Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wikipedia Help Desk
  • This page is only for questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia. For other types of questions, use the search box or the Reference desk.
  • Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
  • We are all volunteers, so sometimes replies can take some time. Please be patient. Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.

  • New users: While this is a good place to ask questions, new users may prefer to ask for help at the Teahouse, an area specifically for new users to get help with editing, article creation, and general Wikipedia use, in a friendly environment.
Are you in the right place?
Search Frequently Asked Questions
Search the help desk archives and other help pages

Tip of the day...
Transclusion vs. Substitution

There are two main ways to use templates on articles: transclusion (also called "inclusion", and accomplished by using {{Template Name}}), and substitution ({{subst:Template Name}}). The former will include the content of Template Name on the fly whenever the article is loaded, while the latter will permanently insert the content of the template into the article. With substitution, even if the template content is modified at a later date, the article's content will not change.

Substitution is the preferred method for long-term, permanent notices because it is less confusing, and it even helps to lighten the load on the database. Substitution has the further advantage in that a template's content may be de-linked from any associated category or slightly modified to suit the circumstances, such as when the template is used on a talk page. Transclusion is preferred for displaying material that is normally updated, that way, all the places it appears are updated in a single operation.

To add this auto-updating template to your user page, use
{{tip of the day}}


March 21

Changing things all around an article - make one big edit or multiple small edits?

When editing a large article with many problems (i.e, typos, mistranslations, formatting errors, etc.), should I make these one big edit, with no edit summary, or several smaller edits, each with their own summaries?

Also, since this is my first time at the help desk, can these policies be applied to other-language Wikipedias, or only the English Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tymewalk (talkcontribs) 00:00, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

@Tymewalk: You should always use edit summaries regardless of the size of the edit. That is just good practice and helps other editors know what you are doing. As for small vs large, it depends. If it is a high trafficked page you might run into an edit conflict and lose all your work. Personally, I like the small edit approach as it allows me to work on it over time and not be rushed into completing it. You can also put an {{in use}} tag on the top before you start if you plan on taking a long time to edit the page. That way potential edit conflicts would be reduced. As for other projects, I wouldn't be able to tell you. Each project is different with their own styles and procedures. We wouldn't be much help on that front. --Majora (talk) 00:06, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
@Tymewalk: I'll add that small changes allow more specific edit summaries, make it easier for other editors to review your work, and make it easier to undo any portion where there is a disagreement. Translations can be tricky, tend to be disputed far more often than the other cleanup work you identify, and can be difficult to review if the reason for the changes and the sources aren't clear. Typos, formatting changes, basic style changes, etc can be done in large edits while still being clear to reviewers. I find it helpful to look over my own diffs and those of other editors to get a feel for what is and is not easy to review. --Ronz (talk) 17:26, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

user gilliam help help

I tried and tried but could not get my info out of the above talk comment and need help fixing this problem. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noonezero (talkcontribs) 09:47, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

You have been asking Gilliam for help on the talk page User_talk:Gilliam. I'm sure that administrator will consider your request, but it sounds rather confused. You are welcome to come back here, but please explain your problem again. Dbfirs 10:09, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Using wiki common images for a small commercial project

I am totally new to using images with copyright concerns. My lecture for a psychotherapy training in London is going to be filmed so that it can be shown in Bristol as an on line resource. Trainees will pay a fee to do the course although I am not paid a fee for preparing the lecture, only to give it. Can I use Wiki commons images without fear of infringing copyright?

Thanks Carol 11:11, 21 March 2017 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carolleader (talkcontribs)

