Wikipedia:Help desk

I have been vandalized.

My plot summary work on the episode list of "The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet" has been vandalized.

List of The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet episodes#Season 1 (1952–53)

I have worked on this for a year and a half. I know the page was long, but there are 14 seasons. People expect more than two lines for a plot summary. I could show you countless examples. This is for history. Entercontainment (talk) 10:54, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

@Entercontainment Please review WP:ARTICLESIZE, MOS:TVPLOT and WP:DETAIL. Your version of this article was apparently the largest article on Wikipedia, which is certainly disproportionate to the significance of this show. If it's really appropriate you might look at WP:SIZESPLITting some or all of the seasons into their own articles so that you can include the full plot descriptions there. Athanelar (talk) 11:06, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

It's a content dispute, not vandalism. Special:Longpages confirms there is currently no larger article than 700,082 bytes. Some editors examine that page and you made a target. Splitting per season is the normal practice for long-running shows with detailed plot summaries. At User talk:Entercontainment#Additions to episode lists you asked: "How are my summaries any different than these? Hacks season 1". The answer is in the question: "season 1". Your summaries were longer than most but not extraordinary when I look at some well-known shows in Category:2021 American television seasons. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:31, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

Is there someone who could do the splitting for me? I don't think I could do it right. Please help. Entercontainment (talk) 11:36, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

You would anyway need to read up on the relevant processes and make sure it's actually an appropriate split. It's not a simple process that somebody else can do quickly for you. Please read WP:SIZESPLIT and WP:PROSPLIT if you want to look into that. Athanelar (talk) 12:14, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

Please, please help. I spent a year and a half on that show. Entercontainment (talk) 20:21, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

Well the good thing is it won't take that long to learn how to split. Athanelar (talk) 20:32, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

Could someone please set up separate season pages similar to these?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilligan's_Island_season_1

There wouldn't have to be any Production, cast info. Just my plot summaries.

Please, I worked a year and a half on this. Entercontainment (talk) 14:46, 28 October 2026 (UTC)

@Entercontainment Like I said to you before, if you want it done you're going to have to learn to do it. If you don't want to go to the effort to do so, why would another editor want to do so for you? Athanelar (talk) 15:01, 28 October 2026 (UTC)

Please, there must be people that can do this in their sleep. Entercontainment (talk) 15:26, 28 October 2026 (UTC)

Why are you so resistant to doing it yourself? Athanelar (talk) 15:27, 28 October 2026 (UTC)

How about two pages with seven seasons each? Entercontainment (talk) 20:25, 28 October 2026 (UTC)

You'd have to demonstrate that there's good reason to have articles for those specific groupings of seasons. It's very unorthodox. Athanelar (talk) 20:57, 28 October 2026 (UTC)

Somebody already made Draft:The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet season 1. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:22, 28 October 2026 (UTC)

If it passes, I could copy the code and put up the other pages. Entercontainment (talk) 21:44, 28 October 2026 (UTC)

It is exactly the way I envisioned the page. It hasn't been submitted yet. Should we do it? Entercontainment (talk) 22:25, 28 October 2026 (UTC)

If it is something that you want done, then you should do it. It is not the responsibility of other editors to do this for you.

Splitting it off into seasons is a good idea--so go ahead and do it. Amber (talk) 14:31, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

Hawaiian language

Why did Noam Chomsky make a remark in one of his webinars that Hawaiian language was the root of all languages? ~2026-58334-48 (talk) 12:22, 1 November 2026 (UTC)

The help desk is for asking questions about editing Wikipedia; the reference desk would be the better place to ask such a question. ~~ qkuldo(tell me about it) 12:51, 1 November 2026 (UTC)

Also, while Chomsky has made bold claims, he is very unlikely to be the actual source of stupid claims like that one. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:28, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

Advice on reassessing an undisclosed paid-editing tag

Hello,

I'm looking for advice on how to get an independent reassessment of the undisclosed-paid-editing notice on Juan Bernal Ponce.

I'm the subject's son, and I've disclosed that connection on my user page. I began addressing this issue on January 11, 2026, nearly ten months ago. I also explained that I previously hired a freelancer to assist with formatting. Since January, I've been using the article's Talk page rather than editing the article directly.

Several independent editors have since reviewed and cleaned up parts of the article, including removing wording and material they considered inappropriate.

In August, I requested a reassessment of the remaining notice on the article's Talk page, but so far have received no response. In October, I contacted the editor who originally added the notice in June 2024, but haven't heard back either.

I'm not asking to remove the notice myself. I'd simply like to know the appropriate process for requesting an independent review, particularly given the disclosures and subsequent editorial changes. If there are outstanding concerns that need to be addressed, I'd appreciate knowing what they are.

You can see the previous discussion here: Talk:Juan Bernal Ponce#Review of undisclosed paid editing tag.

Thank you for understanding and suggestion, it really means a lot.

Juanj1979 (talk) 07:30, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

Please don't use AI to talk to us. It's not allowed

The tag will be removed when an editor with no connection to the subject does a full review of the article to ensure there is no remaining promotional content and then removes the tag. Athanelar (talk) 10:44, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

The first assessment was already independent. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:31, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

table help

I'm not sure if this is the right place, if there is a better place to ask please tell me, I have been working on a H;TABLE for a while and I am finally happy with it, however, on mobile it is collapsed why might that be? User:Issac I Navarro/sandbox 2. Issac I Navarro (talk) 08:11, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

might Template:Round corners fix the issues that I have on viewing it on mobile? Issac I Navarro (talk) 08:20, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

@Issac I Navarro: What do you mean by "it is collapsed"? User:Issac I Navarro/sandbox 2 looks the same to me in desktop and mobile. "Project updates", "Article guidance and policy", "Ways to contribute" are collapsed by default in both. The whole table is expanded with no collapse option in both. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:17, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter, using desktop is fine. Also, logging on Wikipedia via phone on the internet is also fine.

