with WP:CATGENDER. The problem is that many of these statements will have to be repeated there, and I think that, in order to comply with WP:CROSSPOST, continuing this discussion will require a very concise summary of the status quo, one that I'm finding cumbersome to create, so I need help with that.
    Also, we definitely need more opinions, especially those of women and LGBTQ+ people, because they are oppressed. Their voices need to be heard, and they deserve the right to participate in policymaking, since it is a multilateral process. Can we try and ping more such editors to diversify the discussion? — CrafterNova [ TALK ] [ CONT ] 05:00, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "I think that the notion of articles about criminals somehow being "biographies" is futile. These articles should be written as deterrents to decrease crime rates, not to condone crimes." I don't get this at all. They don't condone crimes, they simply tell that people committed them, and that they happened. Even criminals have the right to not have misinformation spread about them, regardless of the terrible things they've done. WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. Industrial Insect (talk) 16:23, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]


    Women have committed rape.

    Also, what's this statement for in Category:Female rapists? It seems quite derogatory. Category:Rapists says "This category consists of individuals who have been convicted of rape in a court of law as well as those who are considered by most historians to have committed the crime." and not "men have committed rape". Categories should not begin with such derogatory statements. Reduction of misogyny on Wikipedia has still such a long way to go. — CrafterNova [ TALK ] [ CONT ] 14:26, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    The description in Category:Female rapists was missing a word. I have changed it to "Women who have committed rape".[5] It's a statement about which articles belong in the category and is not supposed to be a statement about women. Category:Rapists is not gender-specific so it says "individuals" and should not say "men". PrimeHunter (talk) 17:54, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Sanity check

    Is this edit vandalism? Every other climate table I've seen on Wikipedia has standard width, and I gave the explanation that this is why I standardized the width of this one. No entries in this table are any wider than on other tables that contain temperatures below -10 degrees.

    I asked for an explanation for what makes this edit wrong after I created my account and the same person reverted me without explanation claiming my edit is just vandalism. IvicaInsomniac (talk) 19:38, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @IvicaInsomniac: I suggest you start a discussion on the article talk page, ping the other editor and give the explanation above. They may not have understood your first edit summary "Why does this page alone have to stand out?" TSventon (talk) 20:10, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    FWIW: This editor told me that my edits are useless and to leave Wikipedia and went through my edits to find this and revert this after I made an edit request on Talk:Android version history. I already left a notice over there that this is my account now and I'm the person who made the edit request while unregistered. But I'll try the longer explanation. IvicaInsomniac (talk) 20:25, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @IvicaInsomniac:, Android version history is semi-protected, so it is likely that it has a history of controversy, and that it will often be safer to ask for further discussion rather than accepting an edit request. Wikipedia is supposed to be be based on WP:Reliable sources so it is more useful to make changes supported by a RS rather than just by your own knowledge. TSventon (talk) 21:54, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @TSventon: Thanks, I understand that. The problem there is that I gave few examples of why the page should have a {technical} template and I received that "answer" and was followed around. I don't care what happens with the Android page any more. IvicaInsomniac (talk) 17:57, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Rule of thumb: if you have to ask whether an edit is vandalism or something else...
    ...it's probably not vandalism. Cremastra (talk) 21:57, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]


    December 17

    Creating Political Biographies

    Hi! I really need help creating a biography for a new congressional candidate. Can anyone help please?? Zachgreen45 (talk) 00:51, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    First of all, gather materials about or mentioning the individual you want to write about. Make sure that they are significant coverage from reliable and independent sources (this list can help you determine the reliability of certain sources), such as news articles or published books. Avoid using stuff published by the individual or their associates as much as possible. When you feel that you have enough materials, you can create a draft with Article Wizard, remember to follow Manual of Style for Biography of Living Person. Submit it when you finish, then wait for a reviewer to accept and publish it into the mainspace. Noted that since the individual you mentioned is still a candidate, it might not be notable enough to qualify for an article unless sufficient coverage is provided to show that the person meets Notability guideline for people. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 01:59, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Zachgreen45:

    Tool that allows for easy linking (other than AWB)

    I would like to put systematically add redlinks for subjects I know are notable, faster than it would be to manually search mentions of them and individually edit all those articles. Any user scripts help with this? Mach61 (talk) 01:08, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Is mass addition of redlinks a task that is supported by guidance? I get the feeling some people might take issue with that. Folly Mox (talk) 01:45, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Nothing in WP:REDLINKS proscribes doing that, and everything I plan to link are topics that generally should be linked on first mention Mach61 (talk) 02:26, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mach61: I enjoy using Find link to link articles, but it has a check that prevents you from adding redlinks. GoingBatty (talk) 02:25, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    High school inclusion discussion. Is there a systemic bias?