Yes, as long as you properly attribute the work to Wikimedia Commons and its author. Pppery 11:15, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Carolleader. Please see commons:commons:REUSE for advice on how to do this. --ColinFine (talk) 12:18, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hello Carolleader. I think Pppery's answer can be misleading. Any material on Wikipedia except some images is under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license. So, there are two things.
The most important thing is that you need to check the copyright status of the image you are using. For instance, this album cover is on Wikipedia but basically under a "fair use" rationale which you could probably not use it for your purpose. On the other hand, this map is in the public domain, and hence can be used in even less restrictive conditions than the CC-BY-SA. See the license description under the file on a case-by-case basis.
Also, the CC-BY-SA imposes not only a "BY" clause to acknowledge the original author (as Pppery describes it) but also an "SA" (share-alike) clause that any redistribution of the material should be under a license that is at least as permissive. You should check with your employer or their legal department what this means; we will not give you legal advice, but I think this means that trainees could (for instance) put the film of the lecture on Youtube, distribute it among their friends, etc. without having to pay royalties - which your employer may object to. Again, check that with a professional. TigraanClick here to contact me 12:24, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Carolleader said "wiki common images" and "Wiki commons images". If this means Wikimedia Commons images hosted at and often displayed in Wikipedia articles then the fair-use license of some images hosted here at should not be a concern. Wikimedia Commons does not allow fair-use images and other images without a sufficiently free license, but some users upload them anyway. If you link the images then we may be able to check whether the license looks valid. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:33, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

How do I edit references once they have been created

Please advise - I have created a number of references - I need to correct them - how do I edit a reference? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vgaidash (talkcontribs) 13:59, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

@Vgaidash: Code like {{cite web|...}} uses a template documented at Template:cite web. You can edit the code directly. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:21, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
If you use "Edit source", you will find the refs between <ref>...</ref> tags. As PrimeHunter notes, the template documentation describes what each field does. For instance, change "|title=Mr." to "|title=Business Structure" to change the title that appears with the reference. (If you are using "Edit" (the visual editor), just click on the reference and the reference editor should pop up.) Herostratus (talk) 14:46, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Our copyright status

Can't really find the right place for this question--what, if anything, do we do about sites that copy is without attribution? I keep seeing The Vintage News go by on Facebook, and much of their content is simply yanked from Wikipedia, sometimes with minor rephrasing (and errors introduced), and never credited--the other day it was this story, which the careful reader will find to be stolen from Onfim; I recognized it cause I wrote it. I'm about to email [email protected] , but I was wondering if this has come up before or if anyone (Moonriddengirl?) has experience with it. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:33, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

  • Update: a site administrator said they took it down. Moonriddengirl, I copied you on my email and so did he. This is interesting--please let me know what you, or any other community member, thinks about all this. Drmies (talk) 17:31, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
I personally disagree with people wholesale pilfering information from Wikipedia without attribution, seeing all the fine lines and balance beams we editors must walk re: close paraphrasing, CCBYSA, copyvios etc. Nothing wrong with getting facts from wikipedia (looking at you childish Daily Mail), but larceny entire sections is. L3X1 (distant write) 17:57, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
L3X1, there's a lot wrong with getting facts from wikipedia, and nobody should ever be using Wikipedia as a primary source for anything, let alone other media sources. That disclaimer on every page, and the dire-warning pages of Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia, exist for a reason. ‑ Iridescent 18:01, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
  • The policy is (in excruciatingly dull detail) at Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks; the TLDR version is that copying Wikipedia without attribution is A Bad Thing and technically illegal, but there's not a great deal we can do. ("Much of their content is simply yanked from Wikipedia, sometimes with minor rephrasing (and errors introduced), and never credited" describes a significant chunk of the world's media. Not that I'd recommend doing such a thing, you understand, but you can test it for yourself by introducing a piece of intentionally weird phrasing into a little-watched article that you know is going to be the topic of increased interest shortly—obscure East European football teams drawn against big English teams are usually a safe bet—and googling a couple of weeks later to see how much it's propagated around the world's press.) ‑ Iridescent 17:58, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Thanks Iridescent. They said they took it down, but it was still there via Facebook. I didn't even want them to take it down, necessarily--I just wanted them to give us proper credit for it. Drmies (talk) 01:57, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
<siiigh...> I agree. Sad,isn't it? It is nice to ask for attribution, and I recommend that we continue that policy, but the more badly they need WP material, the less likely they are to be mentally and morally equipped for proper citation. So personally I am inclined to sigh and look away. What bothers me more is our responsibility in committing anything to a WP article. It is terrifying. Write or edit anything and if you commit it and a minute later go back to say, google to continue the process, you are likely to find your own words staring you in the face, errors and all if you had been careless in hitting the save button instead of "show preview". We might as well have been Fox News as far as certain persons are concerned.  :( JonRichfield (talk) 08:54, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Subrahmanya Saastri,