However, when you load it in the Wikipedia mobile app, it collapses. Is this just an app thing? I have seen other tables be able to load in full on the app. Issac I Navarro (talk) 15:21, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

To note, I was using the WP:ANDROID app to test it being loaded. Issac I Navarro (talk) 15:24, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

@Issac I Navarro: Are you sure it's displayed in the app? "mobile" means the mobile view for browsers, not the app. The bottom of pages in a browser have a "Desktop view" or "Mobile view" link to switch between browser views no matter which device you are on. The iOS app cannot display userspace pages as far as I know but automatically switches to the browser on the device if you tap a link to userspace. I don't know the Android app and don't have a device to test it. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:45, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

Issac I Navarro (talk) 16:09, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

This is what I see on the android app. Using Google/any other internet browser it displays fine, while on the smartphone. Issac I Navarro (talk) 16:10, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

I get the same as you. I have often seen items collapsed on the Android app, but have not explored the circumstances. ColinFine (talk) 16:30, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

Interesting, do you have any idea why WP:TOLN, (below) might be loading fine? Issac I Navarro (talk) 16:32, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

@Issac I Navarro: It may be feature which automatically collapses everything before the first heading in some namespaces, unrelated to tables. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:03, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

Interesting, that may make sense as infoboxes are also collapsed on the app. Issac I Navarro (talk) 17:08, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

I just tried to load it on User Talk:Issac I Navarro#edit test. that i will be undoing, and on the app, it completely removes the table. I'm trying to make this table very user friendly. Issac I Navarro (talk) 19:53, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

I never really noticed but it seems that for whatever reason this is an issue for all tables

. I was taking a look at some old wikilove templates they also appeared this same way. Issac I Navarro (talk) 19:58, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

@ColinFine and @PrimeHunter, Thank you, for trying to help but this seems like an app issue. That for whatever reason it has a difficult time loading the table/any template on a user talk page. Issac I Navarro (talk) 20:01, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

To note, I tried placing the code for it here: . Sorry for taking up your time. Once again, thank you for trying to help. Issac I Navarro (talk) 21:39, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

, this table loads fine from WP:TOLN. Issac I Navarro (talk) 16:19, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

Thumbnail generation broken?

Hi, is thumbnail generation broken at the moment, somehow, please? These just show up as blank boxes for me:

First noticed at Nikon Df.

Same results with 1280px, 1920px, and 3840px --Kjoonlee 14:43, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

Also asked on commons: Commons:Help desk#Thumbnails being delayed again? --Kjoonlee 14:53, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

They're showing up normal for me. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 21:40, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

Oh... They show up for me when I use a VPN to the US, but not when I connect without a VPN. --Kjoonlee 00:36, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

I've no issue seeing either. Maybe it's potentially a caching issue, and it needs to be cleared? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:04, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

Issue was also reproduced in Finland. Reported as https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T443483 Some thumbnail sizes for some images give 404 errors from some geographical locations --Kjoonlee 17:52, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

Wikilink to specific logid

Is there a wikilink alternative, i.e. using double square brackets, or a template that allows linking to a specific log entry given its logid? Rather than having to use the external link syntax like this: logid 187084043. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 15:20, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

@SunloungerFrog: Special:Redirect like Special:Redirect/logid/187084043. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:53, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

PrimeHunter, many thanks! Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 15:55, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

real Wikipedia editor or phishing?

I received an email from Arfat Ali who says he is a Wikipedia editor and consultant. He is offering to write a Wikipedia page to describe my contributions to science.

Is he a real Wikipedia editor or is this a phishing email?

~2026-58324-52 (talk) 16:05, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

The email is a scam. Please see the scam warning. 331dot (talk) 16:08, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-58324-52 Please forward the entire conversation, including any email headers, to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:47, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

Anyone (including you) can become a Wikipedia editor. It doesn't guarantee any particular skill or grant special access. If you are a notable scientist then a volunteer is likely to write a neutral article about you free of charge. If not, then there is no way to buy an article from Wikipedia itself (and certainly not from a self-appointed "consultant"). Adding an autobiography is strongly discouraged. You may find the guidance at WP:PROF, WP:About you and WP:PAID useful. Certes (talk) 19:54, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

Source from a youtube video uploaded by the NTSB.gov

 Courtesy link: Talk:2026 Palm Beach County Learjet 60 crash § NTSB Media Briefing 1 on YouTube

hello

Youtube is generally considered unreliable under WP:RSPSOURCES. However a source somebody used is from youtube under the official NTSB.gov account. Since it comes from a reputable, official government source, can it be used.

Here is the source: Stmbus (talk) 19:15, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

YouTube videos are acceptable if they are from the verified channel of the publisher, like a news organization. A government agency's videos, if their channel is verified, would be okay, but could only be used as primary sources. 331dot (talk) 19:18, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

alright, thanks Stmbus (talk) 19:23, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

from the verified channel of the publisher

Almost. From the verified channel of a known reliable publisher. Just being verified is definitely not enough; lots of verified accounts are not reliable. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:22, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

Format issue

Your webpage using Apple's Safari browser is just terrible. One narrow band of text with no search function to go off the first page. What gives?? Y8rdoc (talk) 19:17, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia has several alternative skins available for those of us who dislike the narrow band of text. The Main Page and most other pages have a search box top right. I'm not using Apple products but I'm not aware of any problems specific to Safari. Certes (talk) 19:45, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

On Safari as of late there is a narrow band of text and nothing else. No search area etc. Y8rdoc (talk) 21:10, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

The answer is...inadvertent reader mode turned on! Turn it off and you get the real Wiki page. Thanks for your time. Y8rdoc (talk) 21:13, 2 November 2026 (UTC)

Happens to the best of us! Suðurhafsljósæta (talk) 08:25, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Is "show nearby articles" broken in location maps?

I want to show all nearby articles on a location map for Canyon Diablo (canyon), Two Guns, Arizona, Canyon Diablo Bridge, etc. But only one shows up here and there, while others don't show up at all. I notice there are several variables at work but I don't know what connects them all. For example, many of these articles use different infobox templates which render the locations differently, etc. So how do we get the "show nearby articles" to work on a universal basis in Open Street maps across different articles? Viriditas (talk) 02:26, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

Loving Spoonful

When I look this up, I get the band that took the name of a song by Mississippi John Hurt, to which there is NO mention. I appreciate that John Sebastian was indeed inspired by persons like John Hurt, but this should be foremost in the Wiki description.

~2026-58283-87 (talk) 03:55, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-58283-87: The quote box at The Lovin' Spoonful#First live dates says: Fritz suggested the Lovin' Spoonful, a line from Hurt's 1963 song "Coffee Blues." And Mississippi John Hurt#Tributes says: The folk-rock band The Lovin' Spoonful took their name from a recurring phrase in Hurt's song "Coffee Blues". PrimeHunter (talk) 05:45, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

Citing Sources

As a brief forward to anyone who saw the section title and panicked, I indeed know the importance of citing sources and that I should be doing it. Not sure how necessary this forward is, but better safe than sorry.