    Please compare Draft:List of high schools in Hatay vs. List of high schools in New Hampshire. I picked these two because the two regions have approximately the same population, around 1.5 million. The first list has zero articles on Wikipedia whereas the second has dozens. I've been trying to write an article for one school on the first list, Draft:İstiklal Makzume Anadolu Lisesi, and it keeps getting declined, the editors asking for more in-depth coverage. Meanwhile, if I try to nominate a problematic US school article for deletion for having almost no references, I immediately get a WP:NEXISTS in response. When I bring this up on AfC help desk, I get the WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS response. Any help would be appreciated. Where is the right place to bring this up? I believe the editors are systemically less willing to use WP:NEXISTS if it is for a place that they are less familiar with. Gorkem80 (talk) 02:28, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't think systemic bias is the issue with regards to your draft being declined , rather that AfC reviewers place the burden of providing sources onto drafters, and don’t accept NEXIST arguments. Note that AfC is optional and that you’re free to move the article unilaterally. Mach61 (talk) 02:37, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    A lot of articles about subjects in United States or other western countries were created in the early years of Wikipedia, when the rules for inclusion were more loose, and many of them were ignored for all these years. In next few days I'll go after some problematic articles like Jesse Remington High School. This kind of unfairness do need more attention. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 02:53, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mach61@TutwakhamoeThanks so much, these responses were very helpful! So for now, I moved the article to the main space, I didn't know I could do that! I worked on the article a lot and I believe it establishes notability and has a good encyclopedic coverage, in spite of the limited available references. I'll wait and see if it will get any objections. Gorkem80 (talk) 03:37, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Gorkem80, what would you say are the reliable, secondary sources that establish notability for the subject? I do not read Turkish, so I can't easily tell which are close to the subject and which are not. Remsense留 08:09, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gorkem80 Note also that things changed in Wikipedia in 2017, as summarised at WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:50, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The TL;DR is that it is not possible for Wikipedia to guarantee having a separate article about every school. The rules were clarified in 2017 to say that notability has to be established through secondary sourcing, as with other articles.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 14:13, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Remsense@Michael D. Turnbull@Ianmacm Thanks for the comments. I believe with the current references the subject's notability is established even without WP:NEXISTS. There is a good mix of national and local newspapers, covering news related to various aspects of the school, including local and national achievements, and statements from notable alumni regarding how their time at the school impacted their careers. The centralized placement exam is a big deal in Turkey and the school's students got coverage in the national newspapers at various points in time. This is not common, can not be dismissed as a "passing mention", since the notable success here is closely related to the domain of the institution that the person is affiliated with. So I don't agree with the second AfC reviewer ToadetteEdit's decision, and they indicated to me that they are doing an AfC review for the first time. I believe any experienced editor who is familiar with Turkey and the Turkish media would agree with me that the current coverage establishes notability in the post-2017 sense. Gorkem80 (talk) 16:11, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Gorkem80, I believe you're right. High schools outside of the US, Canada, and UK don't get the support they deserve. I believe the issue is that most of our editors reside in those countries, and don't give respect to other regions, particularly Asia and Africa. For my own part, I'm not good at finding sources for subjects outside the US, so for the most part I stick to this country. When I had more time and energy to devote to the project, I found that those could easily be defended. It just takes interested editors, especially those with local knowledge of languages and sources. — Jacona (talk) 16:59, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Sanremo

    Why are there several monuments but only 4 images? Before removing something I ask here. JackkBrown (talk) 12:16, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I think it is just because someone changed the caption. The bottom photo is supposed to have several of the things mentioned, as it did in this earlier state. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:43, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Edit review requested

    Please have a look at WP:ANI#Review requested. Thinking back, posting it on ANI was not a wise move, but there is nothing I can do about it now. Thanks. Janhrach (talk) 14:28, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I've filed a false positive report about the bot's report (albeit probably in a wrong format). Tutwakhamoe (talk) 17:02, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    2023 Washington Bridge closure

    How do I prevent the bot from changing the proposed destination at 2023 Washington Bridge closure? --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:32, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    It looks as if it is insisting on using the destination you originally suggested on the talk page. I don't know how to change it - I suggest asking at User Talk:RMCD bot. ColinFine (talk) 19:22, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    How do I put this thing next to other thing

    I want to put {{Motorsport driver results legend}} in line with the results table as seen in Mercedes-Benz CLK GTR#Results. How does one do this? I am not very good with computer. TIA. X750. Spin a yarn? Articles I've screwed over? 19:12, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @X750:  Done in this edit. To do so, I did the following steps:
    1. I clicked on the {{Motorsport driver results legend}} you provided.
    2. In the Tools menu, I clicked "What links here".
    3. Many articles just link to the template, which isn't what you wanted, so I checked the "Hide links" box and clicked the "Go" button to re-search.
    4. I clicked on the first result: 2005 Grand Prix motorcycle racing season
    5. I scrolled down to the "MotoGP standings" section and clicked "edit source"
    6. In a different tab, I went to Mercedes-Benz CLK GTR#Racing results and clicked "edit source"
    7. I compared the sources, and copied the extra code from 2005 Grand Prix motorcycle racing season to Mercedes-Benz CLK GTR
    8. To make the tables line up well, I removed the table title from Mercedes-Benz CLK GTR (which was a duplicate of the section subheader.
    Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:04, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you my friend, GoingBatty. Prosperity be upon your family. X750. Spin a yarn? Articles I've screwed over? 16:52, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Dr BRIJ MOHAN, Dean Emeritus, Louisina Stae University is author of 25 books, one of the most prolific Social Critics. His conspicuous absence in this Wikipedia is unfortunate.

