Wikipedia:Help desk

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

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

Ask a question

November 9

Why are the "what links here" pages wildly inaccurate?

I clicked the "what links here" feature on General relativity priority dispute, landing on https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/General_relativity_priority_dispute&limit=500

91 entires a listed but very few of the pages listed actually have such links.

Is that expected? Common?

Thanks! Johnjbarton (talk) 01:34, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Is there a {{History of physics}} nav box at the bottom of all (most) of those articles? That nav box links to General relativity priority dispute.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 01:40, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Of course, thanks! I looked for one at the top and didn't know about the one at the bottom. Johnjbarton (talk) 02:12, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Links from transcluded templates - navboxes in particular - are the most common culprit here, as Trappist the monk says. This is a very long-standing bug and unlikely ever to be fixed. Besides the technical side of things, a lot of things we do depend on its current behavior - if we link to a userpage with {{userlinks}} or an article with {{la}} or {{DRV links}} or whatever, we want that page to show the incoming link.

Another cause is that WhatLinksHere is abused by the devs to keep track of every page that would need to be updated if General relativity priority dispute were to be deleted, so the {{#ifexist}} parserfunction and everything similar causes a fake link to show up from the page they're used on, sometimes as a normal link, sometimes as a transclusion, depending on how the page is referenced. This is why, for example, whatlinkshere claims the article transcludes itself, and why it claims its talk page does (though the talk page, somewhat unusually, does contain a legitimate link to it, displayed on the {{copied}} template). This also is a longstanding bug, though there's at least some hope it'll someday be dealt with properly. —Cryptic 02:24, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

See User:PrimeHunter/Source links.js for a method to avoid links from transcluded templates. On General relativity priority dispute it produces Source links. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:59, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Which is an excellent stopgap so far as it goes (and one that's been pointed out to me before, so I really should've remembered it), but it's still only a stopgap. There's just too many ways to link to an article in the sense that we'd want to find them - in particular, not from a navbox - that it can't find. That search, for example, doesn't find the link from Template:History of physics, since it links to the article as [[General_relativity_priority_dispute|General relativity]] - and sometimes using underscores in the link is correct, as with T_T. It's also not tolerant to whitespace at the start or end of links, or extra whitespace in the middle (which all create identical-looking links); it won't see links generated by genuine linking templates like {{section link|General relativity priority dispute|Did Einstein develop the field equations independently?}}; and it can't reliably search for pages not in the main namespace (since it only accounts for capitalization of the first letter of the namespace, not the page title). Some of that's fixable, sure, and much of it's rare enough that it's not worth bothering to fix. But it's only ever going to be able to find most inbound links, not all of them. —Cryptic 04:48, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

As someone who edits in a non technical manner, I often want to know that a page is linked to through transcluded templates in this manner. It would be unhelpful if WLH didn't include these links. Furius (talk) 06:24, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Martineau family

Could the recently added photo of Sir William Martineau be placed up further in the section devoted to him? Can it be trimmed so that there is no black line at the top please? Thanks. 115.70.23.77 (talk) 02:41, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

The reason the photo is so far down is because the article has three other images stacked on top of each other higher up, which is pushing all of the other files down. Before we get any farther, though--that image looks like it was directly taken from a commercial site, which gives me some serious concerns about whether Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons can actually host that image. (Copyright infringement is a very real and serious issue, and while the image description does claim it was taken in 1927 (and thus would be in the public domain if I'm understanding copyright law right--which I'm probably not, and I'm also not seeing anything on the original website actually affirming that date...), it's still their image that you directly copied and uploaded.) 2603:8001:4542:28FB:114C:5267:6A5A:C9D2 (talk) 03:19, 9 November 2023 (UTC) (Please send talk messages here instead)

When copyright expires on an image, which is on January 1 of the year following 95 years after publication, then it goes into the public domain. A commercial website may continue to host the image hoping that a gullible person will inadvertently pay them to use the image, but the image is truly no longer "theirs", and anybody can use the image for any purpose without asking for permission. That is what public domain means. Cullen328 (talk) 03:30, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

It seems that the website is selling a physical photo, not the rights to use a digital image. GoingBatty (talk) 06:51, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Please - could the image of Sir William Martineau at the bottom of the page be made smaller - it is too big. Also, ref number 90 is a "word press" citation and maybe not quite right. Also, both references number 89 and 91 are in red. Please fix. I get exhausted/confused but I really appreciate your assistance as always. Thank you 175.38.42.62 (talk) 06:36, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

1. See Help:Pictures#Thumbnail sizes for various options.
2. What's not right about the Wordpress citation?
3. Remove the © symbol from the |date= parameters.

Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 06:49, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Sadly, I could not reduce the size of the photo of Sir William Martineau. Please help if able. Appreciated 175.38.42.62 (talk) 07:16, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

I've done it by adding |upright, as has been done on others.

However, I've also enforced MOS:SANDWICH further up the article which has made worse the misplacement of images you referred to above. There are too many pages for the amount of text, and you may need to consider which might be removed. Bazza (talk) 10:13, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello 175.38.42.62. Along with the image that's been reduced by Bazza, I've done my best to rearrange other nearby images.

In the section, "Sir Thomas Martineau and family", I've kept the portrait in the right corner. However, I've moved the news and the artwork image into a center gallery located at the bottom of the section. As the WP:MOS rule states to avoid MOS:SANDWICH, this is the best I can do. Without doing this, the portraits of Sir William Martineau and Francis Martineau Lupton would be in an awkward location. I've also added spaces between each section with the images.

As I do not want to remove the images without your consensus, I've done this rearrange just to make the article look better. Regards. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 10:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Tapas

I am undecided whether to italicise "tapas", have you main heard of this food? To me, the article seems quite long, so if I guess it is a common food. JackkBrown (talk) 12:57, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Tapas is fairly well known, so I wouldn't italicize it. Clarityfiend (talk) 13:10, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Just put "tapas bar London" (or any other big city, I'd guess) into a search engine and you will get plenty of the best 10,20 or 30 come up. See as an example this. I think that tapas have got their passports and joined the international jet-set. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 14:53, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

The rule of thumb is not to italicize a word if it appears (in roman) in a standard English dictionary. Incidentally, tapas is not "a food" but virtually any appetizer or snack the restaurant decides to call tapas. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:06, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

No words...