I've recently begun editing articles in comparatively major ways that require sources cited. (I'm asking here and not the Teahouse because I feel this means I'm definitely not a new newcomer anymore.) But as I cite sources, I find that it's super inefficient to work with the large and unwieldy template. I wind up having to copy-and-paste another cite source template from elsewhere on the page and going through to replace the information like links, source names, dates published and retrieved, and what-have-you. I was wondering if there was a more efficient way to rapidly have the template appear, ready to be filled in, or if copy-and-pasting the template over and replacing things is the most efficient way to do this compared to just typing everything out. Also, is this a frowned upon method of adding sources? It hasn't gone wrong yet and I've seen nothing against it so far, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's okay to use as a method.

As one last question, I have noticed that all of the templates are formatted differently in the order information is to be filled in. Some include date retrieved, some include author name, some don't include one or both, etc. Clearly this means there is no standard, but what is the source template used most frequently?

Thank you in advance to whoever takes the time to help a rookie who's probably trying to do things he doesn't get yet. WhyNotZoidberg? ^{Woop-woop-woop!} 05:29, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

@Username?WhyNotZoidberg?: It looks like you edit somewhat frequently in the visual editor. Is the "Automatic" tab in the "Add a citation" window (that appears when you click on Cite) not what you're looking for? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:36, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

Hrm. I haven't seen that yet. I'll do a dummy edit somewhere and poke around. Thank you! Edited to add in something without adding a new reply: I found what you mentioned and that is incredibly useful! Thanks a lot! WhyNotZoidberg? ^{Woop-woop-woop!} 05:37, 3 November 2026 (UTC) Edited 05:42, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

WNZ, you say I have noticed that all of the templates are formatted differently in the order information is to be filled in. Really? As far as I know, whether you write |first=Joe |last=Bloggs or |last=Bloggs |first=Joe (as a trivial example) makes no difference. For a book, you could, if you wished, enter the year, then the publisher, then the place, then the series title (etc, in the reverse of the conventional order), and all would be fine. (I'm not recommending that you take up this practice: doing so might mildly irritate later editors of the same article.) -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 08:00, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

As outlined in the relevant guideline (WP:CITESTYLE), there is no one format (although citations within a single article should be consistent). I find myself referencing Wikipedia:Citation templates all the time, particularly the "Examples" section. The citation style I use the most myself is WP:CS2, but sometimes I use WP:CS1 for certain sources like press releases. ExitTheWarrior (talk) 17:05, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

@Username?WhyNotZoidberg?: Hoary is correct. It does not matter which order parameters are listed in when citing using {{cite book}}, {{cite web}} or any other template. If there's anything else you don't understand, please say so. Mjroots (talk) 10:06, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Sorry for being radio silent, I took Tenryuu’s words of wisdom and dashed away to put them to use. In a way. I haven’t actually done anything since then. Thank you all for this helpful advice! The next time I edit an article and cite a source, I shall put this information to good use. WhyNotZoidberg? ^{Woop-woop-woop!} 01:19, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

How to create a module

Rajdhani Fan Person (talk) 15:22, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

What for? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:05, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

Help:Lua is your starting point. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 20:28, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

Newcomer task

British Latin has a newcomer task to revise the tone of the paragraph beginning Equally puzzling is why the Britons, almost uniquely among western European peoples, did not end up speaking a Romance language. How can I stop this, as I don't think the newcomers are improving the paragraph? I added {{No newcomer task}}, but I still see the task. The task says it is identified using a BERT model. TSventon (talk) 21:05, 3 November 2026 (UTC)

I question which sources actually call this puzzling; it sounds like OR to me. But I do see that most newcomers would just make it worse. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 01:56, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

No, it is a valid historical linguistics question, given that most of Great Britain was occupied for not much less time than, say, Transalpine Gaul (roughly what is now France), and it does come up from time to time.

As far as the tone of the paragraph is concerned, I see no problem with it, but it does somewhat restate what has already been said in the paragraph above and elsewhere. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-56420-06 (talk) 03:51, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Being a valid question, and being a valid question that reliable sources have called "puzzling", are different things - that was what I was trying to get at. I agree that the tone checker seems to find the wrong things. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:06, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

The source argues that Britain "should have" ended up speaking a form of Latin, so arguably that means it is puzzling that it didn't. TSventon (talk) 18:26, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

That's just what I meant, relating to WP:SYNTH with its opposition to a conclusion not explicitly stated. I guess it depends how far that idea gets taken. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 19:55, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Why is there any puzzle at all? I'm no sort of linguist, by the way. The source says that the Britons spoke British in the countryside while the Romans spoke Latin in the towns/cities. The Romans left and the Angles, Saxons and Jutes arrived, speaking Low German or something. The source feels the Britons (or Romano-British) "should still have had the expertise in depth to regroup in the 90% of the country they still owned, and drive back or force a compromise with the newcomers." Well, evidently they didn't. The Romans left in around 410, the Saxons et al. arrived from around 450, see Historiography of the Anglo-Saxon settlement of Britain#Themes, and then the Norse-speaking Viking raids date from around 780 - the puzzle is that there should be a puzzle: it all seems pretty straightforward. MinorProphet (talk) 07:30, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

". . . the Romans spoke Latin in the towns/cities. The Romans left . . . in . . . 410."

This is a common misconception. The populations in cities and towns were mostly native Britons who had become Romanised over the course of 350 years; comparatively few people actually from Rome lived in Britannia. It was the Legions who left; the Latin speaking population, including soldiers retired after 25 years service and given a landholding and churchmen for whom it was also their liturgical language, largely remained, and still initially considered themselves 'Romans'.

As the Germanic continental newcomers advanced, they either wiped out or absorbed some of the Romano-British population, but others retreated to their related neighbours, not a few of whom would also have been able to speak Latin, in what eventually became Wales and Cornwall. In Gaul, for example, such peoples retained their version(s) of Latin; in Great Britain they did not. Why, we don't know, because virtually nothing from the period is documented, and what is was written in Church Latin by clerics. About the only writer of Vernacular Latin from the period (some time in the 5th century) whose work at any great length has survived is Saint Patrick. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-56420-06 (talk) 08:22, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

I'm not disagreeing with you at all: but as you must be aware, the vast majority of the population did not live in urban areas, but worked on the land, what we might call genuine peasants, agricultural workers in the fields. Plough, sow, reap, herd cattle, beware the winter. This continued throughout most of the country until the 17th century. Even though the Legions and "Rule of Rome" had made their presence known through most of the land, are you (or academic authorities) suggesting that the greater part of the population actually spoke some sort of Latin in say, 650? You say this is a common misconception, but are there any studies which back up this thesis?^{[citation needed]} I'm genuinely interested. And why were our ancestors so keen to forget Latin? Hurrah that the Romans have gone, we never liked them anyway, we rejoice in our new Germanic overlords. I agree with the OP, this is hardly the sort of task to set before a newcomer. :-) MinorProphet (talk) 17:30, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

