- For other types of questions, see Help:Contents and Are you in the right place? 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.
- 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.
- If you need real-time help, you can join our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
- If you are a new editor, you might prefer to ask your question at the Teahouse, an area specifically for new users to get help with editing, article creation and general Wikipedia use, in a friendly environment.
- Remember to sign your post by adding four tildes (
~~~~
) at the end of your post. Alternatively, you can click on the signature icon () on the edit toolbar.
May 24
Why are A7 and A9 separate criteria?
To me, WP:A7 and WP:A9 seem pretty much the same, except that one is for "articles about a real person, individual animal, commercial or non-commercial organization, web content, or organized event" without an indication of importance. A9 seems to be the same thing, but for musical recordings. Why are there two separate criteria? I.hate.spam.mail.here (message me | my contributions) 05:15, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I figured out that A9 only applies when none of the artists have an article. Is there any other difference? I.hate.spam.mail.here (message me | my contributions) 05:16, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- It is largely historical; as A7 (the "credible claim of significance" criteria) originally had only applied to certain specific categories of articles, generally those which had the potential to use a Wikipedia article for promotional purposes. A9 was created to fill a loophole that people were exploiting to basically do the same to publish articles about their mixtapes. The reason why A7 & A9 have limited categorical applications, rather than being universal, is that the 'credible claim of significance' criteria really is only a problem for stupid shit like "John Doe is a school teacher and a really nice guy" or "Mario's Italian Restaurant is an Italian Restaurant in EBF, Indiana" or something like that. For some other really stubby articles, like say a random species of frog or a tiny river tributary, it was thought that those had a low threat for abuse, and that while those could often be deleted, that AFD was a more appropriate venue for that. --Jayron32 16:19, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- @I.hate.spam.mail.here A9 Was originally intended as a kind of "clean up" criteria - it used to be the case that if someone wrote an article on their band and their new music recording that they sold 2 copies of the article on the band could be deleted under criteria A7 as a {{db-band}} but their obviously non-notable musical recordings would have to have a full AFD discussion. The original intent of A9 was that when an article on an obviously non-notable musician was deleted under A7 all the related articles on their recordings could also be deleted at the same time. Because this criteria has different criteria for when it applies (i.e it's conditional on the existence of other articles) it was created as a different number rather than an extension of A7. For the historical background you can read the discussion that lead to it's creation Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion/Archive 31#Extending A7?. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 19:45, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks @192.76.8.78 and @Jayron32 for explaining this. I.hate.spam.mail.here (message me | my contributions) 23:03, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Combining articles
I have been broadening the definition of an article (with technical content), which has rendered potentially one additional article redundant (and has become in effect the main page for a number of others). Once I have ensured that all the content in the redundant article is captured, what is the most efficient way to bring them together? Just moving and deleting?Guy WF Loftus (talk) 08:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I guess this is about User:Guy WF Loftus/sandbox, which makes extensive use of the contents of Oil reserves, without giving credit to its authors. Guy WF Loftus, if your plan is to replace the current article Oil reserves by the contents of your sandbox, you will need to give due credit to those who have contributed to it. You should also expect resistance from anyone with Oil reserves on their watchlist who disagrees with any of your changes. Maproom (talk) 08:48, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Maproom: You guess correctly on all accounts (thanks for your help). Those whom I would like to credit have no Wiki identities (industry and academic specialists) - how do I credit them? I am hoping for little resistance because what replaces Oil reserves is just industry standard, removing the need for specific (exceptions) and ephemeral content. But of course all informed (and public domain) contributions are equally valid and welcome.Guy WF Loftus (talk) 08:58, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Guy WF Loftus: Attribution needs to be made to those editors that created the articles or contributed substantially to them. You can find the relevant guidelines at WP:CWW. Eagleash (talk) 16:49, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you both for your rapid rapid responses but two core questions remain unanswered:
- What is the most efficient way to combine articles (attribution withstanding)?
- How do you attribute content to individuals who are not Wikipedia editors but who nonetheless peer reviewed and contributed to wikipedia content?
- Guy WF Loftus (talk) 08:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Guy WF Loftus: For attribution, in the sense of re-using verbatim text that other Wikipedia contributors wrote, see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia (a long and boring page, but read at least the first paragraph).
- You may cite specific articles / talks by experts etc. if they contributed to your general understanding of the topic when writing it, even if they are not inline citations to specific claims - see WP:EXTERNAL. However, you may not cite some expert in general, you need a published source for that - any use of expert names as an appeal to authority is a no-no.
- If you want to acknowledge the assistance of some person, I am not aware of any good way to do that. One would usually want that person to perform the edits themselves using their own account, but it’s too late by now, and not everyone likes wiki-editing anyway. You could leave a note on the talk page along the lines of "I talked with Jane Doe in May 2022 about the article and she was a great help for my edits" (make sure Jane Doe is OK with her name being on Wikipedia forever first). TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 08:47, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Tigraan:Very clear and most helpful Tigraan - thank you. One question down - one to go (viz. "What is the most efficient way to combine articles?")Guy WF Loftus (talk) 08:53, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Copy-pasting your sandbox into the article would satisfy attribution etc. requirements, but it would also probably result in one big revert. At this point, you should probably slowly merge your draft into the main article, bit by bit, so that if anyone objects to one change they can easily undo that change only and not the other sections.