I don't like to complain, but I would like to point out that there are several pages (many corrected by me in countless hours of hard work) containing a term in italics and the same term not in italics. Honestly, it's horrible to see this, it's very confusing. Either we decide not to create italics any more or we keep the homogeneity. It's not possible that there are people who don't know how to edit correctly (luckily there's me). JackkBrown (talk) 16:57, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

I think you have overfixating on a specific style point, while I think it is worthwhile, there are many dimensions to improving the wiki and enforcing a simpler homogeneity is not the best solution. Remsense聊 17:04, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Among these many dimensions, JackkBrown, is the improvement of non-trivial aspects of articles (and drafts) on Italian matters. I've just spent some time on Draft:Church of Santa Filomena of Ugento, rather obviously a translation of it:Chiesa di Santa Filomena (Ugento), which is about a promising subject (a lot better than hundreds of borderline-vanity drafts on minor personages) but grievously underreferenced. I was unable to help it much. The sources that are mentioned are in Italian, which I can't read but you can. Whether this should be "Church of Santa Filomena of Ugento", "Church of Santa Filomena (Ugento)", "Church of St Philomena (Ugento)", "Church of St. Filomena (Ugento)" or something else again is of minor importance compared to its other problems. And it points me to the article Ugento, which is dreadful, nowhere near as good as it:Ugento would be if only the latter were decently referenced. -- Hoary (talk) 00:55, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary: this afternoon I will read all the sources in Italian. JackkBrown (talk) 01:03, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Hoary likes this. 01:15, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Lots of times people will add new text without carefully reading the existing article. Making style consistent within an article is an admirable goal and positive change. I'm often guilty of oversights like this, adding wikilinks to redirects where the article has a link to the redirect target (or vice versa), and similar incautions.

There's nothing wrong with contributing positively by making styles consistent within an article, and I also believe it's not something to become upset about. Anytime I find myself getting upset with previous editors in the course of my chosen gnoming work (citation repair), I remind myself it's a task I've chosen to perform, and take a break if I need to. Volunteer work is ever thus. Folly Mox (talk) 17:12, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

I would like to complain that there are thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of articles in Wikipedia which are so bad that they they should be deleted or rewritten from scratch. I care about this, but (like many of us) not so much that I'm prepared to spend much time fixing them.

If you care about what is to me an utterly trivial inconsistency in Wikipedia articles, fine. But I wish you'd stop coming here and asking us what you should do about them. You care about it: you fix it. If somebody disagrees, they'll let you know soon enough. ColinFine (talk) 17:14, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

JackkBrown, to enlarge on ColinFine's last sentence, one of Wikipedia's standard editing procedures is WP:BRD – Bold, Revert, Discuss.

This means that if you think something should be changed, you Boldly edit it (with a clear Edit summary); if someone else disagrees with your edit, they Revert it (with an Edit summmary explaining why); and if you disagree with their reason, the two of you Discuss it on the Article's Talk page, or either of your personal Talk pages, whichever you both prefer, and come to a consensus.

There is no need to continually come to the Help desk (or Teahouse) to canvass the opinions of all of us here. If you are so frequently unsure whether what you want to do is correct or not, it suggests that you are not yet competent to do it. That is quite understandable, as (a) these are technical matters (which I myself had to be professionally trained in when I worked in Publishing), and (b) you are doing this in a second language whose rules and customs differ markedly from your own, and has more complicated rules because of its complicated evolution. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.5.208 (talk) 18:05, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Geographic Location Dot Does Not Appear When Clicking On Map

This is a long term issue. I feel I saw a discussion about this many years ago, but can't find it. It would seem like a very easy fix to Wikipedia code to allow the location dot to persist when we click a location map on all places in Wikipedia. Tallard (talk) 18:44, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

@Tallard: The infobox in London places a red dot on top of File:United Kingdom relief location map.jpg. The latter is the file page for a file which is displayed in 339 pages at the English Wikipedia and thousands in other languages. A file page always just displays the uploaded file regardless how you got there. It would be difficult to change and the potential implementations I can think of would also have disadvantages like confusing users who expect to see the real file when they click it. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:10, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Users won't be "confused". When a reader clicks on a map, we expect a zoom action, not an unrelated different file. If Wikipedia coding causes clicking that item to lead us to a different file, then that is a thoroughly mis-thought-out code. If I want a map of England, I won't go to the London article. If I want to be able to better see where London is in England, I click on the map for a zoom. Surely this discussion has been had before, possibly ad nauseam?Tallard (talk) 16:07, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

@Tallard: This isn't Google Maps. It's literally an image with a pushpin added on top. Most images on articles take readers to the file page, as intended. If you're having trouble looking at it, might I suggest using your browser's innate zoom feature? There might be a problem once you pass the image's resolution, but that's what implementing a change in function would do either way.

You are, of course, welcome to propose this over at a venue like Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:34, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

IP Blocked

I get the message "This IP has been blocked from editing Wikipedia" with an IPv6 /31 that I am not a part of. This occurs only on my phone and not on any of my other devices behind the same IP, and occurs despite me being logged into a named account. Is there a fix for this so I can edit from my phone? Celjski Grad (talk) 19:49, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

You could try applying for an IP block exemption. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:53, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, I will try there. Celjski Grad (talk) 19:55, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Factual update edit removed?

Thank you for your help ahead. I edited the Cultural section on my home town of Lompoc, California and the next day the edit was removed and reverted back to misleading, incorrect information. I expect I did something wrong, but no idea what? The edit was made November 8, and was removed by Nov 9. I am Brian Cole and was the owner of Howlin’ Byroon’s Music Exchange 2009-2014. Perhaps my edit was too lengthy? Blue1125Seal (talk) 20:31, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

The edit summary on the revert was "Unsourced advertisement" and I agree. Your lengthy addition [1] was completely unsourced, and served as little but a promo for your former store. Meters (talk) 20:37, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

[Edit Conflict and Courtesy link: Lompoc, California].

Hi Blue1125Seal! The reverter, Adflatuss, correctly left an edit summary (see in the article's View history tab) saying in part "unsourced advertisement".