    Dr BRIJ MOHAN, Dean Emeritus, Louisina Stae University is author of 25 books, one of the most prolific Social Critics. His conspicuous absence in this Wikipedia is unfortunate. 2600:8807:606:8C00:840F:A3FF:17DD:6165 (talk) 21:02, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    See WP:PROF. If the individual you mention has been discussed in depth in multiple reliable and independent sources, then he might be a suitable subject of a Wikipedia article. If you wish to write such article by yourself,consider creating a draft with Article Wizard. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 21:13, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    . . . but before embarking on a draft, please read, digest, and follow the recommendations of Help:Your first article. -- Hoary (talk) 23:54, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    For the interested, presumably this man: [6]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    December 18

    How to remove 'stub' notice

    Hello. How can I remove the Stub notice from Ansley, Warwickshire, please? Thanks BJCHK (talk) 01:03, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    If you're referring to the talk page, you can just edit it the talk page and change the "class". ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 01:06, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
     Fixed Talk:Ansley, Warwickshire. GoingBatty (talk) 01:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That article was obviously not a stub. Such articles shuld be upgraded without hesitation by any editor who notices the outdated stub tag. Cullen328 (talk) 04:46, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @BJCHK: When you kindly remove a stub template from an article that no longer needs it (e.g. this edit), please also update the WikiProject templates on the talk page. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 06:20, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    ماهي مصلحتكم من هذا

    نعم 82.151.77.204 (talk) 01:13, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    This is English Wikipedia, please ask your question in English. We're all volunteers here, we don't get any benefits except psychological satisfaction. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 01:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Google translation: "What is your benefit from this?" GoingBatty (talk) 01:50, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    What to do about pages with logos that contrast really badly

    Sorry if the header doesn't really explain it that well, but if you go to the page Natural News, for example, you'll see that the logo is barely visible, as it's white on a light gray background. What can be done about this? I've seen this on other pages as well, so... LOOKSQUARE (👤️·🗨️) talk 01:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @LOOKSQUARE: You could upload a new version of the logo, as I've done for Natural News. GoingBatty (talk) 01:49, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, one with a background? Thanks, I'll try that if I see something similar elsewhere. LOOKSQUARE (👤️·🗨️) talk 11:45, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Access full Wikipedia on Amazon Alexa

    I am visually disabled and used to access full Wikipedia articles on Alexa. Lately I can only access Wikipedia summaries. How can I access full Wikipediais Alexa? 

    Thanks 2601:645:8A00:7D20:D4DD:E4B9:56ED:1BA0 (talk) 02:52, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi there! I don't have an Amazon Alexa device. However, I see that Pigsonthewing started a page called Wikipedia:Amazon Alexa, so maybe they can help. GoingBatty (talk) 04:47, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! I will check it out 2601:645:8A00:7D20:E511:DBA:69E8:9A5E (talk) 04:11, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Not sure what to do.

    I found a draft with only 2 revisions, and i found it to be a complete copy of this site, now, i would csd g12, but im not really sure if i should, what do i do. Begocci (talk) 10:29, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    It wouldn't really matter anyway, because it has zero chance of being accepted into article mainspace in this form.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 10:40, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    thank you. Begocci (talk) 10:42, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Begocc, Ianmacm, as foretold by the redlink above, the draft has been properly G12ed. Current policy forbids copyvio in any namespace, since every namespace is publically visible and technically "published" according to the definition WMF Legal have chosen to understand. Folly Mox (talk) 13:29, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    thanks Begocci (talk) 14:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Edit War

    OP has been indef blocked from editing the article in question. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:41, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

    I've unfortunately found myself embroiled in an edit war on a Wikipedia page. We're in need of arbitration.

    Although the page hasn't been reverted, other authors have effectively reverted my thoughtful contributions. I understand where the other authors are coming from, but believe they haven't grasped a broader perspective on the topic. I find the content, as is, extremely biased.

    I find this a case of discrimination, as I believe my contributions reported comprehensive philosophical belief. My thoughts are grounded in Harvard University and Oxford University Press, but have been repeatedly dismissed as unreliable sources.

