Wikipedia:Help desk

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

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

Ask a question

Can't edit this page? ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

Assistance for new editors unable to post here

The help desk is currently semi-protected, meaning the help desk pages cannot be edited by unregistered users (IP addresses), as well as accounts that are not confirmed or autoconfirmed (accounts that are at least 4 days old with at least 10 edits on English Wikipedia).

However, you can still get direct assistance on your talk page. ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

There is currently 0 user(s) transcluding the {{Help me}} template looking for assistance from volunteers.

Why is "perplexity.ai /search" on wikipedias Black List?

I mean the URL.

and on which black list? -- Steue (talk) 21:20, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

m:Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2023-05#perplexity.ai/search. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:24, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, * Pppery *

I tried some "Advanced search"ing for this black list. How would I have found this black list entry myself?

Billinghurst put "perplexity.ai\search" on this black list at 22 May 2023, this was almost two years ago. Meanwhile perplexity.ai is doing well (by my experiences).

Isn't it time to review this? -- Steue (talk) 22:22, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm confused. ;) - Roxy the dog 22:24, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

@Steue: MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist and meta:Talk:Spam blacklist have archive search boxes. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:58, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

FYI Billinghurst has been inactive since August, so you probably won't hear back from them. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:25, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Roxy the dog, if you want to be enlightened, it might help, if you explained *what* you don't understand.

Thank you * Pppery *, but couldn't *any* admin check this case and remove the URL from the black list?
Steue (talk) 03:02, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

It's on the global blacklist, so it would have to be a Meta admin to remove it, but a local admin could add entries to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist to override the rule. I might be willing to do that, but you'd have to explain to me why that specific URL should be linked to - right now I'm not seeing a clear reason. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:32, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Spam blacklist rules (on either the local or the global blacklist) are not removed just because they're old and things may have changed. They're removed (or whitelist entries are added) only if a clear reason is provided why the site should be linked to. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:33, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

You should note that the URL is a link to a search result. We do not consider a search result a reliable source. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:11, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

@* Pppery * and Orange Mike

I'm just a user of perplexity.ai, I have no connections to perplexity whatsoever, and my experinces (in the last few days) are only positive. I asked it technical problems re. my computer, and some language questions, and the answers were spot-on.

But yes, it did do some mistakes, which I recognized, but when I asked whether this is correct or I pointed them out and explained them, along with facts based on its references, it did find the rules and committed the mistake and gave a correct answer. In one case I checked all 9 references, and they all existed and contained what perplexity had said it contains.

So, Perplexity is usefull in finding, summarizing and delivering references (much better than standard (i.e. non-ai) google is), which then can be checked by humans i.e. wp-editors. And checking the original references is, what I would expect editors to do, before using what any ai has delivered for an article.

* Pppery *, actually I don't understand the reasons to put perplexity.ai on the list. I didn't come across the exact reasons why perplexity\.ai.search was blacklisted.

And actually it's not "perplexity.ai" which is on the black list but "perplexity\.ai/search/"; "perplexity.ai" is mentioned in its article.

I only wanted to use perplexity's answer for a disk, so that other editors could check these answers, if they wanted to, which is standard in wp and should be possible, no matter where the info is coming from.

I could copy the answers or part of them or summarize them, and state that they are from "perplexity.ai", with no problem from wp's filter. Only if I want to name the *exact* link (complete URL) to a specific question and answer of perplexity, does the black list block. For a disk I can just insert a space into the url or use a backslash instead of a slash, which already has been done by other editors, so that the url does not trigger the filter.

* Pppery *, if you would take the time and trouble to follow the first link (in this topic) (to the archive) you will probably understand the reasons better then I. And there 'Billinghurst' has written, that we should wait and see how things develope. My hope was, that an admin would check how things are today.

How can we find out if/whether things are better today than 2 years ago? I see only one way: un-block perplexity'ai/search and see what happens.

I think, the services which we, as editors, can get from perplexity (in terms of finding references) are worth a try.

Steue (talk) 17:42, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

We don't do "suck it and see" with links that were blacklisted, as they're blacklisted for good reason. You would need to provide a compelling case as to why we should even link to it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:44, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Notability#RfC_on_change_of_name

Discussion if the name WP:NOTABILITY should change to something else. For the interested. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:25, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Courtesy link to the discussion. Musiconeologist • talk • contribs 15:10, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Edit count disparity between Wiki and X-tools?