- There is still a risk that you end up reverted, which is why "the most efficient way" is to make the edits directly into the main article from the start. That way, as soon as there is pushback, you can discuss and see what the problem is. And if there is no pushback, you can work your way through further edits. See WP:BRD (technically not a guideline but virtually every experienced editor agrees with it). TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 09:30, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Tigraan:Interesting - I had intended doing it wholesale because the parts of the article which have been preserved have been very slightly tweaked to include the broader subject. I am also going to reduce overall sentence length to remove what I can of sub-clauses and nested statements (adding notes to prevent loss of detail but maintain the flow). Wholesale makes this easier because it reduces the chance of making typos, which I have already ironed out from the sandbox. It also makes sense because broadening the subject applies equally to all sub-sections the instant you move the title (unpicking each sub-set introduces the potential for new typos). The compromise is to do this progressively (as you suggest) and logically (by sub-title) only adding the subject change initially, so as to unfold the narrative and limit reversion. This will have the added benefit of providing a clearer audit (old versus new) for individuals to make minor reversions if they feel compelled to do so. It then become passively more collaborative, which only works if contributors are alerted to the change. This needs careful unpicking but thanks for your insights - I will tread carefully out of respect for those previous contributors.Guy WF Loftus (talk) 05:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Tigraan:Very clear and most helpful Tigraan - thank you. One question down - one to go (viz. "What is the most efficient way to combine articles?")Guy WF Loftus (talk) 08:53, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you both for your rapid rapid responses but two core questions remain unanswered:
- @Guy WF Loftus: Attribution needs to be made to those editors that created the articles or contributed substantially to them. You can find the relevant guidelines at WP:CWW. Eagleash (talk) 16:49, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Maproom: You guess correctly on all accounts (thanks for your help). Those whom I would like to credit have no Wiki identities (industry and academic specialists) - how do I credit them? I am hoping for little resistance because what replaces Oil reserves is just industry standard, removing the need for specific (exceptions) and ephemeral content. But of course all informed (and public domain) contributions are equally valid and welcome.Guy WF Loftus (talk) 08:58, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Potential copyright issues with it:Giovanni Pietro Luigi Cacherano d'Osasco
I have been creating an biography article Giovanni Pietro Luigi Cacherano d'Osasco. I know that there is an Wikipedia Italian article it:Giovanni Pietro Luigi Cacherano d'Osasco. I decided not to use and translate that, but use the following source:
- Massabò, I. Ricci (1973), "Cacherano d'Osasco, Giovanni Pietro Luigi", Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, vol. 16, Rome: Istituto della Enciclopedia italiana
However when I used Google translate so some of the translation (as one would expect) was not clear. So I cut and pasted the relevant paragraph from the Italian article and to my surprise the translation was nearly identical, despite far more sources allegedly being used in the Italian article.
Once I had finished my translation, I ran the Italian article through the DYK toolbox Earwig's Copyvio Detector unfortunatly is show that 90.4% of the text of the two articles match.
I do not know what Italian copyright laws are, but I suspect copying text from a 1973 article without accreditation is at the very least plagiarism and most likely a copyright violation. Please can someone who reads and writes Italian informs who ever is responsible for policing this on the Italian Wikipedia that they may have a problem. -- PBS (talk) 13:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- PBS, copyright is taken very seriously here at en:WP. They may be a bit more relaxed at it:WP, but I suspect they still won't tolerate what you describe. Unfortunately I don't know enough Italian to report it there. Plagiarism is fine, but should be admitted to – I've seen whole sections closely based on, and attributed to, out-of-copyright editions of Encyclopedia Britannica. Maproom (talk) 14:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC).
- PBS, thank you, I have followed the process at it:Wikipedia:Sospette violazioni di copyright#Testi to report the problem. TSventon (talk) 14:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
backlink
hello my name is Charles; I manage an affiliate store called golfsupplies1359.com; with that said; I've valued your website very highly; I find it informative and trust worthy; and I would like to exchange backlinks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.72.238.164 (talk) 14:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- You are free to link to any article in Wikipedia. However, there is no place in Wikipedia that is appropriate for a backlink to your store. -Arch dude (talk) 15:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hi. Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam says that external links are
nofollow
'd, so even if they are inserted, they will not get any PageRank. I.hate.spam.mail.here (message me | my contributions) 23:05, 24 May 2022 (UTC)- And also, Wikipedia is not a means of promotion, but an encyclopedia, so I don't think exchanging links builds the encyclopedia. I.hate.spam.mail.here (message me | my contributions) 23:06, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
I need to be able to contact someone
My family has a page on wikipedia. I went to the page as I do every so often and noticed my parents obituaries appear on the site. There is also incorrect information. How do i get in contact with someone to correct this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LodeStarrr (talk • contribs) 16:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Can you please tell us the name of the page (or provide a link to it) so we can help you further? --Jayron32 16:58, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- This seems to be about Boss (rapper), based on reverted edits by this account and certain edits/editors in that article's history. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:08, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- LodeStarrr Your family does not have a page on Wikipedia. Wikipedia has an article about your family here. You should use its article talk page to make a formal edit request(click for instructions) detailing changes you feel are needed, preferably sourced to an independent reliable source. 331dot (talk) 17:25, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia stalker editor
There is a man who has been obsessed with my son Brennan Gilmore ever since he had a band in high school. As he grew older this man would attend his concerts and then send gifts and fan letters to our home. Brennan's mates would tease him about this nut case. Evidently he is a dedicated Wikipedia Editor and scours the internet and publishes any tidbit of info on Brennan. He has followed his college and career till the present day. The fact that Brennan has had some remarkable career and life experiences has sent him into a flurry of self importance as the Brennan Gilmore expert. Several attempts have been made to edit this entry down, but he is very Wikipedia savvy, and they pop back up. As a result Brennan has a Wikpedia " article that stretches to infinity. Brennan hates it. It seems so self serving and ridiculous to have a Wikipedia article that far surpasses Einstein's.