    The Wikipedia page is: Social cost of carbon. Problematic authors are @AndyTheGrump and @InformationToKnowledge AidanParkinson (talk) 11:12, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm not sure what help you are seeking, but instead of edit warring, discuss the matter on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 11:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've had to revert the article I'm afraid.
    I don't know what can be done. But the two cited authors are being offensive to me and can't find a space for my different views on a page on which they hold an interest.
    I find the editorial environment discriminatory and hostile. 2A02:C7C:382A:4F00:95AA:47A9:C546:123A (talk) 11:58, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    They've labelled me a "crackpot", a "vandal" and three respected publishers "unreliable": Oxford University Press, Harvard University Press and Fringe Papers 2A02:C7C:382A:4F00:95AA:47A9:C546:123A (talk) 12:00, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    AidanParkinson, it looks to me as if you're dissatisfied with the way the discussion has been going on within Talk:Social cost of carbon and you're looking for a forum where you might find readers more inclined to agree with you. But this isn't the place. (Indeed, "forum shopping", as it's called, is frowned on.) Please read Wikipedia:Dispute resolution, carefully. -- Hoary (talk) 12:31, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    No, this is incorrect. I'm happy for disagreement, a discussion of any disagreement can be happily included on the page. I just need people to allow reasonable plurality in belief. This means including perspectives when no reasonable critique disqualifies it. This is a core ethical consideration which leads me to be very disappointed with the forums behaviour. AidanParkinson (talk) 12:39, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    In fact, my edits specifically include the different perspectives on the topic. The problem is that the other hostile editors do not allow such a perspective to be included. AidanParkinson (talk) 12:40, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    Tables

    inside table cells, how does one make sure numbers are centre aligned? Tried align=center| but doesn't seem to work....the numbers i want to centre align still end up on the left of the cell. Please can you just tell me in simple language what to do. All the help articles in Wikipedia on this are too complicated. Please can you simply type out what i'm supposed to input to make sure whatever number i put in a table cell stays in the centre.

    Cheers ROC7 (talk) 12:18, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Like this, ROC7: | style="text-align:center;" | text -- Hoary (talk) 12:35, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks.

    Please note i'm not creating a table, i just want to add some data into an already existing table.

    So, let's say i want to input the number 8 into a cell of this already existing table

    Is this correct? is this what i type in?
    | style="text-align:center;" | 8
    or is it
    style="text-align:center;" | 8
    Please can you clarify.
    Many thanks ROC7 (talk) 12:52, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @ROC7: Help:Table tells you everything you need to know. In this particular case:
    style="text-align:center;"
    no styling so uses the table default
    centred again
    Bazza (talk) 13:33, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    As i've already said, i find that page confusing. I simply want to add data to an already existing table. For example, if i want to add the number 8 to an existing cell, can you please specifically describe how i should type in the info to make sure that number 8 gets centred. Thanks ROC7 (talk) 13:37, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Look at the source code for the table I inserted above and you'll see how it's done. If you're not able to do manage this, then perhaps you should ask someone else to do it for you. Bazza (talk) 13:42, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @ROC7, I'd try WP:teahouse, which is specifically for inexperienced editors. Sorry I can't help, I'm dead useless with templates, can barely figure them out myself, but what Bazza is saying is how I usually do it: go look at the source code and try to replicate it. If you break something, you can also go to the article's talk page, open a new section, type {{help}}, and explain the problem. Valereee (talk) 14:58, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @ROC7: The above replies and most help pages are for the source editor. You usually use VisualEditor which works differently and has many limitations. I don't think it can align table cells. Please say you use VisualEditor when you ask for editing help. Most experienced editors use the source editor and will often give answers for that only. Help:VisualEditor#Getting started: the VisualEditor toolbar mentions a "Switch editor" button near the end of the section. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:28, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Changing account details (password lost)

    Hello, I asked a question on 2 November and received some help about this. I have an account which has been active since about 2006, which I am currently logged into on some devices. However, I have lost the password and access to the original email account, and as a result can't change either. A user, PrimeHunter, helpfully suggested that I put a Committed identity on my page to verify my identity, which I have done. He suggested that I apply for a change of email address at phabricator, but I cannot log in there without my password. Is there a way to work around this? I would desperately like to be able to retain access to my account, with an active email. 138.251.244.27 (talk) 15:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    On a device where you are not logged in, you can create another account with the email address you want and use that account at Phabricator. Use the security issue form at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/maniphest/task/edit/form/75/ if you reveal information you don't want to be public. See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry#Alternative account notification. It's important that you remain logged in to your old account until it has a working email address or password. Otherwise the chance of getting your request accepted may drop a lot. Logins are sometimes lost for unknown reasons. As soon as you have a new account, I strongly recommend you make a logged in edit from the old account saying the new account is yours and you will use it to request a password is set for the old account. Then link that edit when you make the Phabricator request from the new account. You may be asked to make more edits from the old account if you can. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you again. 94.174.119.108 (talk) 18:17, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Avoiding funding requests since I am a monthly donor

    I have been a monthly donor to Wikimedia for quite some time. Recently, each time I have tried to use Wikipedia either on my desktop or my phone, I have encountered funding requests which I don't know how to suppress (without feeling guilty). I just set up a Wikimedia account to learn how.