On my contributions page it shows that as of now I've made 38,973 edits, but according to X-Tools it's 38,683 (live) and 353 (deleted) for a total of 39,036.

Why the 63 difference? It's not much in the grand scheme of things - 0.16%, but it's still a difference. Is there some kind of edit or action (revdel?) that doesn't count on Wiki totals, but is still visible to X-Tools? Chaheel Riens (talk) 06:52, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

@Chaheel Riens: Wikipedia:Edit count#What is an edit count? lists some of the reasons for the discrepancies. You've made about 40 page moves, which would account for most of the difference. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:10, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

John of Reading - thanks! Chaheel Riens (talk) 08:17, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

JuicyFields scam

Shouldn't we have an article about the JuicyFields scam?

People with close ties to the Russian government stole more than 645 million euros from more than 186.000 people and there is no article about that? Polygnotus (talk) 14:18, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

It looks like it passes GNG and has sustained coverage. I would say that it would be okay to make. ✶Quxyz✶ 18:39, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

It crys (or shouts?) for one. -- Steue (talk) 17:50, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

@Steue, @Polygnotus, I have made a draft here. ✶Quxyz✶ 18:09, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Checking journals for reliability or predation

Is there any efficient way for me to check the reliability of a journal like there being a list (on- or off-wiki) like RSP? Are there any other general tricks to use? ✶Quxyz✶ 14:29, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

First, you should look at its publisher I think. Ruslik_Zero 18:37, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Are you asking as a Wikipedia author ("I found a ref, is it a good one to add?") or a reader/editor ("I'm looking at this article, I'd like to see the suspicious refs flagged.")? DMacks (talk) 21:30, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

First one, I am having general issues backing up claims and writing articles because I don't know if a given journal is reliable or not. My current strategy is googling it and seeing if some Redditor wrote an essay on the journal's reliability. ✶Quxyz✶ 21:40, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:CITEWATCH is one starting-point for potentially problematic journals. It's not especially easy to read. DMacks (talk) 22:37, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. This is something I've wondered about too. Meters (talk) 22:58, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

How do you archive specific comments

I know how to auto-archive but how do you archive specific things? OrangeLolipopSnail (talk) 18:04, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

OrangeLolipopSnail, are you looking for Wikipedia:One click archiving? You would need to install a script, I haven't tried it myself. TSventon (talk) 19:36, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Like if I want to archive a specific comment or something like that how would I do it? OrangeLolipopSnail (talk) 21:10, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

I think that normally whole talk page sections are archived as the section headers make discussions easier to find. TSventon (talk) 21:18, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Ok how would I archive a specific section OrangeLolipopSnail (talk) 00:09, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

I think the first question is why your automatic archiving hasn't started yet. As far as I can see it should have. TSventon (talk) 01:14, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

On what? My user page? OrangeLolipopSnail (talk) 09:21, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I am talking about your user page. TSventon (talk) 12:26, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Ok I don’t know why either maybe it’s a bug or something else OrangeLolipopSnail (talk) 13:28, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

One thing that was preventing automatic archiving was a mistake in one of the configuration details. I fixed it. Let's see if archiving happens over the next day or two. DMacks (talk) 13:56, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Tysm OrangeLolipopSnail (talk) 17:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Thomas Davis (priest)

I added a quote to citation number 1 but it is all wrong. Please fix. Thank you Srbernadette (talk) 01:18, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

I see a red warning message "horizontal tab character in |quote= at position 36". Maybe you cut'n'pasted that quote from some other site or app that uses 'tab' rather than simply spaces to do alignment? I adjusted it to use just a single regular space character at each location and the message went away. DMacks (talk) 02:55, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

File music not working properly

I am working on the Vietnamese's DR. Congo page and the national anthem Debout Congolais and when adding the music file Democratic Republic of the Congo's national anthem.ogg, it shows an error, although other language pages like English and French works just fine. Can anyone help me? thanks. (this also appear on many other pages i'm working on) KolnSilver (talk) 02:26, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