@MinorProphet:, I think the misconception was that in 410 the people of Roman Britannia could be divided into "Romans" and "Britons" and that the "Romans" left in 410. That may not be what you meant and, as you said, citation needed. By then most inhabitants were Roman citizens, some more Romanised than others, so they couldn't be neatly divided into two groups. If you are interested, I found an open-access book chapter on "The Romance of Early Britain" at https://academic.oup.com/book/55329/chapter/434347840 . TSventon (talk) 06:03, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

I was attempting to be brief. Obviously over the course of 350–400 years there was a lot of assimilation, and by c400 the Romano-British population were a 'cultural force' to be reckoned with. On the other hand, I don't think there is much disagreement that the Roman legions, who maintained the Pax Romana, even as a sort of unwelcome police force, departed around 410. You would have thought that there might be a reason why the semi-Latinate speakers were unable to withstand the well-armed and aggressive invaders. What percentage of the population were counted as Cives Romani? "Civis Romanus sum" they could claim with pride. Many thanks for the link, I'll have a read.
I have to confess that my thoughts are emotionally swayed by the music of Edward Elgar and Caractacus - the "Triumphal March" with Adrian Boult, and "Oh, my warriors" sung by Peter Dawson inform my thinking. Best, MinorProphet (talk) 15:07, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

Bild Lilli doll / Lilli (comic strip)

• Bild Lilli doll
• Lilli (comic strip)
• (Unreliable source) Meet Lilli, the High-end German Call Girl Who Became Barbie

The above website, while not usable as a source, contains multiple images of the comic. Is there a source with a compatible license so we can show one or two of those comics? --Guy Macon (talk) 05:36, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

@Guy Macon: Apparently the artist, Reinhard Beuthien (Q120667387), died in 1970 and his work is protected for 70 years PMA. If you found a reliable source you could make a fair use argument for an image on Wikipedia. TSventon (talk) 06:14, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Joind

i want joind illuminati group plz help e to joind

Shabaaz123 (talk) 08:51, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Shabaaz123.

What is your question about editing Wikipedia? (That is the only kind of question that is relevant on this page). ColinFine (talk) 10:37, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

To qualify for membership, you have to be able to track them down by yourself. Study the literature. Emberto Eco's book Foucault's Pendulum may guide you. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230,.195} 00:08, 5 November 2026 (UTC) ~2026-56420-06 (talk) 00:08, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

Takes a while

My latest writing submission was probably 2 months ago, if not more. While I know there's no need to rush on publishing a new writing, it takes longer than I have anticipated and I start wondering if the moderator would pick up my submission. Does anybody face the same timeline as me, or maybe longer than that? I want to manage my own expectation. Acupoflatte (talk) 11:02, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Your seventh submission of Draft:Travelodge Hotels Asia was on 9th October, which was four weeks ago, not two months.

Drafts are not reviewed in any particular order, so there is no reliable way of predicting when they will be reviewed.

Given that the draft still clearly has no WP:CORPDEPTH sources, I'm surprised that no reviewer has yet looked at it and declined it. Perhaps this is because, after six declines and no improvement, it is likely to get finally rejected, and that takes a little more thought than declining.

Have you read WP:BOSS? ColinFine (talk) 11:11, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Listicles for notability.

Hi, I am Dare2Leap.

I wanna ask a question: are all listicles ineligible for proving notability or just tend not to? I am currently working on Draft:Unciv. One example is https://it.androidsis.com/giochi-senza-pubblicit%C3%A0/. Thanks. |)are2|_eap (Talk) 13:47, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Dare2Leap. Listicles are generally pretty useless as they're a sort of low-effort journalism that websites like to spam out for clicks. They're often very light on analysis (so would fail our significant coverage criteria) and are often paid-for by the company who represents the top product (so would fail our independent criteria). qcne (talk) 14:13, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Usage of Discord rather than the talk page

Hi, I’m fairly new to Wikipedia but this concerned me. It was my understanding that debates about an edit would be discussed exclusively on the appropriate talk page. So my question is this: is it generally standard to use external discussion platforms to settle issues about edits? I wasn’t consulted via discord, I’d like to clarify. I don’t use the platform. Sunshinezguy (talk) 14:42, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

You're correct that it is generally inappropriate to discuss content-related business offwiki. All such discussions should be held onwiki so that people don't need to have external apps or accounts to be part of that discussion. Athanelar (talk) 15:21, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. This seemed odd Sunshinezguy (talk) 15:21, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

(edit conflict) There is a page at Wikipedia:Discord with some advice on how to use Discord. It says you can't establish consensus on Discord, but doesn't say you can't discuss content there. TSventon (talk) 15:32, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Sure, but in this example OP was saying that what happened was that some editors decided a quote wasn't appropriate to include in an article based on a discussion they had on Discord. Deciding what content is or isn't appropriate for an article is the sort of thing that probably shouldn't be done on Discord. Athanelar (talk) 15:54, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Account

Hello,

I have an account with Wiki and cannot remember my user name or password. I've tried all of the obvious ones. Can you please assist? I need to change my payment method.

Thank you,

Anne Croy ~2026-58553-16 (talk) 15:15, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-58553-16 Your Wikipedia account has no connection whatsoever to any payment method you used to donate to the Wikimedia Foundation. The only connection between Wikipedia and the WMF is that they "pay our bills" so to speak. You can manage your donation at the Wikimedia foundation's website which contains a link to login using the email address associated with your recurring donation. You can also contact them directly at donate@wikimedia.org for help. Athanelar (talk) 15:19, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Preferred Procedures for Archiving Sources

I was archiving the URLs for the cite web inline citations on Adelina Sotnikova and upon copy-pasting the URL for one of the sources into the Wayback Machine, was given snapshots spanning from 2014 to 2026. Does Wikipedia prefer the earliest available snapshot for archiving sources, or does it prefer the latest available?

Cheers. 붉은혜성라이카/BlazingCometLaika 15:19, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there's an official policy/guideline about this, but my instinct would be that we should use the most recent archived snapshot, since that represents the most up-to-date version of the source before it stopped being accessible. (Consider that news articles can be updated or corrected as new information becomes available, for instance; so you'd want the version after any corrections were made, not before.) Athanelar (talk) 15:22, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Sometimes, the very latest archive doesn't even contain the material anymore, so I'd take Athanelar's advice but check that it's the latest "good" one rather than always taking the latest of all. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 15:57, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

@Athanelar@TooManyFingersAlright. Thanks for the advice. If it’s a snapshot of a link that’s still live, should I just use the latest possible link?