    Thanks, Mark Huibregtse Mhuibreg (talk) 15:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Hiya @Mhuibreg, welcome to Wikipedia! You should be able to do this in your preferences
    Preferences → Banners → Empty Fundraising
    should do it :D Justiyaya 15:20, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia:Contents page

    On mobile view of the linked page, by default, the heading for Welcome to Wikipedia’s curated content is collapsed by default and I would like to set it so that it isn’t able to be collapsed. I am hoping to get some suggestions on how I would be able to do that. Thank you. Interstellarity (talk) 16:14, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    "Via Emilia" and "Via Flaminia" pages

    Is there a reason why "Via Emilia" is written in italics while "Via Flaminia" isn't? JackkBrown (talk) 16:22, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    The reason is that Saga City added {{italictitle}} to Via Aemilia in 2011, while Cote d'Azur removed italics from Via Flaminia in 2022. ColinFine (talk) 16:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @ColinFine: which is the right thing? Italics or not? JackkBrown (talk) 16:40, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) @JackkBrown: The editors of each article did what they think is best, and likely did not work with each other to discuss the cross-article consistency you desire. In the Via Aemilia article, there are instances of both "Via Aemilia" (with italics) and "Via Aemilia" (without italics) and "Via Emilia" (alternate spelling without italics). Similarly, in the Via Flaminia article, there are instances of both "Via Flaminia" (with italics) and "Via Flaminia" (without italics). You may wish to ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Italy to see if they have a guideline about the proper italicization. GoingBatty (talk) 16:41, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @JackkBrown: MOS:FOREIGNITALICS, in particular,MOS:BADITALICS, states that a proper name is usually not italicized. But you already know this because you've been directed to those guidelines many times when you've asked similar questions before. Bazza (talk) 16:56, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bazza 7: unfortunately, I have my doubts, because it's strange that on such important pages both italics and non-italics are used (as written by User:GoingBatty), completely at random. JackkBrown (talk) 17:02, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @JackkBrown: You have doubts... about what? There's guidance for you to follow if you wish in the Manual of Style. Many editors have told you that articles are inconsistent because they are written by many people, some of whom choose not to spend time and effort on styling, whilst others do; we are all, including you, at liberty to take the same approach. What's not to comprehend? I don't understand why you keep asking the same questions when people have gone to the effort to provide the same answers in the past. It's tedious. (And, incidentally, the articles you refer to as being of "such importance" aren't.) Bazza (talk) 17:10, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @JackkBrown, please undertake the following exercise: for one of those two articles, click the 'View history' tab, select the 'oldest View' option, note the date when the article was started (Via Emilia in 2004 and Via Flaminia in 2003), and then click through the history to today and count how many different editors have contributed to each article between then and now. Do you really think that all those contributors were paying close attention to maintaining consistent italicisation and other stylistic points?
    THAT is why there are inconsistencies within articles, and between different articles. If you find some that bother you, go ahead and change them, and in the unlikely event of someone reverting you, discuss it with them per WP:BRD: by now you know as much if not more about Wikipedia's italicisation guidelines as any other regular responders here, and you are just as capable as anyone of reading the MoS. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.215.44 (talk) 22:43, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Can also check how many editors at for example [7]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:01, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Infobox for a person

    I've started to work on my first article in 10 years. How do I insert the infobox template in the right hand corner. I'm sure the solution will be embarrassingly simple Buster7 (talk) 17:00, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Buster7: User:Buster7/sandbox-ZedsDead is about a musician so I guess you want {{Infobox musical artist}} and not {{Infobox person}}. See also Wikipedia:Notability (music). I got no Google hits on the name in the opening sentence but discovered it was misspelt. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:17, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Buster7: I suggest you go to Template:Infobox musical artist, scroll down to the "For articles about individuals" section, and copy the infobox code. Then edit your user page and paste it at the top of the page. Populate the parameters that are appropriate for this musician and delete the parameters that you won't use. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:45, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @PrimeHunter and @GoingBatty Thanks for the help. I'm sure to return for more. Buster7 (talk) 00:54, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Cherelle Parker Page Updates

    Good afternoon,

    After making updates to the Cherelle Parker page, I received a notice from Wikipedia that the changes had been undone for copyright reasons. I was hoping to receive more information on what was considered inappropriate. I work for Cherelle Parker and am employed by her transition committee. I have explicit consent from her to make these additions, all of which are backed by well-regarded news sources. Please advise how these changes can be implemented according to Wikipedia's policies.