@KolnSilver: the file File:Democratic Republic of the Congo's national anthem.ogg is not on Wikimedia Commons (see English Wikipedia file page for reasons). So to use it on viwiki you would need to upload it locally. I am not sure of the viwiki policies about this. Commander Keane (talk) 03:05, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! May I upload a different version of the national anthem instead (if allowed)? Or I just have to reupload the original files? KolnSilver (talk) 07:47, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

@KolnSilver: I am not 100% sure about the DR Congo copyright laws. I don't think you can upload any version of the anthem to Wikimedia Commons as the tune is copyrighted. You can upload at vi:Special:Upload if vi:Wikipedia:Quy định sử dụng hình ảnh says it is ok. My guess is that you can upload the original file at Vietnamese Wikipedia. Commander Keane (talk) 09:17, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! KolnSilver (talk) 13:19, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

For Democratic Republic of the Congo, copyright of a non-photographic work with a known author is 50 years after their death. Per Democratic Republic of the Congo, the song dates to 1960 and was written by Joseph Lutumba and Simon-Pierre Boka di Mpasi Londi. None of the wikimedia sites have an indication whether Lutumba is still alive; frwiki says Londi died in 2006. That means the earliest the lyrics become free of copyright restriction (and therefore uploadable to commons) is 2057. DMacks (talk) 19:25, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

gosh ok... Thanks! KolnSilver (🗣🔥 | 📒) 02:46, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

You're welome! For the record, I didn't know any of those details, just a few efficient tools to find them and some lucky breaks along the way. DMacks (talk) 03:17, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Weasel

Hello. I'm doing some cleanup at The Tempest and in this edit summary a bot refers to "Category:Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from March 2025". My question is, how do I find these weasel words in the article so that I can fix them? Am I missing something obvious in the edit itself? AndyJones (talk) 09:16, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

@AndyJones: (Short answer) This category is added by the {{Who?}} template, among others, and is placed after the text "Some critics" in the article. (Long answer) To find this answer, I visited Special:ExpandTemplates, typed {{:The Tempest}} into the "Input" box and The Tempest into the "Title" box, then clicked "OK". That displays the article wikitext with all the templates expanded, so that I could search for the category name and note where it occurred. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:25, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Got it, thank you. AndyJones (talk) 11:08, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

@AndyJones: I made a script to do it all with a click under Tools: User:PrimeHunter/ExpandTemplates.js. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:21, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

And as for the mention of the category in the edit summary, it simply means that someone prompted the bot to run on all articles in that category; the bot does not do anything with weasel words in particular. Janhrach (talk) 17:54, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Subject/verb agreement question

Hello! I am currently working on the article for the Young Lords. One thing that's proving somewhat challenging is subject/verb agreement. I thiiiiink that because the Young Lords is the name of an organization, I should be using singular verbs? But this usually feels wrong. "The Young Lords was first established..." feels far less intuitive than "The Young Lords were first established...". Precedent from other similar articles seems to favor "were" for organizations with named like the Young Lords (ex. "The Bloods are a primarily African American street gang..."). What do folks think, though? Spookyaki (talk) 21:39, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Spookyaki, this should be covered by the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. MOS:PLURALS says that in US English singular verbs are usually used for organisations. TSventon (talk) 21:53, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

I recognize that, but that doesn't really conform to the way it's commonly used in this particular case. Of the academic sources I've seen, only one uses singular verbs exclusively. Six (all published in the United States) use plural verbs exclusively, and one uses both. Spookyaki (talk) 22:18, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Presumably that's because the name of the group is syntactically plural. So in this case, the rule that organizations take a singular verb conflicts with the rule that plural nouns take a plural verb. Thus, in US English, "The Velvet Underground were a rock band ..." is less likely than "The Doors were a rock band ..." because, while both are groups, the name of the former is syntactically singular and that of the latter is syntactically plural. In the first case, both rules argue for a singular verb, while in the second case, one rule argues for plural and one rule argues for singular. Personally, I would use a singular verb for any group regardless of its name; thus "The Young Lords was ...", but I wouldn't strongly object to using "were". CodeTalker (talk) 23:10, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Farrer Hall (Monash University)

Refs numbers 1 and 6 are the same - can you please double them up and leave the full quote in? Thank you Srbernadette (talk) 00:06, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Srbernadette, over the years, you have made the same request several times. Wikipedia editors have dutifully done this for you. Have you then never examined what they have done, in order that you might later perform the same simple series of edits yourself? -- Hoary (talk) 03:51, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Use of deprecated (unreliable) source Tag on new article.