Cheers. 붉은혜성라이카/BlazingCometLaika 17:21, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

If the link is still live, then first of all an archive link isn't strictly necessary anyway, but if you still want to include one for futureproofing then yeah, use the latest available archive. Athanelar (talk) 17:31, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

@붉은혜성라이카: Use the archive page that corresponds to the access-date (the earliest one that is after the access-date). If you decide to read a later page and you verify that it still contains the cited facts, then you can use that later page, and you can and should then also change the access-date. -Arch dude (talk) 20:32, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Somec, hatnote

Why is there a hatnote in the Somec entry pointing to A Sleep and a Forgetting? Should it be removed? It is not known as "Somec". ~2026-58705-04 (talk) 16:46, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

In the book, is there not a fictional drug called somec? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:39, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

The latter article does not mention somec. It should either be added there (with a citation of course) or the hatnot removed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 17:51, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-58705-04: "A Sleep and a Forgetting" is one of eleven short stories in a book and currently redirects there but used to have its own article with significant mention of the fictional drug Somec. I don't know the book or story but it wasn't among seven reprinted stories so I guess it didn't have much impact and the hatnote should be removed rather than adding Somec to the book article. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:47, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Why cant I edit a paragraph about the current liverpool manager who lost to Fenerbahce 3-2 today? The mod tells me I abused the edit twice... but how?

Why cant I edit a paragraph or description about Iraola (Liverpool manager)? ~2026-58581-48 (talk) 20:51, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

Your edit are unsourced(see referencing for beginners if you can provide a source) and this edit contains unsourced personal commentary("he could be sacked") 331dot (talk) 21:11, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

How to Publish sandbox article?

Hello, I am trying to publish a short bio about my company? I developed in Sandbox, so the initial draft is ready. Please advise.

Thanks... -Rod CATSanDiego (talk) 22:57, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

@CATSanDiego: The only thing in your sandbox is a link to your company. This will never be accepted as an article, and I strongly suggest you don't continue on with this endeavour if your purpose is to promote your company. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:11, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

AI cleanup reach out

Feeling confused and unfulfilled with your WIKIPEDIA experience? Do you find yourself having editing DESIRES you can't express? My friends! Let those inhibitions fall to the wayside and free yourself. Amazing!! personal discoveries await YOU!! when you enter the AItastic maintenance universe of Wikipedia.

Join us and get your mojo back! Enjoy life again on Wikipedia, well ignoring your family and impress your boss with wasting your precious work time!

We welcome any and all editors to join WP:WikiProject AI Cleanup – to combat the mass problem of AI-generated content. We are currently overwhelmed with 335 AI open cases that need cleanup! Moxy🍁 23:10, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

My entry was flagged as biographical

 Courtesy link: Christopher D'Elia

Christopher Francis D’Elia is my entry.

When I was a dean at LSU, it was suggested that I have a Wikipedia entry because I was so involved with important Gulf research that attracted much media attention. Someone on my staff posted an entry. I had little to do with it, and I did not review it carefully. I have since retired and wanted that to be noted on my entry. I made that change, but I realized that there was a lot wrong with the entry. Being unfamiliar with your guidelines, I edited it extensively myself. The entry was flagged. I hired someone with demonstrated knowledge of how content and format should be presented. The company had done several entries for prominent colleagues at other institutions. I think that they did a fine and accurate job. Can you review it, change it as needed, and unflag it? BTW, I really want to have an entry that makes it clear that I am not the actor/comedian Chris D’Elia who got accused of sex crimes. I actually received threatening calls and texts from people who didn’t realize who I was but had found my contact information on the web. I’ve had a long and interesting career, and I didn’t appreciate the fact that I was confused with the actor. ~2026-58704-10 (talk) 23:16, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

I don't have time for such a review right now, but please see WP:About you. Also please do not edit the article again, and please sign in to your account before posting comments. Thanks, Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 07:21, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

Are link anchors *not* preemptive?

Hello! I'm going to add a link to an article section. From what info I could find it seems like adding an anchor preemptively (i.e anchoring the current title without changing it) would help since it protects the link from future changes to the title. But this isn't a use case listed at WP:ANCHOR, and MOS:SECTLINK suggests—instead of adding a preemptive anchor—to add a comment telling future people who change the section title to do fixes.

TLDR I see no MOS/Help examples of anchoring the existing title of a section. Is that nonstandard practice?

(New to anchors as of today, so want to use them correctly!) Placeholderer (talk) 23:33, 4 November 2026 (UTC)

@Placeholderer: It would create a duplicate ID. The standard says ID's must be unique. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:37, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

I see! I guess I missed Template:Anchor#Limitations.

Thanks! Placeholderer (talk) 00:43, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

How often should I be adding a Lang template for Māori words in NZ english wikipedia?

I haven't been able to find any specific policy on this. It seems like the correct thing to do but because Te Reo Māori is extremely common and already a part of NZ english by default I'm wondering if it would be better to use Lang templates sparingly. Kiwiisabirdok (talk) 02:42, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

@Kiwiisabirdok: have you looked at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Text formatting#Non–English language terms, terms in everyday use would generally not need italics or a template. I would suggest asking at Wikipedia:New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board as helpers here will mostly not be expert in NZ English. TSventon (talk) 02:59, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

Will do, thank you Kiwiisabirdok (talk) 05:12, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

Be aware that you can use {{langr}} to mark up such words without italics. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 07:24, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

One very good reason to use lang templates for words that aren't common in worldwide English is accessibility - it helps screen readers process them correctly. They don't need to be italicised; it can be effectively a hidden template that's still extremely helpful for those who use a screen reader. Meadowlark (talk) 05:58, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Citing PhD certificate

Are any templates particularly appropriate for citing a PhD certificate? An associate of the subject at William Woys Weaver has helpfully (with permission) uploaded an image at File:William Woys Weaver - PhD - University College Dublin.jpg. Cite document strikes me as most appropriate, but I can't link to the image itself. I'll note that other sources reference the subject getting a PhD, but none have given the date, so the chronology was a bit muddled without this reference. Whonting (talk) 07:32, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi Whonting. A diploma is likely going to be considered a WP:PRIMARY source regardless of whether its uploaded somewhere online, and you don't really need someone to upload the file to cite it. Moreover, uploading it to Commons is most likely a prpblem per c:COM:L because the copyright holder of the text/imagery on the diploma itself would not be the person who received it but rather the person/institution who created/issued it. If you're trying to add a citation for someone's academic history, your best best is to look for some kind of official biography or other publication (online or off) that you can cite instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:39, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for replying Marchjuly.