Please help post this article in Wikipedia as any other article appears. I finished writing it. Remove my name and sandbox on the page of contribution. The link is below. CSHN Murthy (talk) 15:40, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

  • Sorry, CSHN Murthy, thank you for your contribution, but in its current state I cannot do that. Please see Wikipedia:Your first article. Your draft does not cite reliable sources and is poorly organized (lacking even paragraphing). Cullen328, I don't know how to move a sandbox into draft/review space; perhaps you do? Drmies (talk) 16:13, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
I can move it using Twinkle L3X1 (distant write) 17:05, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Moved to Draft:Subrahmanya_Saastri L3X1 (distant write) 17:25, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

MY CSD Log is not automatically updating

I CSD several articles yesterday, but in my contributions noticed my CSD log wasn't being updated. Is this because I am using page curation instead of Twinkle? I thought I had to put something in my common.js, but it it not there, and I cannot find any instruction for creating a CSD log. Thanks L3X1 (distant write) 16:42, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Ah, it is twinkle only. Is there anyway to make Page curation nomination add to this? L3X1 (distant write) 16:44, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Archive bot configuration

The WP:SPEAK project talk page is using the outdated miszabotII archive not that is no longer functional, there are a lot of things that haven't been archived in a few years, I just joined this project two days ago and it isn't very active, I figure the best way for a new start is to have all of the old stuff archived. I can't figure out how to set up the lowercase sigmabot III bot or what to do with the old archives. Please help!! ThatGirlTayler (talk) 18:26, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

entry created about me - incorrect

The wiki profile created of me is out-dated and inaccurate. I have tried twice to edit it but am unable. I'd like to delete it and create a new one myself (I have no idea where the existing one came from).

many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbissell (talkcontribs) 18:29, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

@Sbissell: Can you tell us the exact name of the article you are referring to? Also, you may want to have a look at Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines which has some information for individuals who have biographies about them on Wikipeda that you might find helpful. Deli nk (talk) 18:40, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
You can point out inaccuracies on the talk page of the article, and suggest improvements. Let us know which article, then we can make the corrections. Dbfirs 21:23, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Talk on Wikipedia Page for Simon Lee (Academic)

I would like to draw attention to some content on the page of Simon Lee (Academic). The talk page contains a substantial amount of material that might be considered libellous, and certainly does not appear to be balanced. I have attempted to remove some of this, as it is public domain, but have been advised by what appears to be an editor that this can not be done. If I cannot do it then perhaps you might as it is certainly offensive to me, would probably be to the subject if aware of it, and is in the public domain. whilst historical, and covering a contentious period, it remains damaging and at the very least defamatory.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sebastian.newdigate1 (talkcontribs) 19:02, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello Sebastian.newdigate1 Generally comments on talk pages are left in an as-is state, unless they contain foul langauge or are trolling/vandalism/other wise malicious. In this case the material is Key23's (appears to be a SPA) opinion from 2009 and Stuartmoss's from 2010, so I don't think it can be considered libellious. L3X1 (distant write) 19:18, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Comments that old should probably be archived but that fact that they have been there for seven or eight years. WP:TPO notes the very narrow parameters for deleting other people's comments and states that an edit summary explaining the actions is necessary. That didn't happen here. The reasoning that the content was offensive to you doesn't work. Wikipedia is not censored. Another policy, WP:MULTIPLE, states that if you are using multiple accounts you should identify them as such. I assume there is a connection between Sebastian.newdigate1 and Sebastian Newdigate. Justeditingtoday (talk) 22:08, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

The very simple reason for different accounts is that I simply forgot passwords and therefore created an identity as near to the original as I could - If I was seeking to disguise I think I might have used something entirely different. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sebastian.newdigate1 (talkcontribs) 19:48, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

List of philosophers

[Post removed] (talk) 19:17, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

You also posted this to Wikipedia:Teahouse#May I be added to the List(s) of Philosophers? You can look for answers there. Please only post in one place. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:36, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Template question: View & Talk links showing up red

I've create a new template: Template:Army_Group_Rear_Area_(Wehrmacht). However, the "V" (view) and "T" (talk) links are showing up as red, not blue. Not sure how to fix this. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:26, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

It may be because the '(Wehrmacht)' is missing from the name parameter. Eagleash (talk) 00:32, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
That was it! Thank you. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:34, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Is this archive bot set up right?

