I changed my NPP settings to Unreviwed Mainspace Redirects, and the number in the upper right corner now says 29K pages needing reviewing. Is this because of the changes, or were page creators really busy this week and doubled the number of unreviewed pages? L3X1 (distant write) 02:03, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi L3X1, hope you're doing well. My guess is that the increase is purely because of your changing the NPP settings and including redirects. Thanks. Lourdes 03:27, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Lourdes. L3X1 (distant write) 03:29, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ref number 14 is not done correctly. Publication should be in italics maybe??? Please leave in quote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.182.51.93 (talk) 07:03, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When you read Template:Cite web and compare it with reference 14 (which you added), it will tell you that the parameter "website" will be italicised, whereas the parameter "publisher" which you have (as usual) misused by cluttering it up with data that doesn't belong there, does not get italicised. The solution is in your own hands. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:35, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) That rather trivial and not particularly controversial fact was over-sourced (six), so I've deleted three of them, including number 14. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:37, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree - It is a trivial piece of information- Ellen Degeneras - that is why I added the ONE piece that had the information in it. As it stands, the article does NOT have any references to Ellen. Please place back the reference that I added from FOX news. Thanks 101.182.51.93 (talk) 08:00, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have failed to correctly add a 3rd book to the "Further reading" section at the very end of this page. Please leave in the quote. Thankyou101.182.51.93 (talk) 07:55, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed As previously explained to you only a few days ago, you do not place the book details within ref tags in this situation. Eagleash (talk) 08:13, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the "Grandparents" section - can you please do a direct link to Kate Lupton (Baroness von Schunck) - who has her own little section on the Lupton family page. Thanks as always 101.182.51.93 (talk) 08:28, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done

The way to do this is to use a wikilink in the form [[target article#target section|link text]]. So [[Lupton family#Kate Lupton (Baroness von Schunck)|Kate Lupton]] gives: Kate Lupton. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 10:15, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In List of Islamist terrorist attacks#2002 the table is sortable, but when one sorts by Deaths the numbers are out of order. Why is that? Can it be fixed? Saturnalia0 (talk) 21:01, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed with data-sort-type="number" in the column header [1] per Help:Sorting#Forcing a column to have a particular data type. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:55, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This weird thing keeps happening. One moment my account is blocked indefinitely by Daphne Lantier and my IP address is autoblocked; the next, I'm back to when I first made my account. Please give me an explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Will this username please work? (talk • contribs) 23:19, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your account has not been blocked on Wikipedia, Will this username please work?, and as far as I can see, Daphne Lantier is not an admin on Wikipedia and cannot block accounts. She has blocked you on Wikimedia commons, after some warnings: see Commons:User talk:Will this username please work?. If you think this was not appropriate, you need to take it up on Commons. See Commons:Commons:Blocking policy#Appealing a block. --ColinFine (talk) 09:51, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clarifying further, the same account works at wikis run by the Wikimedia Foundation but each wiki has its own domain, user pages, contributions lists, blocks, logs and so on. You are blocked at https://commons.wikimedia.org but not here at https://en.wikipedia.org. Special:CentralAuth/Will this username please work? shows you have currently made 7 edits at Commons and 10 edits here. None of the edits have been to deleted pages and none of your user pages have been deleted. User:Will this username please work? still exists and commons:User:Will this username please work? never existed. commons:User:Wikimedia Commons Welcome posted a standard welcome message to commons:User talk:Will this username please work? without deleting anything. Your repeated complaints at Commons made no sense. I guess you were blocked because they thought you were deliberatly posting nonsense complaints but maybe you are just really confused. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:31, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying that, PrimeHunter. I wonder if Will this username please work? got confused between the two separate user and user talk pages (on enwiki and on commons) and thought one of them had been deleted or altered? Either way, "Will" (for short), what you posted at the Commons Help desk was combative and accusatory, and I see why people might have got annoyed with you. --ColinFine (talk) 12:48, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I have a draft in the sandbox and was wondering how to move it to the draft section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maria Faith Tabotabo Tijani (talk • contribs) 23:29, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do you wish to move it to draftspace so you can continue working on it, or do you feel that it is ready for mainspace? Eagleash (talk) 23:36, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Maria Faith Tabotabo Tijani: I have moved it to Draft:Ryobi Holdings and added a box with some help and a submit button. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:50, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: I have taken the liberty of tweaking the AfC t/plate as it contained your username and you would have got any notifications of acceptance or rejection. Eagleash (talk) 00:07, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]