I recently created a new article; (Timeline of Yoruba history), however, it was bot-tagged with a 'deprecated (unreliable) source' restriction upon creation. I have looked through all the sources and cross-checked with the currently deprecated sources list here on Wikipedia, but unfortunately haven't been able to identify the culprit reference responsible for the tag. How do I solve this issue and get the article into better standing without having to re-edit/reference from scratch? Oramfe (talk) 00:31, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

I searched the article for "deprecated" and "unreliable" and I don't see either term mentioned anywhere in the article. Could you provide more detail as to where you're seeing this, or the precise name of the tag as it appears within the article? DonIago (talk) 01:12, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

DonIago see the tags on the first edit in the article's revision history. TSventon (talk) 01:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! DonIago (talk) 01:19, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for this! Now do I simply edit out the responsible reference or is there any other way to submit the article for a review process to get the tag removed (I created the article directly, not from a draft), because it seems to have precluded the article from search engine indexing parameters. Oramfe (talk) 01:39, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

I don't think you can remove the tag, I may be wrong. Hopefully you can fix the Scribd reference as suggested at the perennial sources list. The article won't be indexed by search engines until it is approved by Wikipedia:New pages patrol or 90 days if sooner. NPP is heavily backlogged, but is due for a backlog drive in May. TSventon (talk) 01:58, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks once again. Oramfe (talk) 02:07, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Oramfe, hopefully someone has a general answer to this question, but I had a look at the references and I think that scribd may be the culprit. TSventon (talk) 01:14, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

(Almost certainly) Confirmed. Scribd is listed at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. DonIago (talk) 01:20, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Hopefully there is a better answer than checking each of a hundred references against the list at WP:RS/P. Or checking the list and hoping you recognise one of them, which is what I did. TSventon (talk) 01:26, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, highly appreciated. I know simply editing out sribd will not get the tag out (back-end) How do I remove it? Oramfe (talk) 01:57, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. Just saying there's a concern without making it clear what the specific concern is isn't especially helpful. As far as removing the tag, I don't know whether the presence or absence of it makes any real difference as long as the underlying issue has been addressed, but tags aren't something I'm highly familiar with. DonIago (talk) 02:30, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

@Oramfe: An edit filter hit applies to the edit and not the article. The hit means the edit at the time matched a filter at the time and that will continue to be true no matter what later happens to the article or fitler. The tag cannot be removed. It was actually worldstatesmen.org which caused it but it's hard to work out. I clicked "view filter log" at the top of the page history to see it was tagged by Special:AbuseFilter/869. It has a long list of domains which would be very tedious to test one at a time. I don't know a shortcut for ordinary users. My account has access to Special:AbuseFilter/test which helps. I copied the filter code and entered "Timeline of Yoruba history" at "Changes made to page". Then I tried removing different lines of domains and click "Test" to see when the filter was triggered. It was the ORG line. Then I removed different domains from that line and found it was worldstatesmen. An edit filter can unfortunately not report which part of the filter caused the hit. We could make numerous different edit filters for different domains but that's impractical, and inefficient on the servers. Some edit filters prevent saving the edit. This one doesn't and you are not expected to track down and fix the cause. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:34, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

@Oramfe I have the very useful script User:Headbomb/unreliable installed and can instantly see in the current version of the article that it still uses a deprecated source, namely this one to www.worldstatesmen.org, currently #83 in the citations. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:45, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Farrer Hall (Monash University)

Please put in the info box that it is “College Head” not just head and that Mr Mitchell is the head in 2025. Thanks Srbernadette (talk) 03:33, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Srbernadette, precisely which obstacle arises when you attempt to effect this very simple change yourself? -- Hoary (talk) 03:48, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