I just set up a new archive bot to replace the old one, but so far nothing has happened. Can someone with more experience please check to see if it is set up right? It's located at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia ThatGirlTayler (talk) 00:48, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

@ThatGirlTayler: The archiving bot only runs once a day so give it time. Come back in a few days if it hasn't archived. I changed a couple of unreasonable parameters but they probably wouldn't have prevented archiving. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:33, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: Thank you so much!! I Really appreciate it. ThatGirlTayler (talk) 02:14, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

March 22

2017-18 NBA team season template

Can You move the template from the talk to draft. (talk) 01:16, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

How to flip tabes

Does anyone know how to flip the tables at National Football League Coach of the Year Award. I want the oldest year to come first. Currently, the most recent year comes first. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 02:29, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

I think the tables are 'sortable', so if you click the arrows they reverse the order; so it is up to the reader how they display. Or have I misunderstood the question? :P Eagleash (talk) 02:40, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
That is the way I want them to display but I want to display that way withing having to click the table. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 02:47, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Mobile users and users without JavaScript don't have sortable tables. And sortable tables initially display in the source order. This initial order cannot be changed. The source code has to be reversed. I don't know whether there are useful tools to help with this. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:49, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Copy the table to an excel document, reorder the document in the way that you want and use a tool that converts excel tables to wikitables.Naraht (talk) 04:02, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Sent emails?

Is it possible to check whether you've really sent an email using the Wiki email function? I (think I) sent one yesterday, and expected a response by now - but nothing as yet. So I'm wondering if I closed the page accidentally before it was sent, but can't find an equivalent to an "outbox" or "sent items". Chaheel Riens (talk) 09:00, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

This won't solve your current problem, but for future use, there's an option in Preferences to send you a copy, when you send an email to someone else. - X201 (talk) 09:09, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Ordinary users cannot see later whether they have sent a mail. The email form displays MediaWiki:Emailpagetext which says: "A private log will record that your e-mail has been sent, and this log can be inspected by certain privileged users in order to prevent abuse. This log does not identify the recipient, title, or contents of your email (though in cases of extreme abuse, Wikimedia Foundation staff can verify the recipient account)." PrimeHunter (talk) 11:25, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
In that case, should it not be possible to request a CU verification? If Chaheel Riens sent only one or a few email(s) that day, it would answer the question. Unless the account has been hacked I fail to see how such a confirmation could be a breach of privacy. TigraanClick here to contact me 12:02, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
I doubt a CheckUser would use sensitive tools when the user can just send a new mail to be sure. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:17, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
That's what I did in the end. I just sent it again - and received a response within an hour. Not sure what happened before, but it must not have been sent, or I closed the window too soon, etc. Chaheel Riens (talk) 17:50, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Unequal babel links

Our Tetrarchy article (covering the period of Roman history) has a babel link to the de:Tetrarchie article (covering government by four people), but the de:Römische Tetrarchie article (covering the period of Roman history) has a babel link to our Tetrarchy article. How is this possible? I thought Wikidata links required parallelism: if en:A links to de:A, de:A must link to en:A and cannot link to en:B. Nyttend (talk) 12:26, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

The link from de:Römische Tetrarchie is not made through Wikidata, but with a manually inserted [[en:tetrarchy]] at the foot of the page. As you say, Wikidata works only with one-to-one mapping; hence it doesn't cope in the frequent cases where the breakdown and scope of articles is different between different language Wikipedias. This is one of the serious weaknesses of Wikidata. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:35, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) They are called interlanguage links. WP:BABEL is something else. de:Römische Tetrarchie has [[en:tetrarchy]] in the wikitext so the link is not made with its Wikidata item (Q15733698). A wikitext link will override an existing Wikidata link or in this case add a link to a language not in the Wikidata item. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:41, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
User:PrimeHunter explained above how it is possible. Another question is, how could it be resolved? Actually it can't, because many Wikipedias have a single article about a Diocletian's tetrarchy with some general notes about the form of government, and only a few have separate articles about each. Compare Wikidata resources d:Q174450#sitelinks-wikipedia and d:Q15733698#sitelinks-wikipedia. --CiaPan (talk) 14:44, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

new listing

I'd like to have a listing/page for the Independent school I work for. Is that possible? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ckleefman (talkcontribs) 15:54, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