This means there were two major problems with your text, each alone requiring (by Wikipedia's rules) its removal:

(i) The text was unsourced. How does anyone know you weren't making it all up? (People do do this, or try to.) Everything in Wikipedia is supposed to be verifiable by readers, and that means every factual passage has to be cited to a reference from a published Reliable source.

(ii) The text read like an advertisement for the activities of Brian Cole (yourself) and for the Calvert Theater you were/are associated with, so was promotional, which is not allowed in Wikipedia. An encyclopaedia is not at all the same thing as a guidebook.

Sorry to disappoint you, but if we do not maintain strict standards for what we allow, which means citing everything and maintaining strict Neutrality, Wikipedia would degenerate into an untrustworthy free-for-all. Everything you wrote was probably 'true', but it needed to show that it was true (via references) and it needed to be expressed in neutral, encyclopaedic style. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.5.208 (talk) 20:55, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

@Blue1125Seal: However, if there is incorrect info in the article, and that info is unsourced, you can remove it. -Arch dude (talk) 21:28, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Arch dude Blue1125Seal (talk) 01:02, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Talk Page

Where is the talk page on an article for me to suggest edits? Will.Monroe FMDefense (talk) 21:29, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

@Will.Monroe FMDefense: There should be a button that says "Talk" directly underneath the title of the article that will open the talk page. If you're looking to make an edit request, you might instead want to use the edit request wizard, which will help you to do so. Tollens (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for this, I wasn't aware that was a thing. 331dot (talk) 21:34, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Will.Monroe FMDefense (edit conflict) The exact location of the link can vary depending on which "skin" you are using to view Wikipedia and if you are in mobile or desktop mode; if you are in desktop mode, there is a "talk" link at the top left of the article next to the words "project page". If you tell which article you are interested in, we can provide a link for you. 331dot (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

What should I do?

I made an account here because I thought there would be ways I could improve Wikipedia. However, I realized too late that there is a lot of stuff here that I have no clue about what it is, and the stuff I do know about, I can't find any way to improve it. I feel kind of stuck here, in this phase of not being able to do anything. Honestly, I feel like all I can ever be here is just someone who reverts vandalism because I can't edit the things I know about. I really don't know what I should do here, as reverting vandalism is good, but I want to do more helpful things here. ThatOneWolf ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:31, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

ThatOneWolf You could try going to the Community Portal which has some tasks available that can be done. 331dot (talk) 21:35, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

ThatOneWolf, random Canadian guys who play Minecraft a lot are not condemned to a life of Minecraft and Wikipedia and their likely long-term effects. Go to a museum or three, find a new interest, cultivate it, read a book about it, explore it some more, read more about it, consider editing Wikipedia articles about it. -- Hoary (talk) 23:11, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the suggestions. Also, don't worry Hoary, I do things outside as well, lol. ThatOneWolf ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:34, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

ThatOneWolf, I highly recommend the "go to a museum" option, taking along a good smartphone or digital camera. Many of my contributions over 14 years resulted from museum visits where I photographed the most interesting and unique objects and their imformative labels. In many cases, you have probably taken the best freely licensed photo of the object, and learned enough to make substantive improvements to the relevant Wikipedia article, after a bit of work with your favorite search engine. Cullen328 (talk) 09:29, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

@ThatOneWolf, Wikipedia:Requested articles has a huge list of things someone thinks should be a WP-article. Some of them may actually be good ideas. Perhaps you can find an idea there that interests you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:57, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Albert Kitson, 2nd Baron Airedale

Reference number 18 is a bit odd - the quote comes up on a general google search but once I go to the citation (number 18) itself - I cannot find the quote that is relevant. What's going on? Thanks for any advice 115.70.23.77 (talk) 22:38, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Click on citation number 18, and you don't see the quote in the visible text. However, view the HTML source and you'll see the quote in line 557 in a blog comment text. GoingBatty (talk) 22:53, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Here's what you want to reference:

The Kitson's [sic] London home, 3 Cadogan Square, was damaged by a bomb during the Second World War and they moved to Stansted in Essex.

Here's what you say you want to source that with:

"Having been bombed out their home in Cardigan Square, London in 1940, Lord and Lady Airedale had lived at Stansted, Essex where they both died; Baroness ..."

That's your ellipsis, not mine. Why not cut "; Baroness ..."? And in my idiolect, "bombed out their home" is odd; I'd have "bombed out of their home".

This doesn't appear in the cited source as I read it, either. But GoingBatty has deftly located it. Here it is, at greater length:

Albert Kitson, 2nd Baron Airedale of Gledhow (1863-1944) was educated at Rugby and Trinity College, Cambridge, where he gained a BA. Royal author and journalist Claudia Joseph wrote in 2021 that Lord Airedale and his wife Florence "lived in 17th Century Gledhow Hall – famously painted by William Turner – and attended the Coronation of George V. Their daughters Doris and Evelyn were debutantes who did the society season and were presented at Court. In her post-war memoirs, Doris’s sister Evelyn recalled a ‘memorable time’ when evenings were filled with many balls where everybody knew each other ‘partly because so many guests were relatives’. Roedean-educated Olive Middleton was close to her Airedale cousins, attending society balls at Gledhow. Later, during the First World War, the house was converted into a Voluntary Aid Detachment hospital run by the Red Cross and the newly married Olive worked there as a nurse with her second cousin Doris, a fellow old Roedeanian". The Duchess of Cambridge (née Catherine Middleton) visited London's Imperial War Museum in 2018 to read records stating that her great-grandmother Olive Middleton was "in residence" - on and off - as a VAD nurse at Gledhow Hall from May 1915 to April 1917. By 1928, the Gledhow Hall estate was being sub-divided. By 1929, the old hall itself had been reportedly divided into two flats. Having been bombed out their home in Cardigan Square, London in 1940, Lord and Lady Airedale had lived at Stansted, Essex where they both died; Baroness Airedale in 1942 and Lord Airedale in 1944. As Lord Airedale had no male heirs, the barony succeeded to his half-brother Roland. The National Portrait Gallery also holds three portraits by Bassano Ltd of Hon. Angela Estelle Goff (née Kitson), one of Lord Airedale's seven daughters.