People really look to Wikipedia for info that is more complete and vetted better than news media. I am a monthly paid subscriber myself. Can you do anything about the disproportion of this entry? Brennan says trying will get him excited about engagement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:5C5:C100:1D33:E8DB:BD70:ED40:6585 (talk) 18:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Courtesy link: Brennan Gilmore. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:06, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Wikipedia does not have paid subscriptions. Do you mean that you make a monthly donation to the Wikimedia Foundation, the organization that operates the computers Wikipedia is on? Wikipedia does not claim to be a reliable source and people should not be looking to Wikipedia for vetted information, because we don't do that. We summarize independent reliable sources.
- Please understand that a Wikipedia article summarizes what independent reliable sources state about a topic. If you are saying that the sources offered in the article are not being accurately summarized, please describe the specific errors on the article talk page(Talk:Brennan Gilmore). If the sources are summarized accurately, but are incorrect, you will need to discuss that with the sources themselves to get them to issue corrections. Modern topics that receive much coverage online will by nature often have lengthly articles here.
- If Mr. Gilmore is being the subject of stalking, he will need to contact his local authorities or perhaps seek legal counsel for options to stop it. That's not really a Wikipedia matter unless Mr. Gilmore is a Wikipedia editor being stalked here on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 18:10, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- There seem to be two aspects to this request. One is about content, which you've already been advised on, but I would also direct you to the specific help for people in your situation at Wikipedia:FAQ/Article subjects. The other seems to be a complaint about the behavior of a specific editor, which is not something the help desk is really designed to deal with. If you have diffs of specific problematic edits that the user in question has made, you may want to start a thread at WP:ANI to discuss it. Accusations by themselves will not result in action being taken, you must present specific evidence. If there are aspects of this that are related to Wikipedia but not visible on Wikipeida, please email that evidence to the Arbitration committee at arbcom-en@wikimedia.org . Beeblebrox (talk) 20:49, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I reviewed the article and don't see anything that is out of the ordinary. It seems properly sourced and neutral. As long as there are no BLP privacy violations, I'm not sure anything can or should be done. Long after the stalker has passed away, there will be a good record of Brennan's life which will serve as his legacy. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:13, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Albert Einstein is five times larger than Brennan Gilmore, and it's only one of numerous articles in Category:Albert Einstein. Brennan Gilmore is not large by Wikipedia standards (we have billions of words) and I see no sign of anyone trying to reduce it. The creator and main contributor has 11,500 Wikipedia edits. He had been an editor for ten years before starting the article which is only a tiny part of his Wikipedia work. That doesn't sound like a stalker to me. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:57, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- As a casual observer, I think a lot of the information in the article is.... minutia. Such as
Brennan Gilmore's grandfather, John Middlemas, a 97-year-old World War II veteran, "took a knee" in support of NFL players...
andHis grandfather's activism was inspired by his own New Zealand relative, a British settler...
andGilmore has been outspoken on the lack of restrictions on personal spending of campaign funds in his home state...
Do we need to know all of his political opinions, or all of this stuff about his grandfather? I think this is far too much detail. I hope the subject isn't actually being stalked, but if I were Brennan, I would think this amount of detail is weird. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 03:27, 25 May 2022 (UTC)- The grandfather taking a knee only became public because Brennan photographed and tweeted it [1], generating 139,000 retweets and many news stories like https://time.com/4956246/war-veteran-kneel-nfl-players/. Brennan's own Twitter replies indicate he appreciated the attention. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:48, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @PrimeHunter OK, it became public. Not everything that is public is noteworthy, as you know since you are an experienced editor. That event is great for them, and I'm glad Brennan appreciated it, but still -- do encyclopedia readers need to know this? This is just my opinion, of course. Thanks. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 08:41, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- The grandfather taking a knee only became public because Brennan photographed and tweeted it [1], generating 139,000 retweets and many news stories like https://time.com/4956246/war-veteran-kneel-nfl-players/. Brennan's own Twitter replies indicate he appreciated the attention. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:48, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- As a casual observer, I think a lot of the information in the article is.... minutia. Such as
- I have a similar problem someone is stalking my wiki entry, constantly editing in stuff and I really need to talk to someone about the problem. 2001:8003:37C0:E700:54C:ECE5:7C44:2115 (talk) 07:08, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Wikipedia entries are edited "constantly". We have articles about subjects, you do not own an article about yourself. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:20, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Is Wikipedia welcoming of Christianity?