• Yeah, definitely primary, although I think this is an appropriate use of such a source.
• I had them post it online so it could be cited under WP:PUBLISHED.
• Interesting point on copyright, I am not too experienced there although would think the image elements old enough to be out of copyright, and the text and structure ("this certifies that... on this date..." etc) is below the threshold of originality. I might leave a question on Commons.

Whonting (talk) 08:51, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

If you are intending to cite this as verification that the individual concerned has a PhD, I have my doubts that it is acceptable. Uploading to Commons doesn't constitute publication by a reliable source. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:52, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

I have a citation for him holding a doctorate, but not for when he got it. This is just being used for the year and month, which are needed so the PhD can fit in the chronological biography. Ping @ScottishFinnishRadish, who responded as I was typing this. Whonting (talk) 13:02, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

Use . It's not a great source, but it's good enough for a fairly non-contentious statement. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:58, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

Readers in the European Economic Area (EEA), including the EU and UK, cannot access that reference to check its contents. Bazza 7 (talk) 13:17, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

Two points. The source is readily visible through a free (FirefoX) VPN set to the US (I'm in the UK) and sources don't need to be verifiable by everyone (eg a book reference) Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:16, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

Sources only need to be theoretically verifiable by everyone. Requiring long-distance travel, subscriptions to foreign newspapers, ability to read foreign languages, etc is all acceptable. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 19:34, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

And in these days of AI picture generation, a picture of a certificate can probably no longer be considered "reliable". Does the degree awarding body maintain some sort of online confirmation of the doctorate? Feline Hymnic (talk) 15:42, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

AI has changed nothing in that regard. Documents uploaded to Commons aren't reliable sources, and never have been. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:05, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

My thinking here is that if we have reliable sourcing that someone received a PhD and they post a picture of their certificate to Twitter, that would be sufficiently reliable for the claim that they received the PhD in 2009 under WP:ABOUTSELF. It wouldn't become unreliable for that claim because it was posted on Commons rather than social media. Here, for all intents and purposes this was uploaded by someone acting on Weaver's behalf, taking the photo in their house with permission etc. It can reasonably be taken as WP:ABOUTSELF or equivalent. Whonting (talk) 00:50, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

We shouldn't be using WP:ABOUTSELF material for statements regarding qualifications. I've personally got no doubt that Weaver has a PhD, and I can't think of any reason why the date might be in question, but we have policy on requiring independent sources for such things for a reason. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:59, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Which policy are you thinking? I would agree if the claim was that he had received a PhD. Whonting (talk) 01:04, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

There's really no difference between someone just claiming they've got a PhD and saying they got a PhD in 2009; it's also irrelevant whether they tweet out an image of their diploma in such a case. In my opinion. such a tweet or website post would be the type of exceptional claim that wouldn't be allowed by ABOUTSELF and BLPSOURCES. If you can find a reliable source stating that Weaver received his PhD from some university but doesn't mention the year he got it, you don't need to mention the year in the article; you can just mention he got his PhD from said university. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:14, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

The PhD thesis is dated 2008 and linked at http://library.ucd.ie/iii/encore/record/C__Rb1840264 . TSventon (talk) 01:18, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

The date a PhD was submitted neither confirms when a PhD was awarded, nor even if it was awarded at all. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:23, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Yes, the link is helpful, but Andy has it right. Whonting (talk) 01:26, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

I can find a reliable source saying he received a PhD from a university, and it is in the article already. I don't have the year, and that was necessary since the biography is structured chronologically, and without this source it was unclear where it fits. Whonting (talk) 01:24, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Change language

How to change Wiki language to that of the chosen ste (text in original language)?@ ~2026-58802-14 (talk) 08:51, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-58802-14 Are you looking for List of Wikipedias? Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:32, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

I think what you're looking for is the XX languages menu, located in the top right of the page when using the default Wikipedia skin. The menu is available on most pages, but will only list languages that have an equivalent to the page you're currently looking at.

You can also visit the Main page, which has a list of the other-language Wikipedia versions at the bottom of the page. – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 21:02, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

Coordinates

Hi,

On Le Val d'Or station, the coordinates I entered in the infobox don't appear as such in the final rendering and thus they are off by a few hundred metres. Could someone help? Thanks! 15:40, 5 November 2026 (UTC) PalleyCov2030 (talk) 15:40, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

@PalleyCov2030: It appears that the decimal coordinates you entered in the {{coord}} template were simply off by that much. I've emended them, and they seem to be correct now. Deor (talk) 16:14, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

ip banned

Hey,

I’m from Germany, and I created an article that I genuinely thought might be interesting to others. I was warned that I should rewrite it and that it wasn't very good. However, I still believed the topic could be interesting, which is why I also asked for feedback.

Someone gave me feedback, but I found their response a little difficult to understand. After that, my article disappeared. I then created a new, improved version because I thought the original wasn't good enough for them .

Unfortunately, I was subsequently IP-banned.

I sincerely apologize for any issues or inconvenience I may have caused. I never intended to break any rules or cause trouble. I was simply trying to contribute something that I thought might be interesting and improve it based on feedback.

My username is swilux, so you can look into the logs if needed.

I'm very sorry for the misunderstanding, and I would really appreciate it if you could reconsider the ban.

Thank you for your time and understanding.

~2026-59131-72 (talk) 16:27, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

Since you posted here, your IP is not blocked. I see no block on the Swilux account, either. 331dot (talk) 16:39, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Swilux shows no edits and Special:Log/Swilux shows only that the account was created. It would be more helpful to know which IP address was affected, as its logs would show why it was blocked.

Wikipedia:Appealing a block has guidance on how to appeal a block. – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 16:45, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

Does this relate to the English-language Wikipedia, or the German one, where the Swilux account appears to be blocked? If it is the latter, we cannot help you here, and you will have to appeal the block as instructed there. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:31, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

The German-language Wikipedia's appeals process/guidance is located at de:Wikipedia:Sperrprüfung. The English-language Wikipedia isn't responsible for managing other-language projects. All the different language versions are autonomous. – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 20:44, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

New Wiki page keeps getting declined

Hey there, I keep trying to publish a wiki page for a notable person (very big in the insights space and has worked for unilever and cocacola) but it keeps getting declined. The latest feedback says that its been declined as it has suspected AI in it but i've run the copy through multiple AI checkers and gotten the all-clear. Does anyone have any suggestions please? Simon Mustard (talk) 19:36, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

very big in the insights space and has worked for unilever and cocacola None of this has any bearing on our definition of a notable person, which requires nothing more and nothing less than the presence of multiple reliable, independent sources of significant coverage about the person. Click both of those links and read the pages they go to.