    As always,

    John Dolan Jf4dolan (talk) 19:54, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    You are strongly advised not to edit articles you have a conflict of interest for. Moreover, since she is your employer, you are required to disclose a paid conflict of interest where others may see it, such as on your user page, which you have not done.
    As for the copyright point: it is possible to license material for use on Wikipedia, especially images, but it is often not preferred regardless to adapt content directly from primary sources, as it can often lack the distance and balance expected for a tertiary source like Wikipedia. If you cannot honestly say your goal is to improve the encyclopedia rather than to promote your employer, we ask you not to edit the encyclopedia
    Also, you've removed significant amount of content supported by other sources, I would stress extreme caution with this: you are only allowed to edit this article if you can maintain a truly neutral point of view in your edits. Cheers. Remsense留 20:02, 18 December 2023 (UTC
    @Jf4dolan: we do not need and do not want her "explicit consent" for any edits to this article. She does not own the article: it belongs to Wikipedia. See WP:OWN. -Arch dude (talk) 20:23, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jf4dolan: Any material that is "published" (e.g., by being placed by you on your web site) is copyrighted by default action of copyright law. Wikipedia cannot allow you (or anyone else) to copy that material into Wikipedia unless there is an explicit written copyright license of the material, because that violates the law. As a matter of Wikipedia policy, we accept material only if the license is as least as permissive as CC-BY-SA. If you add new material here or license old material, you have no control over who can copy the material or what they can do with it, except as described in the license. -Arch dude (talk) 20:32, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for the insight. Much appreciated. Jf4dolan (talk) 21:05, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Marlborough College

    I added a file - in the History section (old photo) but it is way too big. Please help. Thanks 175.38.42.62 (talk) 23:37, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

     Fixed. Reduced size to 250px. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 23:42, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I removed the explicit size, per MOS:IMAGESIZE. Bazza (talk) 23:46, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    December 19

    Script warning: One or more cite web templates have maintenance messages

    Getting the warning "Script warning: One or more cite web templates have maintenance messages; messages may be hidden (help)" when editing and saving Hillel Day School. What does this warning mean and how to deal with it? Yamfri /ˈjæm.friː/ (talk) 05:25, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Yamfri: Hi there! The (help) in the warning is a link that takes you to Help:CS1 errors#Controlling error message display, which explains what you can do to see the messages. In this article, references #2 & 54 have a message stating "{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link)", because they both contain |url-status=unfit. See Category:CS1 maint: unfit URL for more info. GoingBatty (talk) 06:11, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for help! I've changed those misapplied unfits to deads. Yamfri /ˈjæm.friː/ (talk) 12:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Citing IUCN References

    Greetings, fellow editors.

    I am a fairly new Wikipedia editor and my goal is to help make knowledge on Australian parrots and Proteaceae species (especially the threatened species) more accessible to the general public, as many people rely on this site for information.

    I have been making edits to some articles and am currently in the process of adding the IUCN Red List statuses to multiple Proteaceae genera, including Grevillea and Hakea, as well as adding additional information such as on distribution and threats from reliable sources to these articles.

    However, after reading other, highly rated Wikipedia articles for advice on how to write, as well as reading the recommended citations for IUCN Red List assessment pages, I have noticed I am not citing my IUCN references correctly. It appears I have missed a lot of key information, such as the DOI number and assessors.

    Would anyone please help advise me on how to correctly cite IUCN references for Red List Assessments on Wikipedia species pages?

    I have revised one of my IUCN references for my edits to Hakea pulvinifera to fit what I have seen in other articles, but I'm still not sure if it is correct. The revised reference looks like this:

    Barker, W.; Keith, D. (2020). "Hakea pulvinifera". The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: e.T113088579A113309795. doi:10.2305/IUCN.UK.2020-3.RLTS.T113088579A113309795.en. Retrieved 15 December 2023.

    Whereas the old reference looks like this, and was written in website format instead of the recommended journal format

    "Hakea pulvinifera". The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2020. Retrieved 14 December 2023.

    I have also asked this question in the Template Talk:Cite IUCN page but decided to ask here as well in case there are people here who can help as well.

    Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

    Thank you. Lord.of.the.Proterozoic (talk) 09:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Lord.of.the.Proterozoic: You might be interested in {{Make cite IUCN}}, which should format the reference automatically using a bot. Tollens (talk) 10:38, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Lord.of.the.Proterozoic, I see your question has been answered at Template talk:Cite IUCN § Citing IUCN References, but also that you've been editing using the Visual Editor. I just tried to add a {{cite iucn}} template in that editing interface, and tried to alter an existing citation to use that template, and could do neither. It's possible the desktop mode of the Visual Editor supports using specialised citation templates, but it's likely easier (and possibly necessary) to use the source editor for this. You can always drop into the source editor to create the proper citations, and switch back to the Visual Editor for general editing. Swapping editing interfaces more than once will cause the editor to edit the full page rather than a single section, just a heads up. Folly Mox (talk) 13:21, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I suspect that editors using that abomination that is ve can't create a {{make cite iucn}} template is because that template does not have any WP:TemplateData (another abomination). I don't use ve so I am not qualified to add the necessary TemplateData but no doubt, there are others out there who are.
    —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:19, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Sunflower business in our society

