Wikipedia:Help desk

Do we have a specific policy on the notability of people mentioned in the Bible? How about the Quran? If not. what would be the closest notability guideline? --Guy Macon (talk) 05:32, 24 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia:Notability (people) is the policy. I don't see how being mentioned in the Bible or Quran would make any difference. Shantavira|^{feed me} 06:55, 24 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I think this is probably a policy gap where it would be sensible to have some kind of presumed notability. I would imagine that given the sheer volume of academic study of these texts, there must be significant coverage available for any and every named figure in them. Athanelar (talk) 10:59, 24 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

List of biblical figures identified in extra-biblical sources is quite extensive, and they are virtually all blue links already. No doubt there are many more about whom we know nothing at all except that their name appears in the Bible. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:14, 24 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blastus (2010) theer were two opinions posted:

[1] "Though this individual is a biblical character, without provide additional scholarship which verifies the individual's importance (i.e. Reliable secondary sources which deal with the individual), this individual is not notable. The New Testament isn't so important in a scholarly/encyclopedic sense as to warrant articles on each named minor individual. A list perhaps, which contains individuals in said book, but not individual articles."

[2] "The Bible and Qu'ran are significant enough, and covered by so many sources, that any person mentioned in either will be the subject of significant coverage"

Now the same question appears to be surfacing at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hul (biblical figure) (ongoing AfD). --Guy Macon (talk) 12:50, 24 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

The "Wikipedia rule" that comes to my mind first, when I read the article, is that Hul definitely does not meet SIGCOV inside the Bible. He is merely mentioned, twice, in genealogy tables. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:44, 24 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

There is a lot of begatting in the Bible, and undoubtedly several figures who are hapax legomenona known by name only. The most famous of these would be, or so I assume, in the conflicting genealogies of Jesus. Shall research. kencf0618 (talk) 16:46, 24 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I would say if we did presume notability of scriptural figures then a notable exception would be anyone who is only namedropped in a genealogy. Athanelar (talk) 19:32, 24 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

The Christian texts must be among the most-studied published works ever. Over the last 2,000 years there have probably been sufficient students of Christian theology to have analysed the Bible from end to end, many times over. This includes the apocrypha and other historical texts that, while related, are not normally bundled with those (Secret Gospel of Mark, anyone?). In these researches, these students have, between them, probably covered every single aspect of interpersonal relationships, not just the begetting. In the libraries of Oxford and Cambridge there's a wealth of published work that would satisfy WP:V, it just needs somebody to go and read it all. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:36, 24 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

My mum became obsessed with Christianity at an early age. She even refused to marry my dad (who turned out to be a complete asshole) unless he was baptised as an Anglican, and subsequently named me, her oldest son, after Jeremiah. I feel the weight of thousands of years of biblical exegesis upon my shoulders - a bit like Atlas: thus woe unto the lot of you, and no mistake. MinorProphet (talk) 15:22, 25 September 2026 (UTC) Reply

The result of the AfD for Hul (biblical figure) was no consensus (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hul (biblical figure) ). I was surprised, given the sourcing and the only mention in the Bible being in a couple of genealogies. I can't imagine any name mentioned in the Bible or Quran (and maybe the Book of Mormon) that doesn't have some speculation in ancient texts or Bible/Quran religious dictionaries, so it appears that they are all notable. Oh well. I seldom edit any religion page, so Not My Clown. Not My Circus. --Guy Macon (talk) 11:31, 30 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Next discussion: WP:HD#Titles without Wikipedia page on lists.

Almost all of the video game lists have different layouts and info. See List of ZX Spectrum games, List of Nintendo Entertainment System games, List of Xbox 360 games (A–L) etc. Wouldn't it be more pleasant looking and professional if they were uniform? What are the guidelines for these lists? AngelSparkles (talk) 22:25, 25 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

The info is limited to what's been published in reliable sources; you can't add in things just because you know them.

As far as layout, they don't need to be the same, but you are definitely free to go to the Talk page of one article and say "I think this other article is laid out better, for [these reasons], and I think we should change this one to be more like it." TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 22:39, 25 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for replying @TooManyFingers. In my opnion it would be a lot cleaner if they all followed the same guidelines. Like if somebody decides to make a new list for an upcoming console he's free to do whatever he wants with it? That doesn't make sense. Maybe with AI we can make then all uniform. Changing them manually will take a very long time now. AngelSparkles (talk) 18:43, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

We do not permit the use of AI to edit Wikipedia. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:03, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

This isn't something that rises to the level of needing codification in the WP:MOS. There are no deadlines, so if people agree that your proposed format is better, they can choose to redo it in the new layout. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:28, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Tenryuu @TooManyFingers Hm ok. Are videogames that have no Wikipedia page allowed on lists? The page List of ZX Spectrum games is full of them. AngelSparkles (talk) 15:12, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Is there a tool which I can use to quickly revert edit just from seeing (user's) edit history or is there none? Rollback doesn't work when the edit is years old or other recent edits to the pages have been made. zglph^•talk• 11:43, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, @Zglph!

You can take a look at Wikipedia:Tools and Wikipedia:Editing tools to see which tool suits you to quickly revert edits just from seeing the page history!

Happy editing! (⁠◕⁠ᴗ⁠◕⁠✿⁠) Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 12:33, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, the above reply was not helpful to me. Can anyone with their knowledge of tools help me out with the query? zglph^•talk• 16:55, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi again, @Zglph!

Try taking a look at Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism/Tools to see which tool you can use to revert an edit just from seeing the page history!

Again, happy editing! (⁠◕⁠ᴗ⁠◕⁠✿⁠) Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 17:08, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I think they're looking for a tool that lets them revert from the user contributions page, not from the page history of an article. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 19:48, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

In that case WP:POPUPS is the tool for the job (and man others!) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 12:32, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I accessed Queen Mary University of London today from a mobile device, using the default appearance setting (Vector 2022). The particular page is probably not relevant, but I figured I'd provide it. At the very top of the article, below the title, there is a scrollable image gallery with all the pictures displayed later on in the article. I figured this was a Manual of Style/Layout error and went to correct it, but this image gallery doesn't show up in the source. Is this some new 'feature'? Is it a bug?