I’m a little afraid of joining wikipedia because its users may harass me for being a Christian, After seeing several users calling Christians “crackpots” “nut heads” “lunatics” “fundies” and “thumpers”. Also it seems like it’s largely comprised of atheists. I just want to know whether Wikipedia is welcome or persecuting towards Christians. 104.151.161.88 (talk) 22:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- See the note at the top of the page that reads "The Wikipedia help desk is a place where you can ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia." I can say that there number of assumptions in your post that are completely wrong. MarnetteD|Talk 22:39, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- @MarnetteD Just for clarification are you talking about me or the assumptions that are made about Christianity? 104.151.161.88 (talk) 22:44, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I want to step back from this question and suggest that if you are offended by opinions, strongly held, that are different from your own, then perhaps you should examine if you really should be using the internetz? -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 22:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I’m not “offended”, i only want to know if I will be harassed for expressing my belief via user talk page. 104.151.161.88 (talk) 23:00, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think that's pretty unlikely. You could also just not discuss it outside of discussions where it's necessary, which should be few and far between as personal views shouldn't be part of editing. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ok, I just got a little discouraged from a editor calling Christian’s crackpots. You may not know how that feels to be called that, 104.151.161.88 (talk) 23:07, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I've been called a whole lot, and more. Luckily it's text on the internet, so it's easily ignorable. Of you create an account and find that you're being harassed, there are mechanisms to address that. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Really? Well that’s good to know! 104.151.161.88 (talk) 23:18, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I've been called a whole lot, and more. Luckily it's text on the internet, so it's easily ignorable. Of you create an account and find that you're being harassed, there are mechanisms to address that. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ok, I just got a little discouraged from a editor calling Christian’s crackpots. You may not know how that feels to be called that, 104.151.161.88 (talk) 23:07, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think that's pretty unlikely. You could also just not discuss it outside of discussions where it's necessary, which should be few and far between as personal views shouldn't be part of editing. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Roxy the dog also are you assuming I’m closed minded because I Christian? 104.151.161.88 (talk) 23:09, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I’m not “offended”, i only want to know if I will be harassed for expressing my belief via user talk page. 104.151.161.88 (talk) 23:00, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I want to step back from this question and suggest that if you are offended by opinions, strongly held, that are different from your own, then perhaps you should examine if you really should be using the internetz? -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 22:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- @MarnetteD Just for clarification are you talking about me or the assumptions that are made about Christianity? 104.151.161.88 (talk) 22:44, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- No one should be able to tell from your edits that you are a Christian -- or that your eyes are blue (or whatever). If someone checks your user page and sees that you are a Christian and then harasses you for that, the person can be warned and blocked if necessary. If others can tell from your edits, then maybe, possibly, you need to adjust your edits... Welcome. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 03:36, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Yes. Welcome! Llll5032 (talk) 23:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Not at all. It was a general observation. -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 23:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for responding (:. 104.151.161.88 (talk) 23:18, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I am a Christian, and I express it in a userbox on my user page. I have never felt unwelcome because of that. So long as you are not a jerk about it, you should not receive harassment. If you do feel you are the target of harassment because of your faith, ask for administrator help. (I am an administrator, but I am not the only one.) ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 00:11, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah I have actually seen a fair number of users (in the long time I've been here) who have expressed their Christian faith on their userpage. Generally speaking, that is just fine. At the same time, the times I've seen it go wrong is when there are adherents to a particular religion who feel that their belief/faith somehow removes the requirement from citing sources or doing other necessary Wikipedian things when they edit. Take a look at the links AngusW🐶🐶F has included below and if those things aren't going to be a problem, then there's no problem. Harassment isn't okay here in any case. Jessamyn (my talk page) 02:09, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- And in case you didn't find it on your own, here's the Christian Wikipedia category (i.e. those who have noted it on their userpage) and it's a big group, and the Theist Wikipedian category is even larger. Jessamyn (my talk page) 02:10, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah I have actually seen a fair number of users (in the long time I've been here) who have expressed their Christian faith on their userpage. Generally speaking, that is just fine. At the same time, the times I've seen it go wrong is when there are adherents to a particular religion who feel that their belief/faith somehow removes the requirement from citing sources or doing other necessary Wikipedian things when they edit. Take a look at the links AngusW🐶🐶F has included below and if those things aren't going to be a problem, then there's no problem. Harassment isn't okay here in any case. Jessamyn (my talk page) 02:09, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- I am a Christian, and I express it in a userbox on my user page. I have never felt unwelcome because of that. So long as you are not a jerk about it, you should not receive harassment. If you do feel you are the target of harassment because of your faith, ask for administrator help. (I am an administrator, but I am not the only one.) ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 00:11, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for responding (:. 104.151.161.88 (talk) 23:18, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Not at all. It was a general observation. -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 23:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I would read WP:ADVOCACY, WP:SOAPBOX, and WP:HOLYWAR. Also, if you are a member of a particular congregation, you might want to stay away from editing that group or leader's Wikipedia article because of conflict of interest. WP:COI AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 01:18, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- If you want a guarantee that you will not be harassed, then editing Wikipedia is probably not the hobby for you. I happen to be a Jew and I have been harassed by people who hate Jews and also by other Jews who think that I am not religiously observant enough. I am confident enough to mostly disregard this kind of harassment because it reflects far more poorly on the harassers than it does on me. Harassers get blocked and I have been editing since 2009 without a single block or a single warning of a block. I too am an administrator. We try very hard to control and stop harassment but it happens. Muslims get harassed. Hindus get harassed. Atheists get harassed. Various sects of Buddhism harass each other. In Northern Ireland articles, Catholic Christians may harass Protestant Christians and vice versa. And so on. If you have the courage of your convictions, always edit in compliance with Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines and scrupulously refrain from proselytizing, you should be fine. Cullen328 (talk) 04:42, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Undocumented feature?
Hi.
I have been editing articles with the basic Wikitext editor for some time (laptop, Windows10). Recently something happened to change the appearance of displayed text when editing, such that any legal markup, eg
- ''[[]]'' or ''[[Hello world]]''
gets colored two-tone blue. I could get used to this if it weren't for the cursor also turning blue when within such a string and hard to find, but other several other tricks cropped up at the same time, including:
- My [Insert] key now toggles the editor between insert and overtype mode with no indication which mode the keyboard is in.
- The span of the vertical slider no longer corresponds with the range of the article I'm editing, and hovering the mouse pointer near the bottom of the slider, its shape turns to a diagonal (NW-SE) pointer and has the power to raise or lower the slider's lower range.