Certain mannerisms, as well as a curious degree of interest in people surnamed Middleton, seem uncannily familiar. -- Hoary (talk) 23:05, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Yup. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:52, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

November 10

tildes? Where do I find them on my keyboard. (it's a German keyboard layout)

Where do I find tildes on my German keyboard layout? BillyBobBluesStomper2 (talk) 05:12, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

See German keyboard layout. Apparently you need to use the AltGr key key (the righthand Alt key) to shift to the third symbol on the "+" key. Meters (talk) 05:19, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

For Wikipedia purposes it might be easier to just select the sign option. This is readily available in the Text editor, but I don't know how (or if) it works in the Visual editor. Meters (talk) 05:26, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Depending on your requirement, as an alternative you can always google any desired unusual symbol, then copy-and-paste an example into your typing stream (I do that myself with em-dashes and en-dashes at least, also sometimes with some very obscure diacritics). Tony 1212 (talk) 17:46, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

banned?

why did i get banned 194.187.10.64 (talk) 09:13, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

What makes you think you are banned? Do you mean blocked? If you posted here you are not subject to a block, unless you have an account that was blocked- in which case you must return to your account and follow the instructions provided. 331dot (talk) 09:15, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

why did you change what i said about besiktas?! 194.187.10.64 (talk) 10:06, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

If you can't be bothered to specify either the edit or your username, don't expect people here to take the trouble to work out what these may be. -- Hoary (talk) 10:23, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

I have no idea who Besiktas is, but edits like [2] are reverted because a WP-article is not a chat-room, and if you keep making edits like that someone will block you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:55, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

What do you do when someone (an ip editor) has provided their real name and address on a talk page?

Someone asked to cancel a service on that service's page saying they wish to cancel their subscription, with their full name and address visible. I'm not going to link it here for obvious reasons, but what is the correct procedure? Does it need to be deleted from the edit history as well or not, since its not a user revealing another users information, its a user volunarily giving information about themselves? MarkiPoli (talk) 11:08, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

User:MarkiPoli, email the oversight team. See WP:OS for more. Folly Mox (talk) 11:13, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Since it's personally identifiable information, it will need to be suppressed for the safety of the individual involved, even though it doesn't breach WP:OUTING since it's not tied to a Wikipedia account name. Folly Mox (talk) 11:14, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I will do that. I was a little confused because WP:OUTING doesn't say anything about an editor accidentally or deliberately posting their own information. Is there any specific policy regarding this? MarkiPoli (talk) 11:27, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

User:MarkiPoli, yes: WP:OSPOL, number 1. Folly Mox (talk) 12:55, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Yes, please ensure you send a request to the oversight email when you see instances of editors posting addresses, telephone numbers and other personally identifying information on Wikipedia (speaking with my oversighter hat on).-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:29, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

List not ordered

All info in List of unsolved murders in Canada is just randomly added instead of chronologically. Can someone please put these in chronological order because it looks amateurish and ugly this way. Aquatic Ambiance (talk) 14:18, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

The article isn't protected. You can be bold and edit it yourself! ThatOneWolf ^{(talk|contribs)} 14:48, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

@Aquatic Ambiance: Or, you can click on the up arrow in the Year column header to sort the table. GoingBatty (talk) 06:28, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Citing throughout a multivolume work

Hi! I want to elegantly use this new work throughout a few articles, but it's in eight (relatively brief) volumes, and it doesn't seem likely that page numbers for the omnibus version would be helpful. Is there a canonical way of an inline citation that just bundles the volume and page number? I didn't see one. Remsense聊 14:59, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Here is a cite to a multi-volume series with a two-part treatment of a single area (Battersea) with chapters separately number in online PDFs - if you look at the source, you should be able to pick out the bits that are needed for your reference. (I admit it took me months to get it into this shape.)

Saint, Andrew; Thom, Colin (2013). "Chapter 8: Industry" (PDF). Battersea. Part 1:Public, Commercial and Cultural. Survey of London. Vol. 49. New Haven: Yale University Press. p. 12. ISBN 978-0-300-19616-0. Retrieved 20 March 2023. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 15:42, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict){{sfn|Xiang|2023|loc=vol 5, p 234}} for example? [Dummy citation to remove big red error! Xiang (2023), A Brief History of the Chinese Language] Martin of Sheffield (talk) 15:49, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you and @Verbarson, I think I'm going to go with the {{sfn|loc=}} method for now. Remsense聊 16:11, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

References

I have a question about the reference desk.

Question asked, and answered. Wikipedia is not social media. Reference desks are for asking questions only.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Is off topic things allowed on the Miscellaneous part of the reference desk? —The Industrial Me 1563 (talk) 16:55, 10 November 2023 (UTC) @The Industrial Me 1563: Ask on its talk page. Remember that all responders are volunteers, so even if you ask an OT question, and even if the community thinks it's OK to do so, nobody is obliged to respond. -Arch dude (talk) 18:02, 10 November 2023 (UTC) Is OT questions allowed on the talk page of the Miscellaneous part of the reference desk? Yes or no? —The Industrial Me 1563 (talk) 18:42, 10 November 2023 (UTC) By definition the Miscellaneous desk is for topics not covered by the other desks. So I suppose it depends what you mean by "off topic". DuncanHill (talk) 18:47, 10 November 2023 (UTC) Would I get blocked if I publish any OT questions on the Miscellaneous desk or it’s talk page? And, what if we have a dedicated off topic form on Wikipedia and Wikipedia Commons? —The Industrial Me 1563 (talk) 18:52, 10 November 2023 (UTC) Neither Wikipedia nor Commons have 'off topic forums'. That isn't the purpose of the project. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:08, 10 November 2023 (UTC) All of the Reference desks are for asking factual questions. I cannot imagine any factual question that would be "off-topic", although obviously facecious, libellous, provocative or obscene questions will receive short shrift (meaning 4.). Questions about how to edit/use Wikipedia can be asked at the Teahouse (for beginners) or the Help desk (for more experienced users). The only other thing to remember is that Wikipedia is not social media, and is not intended for idle chat. Outside of those parameters, and at the risk of tempting fate, what, The Industrial Me 1563, would you consider to be a hypothetical example of an "off-topic question"? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.5.208 (talk) 19:15, 10 November 2023 (UTC) My hypothetical off topic question would be “Click on the link!” and it would take you to a rickroll. Anyways, should I trust that IP or ignore them? —The Industrial Me 1563 (talk) 19:31, 10 November 2023 (UTC) if you were supposed to categorically ignore IPs, they wouldn't be allowed to post. Remsense聊 19:33, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Implementing a template on Wikipedia