I also agree that there are clear textual signs of AI generation. Not to mention wikipedia.gptzero.me gives it 0% human, 93.3% AI and 6.7% mixed.

My suggestion is to familiarise yourself with the links I've given you, then remove all of the AI generated text and start from scratch with three sources that meet the requirements at WP:42. Help:Your first article might help you. Athanelar (talk) 19:56, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

New AI-detection breakthrough: When a person runs text through multiple AI checkers and says the text "has gotten the all-clear", the likelihood that they are the author of that text drops below 0.5%. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:32, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

I'll add that to my mental list :) Giovanni Guasconti (a word with me) 23:35, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Chapters in reflist

I want to create a reflist that cites multiple chapters from one book, with this format:

• Schnieder, Carl E., ed. (2000). Law at the End of Life: The Supreme Court and Assisted Suicide. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. ISBN 978-0472111572.
  • Schnieder, Carl E. "The Road to Glucksberg". pp. 11–22. {{cite book}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  • Suter, Sonia M. "Ambivalent Unanimity: An Analysis of the Supreme Court's Holding". pp. 25–55. {{cite book}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

As you can see this creates a "missing or empty title" error. I cannot find another template that can properly do this effect. Any pointers? Eithersummer (talk) 19:40, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

If the article uses {{sfn}} or the like, {{harvc}}. If not, manual subreferencing may work for you. I don't know if there are any templates yet for subreferencing.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 19:47, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

{{R}} can do subreferencing. It can also simulate something that looks like subreferencing using its own method that was developed before the subreferencing feature was introduced. – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 20:03, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

If you're not intentionally omitting details about the book to make the references more concise, the correct thing to do would be to include the editor and book title in the citation.

{{cite book|last=Suter|first=Sonia M.|chapter=Ambivalent Unanimity: An Analysis of the Supreme Court's Holding|pp=25-55|editor-last=Schnieder|editor-first=Carl E.|title=Law at the End of Life: The Supreme Court and Assisted Suicide}}

→ Suter, Sonia M. "Ambivalent Unanimity: An Analysis of the Supreme Court's Holding". In Schnieder, Carl E. (ed.). Law at the End of Life: The Supreme Court and Assisted Suicide. pp. 25–55.

If you intentionally want to omit In Schnieder, Carl E. (ed.). Law at the End of Life: The Supreme Court and Assisted Suicide. then Trappist is right; you should use either {{harvc}} or subreferencing (or {{R}}) depending on the article's current citation style, assuming you want this hierarchical layout for the {{reflist}}-generated list.

However, your example looks more like part of a "Bibliography" section (like the one at, eg, Pyrena). If you want the chapters to be listed hierarchically there, not in the {{reflist}}-generated list, then you should simply use the chapter titles in |title= to remove the warning. You can leave an invisible comment in the citation to clarify it's a chapter, not a book, if you're worried future editors will misunderstand and erase the double-indentation.

{{cite book|last=Suter|first=Sonia M.|title=Ambivalent Unanimity: An Analysis of the Supreme Court's Holding|pp=25-55<!--|editor-last=Schnieder|editor-first=Carl E.|title=Law at the End of Life: The Supreme Court and Assisted Suicide-->}}

Including the editor and book title in a comment is also helpful for any editors copying the citation over into another article where they only want to cite that specific chapter. – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 20:32, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

...then you should simply use the chapter titles in |title= to remove the warning. No. Do not recommend that. "Ambivalent Unanimity: An Analysis of the Supreme Court’s Holding" is not a book title and will be incorrectly rendered in italics; should be rendered in quotation marks:

{{cite book|last=Suter|first=Sonia M.|title=Ambivalent Unanimity: An Analysis of the Supreme Court’s Holding|pp=25-55<!--|editor-last=Schnieder|editor-first=Carl E.|title=Law at the End of Life: The Supreme Court and Assisted Suicide-->}}

Suter, Sonia M. Ambivalent Unanimity: An Analysis of the Supreme Court’s Holding. pp. 25–55.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 20:45, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

Seems there's no way to avoid redundantly listing the book's title in the "Bibliography" section then. – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 21:07, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

If this is about User:Eithersummer/sandbox/wgluck then {{harvc}} should answer.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:39, 5 November 2026 (UTC)

BLP articles

I stumbled upon this page Jim Brochu which led me to the linked page Steve Schalchlin and subsequent article Shawn Decker created by the same editor. The latter obviously fails notability. Which raises questions about the former two BLP articles in regards to possible WP:COI, WP:OR, WP:PROMOTION, WP:RESUME and maybe even a touch of WP:NOTHERE. I understand Brochu is notable for inclusion but there needs to be considerable clean up and scrubbing if not AfD for Decker. I don't have the time but maybe someone else does. The eyes on the talk pages are just not there. Someone questioned the authenticity here Talk:Jim Brochu but no one answered the call. Maineartists (talk) 00:54, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Maineartists, the article Shawn Decker fails to demonstrate notability. But this is not one of the reasons for deletion. "Articles for which thorough attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed" is the seventh reason for deletion. So somebody thinking of deletion would have to make those thorough attempts. (You don't have the time? Me neither -- and if I did, I'd use it elsewhere.) -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 07:18, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

How do I make my userpage look less messy on desktop?

This is probably a stupid question to get from someone with an account that’s almost 4 years old, I know, but only recently did i look at my userpage in desktop mode for the first time. It is a disaster. How would I go about centering the section titles and the userboxes? Monkeymoo458 (they/he) userpage talk 01:02, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Major update, I am about 99% sure i have figured it out. Will come back if i am right. Monkeymoo458 (they/he) userpage talk 01:12, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

I did it! Monkeymoo458 (they/he) userpage talk 01:45, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Glad you found a way! CMD (talk) 01:51, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

@Monkeymoo458: You can wrap the userboxes titles in {{white}} to make them more readable on a dark background. The show/hide link cannot change color in that template. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:43, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Information on actor Gene Evans

you did not mention his starring role in the Giant Behemoth, one of our favorite science fiction movies ~2026-58889-22 (talk) 01:24, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-58889-22: Gene Evans#Partial filmography includes:

• The Giant Behemoth (1959) - Steve Karnes

PrimeHunter (talk) 01:49, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

(I wonder what a pygmy behemoth would look like? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-56420-06 (talk) 08:26, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

In a 1959 movies context, "less magnified" might be all. But part of the problem is finding an expert who can reliably classify your behemoth, beyond just answering the obvious question of whether he indeed be moth. (The beitbird and beitplane have usually turned out to be just someone wearing a cape.) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 15:20, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Can we update all usage of urls of a usurped website at once?