In the info box, I tried to replace the word "Head" with "College Head" and I failed. Perhaps it is impossible to do with this "template"? Please fix if you can, you are more capable. Thank you Srbernadette (talk) 04:44, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Srbernadette, the template is Template:Infobox residential college. It lacks the field "College head". So here's what you have to do -- while editing Farrer Hall (Monash University) (don't attempt to edit the template). First, in the infobox, leave | head = Steve Mitchell just as it is. Secondly, add the line | head_label = College head. In principle, you can add the new line anywhere, but putting it immediately before or immediately after the line naming the head would be a sensible choice. -- Hoary (talk) 05:28, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

I tried to do what you advised, but you can see that now the whole "head" line has vanished. I tried so hard. IF YOU CAN PUT THE HEAD BACK IN PLEASE STATE THAT Steve Wilson was the College Head in 2015 - NOT 2025. I cannot work out who the current head is - so state that Steve Wilson Was the head in 2015. Also college colours are GREEN and BLACK. Please add this in. Srbernadette (talk) 06:01, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

This is what an IP did. It's most definitely not what I prescribed. But perhaps no matter, because: While I generally pay little attention to infoboxes and so may well not be up to date on the relevant guidelines, I'm surprised that anyone would want to use one in order to specify the college head as of a decade previously. If the identity of the head in 2015 is non-trivial information and can be referenced, why not add it to the body text instead? -- Hoary (talk) 06:37, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Good point Hoary

I agree - can you add the college colours are green and black. Than you so much. Srbernadette (talk) 06:48, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

This has already been done, Srbernadette. -- Hoary (talk) 07:20, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

How can I invite editors to help expand an incomplete article?

Hello and thank you in advance for your help.

I’ve recently started Draft:False humility on the English Wikipedia. However, due to limitations in my English skills and access to reliable sources in this language, I am unable to fully expand and improve it.

I was hoping to invite other editors to help develop and complete the article, but I couldn't find any currently accepted template or tag like {{Expand}} or similar that would signal this need to the community.

Could someone please guide me: 1. Is there a proper way to invite collaboration on a specific article? 2. Is it acceptable to leave a note on the article’s Talk page asking for help? 3. Is there any recommended template or place to post such a request (e.g. relevant WikiProjects)?

Your guidance would be greatly appreciated. Arbabi second (talk) 15:24, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

@اربابی دوم I think that the most appropriate place to seek collaboration for this draft is at WT:WikiProject Psychology, which is active and where you can place a link to the draft. You could also add that Project's template onto the talkpage of your draft. That is less likely to attract collaborators but may help when you submit the draft for review, assuming you intend to do that. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:37, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Thank you for your helpful guidance.😊 Arbabi second (talk) 16:07, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

COI editing

I am the subject of the wikipedia article Djan Khoe. The article is asking for improvements and I believe to have material to do just that. To avoid COI, I would appreciate to have someone to do the editing for me. The edits will be minor, adding a citation, a link and simple text. Khoe0005 (talk) 20:03, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

The article Giok Djan Khoe survived a deletion discussion a few days ago, but it needs a lot of work. Ideally a biography should contain some background detail about a person and not simply be a list of their work. If you would like to help, please make an edit request at Talk:Giok Djan Khoe.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 20:32, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Khoe0005. Thank you for being open about your COI. I agree with what Ianmacm said, but I would add that everything in the article should be verifiable from a reliable published source - and, in most cases, from a source wholly unconnected with your or your associates. If you request something to be added without a source, the request is likely to be refused. ColinFine (talk) 08:59, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Farrer Hall (Monash University)

In the info box - which I cannot access on this device - the words for college colours - the word "black" should have a capital letter - B. Please fix and I'm sorry I cannot do this myself. Thank you again Srbernadette (talk) 01:57, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

@Srbernadette: Please go to "edit source" and edit the |colours= parameter in {{Infobox residential college}} as you desire, though I fail to see why the colours should be in title case. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:33, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Srbernadette, if you cannot "access" (edit?) the infobox of Farrer Hall (Monash University) on your device, are this edit and this one not by you? -- Hoary (talk) 07:59, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

International taxation category in French

I am trying to link the French fr:Catégorie:Fiscalité internationale on wikipedia to the Category:International taxation, which has already 16 languages...but every time I try to link these categories I have an error message...How should I proceed? Thank you Adumoul (talk) 15:17, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Adumoul you can't link the categories as they have different Wikidata items. You need to merge the Wikidata items as explained at d:Help:Merge. TSventon (talk) 15:33, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

@Adumoul You wanted to do it. I let's you do it for this reason.