Are there any tech experts out there that might have a clue on how to approach the topic at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Implementation of Template:Refideas editnotice? BOZ (talk) 16:59, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Hamas

Hamas is designated a terrorist organization by the US and most democratic governments and responsible people. Please make this correction. Blandy28 (talk) 19:52, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

@Blandy28: Please see MOS:TERRORIST. Tollens (talk) 20:05, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

From the WP:LEAD of Hamas: "The group's attacks, including suicide bombings against civilian targets and indiscriminate rocket attacks, have led many countries and academics to designate Hamas a terrorist organization." In the article. you find Hamas#Terrorist_designation. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:02, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Multiref anchors

Do any of the multiref bundle templates support adding a name ID so that they may be anchored using something like Template:SfnRef? Krisgabwoosh (talk) 20:37, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

User:Krisgabwoosh, I think Template:R is capable of the functionality it seems like you're asking about.

It's not super clear whether you're trying to reuse a bundled reference (which can also be done by wrapping {{harvnb}}s inside a pair of <ref> tags with the |name= parameter set), or whether you're asking if {{sfnmp}} will read a full citation's |ref= parameter that has been customised with {{sfnref}} (which it does). Folly Mox (talk) 16:07, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

My intention is the have one ref lead to two different citations. Something like this highlighting two websites (presumably bundled) in the references section. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 01:07, 12 November 2023 (UTC) Krisgabwoosh (talk) 01:07, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

References

Skipped a step in merge process

I performed a merge of Biologics for immunosuppression into Biological response modifiers earlier, and in following WP:PROMERGE I provided the wrong copyright-required edit summary on the actual moving of content. I followed up on Biological response modifiers with a dummy edit with the required edit summary, which hopefully is fine. But, since Biologics for immunosuppression was made a redirect, when I try to make a dummy edit with the copyright-required edit summary, it's not appearing in that page's history. Kimen8 (talk) 21:04, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

User:Kimen8, {{R from Merge}}, which you correctly added in the BLAR, provides the text necessary for license compliance on the redirect page itself. Folly Mox (talk) 16:11, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Wonderful, thanks. Kimen8 (talk) 16:26, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Mobile media viewer caption issue

The caption for this image in the mobile version of MediaViewer is currently some weird string of code (see below). Any ideas on how to fix this?

“ Parties to Geneva Conventions and Protocols .mw-parser-output .div-col{margin-top:0.3em;column-width:30em}.mw-parser-output .div-col-small{font-size:90%}.mw-parser-output .div-col-rules{column-rule:1px solid #aaa}.mw-parser-output .div-col dl,.mw-parser-output .div-col ol,.mw-parser-output .div-col ul{margin-top:0}.mw-parser-output .div-col li,.mw-parser-output .div-col dd{page-break-inside:avoid;break-inside:avoid-column} .mw-parser-output .legend{page-break-inside:avoid;break-inside:avoid-column}.mw-parser-output .legend-color{display:inline-block;min-width:1.25em;height:1.25em;line-height:1.25;margin:1px 0;text-align:center;border:1px solid black;background-color:transparent;color:black}.mw-parser-output .legend-text{} Parties to GC I–IV and P I–III Parties to GC I–IV and P I and III Parties to GC I–IV and P III Parties to GC I–IV and P I–II[note 1] Parties to GC I–IV and P I Parties to GC I–IV and no P ”

Thanks, Andumé (talk) 21:08, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

@I Am Andumé: A similar case was reported 25 October at phab:T211444. Until a patch is made and deployed, a possible fix here would be to only have pure text in the image caption at Fourth Geneva Convention#Part I. General provisions, but I don't think we should do that. It's useful to most readers to have the legend in the caption. If we move it outside the caption then it may not be moved back in when the bug has been fixed. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:59, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. I agree that the legend should be kept in the caption (after all, you can still see it properly outside of MediaViewer). Andumé (talk) 22:40, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Is there a bot that can do this task?

The Organized crime task force and the Serial killer task force banners recently got added to the banner of Template:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography using parameters. The previous banners (as wrappers of the new one with the parameters) were mass substituted. This has left ~6700 (see Category:Unknown-importance Crime-related articles, not counting ones that didn't have an initial basic crime importance) duplicates, that have both the original crime importance and task force importance but split between two duplicate banners. Is there any bot that can merge the importance values on the pages that have both templates so there aren't so many duplicates? Of course the ones that were not initially tagged with the original crime ones will have to be manually tagged as they don't have the basic importance parameter, but that's 500 which isn't as bad.

Sorry if I didn't explain this well D: PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:37, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

@PARAKANYAA: Hi there! Try asking at Wikipedia:Bot requests. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 06:27, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

November 11

Heneage Finch, 3rd Earl of Winchilsea

Ref 6 is in red, please repair if able - thanks 58.179.137.31 (talk) 04:07, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

 Fixed Tollens (talk) 04:59, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Request for easier access

FYI

 – Added section header. GoingBatty (talk) 06:23, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

I suport Wikipedia by buying "Wikipedia pens, mugs, TShirts... etc But it difficult to find any link to the site. Should make it easier to access for seasonal shoppers and generate community spirit. Even this "Help Desk" seemed to create more hurdles with "log in" & "create an account"... Wikipedia has to be more demcratic and allow for "Techo-peasants"! 2607:FEA8:5661:6F00:DD73:A368:BEBD:179E (talk) 06:17, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi there! What specific changes do you have in mind? GoingBatty (talk) 06:24, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure what site you mean. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It does not sell mugs etc. Where are you buying them from? I stand to be corrected but as far as I can determine no Wikipedia merchandise is sold to support Wikipedia financially. You are only supporting the manufacturer and the retailer. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

They may be referring to https://store.wikimedia.org/ 331dot (talk) 09:46, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the link. It was indeed difficult to find. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:30, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Warning for anyone outside of the USA from the FAQ: "We cannot provide any customs clearance estimates, but in most cases, shipments may spend anywhere from one to three days in customs. IMPORTANT: Any customs or import duties are charged once the order reaches its destination country and must be paid by the recipient of the order". Martin of Sheffield (talk) 14:16, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Articles by size

I am interested in finding small Good and Featured Articles. Is there a way of searching for Good and Featured Articles with fewer than 10,000 bytes for example? Ykraps (talk) 08:50, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

@Ykraps: Yes, the PetScan tool can do this. It can scan the articles in a category testing various page properties, including the length of the page in bytes. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:56, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

@John of Reading: Thanks. It took some working out but I have managed to get what I want. Do you know if there is a way of linking those results or saving them so I can show them to someone else? --Ykraps (talk) 09:56, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

@Ykraps The simplest thing to show someone would be Wikipedia:Wikipedia records#Articles (although that only lists the absolute record). Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:47, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

@Ykraps: Have a look at the Petscan "Output" tab. You could try selecting "Wiki" format, which returns the results in a format that you could paste into a Wikipedia sandbox, or "Plain text", which just sticks the article names out one per line. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:23, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks both. --Ykraps (talk) 10:29, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Bundle AfD help

I have started an AfD discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Natural History of Fear. There are around 100 other articles in the same collection as this audio drama which I also believe fail to meet WP:GNG. These are listed at Doctor Who: The Monthly Adventures. I am aware of WP:BUNDLE, but is there an easier way to bulk nominate articles for deletion discussion? It will take me some time to go through every article and add a deletion tag linking back to the deletion discussion of The Natural History of Fear. Thanks! Torpedoi (talk) 09:21, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Search inside Wikipedia

Firefox browser, Windows 7 Pro 64bit. On the main page of Wikipedia clock on the "search" icon or Alt+Shift+f does not get any results. Which make search in Wikipedia impossible. Jrvladr (talk) 10:47, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

@Jrvladr You may have to click on the magnifying glass icon to open the search box. If that doesn't work, then the link Special:Search will. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:51, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Gyros in Greece Have No Lettuce

Hello, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyros The cardinal for this site keeps changing the edited part on gyros in Greece where it talks about lettuce. I've lived there, travel back there regularly, and have had hundreds of gyros from all over the country. There is rarely if ever any lettuce in them. Perhaps that person looked at pictures that have parsley in a gyro. Only rarely is there a strand of lettuce included in the toppings. Here's an example of a site with the list of ingredients that are traditional (toppings include tomato, onion, tzatziki): https://www.itinari.com/a-guide-to-ordering-gyros-in-greece-xfr8

Please leave the "lettuce (rarely)" part, and then don't let the editor change the part where tzatziki is added "sometimes." It's been on 100% of gyros I've had. The person editing this page has clearly not been to Greece. Thanks! 24.180.80.253 (talk) 11:36, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

I have no idea what a gyro is, or a cardinal, but the place to discuss edits to an article is the talk page of that article. Bear in mind that Wikipedia simply reports what reliable sources say, not what you know from your personal experience. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Hostile UI

I can not understand why do you keep updating (and in fact downgrading) your layouts. It is becoming more and more difficult to use wikipedia for someone who uses many languages. I have already changed my layout to monobook, but recently I noticed that when you try to change language of an article, you can no longer just pick one from alphabetically organised list, but you have to click "show X more" and fight with this clownish crap. Why supposed geographical origin of a language is more important to you than users convenience? It is such a shame that wikipedia contributes to this onepager internet madness. Mewczak (talk) 12:54, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

The UI changes on Wikipedia are pretty deliberative and do not remind me at all of the haphazard, arguably unethical process that other major websites use. Unfortunately it's not to everyone's taste, but design trends hold sway and go out of fashion, that's the nature of media. This ultimately what the web being a dynamic format enables, unfortunately. Remsense聊 12:57, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

You are right, I have overstated the similarity between wiki and other websites - it is certainly pretty far from suboptimal solutions in other places (because fortunately money is not in the game I guess). And at least the possibility to change your layout remains! Mewczak (talk) 13:11, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Okay problem solved I just learned that you can uncheck "use a compact language list" in your preferences. But I guess I will never learn why one has to put more and more effort (being logged in, changing preferences) to use webpages reasonably and why does wikipedia comfort to this AI dictatorship. Why in the hell would I care what is a guess of a computer about what language I prefer? What is going to be next? Mabe chat-like responses instead of articles, just like in google search engine? Mewczak (talk) 13:03, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

It's impossible to have a design layout that everyone on this planet likes, which is why accounts may choose older skins, though that is technically challenging (though possible) to enable for users without accounts. The current default skin was the result of much study, testing, and debate. Please see WP:VECTOR2022 for more information. 331dot (talk) 13:14, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

BND-Archive

Hi Folks!! What is the copyright status of military images from the BND-Archive, the Bundesarchiv. I've found an image I would like to use. Are they public domain per chance? scope_creep^Talk 14:57, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

@Scope creep: check first if it has already been imported to Commons: c:Category:Images from the German Federal Archive. The ones in Commons have a CC-BY-SA-3.0 license. MKFI (talk) 15:22, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

@MKFI: I found a Heinrich Reiser and thought that was it, but it was a man from the 19th century. For a second I thought I was sorted. Would the image be automatically under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license. scope_creep^Talk 15:31, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

On the signature it states:- BND-Archiv, Signatur P1/2831/1_OT, Bl. 170. I tried to find it in the archive but couldn't. Would somebody be able to find it and check if the image licences with a pd image. I could email them right enough. It is the Heinrich Reiser image here: [3] scope_creep^Talk 15:40, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

I've emailed them. scope_creep^Talk 15:46, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Update a parent’s name

On List of Frausters: Richard Whitney: the correct name of his mother is: Nellie Gertrude Merrill. I got this info from Website: Family Search. MaryKay2788 (talk) 15:34, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

@MaryKay2788: More information needed for that citation, and you should be posting this on the talk page of the article you have a concern with. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:46, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Please discuss this on Talk:Richard Whitney (financier). It is not clear from the citations whether or not his mother's name is found in the sources given (and they are not online) but I rather doubt it: so it may indeed be wrong (it seems to say that both his mother and his father were Whitneys, which is of course possible, but unusual).

However, Family Search is pretty clearly an aggregation of data from differentl places, and does not count as a reliable source. In WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 250#FamilySearch and LDS historical figures, an editor said Family Search is just a collection of user created data mixed up with primary sources. It is not a reliable source - no competent professional genealogist would use an entry from Family Search for anything. Instead, you go to the sources that should be cited in the Family Search entry and verify them before considering the information reliable.

Personally, I think there is far too much detail about Whitney's family in the article anyway. ColinFine (talk) 18:12, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Proper usage of the ellipsis marks

Hello. There seem to be different styles of using the ellipsis marks. Does WP use any standardized version. I wrote most of the article on Paul Martin (illustrator). Is my usage of the marks acceptable in these examples from that article:

Stories of To-day and Yesterday ..., Frederick Houk Law, editor, February 1930. [My notes: The book title is very long, so only the first five words are stated. Space, three dots, comma.]

"entered a huge, bright room ... This was my uncle's studio. ... Although my uncle" [My notes: This is a cut-out excerpt of a paragraph long, direct quote. The second sentence ends after the word "studio", hence the reason for the period.]

"Overflowing pep and energy is expressed ...." [My notes: Direct quote. Space, four dots. The sentence does not end after the word "expressed." The full sentence goes, "Overflowing pep and energy is expressed by the youngster in the picture." The fourth dot is the period that ends the sentence.]

Thanks, JimPercy (talk) 15:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia does have stylistic guidance on this topic, yes, accessible via the charmingly named shortcut MOS:.... Folly Mox (talk) 15:42, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

It just doesn't go into enough detail beyond the basics. It might be helpful to know if any of my three examples look "off." JimPercy (talk) 15:59, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm not able to give an assessment based off the MOS, but since you asked if they look off, I can provide a personal opinion:

All of the examples you brought here look ok. I've also truncated extremely long book titles (fashionable in the 1800s and thenabouts) without the use of ellipses.

In the article itself, the ellipses used in excerpts seem like they could sometimes be replaced with quote marks and commas. For example, reference 30 (Ossining Citizen-Sentinel, 1932). You have a lot of ellipses separating unconnected facts published in the source. Since these are unconnected, you could make each excerpt its own quote, and separate them with commas (or full stops, or semicolons). You could also remove the excerpts entirely: it's not necessary to list out all the original text that is used to support article prose.

Reference 29 feels a bit heavy-handed: you have "New ... Old" linking a source titled "The New Testament and the Old".

In reference 50, you've used ellipsis to elide "(Inc.)" from the business name "R. L. Polk & Co. (Inc.)" (according to the source provided). "(Inc.)" could easily be dropped without ellipsis.

On a somewhat related note, you've cited R. L. Polk & Co.'s Trow General Directory of New York City, Embracing the Boroughs of Manhattan and the Bronx, sometimes with ellipsis following "New York City", sometimes not. It would be easier if this source were placed in a Sources subsection, so you could refer to it by a shortened term.

I didn't make it through all 315 citations, and only really skimmed the ones I looked at, but someone here or at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style may have further input. Folly Mox (talk) 16:50, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Ref. 30. I reworked it, getting rid of some of the ellipses, to make it less confusing or read smoother. I prefer keeping the text in there, since columns on illustrators before WWII are rare (unless among the most famous). Ref. 29. The usage of three dots there does seem odd. I changed those two keywords and deleted the ellipsis. Regarding: R. L. Polk. That will be a harder one to work on. The official title always seemed long, and the ending part of the title didn't remain constant. Thanks, JimPercy (talk) 23:04, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

English = No gaps

American = Gaps

English = No dots in acronyms.

American = Dots everywhere, especially in acronyms.

English = Quotation marks go outside commas and full-stops.

American = Quotation marks go inside commas and full-stops.

Worldwide English = Ellipsis should only have 3 dots, not 4 or more. Danstarr69 (talk) 20:26, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Right. Four dots are not good. I got rid of the extra dot in one of the above sentences. Re. "Overflowing pep and energy." Thanks, JimPercy (talk) 23:04, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

My training as a UK desk editor differs in places from Danstarr69's 'English' above. According to Hart's Rules for Compositors and Readers at the University Press Oxford (OUP 39th Edition 1983):

(p44) Marks of omission

"To mark omitted words three points . . . (not asterisks) separated by normal space of line are sufficient; and the practice should be uniform throughout the work."

"When three points are used at the end of a complete sentence a fourth full point should not be added (unless the incomplete sentence is a quotation within an overall sentence, when the normal sentence point will be added after the final quotation mark); normal space of line should proceded the first full point. But where the sentence is complete, the closing point is set close up, followed by three points for omission."

(p45) Relative placing of quotation marks and punctuation

"All signs of punctuation used with words in quotation marks must be placed according to the sense. If an extract ends with a point or exclamation or interrogation sign, let that point be included before the quotation mark; but not otherwise. When there is one quotation within another, and both end with the sentence, put the punctuation mark before the first of the closing quotation marks."

Hope this is of relevance, though not necessarily identical to Wikipedia's MoS. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.5.208 (talk) 00:11, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Can't log in

I never saw a place to create a "User Name" so assumed it would be my email address. I contributed $10 to Wikipedia so I could use it. I'm a teacher and assumed that this would be a good resource but if I can't log in - there isn't even "forgot my password" message ... I'm sorry I spent the $$$ 2603:6081:8F02:DB32:5541:FFCD:4C41:AB55 (talk) 16:38, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

You do not need to create an account to use (or edit) Wikipedia, neither is any payment required. Should you wish to create an account there are certain advantages. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Create an account. You cannot set your email address as your user name. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:54, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

There's no need to donate to the Wikimedia Foundation in order to use Wikipedia (or any of the other projects Wikimedia hosts). Creating an account is free, but donations are not tied to accounts in any way, for privacy reasons. Donating to Wikimedia does not grant an account any special privileges or access. Folly Mox (talk) 16:54, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

I suspect you gave your email address as contact information when you donated and never created a Wikipedia account. It's different and independent processes. You can create an account at Special:CreateAccount. It's linked on a button on the login screen. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Just for completeness, @2603:6081:8F02:DB32:5541:FFCD:4C41:AB55|2603:6081:8F02:DB32:5541:FFCD:4C41:AB55 , the "reset password" page is Special:PasswordReset. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:30, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

November 12

Article review plus input on possible vandalism. What to do?