@Ckleefman:That depends on a lot of things. First off, since you work for the school, you have a conflict of interest and ideally you should not write or edit any article about the school. Second, the way you phrased your question, saying, "I'd like to have..." could indicate that you don't understand that no one owns a Wikipedia article, it isn't your article. Third, whether or not a topic, such as a school, is appropriate for a Wikipedia article depends on if it meets the notability requirments; in this case the school-specific notability guideline. These guidelines can best be summed up with the question, "has (the school) been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources?" If so, then yes, it can be the topic of a Wikipedia article. If not, then no, it cannot. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:12, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
@ONUnicorn: I would think the most simple interpretation of "I would like to have an article about X" is "I would like Wikipedia to have an article about X" (...but I do not care who writes it). You did put your second point in conditional form, but it still seems a bit bite-y. TigraanClick here to contact me 17:33, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

March 23

New article submitted but it hasn't been posted - how long does it take?

I submitted a new article on March 12 on a notable award-winning scientist, Legrand van Uitert, with many verifiable links. I got an immediate response from an editor saying the subject was not notable and sources were not verifiable that seemed to be a canned response from an editor who hadn't looked at the entry. I sent a response immediately outlining all the verifiable sources and notability and have heard nothing almost two weeks later. I couldn't find any FAQs with information on what happens after one tries to create a new article - it seems like a black hole at this point. Please help.Icosan6 (talk) 04:12, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

  • Icosan6, I'm sorry, but your article is practically unreadable. I strongly suggest you look at a Wikipedia biography of a scientist and try to make it look similar. Practice in a WP:Sandbox if you like. It is very, very hard to read that draft and make sense of it--I suppose the claim is he's notable because he co-filed the patent for some laser? You really need reliable sources to verify that claim, not a PDF from some organization. That goes for all the information here: please see WP:RS on what a reliable source is. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 04:16, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
For the convenience of anyone interested, the OP doubly mis-capitalized the title currently on the article (which itself may or may not be correct): it's at LeGrand Van Uitert (note the "G" and "V"). The recipients list in the Howard N. Potts Medal article redlinks him as 'LeGrand G. Van Uitert', and the IRI Achievement Award lists him as 'LeGrand Van Uitert' unlinked. {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 06:35, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Please help improve the article, IP... Drmies (talk) 16:10, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
@Icosan6: After 5 days, your new user account can be used to create articles directly in the encyclopedia, without going through Wikipedia:Articles for creation, unless the article is about you (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest). What article do you plan to create next? The Transhumanist 10:19, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
User talk:The Transhumanist, I think recent edits to the article have shown that maybe this may not be the best idea. Drmies (talk) 16:10, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

How do you get a list of the currently most active editors

I'd like to create a list of the 100 most active editors over the past 24 hours, or the past 7 days.

How can I do that?

Preferably, I'd like the method to be automated, not manual.

I look forward to your replies. The Transhumanist 10:24, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

@The Transhumanist: Wikipedia:Request a query, perhaps? -- John of Reading (talk) 10:52, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
@The Transhumanist: There used to be Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of recent edits, but it has not been used for several years and it is nominated for deletion (third time). It covered a month, rather than 1 or 7 days. --Gronk Oz (talk) 13:22, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Just in the nick of time. Thanks! The Transhumanist 14:14, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Editing / Vandalizing


I was cleaning the tabloid and gossip paper sources of one of our clients (Axl Smith) for Wikipedia.

It wasnt long till all the sources arrived back and now i'm getting message from 'Serol' about vandalizing your great website... Who actually makes the decicion that what is wrong and what is right? Who is correct and who is vandalizing?