The embarrassing thing is that this happened before, maybe a year ago, and a knowledgeable and helpful User drew my attention to a checkbox in (I think) Preferences, which I had somehow triggered, perhaps by an undocumented Shortcut (does Wiki editor have Shortcuts, such as [Ctrl + W] etc?). Sadly I did not take a note of their solution, and now I can't find the checkbox, and in any case if it can happen to this old duffer it can happen to others. Thanks in advance. Doug butler (talk) 23:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Doug butler: I'm not familiar with the situation you describe. If others can't help, perhaps you might ask at the technical issues section of the Village Pump. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:19, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Syntax highlighter turned on? That is the icon next to the Advanced dropdown on the wikitext editor toolbar.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 23:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks TTM, that clears the problem. How it happened is a mystery but probably attributable to fat fingers :). The associated symptoms would seem to be bugs; I'll copy this conversation to the Village pump as suggested by TT. Thanks allDoug butler (talk) 00:34, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20220527001738im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
May 25
What's the name of the thing?
What's the tool that lets you see which Wikipedia articles contain a certain URL? Like if I find a website that is not reliable, and I want to find every article currently using that website as a rouce. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:29, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @TenPoundHammer Special:LinkSearch? 192.76.8.78 (talk) 01:32, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- That's it, thank you Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:35, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Place things in global context
I thought there was a project guideline stipulating something that should be obvious, that statements ought to have geographic context if applicable: references to small towns ought to mention the country ("John Doe is a politician from Birdsville"), references to seasons ought to mention the hemisphere ("in the spring of 2009"), and so on. Does such a page exist? 49.198.51.54 (talk) 08:20, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- There is a general guideline for the lead (MOS:INTRO) that
the subject should be placed in a context familiar to a normal reader. For example, it is better to describe the location of a town with reference to an area or larger place than with coordinates.
- There is also MOS:SEASON about the specific case of seasons (
Avoid the use of seasons to refer to a particular time of year [...] as such uses are ambiguous
). TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 09:22, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Contact in regards of an Article
I contact you on behalf of Isaacs and Isaacs Law Firm regarding a Target URL in the "References" section posted on a article. The firm changed the Domain Name of the website and I would like to know if it is possible to change the Target URL in the "References" section of this article? Because the Target URL it is not available anymore and makes that reference in the article irrelevant.
Here is the article link:
Link to a Wikipedia mirror
|
---|
You will find it as " "1. Legal Complaint - Very Simple Definitions - Lawyer Terms". isaacsandisaacs.com. Retrieved 21 March 2018." and here the Target URL and website domain name that need to be changed.
Here is the new Target URL: https://wewin.com/glossary/complaint/ And the Domain name is wewin.com not isaacsandisaacs.com anymore.
Kindly wait for your reply. Thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2F0A:B007:3400:31A5:1119:E6E2:DF86 (talk) 08:30, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- This comment is best directed at the article talk page, Talk:Complaint(not sure why the url you provide has .su in it). You will need to declare as a paid editor, see WP:PAID. This is easier to do if you have an account, but you must do it even if you do not. 331dot (talk) 09:01, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) First of all, note that you linked to en.wikipedia.su, which is apparently a mirror of Wikipedia (in violation of the licensing requirements). The .su subdomain does not inspire confidence to me. The correct link is: Complaint, which goes to en.wikipedia.org, which did show the same problem.
- I fixed the link (thanks for the info). Usually, I would encourage you to fix it yourself (Wikipedia, the encyclopedia anyone can edit), but in that case, you did well not to. Arguably it is spammy to cite a commercial website for such a definition, so other editors may choose to remove it entirely; as an employee or close associate of the law firm, you have a conflict of interest in having the link stay, and you should not add such links directly. It is very possible that someone else will remove the link at some point.
- In any future such cases, you could make an edit request - go to the talk page of the article in question (here that would be Talk:Complaint), create a new section, copy-paste the "magic code" (template)
{{request edit}}
at the top of the section and type in your suggested edits in a "change X to Y" format below. The template will cause your query to appear in a review queue, where an independent editor will eventually come around and implement it (or not). - Do also check out the link that 331dot provided (WP:PAID) - assuming you are editing Wikipedia as part of your work, you should disclose that relationship in a formalized manner, as a terms of use requirement. ("Editing Wikipedia as part of your work" can be a bit fuzzy if you are not in a marketing / PR role, the rule of thumb is whether your boss would be happy to see you do such edits during your work time. Read the actual link.) TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 09:17, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- The real question here is "why are we citing a firm of personal injury solicitors for a definition which could be found in any legal dictionary?". There are a huge number of high quality reference works we could cite for this information. The original addition here seems to have been link spamming anyway, the text was added by Darryl Isaacs [2] Who I'm sure has absolutely no COI at all with a law firm that uses his name, then 2 days later an IP shows up to add a link to the Isaacs and Isaacs website [3]. This should be deleted as a completely unsuitable reference added by a spammer, not fixed to point at their new "we win lawsuits" website. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 10:38, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Tigraan Pinging Tigraan since they implemented the edit request above. Would you object to deletion of the reference on the basis that 1) we should not be citing commercial websites when the information is available in all manner of reference works 2) The lead of an article does not require citations 3) The link was added by an obvious COI editor for the purposes of self promotion? 192.76.8.78 (talk) 10:51, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- The spam link could be replaced with this [4] strangely my IP address is blocked from editing that page so I can't make the change. Theroadislong (talk) 10:56, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- No objection at all to the change of ref; I made the edit because it was a clear improvement, but as my post hints to I do think a more neutral ref should be preferred.
- Theroadislong, I made the change you suggested, but I rather doubt your IP is blocked. I would wager that you tried to edit on the wikipedia.su mirror, created by a crawling bot, and you are therefore seeing the page that the crawling bot itself encountered when clicking the "edit" link. I collapsed the OP’s incorrect link to prevent others from doing the same mistake. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 11:43, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ah yes of course, my silly mistake, thanks for the change. Theroadislong (talk) 11:52, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- The spam link could be replaced with this [4] strangely my IP address is blocked from editing that page so I can't make the change. Theroadislong (talk) 10:56, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Tigraan Pinging Tigraan since they implemented the edit request above. Would you object to deletion of the reference on the basis that 1) we should not be citing commercial websites when the information is available in all manner of reference works 2) The lead of an article does not require citations 3) The link was added by an obvious COI editor for the purposes of self promotion? 192.76.8.78 (talk) 10:51, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- The real question here is "why are we citing a firm of personal injury solicitors for a definition which could be found in any legal dictionary?". There are a huge number of high quality reference works we could cite for this information. The original addition here seems to have been link spamming anyway, the text was added by Darryl Isaacs [2] Who I'm sure has absolutely no COI at all with a law firm that uses his name, then 2 days later an IP shows up to add a link to the Isaacs and Isaacs website [3]. This should be deleted as a completely unsuitable reference added by a spammer, not fixed to point at their new "we win lawsuits" website. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 10:38, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Blacklist of forbidden links
Where can I find the reason why a particular site - borgenproject.org - has been banned? If possible I would like to cite an article on that site as a source - if the reason for its ban is not absolutely against it of course. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:31, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Dodger67 There are two spam blacklists to check, MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist which covers just the english wikipedia, and meta:Spam-blacklist which covers all WMF sites. Both of these have a log page which records additions to the lists along with the reasons, and request pages. In this case the link is globally blacklisted, and a search of the archives on meta turns up this discussion from 2007 [5] Which indicates that it was being spammed cross wiki and might have been copying information from wikipedia? 192.76.8.78 (talk) 12:51, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks! So if they habitually republish other sources I might be able to find a different original source of the article I'm interested in. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:04, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Dodger67 I'm not sure, I'm just going off what they said on meta:
it appears to be copying from en:wiki rather than intentional use of the site to improve the articles
which is a bit difficult to understand. The main reason for the blacklisting seems to be a 2007 era spam campaign, and no-one seems to have ever put together a good request to have it removed. If you just want to use one or two links you can use the local whitelist (MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist) to override the global blacklisting on specific articles/sub domains etc. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 13:18, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Dodger67 I'm not sure, I'm just going off what they said on meta:
- Thanks! So if they habitually republish other sources I might be able to find a different original source of the article I'm interested in. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:04, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
How to mark a editor for block
Hi Folks!! What is the process for marking an editor with csd or whatover, if they for example, are a spammer? I saw something about it a while ago, but never really used it.scope_creepTalk 14:35, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Scope creep For obvious spammers/Vandals report them at WP:AIV. For username policy violations (e.g shared accounts, profane usernames, promotional usernames) Report them at WP:UAA. For sockpuppets or abuse of multiple accounts use WP:SPI, unless the edits are obvious vandalism/spam, in which case WP:AIV will produce a faster response. For any other issues use WP:ANI. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 14:41, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- That is what I've been doing so far. Thanks. scope_creepTalk 14:43, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Scope creep I'm a little unclear what you mean by "the process for marking an editor with csd". We don't delete the editors, we delete the pages they create. You might mark their userpage for speedy deletion if it is spam or whatever (see all of the G criteria and all of the U criteria at WP:CSD), and in rare cases we may delete their talk page, but we don't delete them. We may block them or ban them or globally ban them - but it seems you are already familiar with those processes. So I'm not sure what you are asking. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:13, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @ONUnicorn: I read something in passing in 2012 (about) when ACTRIAL finished, about if you came across a bad draft by a spammer you could mark the editor page with a "tag" and a admin would come an address it. I never bothered with it at the time, and never saw it again. scope_creepTalk 15:28, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Scope creep The "general" speedy deletion criteria apply to draft pages, if you come across a draft that is so promotional it is unsalvagable you can tag it for speedy deletion under criteria WP:G11. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 15:31, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @ONUnicorn: I read something in passing in 2012 (about) when ACTRIAL finished, about if you came across a bad draft by a spammer you could mark the editor page with a "tag" and a admin would come an address it. I never bothered with it at the time, and never saw it again. scope_creepTalk 15:28, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Scope creep I'm a little unclear what you mean by "the process for marking an editor with csd". We don't delete the editors, we delete the pages they create. You might mark their userpage for speedy deletion if it is spam or whatever (see all of the G criteria and all of the U criteria at WP:CSD), and in rare cases we may delete their talk page, but we don't delete them. We may block them or ban them or globally ban them - but it seems you are already familiar with those processes. So I'm not sure what you are asking. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:13, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- That is what I've been doing so far. Thanks. scope_creepTalk 14:43, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Ongoing section of 'In the news'
How do I figure out if the war in Afghanistan has been in the Ongoing section of 'In the news'? Best, Tyrone Madera (talk) 16:54, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Tyrone Madera: I tried several incomplete methods to search for something and found [6] with 2021 Taliban offensive. I don't know whether the main article has been there. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:46, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Login
For some reason I've been logged out of Wikipedia, I can't remember my password, and password reset is not working. Any idea how I can resolve this? MFlet1 (talk) 16:57, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- If you have been logged out, can't remember your password, and you do not have an email connected to your account, you cannot retrieve your account. See Help:Logging in#What if I forget the password? The Tips of Apmh 17:07, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @MFlet1: You appear to be logged in, though. Take this time to go to prefences and set an email address for your account so if you do forget your password you can get a reset via email. If you forget your password and no email is set up, you won't be able to access your account. RudolfRed (talk) 17:09, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Have you checked that the password reset emails aren't ending up in your spam email folder? 192.76.8.78 (talk) 17:25, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- There's also the help pages Help:Logging in and Help:Reset password. Do either of them contain anything that helps? 192.76.8.78 (talk) 18:18, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- User:MFlet1 has not set an email address. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:20, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- There's also the help pages Help:Logging in and Help:Reset password. Do either of them contain anything that helps? 192.76.8.78 (talk) 18:18, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
northshore insurance
what insurances dose northshore — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.8.44.64 (talk) 17:20, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
What's going on with Category:Quasars?
Something is odd at Category:Quasars - "B" and "J" are full of items that don't start with B or J, and the initial list (before 0-9) is also a bit out of alphabetical order, plus there's a random asterisk just hanging out. Is there a way to fix all this? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:59, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- The reason is for example the code [[Category:Quasars|B0307+169]] in the wikitext of 3C 79. This causes the page to be sorted like "B0307+169" in the quasar category. If this is the wrong sort order, it can be fixed by editing each of the articles in the category. —Kusma (talk) 22:12, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- 3C 79 is listed under B because it contains the Category entry [[Category:Quasars|B0307+169]], which is because the article was previously called QSO B0307+169, and the category wasn't updated when the article was Moved. Similarly, Blandford–Znajek process says it should be listed under *, as it contains the line [[Category:Quasars|*]]. I don't know why. ColinFine (talk) 22:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Huh. Is there a reason to specify custom titles like these, instead of simply adding [[Category:Quasars]] to the article, with no other qualification? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:25, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- There is an explanation of how * and space are used to sort categories at Wikipedia:Categorization#Sort keys, space is for the lead article and * for other general articles. TSventon (talk) 22:29, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ah ha. Thanks. Things seem to be sorted now. New toys for me! 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:33, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- There is an explanation of how * and space are used to sort categories at Wikipedia:Categorization#Sort keys, space is for the lead article and * for other general articles. TSventon (talk) 22:29, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Huh. Is there a reason to specify custom titles like these, instead of simply adding [[Category:Quasars]] to the article, with no other qualification? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:25, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
May 26
ANI templates
I know that if (hypothetically) I want to send someone to ANI, I must notify them. However, do I have to use {{ANI-notice}} to do so, or can I just leave a message to the same effect? Also, does the notification have to be served manually (or with Twinkle), or can other tools be used to deliver it? Thank you. NotReallySoroka (talk) 04:58, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- @NotReallySoroka: The notice template is the easiest way, but manually writing out a message also works. As I don't use automated tools I can't speak as to whether they're options. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 05:14, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Rendering issue in equations
The article Equality (mathematics) has an equation near the beginning which appears as
I believe the character that looks like a plus with the right-hand bar missing is a mis rendered + sign. -- Q Chris (talk) 08:05, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Looks fine in my browser (Chrome desktop). Bazza (talk) 08:42, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Looks fine to me too. If it happens again try refreshing the page (f5). Shantavira|feed me 08:47, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Please name your browser when you report rendering issues. Chrome has had issues with missing horizontal lines in formulas at some zoom levels. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:55, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- At all zoom levels from 500% to 25%, all +s are still +s in my browser (Chrome desktop). Bazza (talk) 19:49, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- It also misrenders on my Chrome browser, but only at 100%. Replacing the + character doesn't do anything. If I add another +, the new one renders fine, but the old one still misrenders. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:03, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted on Village Pump. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:05, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Also misrenders using Edge. Only Firefox renders it correctly. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:14, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Not true. I've said twice that it's fine in my browser (Chrome desktop); specifically Windows 10, Chrome Version 101.0.4951.67 (Official Build) (64-bit). Bazza (talk) 20:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Dude - why would I lie? I'm using Chrome Version 102.0.5005.62 (Official Build) (64-bit). Edge Version 101.0.1210.53 (Official build) (64-bit). It misrenders. It may be the hardware we're using versus the browser. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:34, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- I'm seeing this problem as well, using Chrome Version 101.0.4951.64 (Official Build) (x86_64) for Mac OS. It manifests for me as a missing bar in the + character in the "Identities" section, as well as two places in which the lower-right curl of the "x" character is missing. It looks like a regression, a re-emergence of a bug that was reportedly fixed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Dude - why would I lie? I'm using Chrome Version 102.0.5005.62 (Official Build) (64-bit). Edge Version 101.0.1210.53 (Official build) (64-bit). It misrenders. It may be the hardware we're using versus the browser. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:34, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Not true. I've said twice that it's fine in my browser (Chrome desktop); specifically Windows 10, Chrome Version 101.0.4951.67 (Official Build) (64-bit). Bazza (talk) 20:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Also misrenders using Edge. Only Firefox renders it correctly. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:14, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted on Village Pump. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:05, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- It also misrenders on my Chrome browser, but only at 100%. Replacing the + character doesn't do anything. If I add another +, the new one renders fine, but the old one still misrenders. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:03, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- At all zoom levels from 500% to 25%, all +s are still +s in my browser (Chrome desktop). Bazza (talk) 19:49, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
I donated last month April 24 and wikipedia took out more money on my credit card this month may 24
Why did wikipedia take out the same donation 2 months in a row on my credit card — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.203.100 (talk) 10:16, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- We editors have nothing to do with the donation process, that is handled by the Foundation. You should email them at donate(at)wikimedia dot org. It sounds like you started a recurring donation not meaning to. 331dot (talk) 10:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- See also donate:FAQ#What is your refund policy? PrimeHunter (talk) 14:01, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Looking for the rule that prohibits editing others' talk page posts
I need to point the rule out to someone but now I just can't find it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:24, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. There is no absolute 'don't edit other people's posts' rule, but the circumstances in which it is permissible are limited. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks @AndyTheGrump I'm aware of that, I just need to actually show the rule "as she is wrote" to the other editor. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:48, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- @The Tips of Apmh Thanks! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:45, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. There is no absolute 'don't edit other people's posts' rule, but the circumstances in which it is permissible are limited. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Natascha Kampusch
Photo Credit is: Austrian police/Getty
If the creator is Austrian police what is the copyright status?
0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 15:09, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- @0mtwb9gd5wx: The copyright is owned by the Austrian police. Unless you can find an explicit license in writing, then by copyright law you have no license to use that photograph and it is unacceptable for use on Wikipedia. -Arch dude (talk) 15:48, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Is not Austrian government work PD like USA ? 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 17:01, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Not that I know of. You will need to research this yourself. You may get help at Wikipedia talk:Copyrights. In teh US, Federal-level agencies' work was all placed into the public domain by an act of congress, but that is not a general rule for all governments at all levels. -Arch dude (talk) 17:11, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, 0mtwb9gd5wx. If Getty Images is involved, then it is highly unlikely that the image can be used on Wikipedia. See WP:GETTY. Cullen328 (talk) 17:27, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Not necessarily; Getty is notorious for trying to claim rights they do not have on images. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:21, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, 0mtwb9gd5wx. If Getty Images is involved, then it is highly unlikely that the image can be used on Wikipedia. See WP:GETTY. Cullen328 (talk) 17:27, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Not that I know of. You will need to research this yourself. You may get help at Wikipedia talk:Copyrights. In teh US, Federal-level agencies' work was all placed into the public domain by an act of congress, but that is not a general rule for all governments at all levels. -Arch dude (talk) 17:11, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Is not Austrian government work PD like USA ? 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 17:01, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Correcting company profile
My business has incorrect information on Wikipedia such as year founded, annual revenue, facility address etc. which I would like to correct. How do I do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.98.177.203 (talk) 15:12, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Wikipedia does not have profiles, not a single one- Wikipedia has articles. Please first review WP:COI and WP:PAID for information on required formal disclosures. You should propose corrections, preferably sourced to independent reliable sources on the article talk page in the form of an edit request(click for instructions). 331dot (talk) 15:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Do you see the wrong information on a page here at wikipedia.org or only at an external search engine like google.com? If it's the latter then the problem isn't with Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk)
Removing extraneous length of template
I wrote a template for my user page (see User:Capsulecap/Accounts). Everything seems to be fine, except for the extraneous length. I believe the items hidden by the #if parser functions when not included are contributing to the problem. Is there any wikicode or CSS I can add to fix this? Capsulecap (talk • contribs) 21:46, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- I fixed it by using non-breaking spaces. There is still extraneous space there but it has to do with the second div element. I can mess with that later. Capsulecap (talk • contribs) 22:22, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
How to make something flashing?
How can you make an image flash on wikipedia? This is for a template I am making. 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦 (talk) 21:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- never mind 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦 (talk) 22:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- still need help, sorry 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦 (talk) 22:09, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Mr Reading Turtle Wikipedia tends to discourage any moving or flashing items. It interferes with too many readers' ability to enjoy the content. That being said, I think you can do whatever you want on your personal user page. You can also ask for talk page advice before adding any flashing images to any articles. That being said, I don't know how to make a template flash, but here are editors who help make infoboxes. They may know. Wikipedia:Userboxes#Users_who_make_userboxes_upon_request TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 00:08, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- still need help, sorry 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦 (talk) 22:09, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Why do I have access to the IP info tool?
I thought only CheckUsers could get information from IP addresses. However, when I look at any IP's contributions page, I see this "IP information" tool telling me to agree to a policy to use it. Why do I see this tool even though I don't have any special user rights? I.hate.spam.mail.here (message me | my contributions) 23:44, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- @I.hate.spam.mail.here: I'm not sure which tool you refer to but CheckUsers can see the IP address used by logged in editors. Many public tools can show some information about a known IP address. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:07, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
How do I prevent IP info from being fetched every time a contribs page is loaded?
I enabled the IP info tool because I opt-in to beta features automatically. I agreed to the policy, thinking the tool would be useful in the future if something came up. Now, whenever a anonymous user's contributions page loads, the IP info appears. Per the guidelines, each query is logged. How do I prevent IP info from being displayed every time an anonymous contributions page is loaded? I.hate.spam.mail.here (message me | my contributions) 23:47, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry if I'm asking too many questions in a short period. I.hate.spam.mail.here (message me | my contributions) 23:57, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- @I.hate.spam.mail.here: If you don't want to see the IP info, turn off the gadget. RudolfRed (talk) 00:07, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- further questions about that tool can be asked at m:Talk:IP_Editing:_Privacy_Enhancement_and_Abuse_Mitigation/IP_Info_feature RudolfRed (talk) 00:10, 27 May 2022 (UTC)