    Sunco Oil manufactures three types of gasoline (gas 1,gas2, and gas3). The sales price per barrel of gasoline and the purchase price per barrel of crude oil are given in Table 10. Sunco can purchase up to 5000 barels of each type of crude oil daily and stop stealing our certificates. 105.255.154.222 (talk) 09:49, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Please do your own homework.
    Welcome to the Wikipedia Help desk. Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misevaluation, but it is our policy here not to do others' homework, but merely to aid them in doing it themselves. Letting someone else do your homework does not help you learn how to solve such problems.
    Please attempt to solve the problem yourself first. You can search Wikipedia or search the Web.
    If you need help with a specific part of your homework, the Reference desk can help you grasp the concept. Do not ask knowledge questions here, just those about using Wikipedia. Tollens (talk) 10:34, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Requests for Donation

    As I already donate monthly I am irritated by the recents pop up requests for further donations! It makes me want to cancel my regular payments. My donations are very small but I am on a low income. 82.31.70.226 (talk) 10:19, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    You can prevent the banners from appearing by creating an account and then disabling the banners in your preferences, if you'd like. Tollens (talk) 10:31, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Welcome and thank you for your question about donations! To hide the fundraising banners, you can create an account and uncheck Preferences → Banners → Empty Fundraising. The Wikimedia Foundation does not track the identity of IP addresses, so it doesn't know your age, income level or whether you donated in the past.
    None of the Wikipedia volunteer editors here who add and improve content in articles receive any financial benefit. We all simply contribute our time because we care about building a great encyclopedia for you and innumerable others around the world to use.
    If you cannot afford it, no one wants you to donate. Wikipedia is not at risk of shutting down, and the Wikimedia Foundation, which hosts the Wikipedia platform and is asking for these donations, is richer than ever.
    You are welcome to communicate directly with the donor-relations team by emailing donate@wikimedia.org. Thank you! 57.140.16.1 (talk) 13:59, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    How to address an error on Wikipedia?

    How can you address an error on Wikipedia?

    There is an error in Wikipedia on the following page:

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

    The error states that "Silver Lake" in Whatcom County flows into the Snohomish River Watershed Basin.

    This Lake actually flows into the Nisqually River Basin near the northern border of Washington State.

    Thank you,

    Kevin Conley Krconley2000 (talk) 14:49, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Krconley2000: How do you know this actual fact? Which reliable source did you read it in? Bazza (talk) 14:52, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You could edit List of lakes of Washington yourself, as it is not protected in any way, but it would need to pass WP:V. Alternatively, you could start a discussion at Talk:List of lakes of Washington.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 14:56, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Noting that the the source presently in the article fails verification, and I was able to source a Silver Lake (county not specified) draining into the Nisqually River Basin trivially, e.g. at here (page 15). Folly Mox (talk) 15:16, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This seems intuitive, since just by looking at the articles Whatcom County, Washington and Snohomish River, the geographical overlap is zero. Folly Mox (talk) 15:23, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I checked the map. It's not the Snohomish, and it's not the Nisaqually. It's the Skagit. I changed it. -Arch dude (talk) 15:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Large-scale copyedit needed in category

    I'm a fairly experienced editor, and I dabble in copyediting from time to time, but I spend most of my time on RCP. Recently, I've noticed that the vast majority of articles within the category Named passenger trains of India (approx. 500 pages) have multiple issues. It ranges from one or two grammar mistakes to outright incomprehensibility. Some of them also have few or no sources. I've run through the entire category with AWB, but that's only scratching the surface.

    My question is as follows: Where would be the best place to post a request for this type of large-scale issue? Would it be on WikiProject India? WikiProject Trains? GCE? Any advice is appreciated. Catalyzzt (talk) 16:29, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I'd recommend bringing to venues other than the GOCE first to make sure those issues are addressed before attempting a copyedit. Copyedits are ideally the finishing touches to an article. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:15, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Catalyzzt, Wikipedia is a volunteer project and editors work on tasks that interest them, so the question is who wants to work on articles about named passenger trains of India. You could ask at WP Trains and post a link at WP India, or vice versa. GCE accepts two requests at a time per editor, so they are unlikely to deal with 500 pages. I fear you would find other categories with similar problems if you looked for them. TSventon (talk) 20:16, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) @Catalyzzt: For those articles that you do not want to fix, there are several options, such as:
    • You could add the appropriate maintenance template(s) to each article, and then those visiting each article (or looking at reports such as the WikiProject Cleanup Listings) would see which articles have particular issues.
    • You could use the appropriate parameters of the WikiProject templates (e.g. {{WikiProject India}} supports |attention= if the article requires immediate attention (this should be used sparingly), {{WikiProject Trains}} supports |unref= and |refimprove=, they both have parameters to indicate if an infobox or image or map is needed)
    • You could create a post on the article talk page detailing what needs to be done (if the maintenance templates aren't detailed enough)
    • Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests per the suggestion above
    Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:24, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    An article hasn't been updated in a long time and I feel deletion is warranted. How to proceed?

    A page in my watchlist, Comparison of portable media players, popped up today in my feed.