Thanks! —§§ LegFun §§ talk §§ 17:07, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, @LegesFundamentales!

Try seeing Wikipedia:Bug reports and feature requests to check if the bug was reported. (⁠◕⁠ᴗ⁠◕⁠✿⁠) Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 17:11, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Huh, seems it's somehing the WMF people are experimenting with. I think they're calling it the carousel media viewer setting? (Based on this: .)

I'm not sure I like how it overrides the standard layout...

—§§ LegFun §§ talk §§ 17:25, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Maybe, but hopefully the bug you're experiencing will be fixed soon!

Happy editing! (⁠◕⁠ᴗ⁠◕⁠✿⁠) Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 17:28, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@LegesFundamentales: It's a deliberate feature called "Image carousel". You can disable it at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:05, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@PrimeHunter

Oh dear, I had worried it might be. How dreadful! (In my view, at least.) Is it WMF policy to irritate editors as much as possible by overriding the agreed-upon layout? Can't they keep their corporate crap on their side of the line and leave us, the ones who actually produce the contents of Wikipedia that attracts millions of people to the site, alone?

I suppose I had better see whether there's a campaign to resist this nonsensical change underway. Meanwhile, I'll toggle this beta feature off, using the link you handily provided.

—§§ LegFun §§ talk §§ 19:23, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I thought they agreed to turn that off after an outcry a few months ago when they were beta testing it and people pointed out the problems with images being divorced from their contexts, and some unfortunate cropping on images featuring nudity. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:03, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, RFC from June, that was formally closed just a few days ago noting that it had been returned to Beta and "The WMF should provide its next update at an appropriate noticeboard. The WMF should give the community ample opportunity to run an RfC regarding the proposed launch version of the feature." ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:08, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

That last quotation could have been fair and good, but it turned out unfair and bad. All that's needed is to remove the word "version", so that the RfC becomes "whether to launch" rather than "which version". TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 22:52, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I added a section on the Sarah and Josiah Moore house where the Villisca killings occurred about every show featuring the house but I can't decide if they should go under the Villisca axe murders or not. ~2026-51931-91 (talk) 19:44, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

It seems you probably need to read Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Some (maybe all?) of your material was based on unreliable sources, and that's probably why your edits were reverted. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 21:37, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I noticed that this opening paragraph is written weirdly/incorrectly, it should probably be fixed: In the Name of Blossom. Nicereddy (talk) 21:21, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

You are free to do so yourself, or you may propose the specific changes you want with a formal edit request on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 21:25, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I reverted a recent edit that made no sense. Thank you for noticing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 21:27, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I have opened a sourcing and scope discussion at Talk:Danny Lane#Undisclosed paid-editing block: review of fourfold 2016 article expansion.

The editor responsible for the fourfold 2016 expansion has since been indefinitely blocked for undisclosed paid editing. An experienced editor has proposed reconstructing the article from the pre-expansion version while retaining subsequent well-sourced material, but the discussion has attracted little wider participation. I have also left a neutral notice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts.

Before starting an RfC, I would be grateful for advice on the usual next step. Is an RfC appropriate here, or is there a better venue for obtaining broader uninvolved review of a sourcing, due-weight and article-scope question of this kind?

Thanks in advance. Aequoratlas (talk) 21:47, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Do you see any good reason to not just proceed as the experienced editor suggested, omitting all the other steps you've mentioned? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 22:44, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

What I mean is, you don't need an RfC to cut garbage out of an article. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 22:46, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

My hesitation was simply the age of the overwrite and the intervening good-faith edits. Given that an editor familiar with the article has already suggested a way of preserving those, I will take it back to the article talk page rather than add another layer of process. Much appreciated. ~~~~ Aequoratlas (talk) 22:59, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Age of the inappropriate edits is certainly unimportant. Your other concern IS important, so I'm glad it's being dealt with. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 23:09, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Noted with thanks. Aequoratlas (talk) 23:20, 26 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Is there any user script that would allow me to select text and automatically change its case (which would usually be to convert it from title to sentence case)? Thanks! Helpful Cat🐈 05:23, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I don't know. But I can imagine that if such a script existed and was highly reliable, it could just be applied automatically in all the places where you might want to use it ... TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 05:47, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

True. I don't imagine any such script would be totally reliable (it would still require manual review), but it would save some time and effort. Helpful Cat🐈 05:54, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I recently came across User:Epicgenius/capitalize, and it seems to do exactly what you're looking for. (CC: User:Epicgenius) — DVRTed (Talk) 06:22, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Amazing, thanks! Helpful Cat🐈 06:25, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I tried it and it doesn't seem to work - the links in the sidebar appear, but I click them and nothing happens. (Using the source editor in Firefox) Thanks for the recommendation, though! Helpful Cat🐈 06:44, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Ah! I just skimmed through the code; it won't work if you have syntax highlighting enabled (Preferences -> Editing -> Enable syntax highlighting for wikitext). (Epicgenius, if you want to add support for it, here's an example of how I did it for a similar script: special:diff/1325653048.) — DVRTed (Talk) 06:58, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Oh, thanks for figuring that out. That helps because I can just temporarily disable syntax highlighting with the toolbar button and then the script works, without me having to go to preferences to disable it. Helpful Cat🐈 07:27, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@DVRTed, thanks for the heads up. Yeah, that's basically what happened here (same issue came up for User:Epicgenius/sortcategories.js). I'll see if I can fix it. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:40, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@DVRTed and @Helpful Cat, the capitalization script should work in the syntax highlighter now. Thanks for bringing up that issue. (As for the category sorting script, I'll work on that later...) – Epicgenius (talk) 13:58, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

It works now, thank you for the fix! Helpful Cat🐈 14:02, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I use a browser plug-in for this: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/text-case-changer/ -- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 09:03, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, that's great too! Helpful Cat🐈 09:08, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Special:Diff/1376983694

Kindly help me fix the links of Debagada district article. I couldn't be able to fix them by myself. Please help.

Thanks, Drpriyesh1 (talk) 07:46, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I have fixed three of the four errors; see the article history. The fourth source is not responding, so I cannot find the relevant data to include. If you can see the source, please mirror the changes I made, or ask here again. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 12:01, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks a ton! 🙏 Drpriyesh1 (talk) 13:21, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Could somebody provide the link for the list of available maps for the fields: ' | map = .. ' and ' | pushpin_map = .. ' in infoboxes like 'organization' or 'venue' etc..? I am able to find a map, but it only lists one example ie of Japan: Template:Location_map+/relief
--Gpkp (talk) 08:26, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

See Category:Location map modules and its subcategories.

The Japan example is at Module:Location map/data/Japan; you can search for all pages begining "Module:Location map/data" like this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 12:24, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

wow.. Thank you Pigsonthewing. --Gpkp (talk) 15:01, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Is there any process for monitoring edits to FAs, to ensure they remain "the best articles Wikipedia has to offer"? I'm watching one which has had 66 edits in the last 24 hours. I'm not saying they're detrimental, because I don't know enough about the subject to give an opinion, but I notice one prolific, apparently good faith, editor is a registered user with no user page, less than 6 months on WP, and a talk page discussing their past errors with other articles. I'm feeling uncomfortable that a FA is being significantly edited without any monitoring. Masato.harada (talk) 11:58, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

It would be very surprising if no-one has that article on their watchlist.

Today's FA, Valley Parade, for example, has 39 page watchers. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 12:26, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Preventing things from being edited, "just in case", is regarded as being against core Wikipedia policy. An article can usually only get protected after there is clearly an ongoing problem with that article - not because there could be one later. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:18, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi Masato.harada. I'm a bit late to the party perhaps, but I respond anyway. Due the extensive review (at least compared to other articles) an article needs to undergo to be granted FA status, most of them probably have multiple stewards watching for anything that might detract from their FA status. Of course, this doesn't mean that they can't be vandalized or subjected to otherwise sub-standard editing, but it does generally mean someone will notice when they are. If you feel the edits you're referring to above are sub-standard in terms of relative Wikipedia policies/guidelines, you can of course WP:FIXIT yourself or revert back to last stable version per WP:STATUSQUO. You should leave an edit summary explaining why you did what you did and maybe even follow that up with a post on the article's talk page. If you're more of a WP:CAUTIOUS type, you can start a discussion about the edits on the article's talk page first, and notify others per WP:APPNOTE: I believe all FA have a template at the top of their talk pages telling who reviewed the article and when they did so. Just for reference, according to Category:Wikipedia former featured articles, there are quite a lot of articles which have been demoted from FA status; so, it's not like once an FA, always an FA. I'd imagine that most of these had nothing to do with random vandalism or bad editing and everything to due with different interpretations of or changes in the FA criteria over the years. It's sometimes helpful to remember WP:CCC when it comes to Wikipedia.

Finally, someone not having a user page isn't really a good indicator of their contributions to Wikipedia. There are lots of users who have been improving articles regularly for years that have (for whatever reason) decided not to make a user page, and there are lots users who been editing for years who only seem to spend their time making edits in their user space: often the first thing they do is create their user page. I'm only making this comment because you didn't identify the specific user that led you to posting here (you don't need to do that). If that user is making bad edits, it almost certainly has nothing to do with them not having a user page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:04, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

OK, thanks to you both. I'm more comfortable now. Masato.harada (talk) 06:51, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

How do I view edit history of deleted pages without Wayback machine? Fence127 (talk) 17:27, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Become an administrator - which requires surviving some sort of Hell Week. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Look out it's Jimothy!} 17:32, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wasn't there some off-wiki service that allowed you to do this? Like wayback machine but only for Wikipedia. Fence127 (talk) 17:37, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

That was Deletionpedia, but it has been shutdown. MKFI (talk) 19:05, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I tried 'wikibin', but it doesn't show categories which is what I'm looking for. Fence127 (talk) 19:21, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

You can view the metadata (authors+timestamps) of deleted pages using User:SD0001/deleted-metadata-link.js. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:47, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I want to view the actual page before it was deleted. Fence127 (talk) 17:51, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Fence127: Which page and why do you want to view it? PrimeHunter (talk) 19:40, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

A category that has been G1 (patent nonsense) speedy deleted. I want to know what was on it. I remember reading it before it got deleted. Fence127 (talk) 19:44, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I edited it too. Fence127 (talk) 19:44, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Fence127: You created Category:Draft namespace move redirects wiht this content:

[[File:Symbol redirect vote2.svg]]
''This category is for drafts that were moved to another namespace.''
==M==
[[Draft:Mokhtar Adbelatif Stadium]]

The only other edit was adding {{db-nonsense}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:47, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I created a sandbox test with the wiki text in the box. Only the icon showed up way too big. That was the only issue. Fence127 (talk) 06:52, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Fence127: I don't know what your intention was but it appears you don't know how categories work or what move means. Draft:Mokhtar Adbelatif Stadium had not been moved before it was deleted and that's not how you place a page in a category. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:30, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Now I do. This was a long time ago. Fence127 (talk) 14:15, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Move means rename and/or move into another namespace. Fence127 (talk) 14:39, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Fence127: Then maybe you could create a meaningful category today but I still don't know its purpose. Many drafts were moved to mainspace to become articles. Some poor articles were moved to the draft namespace. Some userspace drafts were moved to the draft namespace as a preferred location. Some draftspace drafts were moved to the userspace of the author. Some drafts were randomly moved by vandals or confused editors and maybe moved back. Which of these or what else would the category be for and why does it need a category? It's hard to tell when the only example is a page which was never actually moved. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:18, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I don't understand what you're asking me. Fence127 (talk) 15:34, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Fence127: You appear unhappy that Category:Draft namespace move redirects was deleted and said the only issue was the icon size. I'm trying to explain there were other issues which should be addressed if you want to create the category. If you don't then I'm not asking for anything. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:57, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

OK. I am just asking out of curiosity, not trying to restore the old page. Fence127 (talk) 18:47, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I need help with editing the Other media section of the Sonny with a Chance article. This link^[1] says Cite error: The named reference "dvdbigbreak" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page). And see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sonny_with_a_Chance#DVD_releases ~2026-52284-22 (talk) 22:06, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

You added a reference name that already existed but added different content. I've turned it back into a refname reference only, because the reference you added is slightly less complete (the other had an archive URL, etc.). - Purplewowies (talk) 23:25, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Due to browser limitations, I can’t load these websites to check; are the sources posted here reliäble and are they sufficient to support the requested edit? Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} (any/all) 23:56, 27 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Shadestar474: my first thought is that if an editor is blocked from editing articles, making edit requests for controversial topics is probably a bad idea. I am unsure what kind of editing would be a good idea.

My second thought is to check Talk:List of people named in the Epstein files, which gives four criteria for inclusion of names. The other editor has not shown that the four criteria are met. TSventon (talk) 02:19, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Alright, thank you; just checking. Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} (any/all) 02:21, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I looked at a couple of these, not knowing really what to expect from some Epstein thing, and in one of them there was a huge list of people. I immediately thought - without having known about any of what TSventon has written - "Looking at these papers without any criteria can't possibly be right". So ... yeah. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:48, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

where is the my articles section G236 (talk) 00:57, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@G236: You will probably want to look at your watchlist. Articles and other pages you edit go onto your watchlist by default (you can change these settings in Preferences → Watchlist). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:06, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I think I used the templates wrong. Could anybody help me out?

VoteSafe
VoteSafe (disambiguation)

I think I got the order the wrong way around? Though I am not entirely sure. I want to add {{distinguish|...}} on both America PAC and Tom Ridge. I was thinking of, instead of doing so inline, creating sub headings titled VoteSafe and VoteSafe.org, for the already existing paragraphs on both pages. Ybllaw (talk) 09:30, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the help thus far. I also went ahead and created the sections (using the other uses template instead of the distinguish) at both pages' VoteSafe paragraphs. I have not yet updated the disambiguation page to refer to these new sections directly, as I don't know if the edit will be approved and thus persist. Ybllaw (talk) 10:24, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

As there was no reverting thus far, I've also updated the links now. Ybllaw (talk) 10:35, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

	This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hello, I am reaching out for guidance regarding the existing Wikipedia page about Jacques Fath the couturier, but also about the possible creation of a separate page dedicated to Maison Jacques Fath. For transparency, I currently work with the company developing Maison Jacques Fath. Before making any edits or creating a new page, I would like to make sure that I follow Wikipedia’s rules correctly, particularly regarding conflicts of interest and neutrality. I have a few questions: Official website : A link to the official Jacques Fath website appears to have been removed from the existing Jacques Fath page. I would like to understand why and under what circumstances an official website may be included. Images : Some photographs related to Jacques Fath were also removed in the past. How can I find the exact reasons for their removal, and what would be required to properly use photographs from the Maison’s archives? Maison Jacques Fath page : We are considering creating a separate page about Maison Jacques Fath as a fashion house. How can we determine whether it meets Wikipedia’s notability requirements, and would it be preferable to prepare a draft for review first before posting it ? Finally, given my professional connection to Maison Jacques Fath, I would appreciate guidance on the most transparent and appropriate way for me to contribute. My intention is to fully respect Wikipedia’s rules regarding neutrality, independent sources and conflicts of interest. Thank you very much for your guidance. Yulia

Yulia Pod (talk) 10:15, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Previous discussion: WP:HD#Standards and guidelines for video game lists

Are videogames that have no Wikipedia page allowed on lists? The pages List of ZX Spectrum games and List of Atari 8-bit computer games are full of them. If they don't have their own article it often means they're not relevant enough to be on Wikipedia. But if that's the case, should they even be on lists? AngelSparkles (talk) 19:15, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Per WP:LISTV, while I'm okay with a game that at least has a bluelink, I think redlinked games need to be supported by sources. DonIago (talk) 19:21, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

If "ZX Spectrum" has no article, then "List of ZX Spectrum Games" is definitely not allowed to exist at all. But if ZX Spectrum has an article, and there is reliable-sources proof that they really made Games A, B, and C, there is no literal rule saying that Game B must have an article to get on the list. But it's very often better to all agree to act as if that rule did exist, to avoid lists that are stupid.

However, even if everyone knows they also made Game D, Game D is absolutely not allowed on the list unless we have reliable-sources proof that it's by them. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 19:55, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'll just note here, just for unneeded posterity, that the ZX Spectrum was a console that was really popular in the UK about 40 years ago. And the article is a WP:GA! It would definitely be nice to improve the sourcing on the list. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 03:46, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

(About my "avoiding lists that are stupid": it depends what kind of list it is. Some lists are not very long even if you do include all, so then you can.) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:10, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

In my opinion, those lists could very well be removed, because Wikipedia also has the category lists. Category:ZX Spectrum games. All games are already in there and that page isn't cluttered with red links and wrong info. It looks much cleaner. Why have 2 lists with the same purpose. AngelSparkles (talk) 18:38, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

as mentioned above, WP:LISTV has this guidance:

"Reliable sources applies equally to a list of like things as it does for the content article on each individual thing listed.".

Everything on the list page should have a citation - regardless of whether there is an individual page or not - anything unsourced can be removed. Stooob (talk) 12:39, 30 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

You did not write about his movie in 1962 “The Unsinkable Molly Brown” with Debbie Reynolds! It was a fantastic movie. This was a great movie featuring Mr. Keel’s singing and the great Debbie Reynolds. This was not included in his bio! ~2026-52204-86 (talk) 20:02, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi ~2026-52204-86 we have an article The Unsinkable Molly Brown (film) - but that does not mention Howard Keel at all. If you think we have missed something, please provide a reference from a WP:Reliable source about his role in the movie. - Arjayay (talk) 20:07, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

The Unsinkable Molly Brown (film) was released in 1964, not 1962, and there is no indication in that article that Howard Keel appeared in it.

It was based on The Unsinkable Molly Brown (musical) of 1960. Again, Howard Keel did not appear in that initial production. He did appear in a touring stage production of the musical in 1971 and 1973.

You may have mistaken the movie's actual lead actor Harve Presnell for Howard Keel: they are not unalike. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-41275-62 (talk) 20:16, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Howard Keel#Stage work says The Unsinkable Molly Brown (1971–1972; 1973). There is no sign he was in the film. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:28, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Are there any scripts or tools that allow me to make repetitive edits (especially to wikitables) without using AI? Before being warned, I admittedly used AI to reshuffle wikitables [1]. I don't want to use AI anymore but is it there any non-AI gadget that allows me to save time dealing with tables? Wikipediæ philosophia (talk) 22:17, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Wikipediæ philosophia: there is a help page, Help:Table, which lists tools in its external links section. You could try asking on the talk page there. I have found importing a table from Excel useful.

Page watchers, the warning is at User talk:Wikipediæ philosophia#September 2026. TSventon (talk) 12:59, 30 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

need to change 2700 occurrences of SensCritique and senscritique.com to SensCritique [fr]

see:

• https://www.senscritique.com/
• {{ill|SensCritique|fr|SensCritique}}

need bot or script

Xo4v (talk) 22:40, 28 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Please see Wikipedia:Bot requests. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 02:38, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

At Talk:Cathy Dennis#Date of birth and other claims there was consensus to remove the birth date per Cathy's request and WP:DOB. I thought the year should have been kept, but the editors working the page decided to nuke the whole thing.

The problem is that anyone using autowikibot will see a suggestion to add Category:Year of birth missing (living people). What is the best way to let autowikibot users know that this isn't a case of someone forgetting to add a DOB? Will they see a HTML comment?

Alternatively, should I just push harder to have the year listed? Cathy seemed to be concerned about her birthday being published, not her age. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:10, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

If the consensus was to remove everything including the year, then perhaps pushing hard to get it re-added might not be a good idea because the others involved might start wrongly accusing you of WP:IDHT. If the consensus was unclear on the year, however, then seeking further clarification should be OK. As for the autowikibot stuff, perhaps Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser (I think that's the same thing) would be the place query about that. Someone had to have created the bot and someone has to be monitoring it, Maybe "Request a feature" is the place to suggest such a change if needed; it's possible noone anticipated such an issue. Other than that, you could try leaving WP:HIDDEN notes in the text (near anywhere Dennis's DOB might be added and at the top of the categories section) asking those wanting to do so to check the article's talk page first. You might also want to suggest somehow fixing that discussion on the article's talk page so that it doesn't get archived (if the page is set up to archive). I'm not sure of the technical side of doing such a thing, but it would be helpful for the relevant discussion to always be on the article's talk page if you're going to make reference to in hidden notes. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:24, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I'm just wondering how I create a map with pinpoints of different locations, for example the places someone who is missing was last seen. I've created some pages where I would like to add maps, but I'm not really sure how to do it. Thank you. ItsShandog (talk) 07:42, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Less than a week ago, ItsShandog, I could have written the same message (aside from the bit about the last sightings of the missing). Essential reading: WP:WikiProject Maps. You might use Template:Location map many. (The "many" in the name is to suggest the possibility of many markers, but the template works well for a single marker, and of course allowing many markers lets you add "workplace", "body found" or whatever.) You may well go dizzy when first trying to make sense of map construction. Certainly I did. But I took a break, resolving to return to the matter when wider awake. That worked. Best of luck with your cartographical adventures, -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 09:42, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the help. ItsShandog (talk) 09:48, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Template:OSM Location map may be preferable. Darrelljon (talk) 16:18, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

How to download wikipedia aap,I can't download on my device,because its showing this aap is not compitable with your device,what should i do ~2026-52307-12 (talk) 10:19, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@~2026-52307-12: What is your device including version number or similar, and where are you trying to download the app? It's very limited what the app adds over the normal browser interface and it omits other things. You can do fine without it. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:27, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

did cbs copy rite june 20 1962 broadcast in 1990 ~2026-52381-54 (talk) 13:02, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

This is not a general help desk, sorry 331dot (talk) 13:14, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Tried incognito window, same behaviour.

I'd like to write an article about Bot Colony _Redux. Bot Colony, which had an article in Wikipedia for many years and was retired yesterday from Steam.

Bot Colony _Redux https://store.steampowered.com/app/3613080/Bot_Colony__redux/ the successor game, should be released on October 30, 2026.

As I haven't posted a lot on Wikipedia, I could use help from an editor (not sure how Wikipedia responds to these inquiries, can you kindly reply? I'll check my profile and make sure the email address is operational ).

The Bot Colony _Redux article should point to the Bot Colony article. Bot Colony _Redux is a newly developed game intended to succeed/replace Bot Colony. The article should cover the development history, impact of the emergence of Generative-AI, differences from the original Bot Colony, new content (Riot episode, a Tutorial), support for 16 languages.

Sensebased (talk) 14:10, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Sensebased: I guess your heading refers to the text "Contribute" in a menu. It's a heading for the following links and never a link itself. It has misled others and I pointed out the poor design in phab:T419124: "Sidebar section headings in Vector 2022 are not visually distinguishable enough from disabled links". You are certainly allowed to contribute. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:22, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, @Sensebased as a relatively inexperienced editor is like saying "I want to learn to be a builder. I'm going to start by building a house".

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 20:49, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

(I know your account has been there since 2015, but with only 72 edits in your history, you are still a new editor) --ColinFine (talk) 20:51, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I created Draft:Daktar Kaku on 27 September. Today, when I was about to move it to mainspace, I noticed that another editor had directly created Daktar Kaku on 28 September. Daktar Kaku is poorly developed, poorly formatted and has limited sourcing. Whereas Draft:Daktar Kaku is substantially developed, well sourced and well formatted.

When a draft already exists, editors are generally encouraged to work on the existing draft rather than create a separate article. In this case, the mainspace article was created after my draft. I came to know about it only when I was preparing to move my completed draft to mainspace.

What would be the appropriate way to proceed here? Should the existing article be replaced by the draft....or is there another procedure I should follow? BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 15:03, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I would first attempt to discuss the situation with the creator of the article and try to collaborate. 331dot (talk) 15:12, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Can you please create a draft for the 2027-28 United States Television Schedule please. ~2026-52401-64 (talk) 15:07, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

This isn't the place to request an article, that's requested articles(which admittedly is severely backlogged). Also see WP:CRYSTAL. 331dot (talk) 15:10, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Can You Please Fix The errors I Made On the draft 2027 NFL season page please. ~2026-52401-64 (talk) 15:45, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, @~2026-52401-64.

The way to fix the errors you made is to cite the actual sources you are citing. Since you haven't done so, we don't know where the citations are supposed to point to.

Creating an article without first finding the reliable, independent, substantial secondary sources that are required (see WP:42) is like starting to build a house without surveying the plot to make sure it's suitable to build on, or checking that local laws allow you to build there: there is a very good chance that you are totally wasting your time.

Please see your first article. ColinFine (talk) 20:57, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I am GVN Raju, How to correct my date of birth, it was showing as 28th March 1964 and 26th March 1964. it should be corrected as 28th March 1963 as per my aadhar card. I also want to bring to your notice some of recent year achievements (with all press clipping proofs ) needs to be uploaded. please guide to whom I need to share.

GVNRAJU1963 (talk) 16:06, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

 Courtesy link: G. V. N. Raju --Finngall ^talk 16:32, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

In re the DoB, I'm removing it wholesale as unsourced. (No, we cannot use government IDs as sources for that.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Look out it's Jimothy!} 16:33, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'm also going to BHFH the sources:

None of your sources are any good, full stop and end of. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Look out it's Jimothy!} 16:51, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I don't know why my addition to an article doesn't appear. It was my first time and I guess I could be missing a step. FutanariReiwa (talk) 20:11, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi @FutanariReiwa. I don't see any contributions from you. Did you press the Publish changes button to publish your edit? qcne (talk) 20:18, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your reply. Maybe I didn't. Is it possible that my contribution was saved somehow? FutanariReiwa (talk) 20:23, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

If you did not hit that button, then it was not saved. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Look out it's Jimothy!} 20:38, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your help. I just made the edit successfully! FutanariReiwa (talk) 20:50, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

without Google how to download wiki ap directly? ~2026-52395-61 (talk) 20:54, 29 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'm not quite sure I'm understanding your question, but the Wikipedia app is available from open source app repositories like F-Droid, as well as the Samsung Galaxy Store. See List of Wikipedia mobile apps#Wikimedia Foundation, mw:Wikimedia Apps, and meta:Wikimedia Apps for more distribution locations and information. — PeterCooperJr (talk) 02:34, 30 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@~2026-52395-61: I'm also unsure what you mean. If you mean without the Google Chrome browser then your phone probably has Google Play Store to download apps. See https://support.google.com/googleplay/answer/190860?hl=en. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:57, 30 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I recently made the draft Dissomphalus, which is a genus of flat wasps. Do I need to list all of the species? Versions111 (talk • contribs) 08:38, 30 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, @Versions111. I don't know the answer, but you might find it in WP:WikiProject Tree of Life/Taxon template. ColinFine (talk) 09:05, 30 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

You may either list them, or say, "there are 42 species" (or however many there are). If there are hundreds, it would be better to list them (if at all) on a separate "list of species in the genus Dissomphalus" page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 12:58, 30 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I couldn’t find the whole list for Dissomphalus species. If there are, it can be outdated as a 2026 revision states that Dissomphalus has 639 valid species globally. (source) Versions111 (talk • contribs) 06:57, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I would suggest listing only the most significant species. Here's a sample article which has such a list: Lamellibrachia. (The referencing within that section is good in principle although its implementation is not as good as would be desirable.) Hope that helps. Feline Hymnic (talk) 08:17, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Can I make a list of Dissomphalus species mentioned in the citations? Versions111 (talk • contribs) 12:40, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Yes. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 12:42, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I made the list page at my sandbox^{(and also AFCed the draft)}. Please send feedbacks. Versions111 (talk • contribs) 14:03, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Is {{Commons category}} an external link and has to be placed below ==External links== in a wiki page..?
--~2026-52848-82 (talk) 12:20, 30 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Per the template documentation, this template should be placed at the top of the last section on the page, which is sometimes but not always ==External links==. Certes (talk) 12:39, 30 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello there !

I have a few questions about an existing page, as well as a page I would like to create. I don't know where I can ask them because I am relatively new here, so I would be happy to have any kind of help and information that you have for me.

First of all, I want to be very transparent about my connection to the subjects I am asking about. I currently work for the company developing Maison Jacques Fath. Before editing anything, I would like to make sure that I follow Wikipedia’s rules about conflicts of interest and neutrality.

My questions are :

1. The link to the official website Jacques Fath was removed from the Jacques Fath page. Could you please explain why ? And what are the conditions for adding it there ?
2. Some photos related to Jacques Fath were also removed from the Jacques Fath page. I would like to know the reason for this removal and maybe a correct way to use some photos from the Jacques Fath’s archives ?
3. The last question is about creation of a separate Wikipedia page for Maison Jacques Fath as a fashion house. My team and I have a large historical documentation about Maison Jacques Fath. Clearly we will follow Wikipedia’s rules about neutrality and about the encyclopedic character of the information that is posted here. Keeping that in mind, do we need to know anything else about creating a page on Wikipedia ? Is it better to create a draft for a review for the Wikipedia users of Wikipedia admins before really posting it and reviewing it then ?

Once again, given my professional connection to Maison Jacques Fath, I want to do things right and to be transparent from the beginning due to the respect for the rules. Yulia Pod (talk) 12:35, 30 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure has most of the relevant information for editors in your position. I don't know why the official link and images were removed, but WP:ELOFFICIAL and Wikipedia:Image use policy may be useful. It may be that the images are copyrighted or not clearly identified as having a licence allowing their reuse in Wikipedia, but that's just a guess. Certes (talk) 12:48, 30 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello @Yulia Pod.

As part of the collaborative nature of editing Wikipedia, when somebody makes an edit that you don't like or disagree with, your first step is almost always to open a discussion with that editor, usually on the article's talk page (see WP:BRD). This is also more likely to get you the answer than asking a random collection of editors why another editor did something.

But you may also get part of the answer from looking at Special:History/Jacques Fath . I suspect that the edit on 2026-06-17T01:25:18 by a bot called "CommonsDelinker" is part of the answer, given that the edit summary was

Removing French_couturier_Jacques_Fath_in_Paris,_c._1940s.jpg; it has been deleted from Commons by Krd because: No permission since 9 June 2026.

As for creating a new article, I suggest you start by reading WP:PAIDADVICE.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. And that is even without the added complication of a conflict of interest. ColinFine (talk) 13:16, 30 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

magnification ~2026-52573-71 (talk) 23:14, 30 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

This page is only for questions about using Wikipedia, not for general knowledge questions. Furthermore Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a guidebook. You will have to ask for advice elsewhere. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:16, 30 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I was trying to help this user with their banned account, but instead used profane responces. Take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMelissarojas29&diff=1377783308. They said how the [] are you helping me?

With concern,

Bennett Li11 (talk) 03:13, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Bennett Li11: This seems similar to the same things you posted at the Wikipedia Teahouse about this same person. It's not clear what kind of assistance you're looking for? You tried to help this user, but they responded poorly; that kind of sucks, but that's going to happen sometimes on Wikipedia. There's really nothing anyone here at the help desk can do to change that. Some people just don't want to be helped. You're not required to interact with those who respond poorly when you try to help them; you can simply move on and leave them to their own Wikipedia fates. If their poor behavior towards others continues and becomes a pattern of violating WP:BEHAVIOR that no longer can be ignored, it will end up being eventually discussed at one of the administrator's noticeboards and most likely result in the account being formally warned to stop or even blocked. My personal opinion is that you're being WP:TROLLed, and you should just follow WP:DENY. FWIW, the temporary account that was posting on your user talk page has been indefinitely blocked by a Wikipedia administrator named Eskog. If another account shows up on your user talk page to continue where that one left off, don't reply. You can remove the post if you want and just ignore the account. I suggest that you then inform Eskog or another Wikipedia administrator about the new account as soon as possible. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:45, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Marchjuly,

I will just move on. If they make more bad comments, I will use the admins noticeboard.

Thanks,

Bennett Li11 (talk) 05:27, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

"Bad comments"? Bennett Li11, what you pointed out that they said was "How the hell are you helping me? How?" That's not something that many adult speakers of English as a first language would call "profane". Most would, I think, say that it was inoffensive. (It differs in likely offensiveness, though not in meaning, from "How the fuck are you helping me?". Indeed, it doesn't differ in meaning from plain "How are you helping me?".) -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 05:40, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Hoary,

They were just clearly not here to build an encyclopedia.

Cheers,

Bennett Li11 (talk) 05:55, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I created a couple of pages for some lesser-known poets, and I'd welcome any advice about formatting the lists of their works/selected bibliography. I have just been doing APA citations, but it looks kind of messy. Also, since it's ALL the same person, I'm not sure if having the poet's name for each entry is best.

Here are the two pages: Ernest Hartsock and Hansell Baugh.

I took a look at some other poets' pages, but I'm not seeing anything that sings to me (as my mother says! LOL), so I would welcome any advice! ArnoldEli (talk) 12:20, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

@ArnoldEli:, I randomly checked Ezra Pound#Selected works: based on that, you could remove the duplicated author from each line. You could also look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists of works. TSventon (talk) 12:39, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

THANK you so much for the suggestions, @TSventon!! I appreciate your help! ArnoldEli (talk) 13:19, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, how can I get Wikipedia:Reverting rights, and what are the requirements? thanks! Furogh e Lotf (talk) 14:22, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Anyone can do reverting, and Help:Reverting lays out some additional practical information. Rollback requirements are laid out at WP:ROLLBACK, but if I could put it simply: before granting the right we would be looking for some evidence that you can consistently revert properly. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 14:30, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Ah, that explains why I was confused :) I didn't realize that anyone can revert edits. I also couldn't find the “undo” option, so until now I've just been removing the edits and adding the correct version back manually. Is that because I'm using Wikipedia on my phone through the website? Furogh e Lotf (talk) 14:48, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I don't use the mobile interface, but I do know it's lacking in several useful features for people doing reverting. There is usually a link at the very bottom of the page which says 'Desktop view', but whether that's for you is not for me to say. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 16:07, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I see, thanks! Furogh e Lotf (talk) 16:15, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

If you go to the triple-line menu in the top-left and choose Settings, and enable "Advanced mode", you should see more options while browsing, which might include an "Undo" button when looking at a Diff for a change. Or at least, I see an Undo button, and I have Advanced mode on. Though certainly I find things easier on desktops (though that's true for me in general). — PeterCooperJr (talk) 18:38, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I don't know if I'm asking this question the right way so please bear with me. I'm trying to figure out what lived at the title El Clon prior to a page move last week. I think it was most likely a redirect without substantial edit history and the page was simply moved over the redirect. I would like to verify whether that is correct and which page the redirect pointed to. If it was not a redirect or has the history, this would be helpful to know. Specifically, I'm trying to understand pageviews data that predate the recent move, which indicate that the page was not newly created by this move. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:48, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

It seems the entire history is at Arez_(wrestler), that is just one revision redirecting from El Clon to el clon (which has since been moved to El Clon (TV series)). The title got moved there as part of a round robin. You can track this through the logs at El Clon. There don't seem to be any deleted revisions. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 16:56, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

If I understand correctly per the move log then El Clon was presumably a redirect to El clon from August 5, 2024 until September 23, 2026. I now see the evidence of the round robin move, this wasn't apparent when just looking at the history of El Clon. This is helpful, thanks! —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:39, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

good afternoon I've posted multiple sources to update the husafell stones weight and a user named pictwarrior keeps editing it without a source. I've tried to talk to them but they refuse to respond please hell M0UNTA!n85 (talk) 16:40, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Courtesy ping: Pictwarrior

@M0UNTA!n85: as you've already been told, you need to wait longer for them to respond. Wikipedia is slower-paced than social media, and it can take hours for someone to respond.

Reddit, Instagram, and Spotify are not reliable sources. Please see WP:RS. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Talk • Contribs)} 16:51, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

if I am referencing a podcast that has a PhD discuss the topic how should I reference that? M0UNTA!n85 (talk) 16:52, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

If a reliable source, such as a news organization, reported on it, you could cite that. You should not cite the podcast itself. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Talk • Contribs)} 16:56, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Podcasts aren't generally reliable sources, as they usually lack fact checking and editorial control. For example, we don't know if they checked the credentials of the PhD they interviewed. Podcasts are self published sources and should only be used in that context. As John wrote as I typed this, if a reliable source reported on the content of the podcast, that would be ok. 331dot (talk) 16:58, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Is the following article sufficient for a proper source? It's the only one that's not a podcast or social media post but it's old and in Icelandic but confirms what we're trying to change it to. Thank you for the help!Þorsteinsson, Kristleifur. "Kvíarnar á Húsafelli og aflraunasteinn séra Snorra." Eimreiðin, vol. 29, no. 3, 1923, pp. 166-173 M0UNTA!n85 (talk) 17:00, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Sources do not need to be in English as long as they are reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 20:52, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

thank you! I'll try to handle this on the talk page for the husafell stone from here. If the person writes over the edit and tries to use the source who can I ask to check and correct it? I am trying to avoid edit warring but am unsure how. M0UNTA!n85 (talk) 20:55, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

If a talk page discussion does not help to reach a consensus, see dispute resolution options. 331dot (talk) 21:00, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi @A Wondrous Raven reverted my edit in Paul Falk (figure skater) article. When reverting edits, changes should be checked carefully. Why is there a hatnote in Paul Falk (figure skater), a title that already has a disambiguator to distinguish between the two, while there is no hatnote in Paul Falk (actor)? What do you think about this? Thanks in advance for the clarification. ~2026-52681-13 (talk) 16:40, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

@~2026-52681-13: Welcome to Wikipedia:Help desk. Your edit was reverted because a hatnote should be there for disambiguated articles. Note that there are many articles on Wikipedia, and edits of that sort are usually done by human hands; it doesn't look like anyone got around to adding a hatnote to Paul Falk (actor), which is something you could do to contribute to the encyclopedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:25, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Actually, the recommended practice (WP:NAMB) is to not add hatnotes to articles with titles that are not ambiguous. There nothing to suggest that the actor was ever known for figure skating. There are times when there is some residual ambiguity, even when the wiki article title has a parenthetical disambiguator (e.g., when disambiguating by year, we can't realistically expect readers to know in advance which year is associated with the topic they are looking for). older ≠ wiser 20:00, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I've made a few edits to the TI-BASIC article this year, including some to the section on editors and tools. Within that section, I noticed that the last paragraph cited an article in a publication titled "The Spreadsheet" from late 2004, but didn't provide an ISBN or ISSN. I have attempted to look for it over the past few months, but have come empty handed. I brought up my concerns at the talk page about two months ago, but no one has responded. The text itself was added back in 2016 (ruling out any possibility of it being an AI hallucination), and the editor who added it back has not made any edits since about a month after that, so I would not expect a response from them. I have also attempted to search for other sources that could be used to support the paragraph, but that failed as well.

Would I be crazy to just remove the paragraph since I have not been able to verify that the source exists and no one, not even the editor who added it (though, to be completely honest, I didn't think to ping them despite the apparent inactivity), or should I keep searching and waiting in hopes that someone responds with some more information? YOSHI128K ^talk! 16:59, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I don't think it's necessary to remove the text but I don't think you'd be wrong to, either. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 23:25, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

How do I add a new book title for an author's listing? Feldman Public Relations (talk) 19:51, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, @Feldman Public Relations.

Given your username, are you in fact employed by on behalf of that author?

If you are, then you must make a formal declaration of your status as a paid editor (see that link for how to do so), and you should not make any direct edits to articles connected with that author.

What you should do instead is to make an edit request - most easily with the edit request wizard - so that an uninvolved editor can decide whether to implement your request or to do something else.

Note that, since promotion of any kind is not permitted on Wikipedia, there is not necessarily any reason for an article about an author to contain a full list of their works.

Rather, there should be a selected list, concentrating on those works which have been most written about by independent commentators. There is no reason to add a new title until it has been written about in that way (not just an announcement, but an independent in-depth treatment, usually a review in a reliable independent source). ColinFine (talk) 20:33, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I did not know any of this.

I have done edits to correct things for other people as a favor for years. I am not paid to do these edits but I am in public relations. Feldman Public Relations (talk) 20:42, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

If the author is your client, you are a paid editor, you do not need to be specifically paid to make edits. 331dot (talk) 20:47, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

If what you are saying is that you offer your professional services to your friends for free, okay, but it's still a conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 20:49, 1 October 2026 (UTC)Reply