All I am trying to do is clear wrong information, but It seems like I am considered to be a vandal. I have straight access to the source (Axl Smith) and the situation.

Thank you for your time and looking forward to hearing your answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingsmithcastle (talkcontribs) 13:01, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

If you work for Axl Smith, you should not edit the article. You have a conflict of interest. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:09, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Also, Axl Smith is not the source of the article, he is the subject of the article. Wikipedia's standards for reliable sourcing includes professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources. You could raise the question at WP:RSN as to whether or not Ilta-Sanomat is a reliable source. You still should not edit the article itself. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:16, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Kingsmithcastle, Symbol move vote.svg Please understand that Wikipedia has little interest in anything which a subject (whether a company, a person, a band, a charity, or anything else) says or wants to say about itself. That includes the subject's own publications, and also anything published by an independent source but based on an interview or press release from the subject. An article should be largely based on what people who have no connection with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable places. In any case, every single fact or claim in an article should be derived from a published reliable source. Please see WP:V for more information.. --ColinFine (talk) 21:42, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Twinkle for deletion

I have just enabled Twinkle and used it to propose a deletion of the Campus of Northwestern University article. The one time that I proposed a deletion without Twinkle, there were a bunch of notifications that were needed, on project pages and such. Does Twinkle take care of all three steps in the process for proposing a deletion, or just the first one? Thanks, Leschnei (talk) 13:56, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

@Leschnei: For a PROD, all you should do is notify the creator of the article and Twinkle does that for you. --NeilN talk to me 14:01, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Great, thanks much. Leschnei (talk) 14:04, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Also, you linked to the Articles for Deletion (AFD) process which is different from a PROD. Twinkle also carries out all the steps for a AFD nomination. --NeilN talk to me 14:06, 23 March 2017 (UTC) @Leschnei: Muffed ping. --NeilN talk to me 14:07, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Ah yes, thanks for pointing out. My contributions page says that I did a PROD, which is wanted, so all is good. Leschnei (talk) 14:54, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Unethical activity: Dissimulated back-link to a commercial vendor.

Good Morning,

I would like to report that this page content has a commercial backlink attached to the image referring to a vendor website, you may also view it in the section: Weblinks at the bottom page. How was this approved? Here is the page link: Thank you, Redouane — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redouane12 (talkcontribs) 15:47, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Redouane12. This is the English-language Wikipedia. We have no say on what happens on the German-language Wikipedia. --NeilN talk to me 15:51, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi Redouane12, please direct your enquiry to the German WP Help page. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:23, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


ìhelp the children in pasting thair own phorograph in the frame provided above ask them to colour bengali — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:55, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 5.3 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. --NeilN talk to me 16:11, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


Is Wikipedia on drugs at all, I've been on metallicas page and one minute hard wired to self destruct has sold 3 million worldwide then it changes to 2.2 million, then its 2.5 million then its 3.5 million and now its 2.2 million, make up your mind which is it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:5A2D:4A00:CC5A:A065:1294:6C31 (talk) 16:16, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

…Investigating…L3X1 (distant write) 16:23, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Pinging DannyMusicEditorL3X1 (distant write) 16:24, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Draft article langishing in submission process

I've had an article, Draft:The Bold Fisherman waiting for approval since 17th February. It's similar to other articles I've written than have gone through without trouble, and there aren't any messages I can see to indicate why it hasn't been approved. Is there somewhere else I should be looking for suggestions for improvement? What am I missing? Thanks! Joe Fogey (talk) 16:44, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

@Joe Fogey: One problem with this article, and one of your previous ones, is the link to the gif's on the Bodlean Library. They block hot linking to their images, so it then appears as a dead link to the automatic reference checking tools and bots. Try linking to the actual page that the image appears on. - X201 (talk) 16:52, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I've fixed that and some other naked links. Don't the bots tell you when something is wrong? Joe Fogey (talk) 19:01, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
The automatic tools like WP:REFLINKS warn you that it will tag it as a dead link. Some bots just tag it as a dead link straight off. Not sure how many bots will leave it untagged. - X201 (talk) 09:00, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
@Joe Fogey: Apart from the links discussion above, the backlog of articles awaiting approval is a factor. As I write this comment, the New pages feed shows "16879 total unreviewed pages", with "1229 pages reviewed this week". Your article and many others await the attention of reviewers. Eddie Blick (talk) 17:46, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Edited a page intro and the references list is not automatically updating/renumbering