If you have again a problem to do it. Say it there. Anatole-berthe (talk) 06:59, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Edits reverted

Yesterday, a large number of my edits were reverted by User:FlightTime. He said that they were unsourced but all of them were sourced. I asked why, but my post on his talk page was also reverted and he told me I may be blocked from editing. I have waited 23 hours, but received no additional explanation, so I would like someone to restore my edits. Thanks. Player001eliminated (talk) 22:57, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Player001eliminated, in this pair of edits (to take one of the latest examples), you appear to have replaced five paragraphs, of which the first was explicitly sourced to the 2010 census (and the other four not explicitly sourced), with four paragraphs, of which the last was explicitly sourced to the 2020 census (and the other three not explicitly sourced). FlightTime thereupon reverted these edits, with the comment "How can you update a value without updating the year/current source?" Have I summarized this accurately? -- Hoary (talk) 23:37, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

@Hoary I suppose someone could see it that way. All of the content is sourced to the two sources I added at the end. Would it be better to include the sources somewhere else? Player001eliminated (talk) 23:39, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

If you're providing two sources, it's probably because not everything that's stated in the one is also stated in the other. Therefore the reader won't immediately know which of the two to look into in order to confirm this or that assertion. And so it's better to reference each paragraph: tedious work, but thanks to named references not intolerably so. -- Hoary (talk) 23:48, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

@Hoary Should I put them like this: Special:PermanentLink/1284665793? If so, I can do that easily. However, I would prefer someone to restore my edits before I do this so I don't get blocked. Player001eliminated (talk) 00:12, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Player001eliminated, your version at Special:PermanentLink/1284665793 seems good to me. (I'm assuming here that it accurately represents the sources that it references.) But in its FlightTime-approved state (for which I'm assuming ditto), it's not wrong, just unnecessarily dated. Thus I don't see any need to update the article before you've had time for an amicable discussion. FlightTime edits daily, and therefore should be aware very soon that they've been pinged. Better, though, to make your suggestion not here but either at User talk:FlightTime or at Talk:Calwa, California. -- Hoary (talk) 02:05, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

It appears that User:FlightTime is ignoring my messages, and if I posted at Talk:Calwa, California, likely nobody will reply for a year. I'm going to need to restore these edits, and to not be blocked. Player001eliminated (talk) 19:46, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

If you want to draw attention to your proposed edits, make an edit request. 331dot (talk) 20:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Student editor

I saw someone who is a Wikipedia student editor at a university and I'd like to join one. I found one for UBC, it's called BNH200 but it looks like it took place a while ago so I'm wondering where I can find one to join as a project. I'm off campus for a few months but is there an online program I can do because Wikipedia is on the internet? Kansas dude82 (talk) 05:44, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

The student-editing projects are typically coordinated by an individual professor for students in a particular class of theirs. If there was a previous one run for a class at your school, see if you can track down who the prof was. They may be running that class (or a similar one) in the future, or know of another prof who is, or might be willing to take you on for an independent study project. DMacks (talk) 13:50, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

OK I'll ask around, because I know UBC has its own Wiki site Kansas dude82 (talk) 16:09, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Label numbering in an infobox

This is a question about numbering labels in an infobox. Having made a request to add a parameter to Infobox train on the template Talk page (Template talk:Infobox train#Request for an extra parameter), to which there has been no objection, I want to add it as a free-form label. Label 51 in the template (Template:Infobox train) shows a British term, "formation", and I want to add the U.S. term "consist" (which has the same definition). My question is: given that the list of parameters continues beyond label 51, and there are two sequences of numbers, what label number should I use for entering the parameter?Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 09:20, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

wrong category (trail vs natural feature) - Bedfordshire Greensand Ridge

I notice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedfordshire_Greensand_Ridge is under several catagories relating to footpaths / trails however the article describes an "escarpment", while it's assosciated footpath is under a separate article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greensand_Ridge_Walk . Further, the article seems to have been re-puporposed from describing a "path" to the "escarpment" in 2008 here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bedfordshire_Greensand_Ridge&oldid=225146884 .