    Upon further examination and based on the fact that the page is out of date and (I think) beyond repair, I feel a deletion of the page is warranted.

    I have Twinkle installed.

    This is the first time I've done a deletion request.

    Where do I go from here?

    Thanks. Urbanracer34 (talk) 17:29, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Urbanracer34: Yuck. In theory, "once notable, always notable" (WP:NTEMP), so since it has lots of reliable sources it should not be deleted. I suppose it may be useful to historians of technology. I reccommend you rename the page to Comparison of portable media players in 2010. -Arch dude (talk) 18:58, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That sounds bad to me. Many articles aren't updated for years and then an interested editor comes by. See Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Out of date. "Comparison of portable media players in 2010" would discourage updating and give a false impression that it's part of a series. And Comparison of portable media players#General does have entries with release in 2011, 2012 and 2013. It's tagged with needs to be updated (November 2010). I would just leave it as is. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:21, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I will leave it alone per what was said. Thanks! Urbanracer34 (talk) 19:46, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    trl/own or used right thumb nail

    Bold 64.60.211.2 (talk) 18:13, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm sorry, 64.60, but I haven't the slightest idea what you are asking. Please clarify. ColinFine (talk) 19:27, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    License inquiry

    Can I upload an image shared under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike? This is the image (I want to upload it for the Black Sea page, it's beautiful) https://www.worldhistory.org/image/18252/the-periplus-of-the-euxine-sea-c-130-ce/. ♦ WikiUser70176 ♦(My talk page) 18:37, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @WikiUser70176: Images used by Wikipedia must be licensed in a way that allows reuse for any purpose, including commercial use. To use the image, it would need to be relicensed, or it would need to meet all of the WP:NFCC for non-free use. RudolfRed (talk) 18:40, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! ♦ WikiUser70176 ♦(My talk page) 18:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Trying to find a Wikipedia page that no longer comes up in search

    I am trying to find a wikipedia page that was created years ago. However, when you search it, it no longer appears. It is for Jon Cutler (Wrestler) or John Cutler (Wrestler) and I am not sure who originally created it.

    Again, it showed up for years in searches but now I can no longer find it. Would appreciate finding it or seeing how to have the wikipedia page active again. Joncutler (talk) 18:41, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Cutler (wrestler). AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    John Cutler (wrestler) was deleted 5 years ago and Jon Cutler (wrestler) was deleted after an AFD here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Cutler (wrestler) Theroadislong (talk) 18:47, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    The original policy and the Korean version are different

    The original policy and the Korean version are different. Is this officially allowed? Can the Korean version ignore the original version of the policy? Wonjin50 (talk) 19:34, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Wonjin50: Please link any pages you refer to. This is your only edit at the English Wikipedia and we have millions of articles and other pages. If it's about a Wikipedia policy like Wikipedia:No original research then each Wikipedia language makes their own policies. We have no influence over the Korean Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:41, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Wonjin50 Please clarify which Policy you mean.
    Generally, though, each language version of Wikipedia is a separate project with its own set of rules, except for a few Policies that apply everywhere, including foundation:Terms of Use and foundation:Universal Code of Conduct. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 19:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Commons category page title

    This is a minor error, but I've been stumped trying to resolve the template preview error for {{Commons category|Alum}} on Alum. It doesn't like anything under Template:Commons category#Resolving discrepancies applies to this as far as I can tell, or at least with the different permutations of category I tried. The Alum category has plenty of photos; I can't make it more specific since it's a generalist term for a type of chemical. Is there anything else I should do? Noticing that it specifically leaves the category "category link is defined as the pagename", which is a little confusing. What needs to be fixed? Reconrabbit (talk|edits) 22:58, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Reconrabbit: I don't think anything needs fixing here at Wikipedia. There is no preview error, only a preview warning which is deliberately omitted in the rendered page served to readers. Category:Commons category link is defined as the pagename is a hidden category which is also unseen by readers unless they have an account and have enabled "Show hidden categories" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. {{Commons category-inline}} gets commons:Category:Alum compounds from Category:Alum compounds (Q6181563). Maybe that should be changed to commons:Category:Alum but I don't know the chemistry. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:25, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Conclusions from two sources

    I'm writing an article in which I say something along the lines of "[x] became president of [y] in 2010". I don't have any source directly stating this. I do, on the other hand, have two different sources dated to 2010, one from October stating that [x] is the current titleholder and one from July stating that a different individual is the current titleholder. My question is whether I can use those two combined sources to affirmatively state in the article that "[x] (at some point) became president of [y] in 2010". Krisgabwoosh (talk) 00:20, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Clearing Up Generative/SEO Site References

    I recently stumbled across a group of websites that seem to be full of AI Generated articles, possible for some sort of SEO hijacking. One of these sites seems to have lots of use on Wikipedia as references. What should I be doing to report this so that people with more experience than I do can start looking into this? Cmdrraimus (talk) 00:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&oldid=1190815495"