The website http://www.cineartistes.com/ has been used in many references (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=cineartistes&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1&searchToken=3mpxcywwp8besh6wwnwvjoy7v), but has been usurped and no longer carries relevant information. The archived pages (wherever they have been), still work. I am wondering if there is a central way to mark all links to this website as usurped? Benderisgreat98 (talk) 04:51, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

You can ask at WP:BOTREQ and someone with scripting tools will automate the process. Giving one or two examples of archived pages will help them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 11:16, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

@Benderisgreat98: In this case we have the more specialized Wikipedia:Link rot/URL change requests. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:22, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! I will add a topic over there Benderisgreat98 (talk) 17:47, 6 November 2026 (UTC)

FAC

A couple of months ago, I nominated an article for FAC. That nomination was recently archived. However, I've serious concerns about the judgment applied and partiality that seems to exist at FAC, which leads me to question the fairness of the archival. I'm wondering if there are ways to report situations like this, and what would that mean for the nomination? GumballNine1Nine (talk) 01:00, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

Subject: Text and citation repeatedly disappearing when editing the Asmodeus article

Hello, everyone!

I've encountered a strange problem while editing the English Wikipedia article on Asmodeus. I was trying to correct a sentence in the Testament of Solomon section concerning Asmodeus and water. However, after saving my edit, an entirely different sentence, stating that Asmodeus was born of a woman and an angel, disappeared along with its citation. I did not intentionally delete that sentence or its reference. I used Undo to restore them, but when I tried to correct the sentence about water again, the same passage and citation disappeared a second time. And I don't know why. I'm editing from an Android phone using Chrome in desktop mode. Could someone please check the revision history and help me understand why this keeps happening? I would like to correct the inaccurate statement without removing unrelated, properly sourced content. Neoscolastica Ontologica Superiore (talk) 02:46, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

Is this promotional? Not sure.

While researching something else, I noticed the James Clapper says "He appeared in the 2025 documentary film The Age of Disclosure, directed by Dan Farah, in which he was interviewed alongside 33 other current and former government, military and intelligence officials about UFOs" then I saw that Marco Rubio says "Rubio participated in The Age of Disclosure, a 2025 documentary film about UFOs and supposed government programs involving recovery of alien technology that crashed on Earth" and Mike Rounds says "Rounds participated in The Age of Disclosure, a 2025 documentary film about UFOs and supposed government programs involving recovery of alien technology crashed on Earth" I stopped looking there, but there are a boatload of links to the Age of Disclosure page.

My question is this; is this WP:PROMOTIONAL? If they hit the Wikipedia page of ever person they interviewed, that's a lot of links to that one film. Is having it on the Rubio page undue weight? Or should I just ignore it? --Guy Macon (talk) 03:30, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

How do I permanently disable "Hide probably good edits"?

I'm trying to fight vandalism on the site, and in doing so, I often look at other users' contribution histories. But whenever I open one, nothing shows up except the message, "No changes were found matching these criteria." This happens because "Hide probably good edits" is automatically enabled in the filter panel. It's annoying to have to manually disable it every time, so I was wondering if there was a way to permanently turn this filter off in account preferences or settings. JustaBeaver (talk) 03:50, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

@JustaBeaver: If "Show only likely problem edits" is enabled at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rc then disable it. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:11, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

source

0308647

Epstein files can be requested by any person as it is supposed to be public knowledge

~2026-59069-59 (talk) 04:30, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

Hi there! This is the Help Desk, a space for asking questions about using and editing Wikipedia. Do you have a question about using the files in an article, or about the content of the files? If the latter, the reference desk might be able to help you better.

Cheers. 붉은혜성라이카/BlazingCometLaika 04:41, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

Regarding recent edit to the page Fuefuki being undone

I recently edited the page Fuefuki about the city of Fuefuki in Japan, removing the "pop culture" section which states the following:

• Fuefuki serves as the inspiration for the fictional town of Inaba in the 2008 video game Persona 4.
• Fuefuki is well known for being the location of Wil's house.

Regarding the 1st bullet, it sources a video game article as its source. But if you read the actual article, the author did not backup that claim, and just links to the Wikipedia article for Fuefuki itself.

Additionally, in interviews with the director of the video game, he has said the location they went to is actually Fujiyoshida, not Fuefuki. Off the top of my head, there are 2 instances of him saying this:

1. https://web.archive.org/web/20140205015317/http://www.atlusnet.jp/topic/detail/650
2. https://news.denfaminicogamer.jp/projectbook/191030a/3

The 2nd bullet is about "Wil's house" appears to be a joke or troll edit. Like, who is Wil? What "pop culture" is this remark even referring to?

I removed this text as the 1st bullet is factually incorrect and I included a note about the source in my edit comment, and the 2nd bullet as it is obviously a joke or troll edit.

However, my edit was reverted by another editor, User:ExplorerofUniverse, calling it "vandalism" in the edit comments. While I have already left a comment on their talk page, I would appreciate some advice about what I am meant to do in this situation, as I am a new editor. Thank you. Adachi's Cabbage (talk) 08:17, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

@Adachi's Cabbage: hi, are you familiar with the WP:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle? You have made an edit, it has been reverted, so I would suggest explaining the edit on the article talk page and pinging the other editor. That way the discussion is visible to page watchers and anyone who looks for discussions about that article. On one hand your edit summary did not have all the detail you have given here, on the other you did explain why you were removing content, so it probably should not have been described as vandalism. The other editor seems fairly new in terms of edits (246 so far). TSventon (talk) 08:33, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for the advice! Adachi's Cabbage (talk) 08:39, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

There is more information at WP:dispute resolution, but hopefully BRD will be enough for now. TSventon (talk) 08:45, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

Your edit was not vandalism, and User:ExplorerofUniverse should not have described it as such . Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 09:18, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

Everyone, please refer to the response on my talk page. That was a mistake and I agree it was NOT vandalism. ExplorerofUniverse (talk) 13:17, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

Donation

i don't know if you are aware but I have been donating to Wikipedia for years now. If something happens to Wikipedia will I be informed directly? ~2026-59356-17 (talk) 13:26, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

What kind of "things" might happen that you want to be informed of? But, no...we weren't aware and I don't believe there's any kind of direct information for donors. --Onorem (talk) 13:33, 7 November 2026 (UTC)

We don't know that any user has donated or not; donation records are not linked to users of Wikipedia. It's up to you to stay informed about the status of Wikipedia or the Wikimedia Foundation. Donating gives you no special access to information. 331dot (talk) 13:34, 7 November 2026 (UTC)