Hoping for some guidance here. I've edited the intro of an existing page and the references section is not updating accordingly. I tried to go in and edit the reference list directly. The first 5 citations are still appearing despite being removed from the intro and then the numbering starts at 6 and was auto-numbered through the document. Is there a solution to fixing this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lemurr27 (talkcontribs) 17:09, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello Lemurr27 The reflist is automatic, I know of no way to edit it by hand. Did you add/delete or rearrange references, and the reflist isn't updating? What page is this? Thanks. L3X1 (distant write) 17:16, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
@Lemurr27: The first 5 references in Mercury Insurance Group are being called from the infobox. The infobox is before the intro to the article, so they will continue to be first. I fixed an error in one of them. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 17:21, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) If this relates to Mercury Insurance Group, the first five refs are contained in the infobox. At first sight, the references section appears correct (although some refs need 'tweaking'). Eagleash (talk) 17:22, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
The references within the i/bx have now been combined by another editor so the Nos. have now changed once more. Eagleash (talk) 17:28, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

ONUnicorn - I guess I didn't realize that these were linked to the reference box. Thanks so much for the clarification. I really appreciated it :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lemurr27 (talkcontribs) 20:54, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


Joseph Harris Lapin (discoverer of DPT vaccine & author of text book on whooping cough) should be included.

1900 - 1978 — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:44, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

You can request an article about him on this page. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 19:43, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes, he seems to be notable. Ruslik_Zero 19:49, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

My uploaded Commons images are only visible in their categories when I am logged in

I have recently uploaded six images to Commons:

Each of these images has been tagged with the Commons Categories 'Proposed national flags of New Zealand' and 'Proposed flags of New Zealand'.

When I am logged in, and I visit the Commons pages for 'Proposed national flags of New Zealand' and for 'Proposed flags of New Zealand' at and at, my images appear, but when I visit the pages after I have logged out, my images do not appear, unless I once again log in.

I touched base with an Administrator about this problem, but I was referred to the Help Desk. Can you resolve this issue for me, or can you explain how I may resolve it myself?

Kind regards,


NZ Flag Maven (talk) 20:14, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

In the case no one here can help, I beleve the help desk they were referring you to was Commons:Help desk, not Wikipedia:Help desk. TimothyJosephWood 20:27, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
@NZ Flag Maven: The images were also missing for me while logged out. They appeared after I purged the category pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:37, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Rebekah Mercer

Rebekah Mercer is not a Philanthropist but a political donor. Please remove the "philanthropist" from her name. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:B198:7A40:6082:4301:8597:FE73 (talk) 20:29, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Per talk page discussion )which I agree makes sense) I'm moving it to Rebekah Mercer (donor). She is much more hi-vis than Rebekah Mercer (actress). L3X1 (distant write) 21:23, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Mario kart 8 deluxe.

Is this going to be the main Mario kart game for the switch? the reason I ask that is this: since you guys haven't made a page on it yet, it made me think that the game's a spinoff and that it's not the main Mario kart game for the Nintendo Switch. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:374A:8F70:450B:826:8EF5:F3A1 (talk) 20:34, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. I know nothing about Nintendo games, and cannot answer your main question. But what I can say is that if an article does not exist that is nearly always for one of two reasons: either 1) the subject is not notable (i.e. there has not been enough material published about it in independent reliable sources to provide a basis for an article); or 2) nobody has chosen to write an article (i.e. none of the thousands of volunteer editors who work on Wikipedia has decided to write it). --ColinFine (talk) 21:52, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
You may wish to try your question here: Mario Kart 8 Talk Page or at: Entertainment Desk. If this fails to offer results, maybe taking it to a gaming forum online. Good luck! Maineartists (talk) 22:18, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Thousandth edit

I just got a notification that I just made my thousandth edit. How can I see what edit that was? Benjamin (talk) 22:15, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