Hello, after reverting a possible vandalism link insertion on ZeroGPT, I noticed suspect and false citations (https://www.sociobits.org/2023/03/gpt-zero-a-tool-to-recognise-texts-written-by-ai/12260) I flagged for deletion but think it would be better if the article was moved to drafts.

Also, this user User:Mackgrav seems to have add a link to a competing service (https://hix.ai/gpt4 |website=HIX.ai), rather than an actual reputable and reliable source. I am new here but trying to really help this community and would like advice. I have warned the user. Comintell (talk) 03:11, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Removing the link and the message you put on their talk page seem reasonable to me. PiGuy3 (talk) 03:14, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Comintell (talk) 03:27, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

What's going on with the ref desk archives?!

I tried to look up some questions that were supposed to be archived from early November, but they were nowhere to be found -- the archives only run until October 31, and there is nothing after that point (even though questions from early November were supposed to be archived automatically)! What's going on, and when can we expect these questions to be recovered??? 2601:646:9882:46E0:C195:DC40:D019:40A6 (talk) 09:01, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Pinging scs.  --Lambiam 10:09, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Except for the Computing section, where there was nothing yet to be archived, the November 2023 archives had been created, but, for some reason unknown to me, the links to these archives had not been made accessible through page Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives. I have now added them (manually, on page Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Answered questions).  --Lambiam 10:37, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

I see now that they were always added by User:CiaPan, not by a bot as I expected. The entries are actually already present but commented out in the HTML code. The "adding" consists of the undoing of the commenting-out of the entries in the column for a new month. Rather than each month undoing the commenting-out for one column, it may be easier, when adding a section for the new year, not to comment out any months. The links to the month archives will then initially all be red, but I think this is harmless.  --Lambiam 11:07, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that part of the archiving task has always been manual.

Oblivious me, I didn't even know who was taking care of it. Thanks to @CiaPan: and now @Lambiam: for their assistance. —scs (talk) 12:31, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Cecaelia

Hi, there are some instances in en.wiki of the fan word Cecaelia, indicating a fictional human-octopus hybrid. Is it acceptable?-- Carnby (talk) 10:11, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

@Carnby It will depend on context. Taking the Chesley Awards, it seems an artist called his work that. Assuming that's correct, what problem do you see? The List_of_hybrid_creatures_in_folklore#Modern_fiction example seems fine too IMO, though I haven't checked the source. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:21, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

In Ursula (The Little Mermaid) and Descendants 2 it doesn't seem correct, IMHO. The characters weren't called this way.-- Carnby (talk) 10:30, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

I see 3 uses in the Ursula article. IMO, the Ursula_(The_Little_Mermaid)#Part_of_Your_World:_A_Twisted_Tale one is ok-ish, but it doesn't justify the other 2, the use by Braswell doesn't justify the use by WP in this case. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:52, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Apparently, there's also Octopan (non-RS source). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:16, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cecaelia and Wiktionary:cecaelia.  --Lambiam 10:42, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

I am reminded of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Great spider. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:46, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Scylla is probably related. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:58, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

I want to ask how to make an information box for weapon.

Hi Wikipedia editors, and administrators too, in the article SIG MCX Spear, there is no summary box. How should I insert the code to keep the box appear. Thanks. 2001:EE0:4BC2:9B40:8C60:E4FE:CDA3:8239 (talk) 11:28, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

See Template:Infobox weapon.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 11:37, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Right Sidebar (Quicknav to Wikiquote/Commons) has disappeared?

How come the right sidebar has vanished? Is that permanent or something that is merely optional, wherein each user could opt to show/hide it as they choose? I noticed it when I was on actors'/films' articles, and didn't have quick links on the side to jump over to the Media/Commons or Quotes. Please let me know. Thanks. --Cinemaniac86^Talk_Stalk 11:52, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

@Cinemaniac86: Look for a menu saying "Tools" at the top right. It has a "move to sidebar" option. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:05, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

my hotmail account

I cannot get hotmail email as I normally do. I ask google for hotmail and it usually goes to Outlook.com I then press ok and I then fill in my email and password as requested and then I access my emails. Today I am taken to wikipedia with a load of waffle as far as I'm concerned and I don't appear to have an way to get to my emails! Can you please explain what is going on. thank you 2A02:C7C:3E29:C200:2F7:9DA7:E483:F1E2 (talk) 12:41, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Google search results give a high position to the Wikipedia article Outlook.com which is an encyclopedia article about outlook.com. Try the actual website https://outlook.com. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:58, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Searching Wikipedia using wildcards to find people with certain initials

I'm interested in finding a list of notable people with certain initials. I've been all over the search FAQ's, and I understand * stands for any string of characters not at the beginning of a word. But searching on "B* C*" does not give anything useful. Any suggestions?

71.214.71.49 (talk) 15:54, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Erich

Chinese Politburo Articles Redux

I raised this issue on October 31 and was advised to take it to "the talk page" before pursuing dispute resolution. Since it relates to an entire series of articles there is no particular "the talk page" on which to debate the matter on an article-content level. The user TheUzbek in recent months undertook to start Politburo Standing Committee articles for each iteration thereof and simultaneously delete any hint of which members of any successive Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party served on its standing committee. Having attempted to restore a bare bolding of the names of PSC members in one instance and been promptly reverted with a comment that there was no reason to include this information I mentioned the matter here. As I strongly believe that the inclusion of this information is absolutely standard (I have almanacs dating back to the 1970s and Statesman's Yearbooks from the 1990s that never fail to indicate which members of a Politburo are in its inner circle when a list is given) and being forced to follow a link to a PSC article for any hint is a nuisance, days later I went through and put back the bolding on the 16th/17th/18th/19th/20th Politburos and when he started reverting me posted to TheUzbek's talk page. TheUzbek responded that I was trying to force my opinion against a consensus that began when he deleted the always-previously-present information from the articles.

I can not see any way the Politburo articles are improved by enforcing the lack of any indication of which members are on the Standing Committee and believe they are better with it included. The "third opinion" option on "Dispute resolution" appears geared to single articles rather than series. Can someone else please look over the issue in toto? 71.105.190.227 (talk) 16:49, 12 November 2023 (UTC)