Is there any list of most viewed articles of poor quality (like below C-class)? Grumpylawnchair (talk) 03:23, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

@Grumpylawnchair: Not that I know of, but if something like that exists the people over at WP:VPT would know about it, maybe ask over there. See Wikipedia:Statistics#Page_views. Polygnotus (talk) 12:52, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

@Polygnotus: Thank you! Regards, Grumpylawnchair (talk) 14:22, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

@Polygnotus: Btw, I found what I was looking for: User:DataflowBot/output/Popular low quality articles (id-2) Grumpylawnchair (talk) 21:47, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Excellent, thank you! Bookmarked. Polygnotus (talk) 04:18, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

I want to know how to do a web cite to a URL that I know is dead and only in the web archive. As best I can tell, Wikipedia requires a URL, but it also requires that the URL be distinct from the ArchiveURL. Dr. Conspiracy (talk) 04:16, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Kwdavids ("Dr. Conspiracy"), here is a Wayback Machine scrape from 2008 of the first of three web pages that add up to a 1950 article from Time. As I view the page (Firefox, on a computer), at the very top (by which I mean the very top of the page, not the window) I see "http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0%2C9171%2C812777-1%2C00.html". That's what you're after, unless I misunderstand you. (I could also have derived it by chopping off what's at the front of the longer, Wayback Machine URL.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:15, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi, @Kwdavids (I wish people wouldn't use signatures that completely fail to match their usernames: it makes it harder to reply).

Assuming you are using a citation template such as {{cite web}}, you should still give the original URL in url =, but also specify

url-status = dead and

archive-url =

Hope that helps. ColinFine (talk) 11:42, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Recently we've seen the rise of the term "Trump derangement syndrome(TDS)", which returned to prominence during the 2024 U.S. presidential elections and present times. Later, I got informed about a new type of term; namely the 'Musk derangement syndrome'. If you're already well-versed with TDS, you can imagine how little difference it really is to this one. Anywho, I'll briefly explain it: MDS is essentially a way the political right (Republicans) have described democrats who are irrationally reactionary to Musk, his antics and associates. It was originally coined in 2022, as far as I know, but its use has been sparse, so I'm doubting of whether or not this article is relevant or should exist.

I was informed through social media (like Youtube), which generally isn't a reliable nor relevant source to base articles on, but I did some research and found further instances of the term being used (including by government officials, for commercial uses "Etsy" and on news platforms), and as aforementioned, in 2022.

I've based the article heavily on the TDS, following a similar format.

Well, I wonder if anyone can help me out finishing the article for submission, alongside finding more citations for the text. If there's a lack of sources then the article won't be worked on further, instead I'll be waiting for the phrase to become more prominent, if it does. I also need people who are politically diverse to ensure the page is transparent and neutral, up to Wikipedia's standards, you know. But please do not delete anything without explanation and without discussing it on the talk page. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thank you. Pradedovići (talk) 17:11, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Why not just submit it, Pradedovići? -- Hoary (talk) 22:38, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

I have, but I still think the article may be lacking in some areas, which is why I asked for help with those issues. Pradedovići (talk) 07:17, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Pradedovići, I suggest that you read the WP:NEOLOGISM section of Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Cullen328 (talk) 07:20, 10 March 2025 (UTC)