I am not familiar with how categories work here on wikipedia, nor do I know if you are strict about not having different concepts described across revisions. If there is a UK group responsible for maintaining footpath/trail categories could someone please let me know where I should ping them to inform them of this complication, or simply ping them here if that's standard practice.

PS I have never heard of the topic of these articles before so can not vouch for accuracy or notability. Tæppa (talk) 11:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

What do you want to say when you ask the next question "If there is a UK group responsible for maintaining footpath/trail categories" ?

In Wikipedia. There are not groups organised by localisation.

There are maybe groups outside of Wikipedia (Informal groups) organised by location but I don't think there are one specifically for this task.

The things to do on Wikipedia aren't organised in a classic way. This is not organised in a hierarchical way.

Editors (People like you and me) work on the things they want.

Do you need more explanations ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 11:22, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

While it's true "anyone is an editor, just go edit if you see something that should be changed", there are many "WikiProject" groups that sometimes help coordinate or organize details about sets of related articles. For example, you could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography for help clarifying or structuring the categories related to UK geographic features or whether certain topics are different enough to merit separate articles (and if so, what details go where). DMacks (talk) 13:47, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@Tæppa I think @DMacks explained you things in few words.

I think we brought what you need. Do you agree ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 14:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. I think there might be some more mis-categorisations / concept mix ups so I'll collect them all before presenting them to the UK Geography project. Tæppa (talk) 22:21, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Jokūbas Jankauskas

Hello, I am the creator of a Lithuanian artist page, it contains a lot of information about the artist of which people are seeking about. It has over 13 references. Sadly there is a user homo ergaster who keeps deleting the page. The user deleted the page 5 years ago, which with full acceptance did not have enough references. But now the new wikipedia page is sufficient and complies with the requierments. Can you please help me? Imodab (talk) 11:17, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Do the draft then we could help you. How can we help you without a draft ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 11:34, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jok%C5%ABbas_Jankauskas here it is. Thank you Imodab (talk) 11:51, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

The content isn't in English. Is this for Wikipedia in English ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 11:55, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

No, it is for lithuanian wikipedia, but the administrator keeps removing the page because he does not like the artist, and is even bullying people in his discussion page, which seek help just like us. We tried to ask for his help to add or remove information to comply with his requirements, and yet he calls the artist a low influence individual. Sadly there are a lot of pages which he approved which do not have no references. Imodab (talk) 11:58, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

"Wikipedia in English" and "Wikipedia in Lithuanian" are two projects independent of each others.

Therefore , people there are unable to help.

As I did never made any edit on "Wikipedia in Lithuanian" and don't read and write in this language.

I refuse to support a side or another. My position is to stay neutral because I did never contributed and I don't know Lithuanian language.

Anatole-berthe (talk) 12:13, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) If you click on lt:Jokūbas Jankauskas you can see the reasons why the lt admin deleted the page. Using Google translate, in 2022 the reason was "Does not meet the relevance criteria" and in 2025 it was "Advertising, promotion". I am not familiar with the detail of lt Wikipedia policy, but articles on en Wikipedia could be deleted for the same reasons. TSventon (talk) 12:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

What should i do or contact if the administrator is abusing his power and making a mistake. The worst part keeping information from people that are searching for it quite active? Imodab (talk) 12:17, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

There was no advertising on the page, only biography and discography Imodab (talk) 12:37, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

You should post a message here: https://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naudotojo_aptarimas:Homo_ergaster you can use the Pridėti temą link near the top of the page. Polygnotus (talk) 14:11, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Imodab. I know nothing of the policies of LT Wikipedia. But I know that often in EN Wikipedia, inexperienced users make the mistake of writing what the subject of the article wants the world to know about them. (English) Wikipedia is basically not interested in that - it is only interested in what independent reliable sources say about them. Writing what they say about themselves usually does look like advertising. ColinFine (talk) 14:34, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Adding films

I'm working on the Wikipedia for L'Atelier Animation because it's missing some films they made, can I add every film they were involved in or only the ones that also have a Wikipedia page Kansas dude82 (talk) 16:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Where's my draft

I started a draft called Geotechnology. I wanted to continue to work on it but cannot find. Please help BHMI (talk) 22:57, 9 April 2025 (UTC)