You can view your contributions, but they aren't numbered, though. I'm guessing it's this one to Transgender.L3X1 (distant write) 22:47, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure I made that edit after I got the notification. Is there no way to see which was my thousandth? Benjamin (talk) 23:28, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
There are different ways to count edits (see Wikipedia:Edit count#What is an edit count?). I don't know the feature which notified you or how it counts but Special:CentralAuth/Benjaminikuta currently says you have 1004 edits so I guess it counts in the same way. Counting backwards from 1004 in Special:Contributions/Benjaminikuta gives the edit L3X1 suggested. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:58, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Notices automatically informs of you of your 1st, 10th, 100th, 500th, and thousandth edit. As I have only 5500, I don't know if you will be notified at milestones like 10K, 50K , 100K etc L3X1 (distant write) 01:19, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
I found it mentioned at mw:Help:Notifications/Notifications types#Milestone which lists powers of ten up to 1,000,000. Maybe you can still see the edit on the notification icon or at Special:Notifications. The Transgender edit was the first in six hours so I guess that was it. I haven't passed any milestones since Wikipedia:Notifications was introduced in 2013. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:10, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

March 24

Wiki-code/template for a second WP:AFD discussion

Hi all,

What code/tempalete should be added to those two discussions to identify that they are about the same subject?
Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:42, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

@Shirt58: I don't know of an "official" template, but I've added a "see also" to the current AFD. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:16, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
I cobbled together a "previous-AfD-style" box that should do the trick. TimothyJosephWood 12:42, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
I just kindof assumed that OP checked to see if they were sufficiently similar. TimothyJosephWood 13:27, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Auto-archiving help needed

The archiving of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject South Africa is not working, there are topics dating back to May 2015 that are still on the "live" page. Would someone who groks archiving bot settings please have a go at fixing it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:27, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

If someone could make a bot that automatically configured archive bots I would give them all the barnstars. What I mean is you post something like {{archive bot requested}} on the article's talk page, and the nice robot comes along and adds everything with more-or-less the standard settings. TimothyJosephWood 12:36, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
I have moved the first section out of the archiving template.[1] The bot runs once a day. Come back in a few days if it hasn't archived. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:41, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks PrimeHunter, I can't believe that I simply couldn't see the problem, it's so obvious. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:39, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

My page Wanda Phipps has been deleted

My page Wanda Phipps has been deleted--could you please put it back up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:37, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello, are you referring to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wanda Phipps? If so, you could contact the deleting Admin. Sandstein to see if they would be prepared to restore it to draftspace so it could continue to worked on. On another issue, pages in Wikipedia do not 'belong' to any one person, they are Wikipedia's page about whatever the subject is. Also if you are, or have a connection to, the subject, you should not be editing the page. Please see WP:COI and/or WP:AUTOBIOG for more information. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 14:49, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Deepak Deulkar - the correct spelling is Deepak Dewoolkar

Deepak Deulkar - the correct spelling is Deepak Dewoolkar. Please correct the same as soon as possible.15:12, 24 March 2017 (UTC) (talk)

"Dewoolkar" may be correct, but Wikipedia policy is to use the spelling more frequent in published English-language sources. This appears to be "Deulkar". Maproom (talk) 16:37, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Arrow III New Jersey Transit Railcar

You have the incorrect information in regards to the Arrow III NJT Railcar. Schunk did not produce the pantograph in 2011 that is currently in operation on these cars. W did and we are TransTech of SC, Inc. this sentence is incorrect: In 2011 a single arm Schunk type pantograph was fitted to Arrow III #1463 replacing the original twin-arm Stemmann. By early 2014, all 160 units remaining in revenue service had been fitted with the new pantographs.

Corrected on 3-24-17 by Panto 76.

<contact details redacted> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panto76 (talkcontribs) 15:34, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

@Panto76: I see that you have edited the article yourself, but you haven't provided any reliable sources to support this claim, having a conflict of interest yourself. The Average Wikipedian (talk) 16:13, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

2017-18 NBA season template

Can You Move The 2017-18 NBA Season Template from talk to draft for me please. (talk) 18:22, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from ""
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia :
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:Help desk"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA