Wikipedia:Help desk

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

• For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
• Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
• If your question is about a Wikipedia article, draft article, or other page on Wikipedia, tell us what it is!
• If you are having an issue while editing, which editor are you using?
• Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
• For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
• New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners (but please don't ask in both places).

Ask a question

Can't edit this page? ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

There is one Wikipedian looking for help. (refresh)

Help with deleted page

I am trying to figure out why Michael Shane McGuire was deleted so rapidly. It seems to meet the necessary criteria for a page, with many references to outside sources to confirm validity. Tish225 (talk) 08:11, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

@Tish225 It was deleted for being "Unambiguous advertising or promotion" which is simply not permitted on Wikipedia. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:15, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

@Shantavira Thank you for the reply. I am not trying to make it an advertising page. I am trying to document some of the subject's affiliations and publications. As the lead attorney on some notable, controversial cases, he is prominent in this area. Do you have any advice on what I can exclude to help build out the page correctly? Tish225 (talk) 08:23, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

@Tish225: - biographies of legal professionals are not my area, although I have created one - Anthony Hidden. Just stick to facts and try not to embellish his achievements. Independent sources are a must. Mjroots (talk) 09:57, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

@331dot @Athanelar @ColinFine @Mjroots @Shantavira thank you all very much, this has been very helpful! I have reworked the page in a draft form to get it in better shape. Tish225 (talk) 17:10, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

@Tish225 Have a read through WP:PROMO, WP:Yes, it is promotion and MOS:PUFFERY.

Promotion is not usually a matter of a simple tone issue, but rather an evident philosophical issue with the way that the article is constructed.

A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what the majority of people who are wholly unconnected with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, (see Golden rule) and not much else. What you know (or anybody else knows) about the subject is not relevant except where it can be verified from a reliable published source.

Articles which get deleted under G11 unambiguous promotion are typically articles where it is self-evident from the article content that the purpose of the article is not to neutrally, encyclopedically document the subject, but rather to promote them; often one of the subtler forms of promotion outlined by WP:YESPROMO rather than a more obvious kind of advertisement we think of when we hear "promotion" Athanelar (talk) 10:25, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Tish225.

Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost exclusively interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

If an article is, or reads as if it is, what the subject wants people to know about them, then it is promotional. ColinFine (talk) 15:06, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

There were tons of issues with this article. A great deal of the article was completely unsourced, and few of the cites, outside of database entries that don't provide commentary, were really about McGuire. None of the cases themselves appear to be notable, mostly reported local news stories with brief impact, and even if they were, notable court cases don't transmit notability by osmosis to the lawyers involved. I don't see anything in the article that suggests that McGuire actually notable by Wikipedia's standards, just a normal working personal injury attorney. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 15:07, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Tish225 Do you have an affiliation with Mr. McGuire? 331dot (talk) 12:59, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

01753139759 ~2026-28084-05 (talk) 01:32, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

Template:TCMDb title

new TCMDB

http://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/title/3822/More-Than-a-Secretary

now

https://www.tcm.com/watchtcm/titles/3822

find articles:

search: More-Than-a-Secretary site:www.tcm.com/articles

find: https://www.tcm.com/articles/150877/more-than-a-secretary

Xo4v (talk) 21:11, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Xo4v, if this is a question, please reword it like a question; if a request, like a request. As it is, it's incomprehensible. -- Hoary (talk) 00:29, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

The g ~2026-27792-67 (talk) 02:42, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Looking for naming convention regarding UK nationalities

I noticed an article I've written on Georgia Ellery was recently edited to replace "English" as Ellery's nationality with "Cornish". I'm wondering if there's a policy outlining which nationality to use for people from the United Kingdom. While I'm at it, I'd like to know for my own future reference what the nationality case is for Canada and Québec. Shudsky (talk) 02:21, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Shudsky for a start, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography#Context and its footnote: There is no categorical preference between describing a person as British rather than as English, Scottish, or Welsh. Decisions on which label to use should be determined through discussions and consensus. The label must not be changed arbitrarily. To come to a consensus, editors should consider how reliable sources refer to the subject, particularly UK reliable sources, and whether the subject has a preferred nationality by which they identify. TSventon (talk) 02:35, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

This seems to imply that it should be one of those options though (British, English, Scottish, or Welsh). Is there ever a case where "Cornish" should be used, save for when sources explicitly refer to the subject as such? Shudsky (talk) 02:42, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Cornish nationalism is a thing, and it's entirely possible for a person to choose to identify as Cornish for that reason. It is also equally possible for a tendentious Wikipedia editor to disruptively change Cornish public figures' nationality from "English" to "Cornish" due to the same sentiment, so it would be worth doing some investigation to figure out which one is the case here. Athanelar (talk) 02:47, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Good catch—seems it was the latter. Thanks. Shudsky (talk) 02:56, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

I checked the user InktasticMagic's history and it seems to be full of similar edits, replacing English nationality with Cornish in biography articles, among other Cornwall related changes. What's the course of action for something like this? This seems to be a clear case of WP:Single-purpose account, but I'm not sure what should be done. Does this rise to the level of vandalism, where it warrants a report to admins? Based on their talk page it looks like there have been some worthwhile contributions so I will assume good faith. dylansan (talk) 12:24, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Step 1 in any conduct issue is to contact the user on their talk page and ask them to explain themselves. So, go do that first. If that doesn't turn out productively, then you can escalate it to a report at WP:ANI; but it certainly needs to be dealt with as disruptive editing, because it is undeniably tendentious behaviour. Athanelar (talk) 12:45, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I have yet enough grasp of policy to have that conversation, but I can try. dylansan (talk) 13:26, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Realistically, wed need the article subject to specifically state they think they are Cornish, given it's not it's own nation (at least according to the UN). Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:44, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

The Cornish are a recognised national minority under the European Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, like the Welsh, Scots, and Irish. DuncanHill (talk) 13:37, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

I don't really see how that is relevant. I suspect Catalonian would be similar, but unless we have something specifically stating the person wants their nationality to be stated as such, changing someone's bio to say that they are Cornish rather than English or British is a bit incongruent. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:33, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

It was a response to your assertion that "it's not it's own nation". Wikipedia's problem is we don't know what we, as an encyclopaedia, mean by "nationality", still less by what it means when we include a word like "English" or "Scottish" or "British" or "Welsh" or "Irish" in the lead.. It opens the door to nationalists of all waters to make trouble, and I include the "no such thing as Cornish" and the "must call them Cornish" camps as being just as bad as each other. DuncanHill (talk) 20:40, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Unblock requests

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents § LateNightCoffee

Question 1: I am blocked from 2 namespaces. I would like the unblock requests to be considered separately, can I make requests for both in separate sections on my talk page? Or do I need to wait for a reply to one of them before I make the other request? Late Night Coffee (ping me) 04:15, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Question 2: Is it technically possible for a block from a namespace to be reduced to a block on creating new pages in that namespace? I frustrated some other editors by creating too many new categories too quickly. I want to ask for my category namespace block to be reduced to a block that only stops me creating new categories, but allows me to make minor edits to existing categories. Is a block on just category creation something the admin software is able to do? Late Night Coffee (ping me) 04:15, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

@LateNightCoffee: Since you posted each question above as a separate posts with identical time stamps, perhaps you were looking for separate answers. If that's the case, then my apologies for only posting this once. I'm not an administrator, but it seems you be better off asking the administrator or administrators who blocked you about such things. There are administrators who do help out here at the Help Desk, but there are many non-administrators as well. I think it's probably better, even if only as a courtesy, to seek out the blocking administrator when you have specific questions about a block they issued and any unblock conditions that might be associated with said block, at least first, and only then perhaps seek input from other administrators if you don't receive a response in a reasonable amount of time (i.e., a few days to a week). Finally (this is just a non-administrator observation), your block is only about two weeks old, and it's an indefinite block; so, you must've done something not too good. My guess is that you're going to have to do quite a bit of convincing to get unblocked (even partially) after such a short time. It might, therefore, be a good idea to focus on other areas of Wikipedia for a bit longer to show others you're unlikely going to revert to bad habits than try to get back to editing asap in those areas where you ran into trouble. The point of the "namespace block" seems to have been to give you a chance to do just that; otherwise, you probably would've been given a full block that applied everywhere. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:48, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

I think the blocking admin is in a very different timezone. I wanted to know if I could prepare both before they got back on line, or if I needed to wait for a response overnight. Late Night Coffee (ping me) 07:37, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Admins, like everyone else on Wikipedia, are volunteers who participate only when Real Life^TM allows them; they do not work to some obligatory rota, Real Life^TM may include changes of work-shift patterns, vacations, family matters, and other competing activities.

Allow a week before you conclude that they are not going to respond. Since you (it would seem) initially offended, Wikipedia is not under some obligation to prioritise the matter. {The poster formerly knowna s 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 13:46, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Wait for a response. After looking at your talk page and the unblock request, my inclination would be to decline the appeal. It's too soon, it's only been two weeks, and you give the impression that you cannot function on Wikipedia without the ability to edit the template and category namespaces, which seems highly unlikely given your experience here. Your talk page also gives the impression that you've been making messes that other people have to clean up, and you would resume doing so if unblocked. In spite of your argument that primarily one editor objected to your actions, an administrator clearly agreed you were being disruptive, and prevented that disruption from continuing.

That said, I might consider your suggestion of restricting only page creations in those namespaces, but I'd like to hear from Voorts regarding this.

So yes, I would wait for him to respond. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 17:14, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

No, and this continued bludgeoning/forum shopping is making it more likely these blocks get converted to an indef. voorts (talk/contributions) 17:33, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

It was hard for me to determine, reading the talk page and ANI discussion, whether the disruption was more about creating templates or editing templates or both, so I think it's a legitimate question whether it's warranted to allow editing but not creations. I wanted your view on this specifically before I close the appeal. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 18:41, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

I've left my view of the appeal on their talk page. voorts (talk/contributions) 18:50, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

You keep asking the same questions over and over again. I've already answered this question on your talk page. Make an unblock request or don't. You're not going to get a different answer. voorts (talk/contributions) 17:32, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

May I request to become an extended confirmed editor

May I request to become an extended confirmed editor, so the automatic page translation tool becomes available in my User Account? Thanks. Neuralia (talk) 14:09, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Should have happened automatically, many years back. Seems to have been sorted out now, anyway. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:17, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

@Neuralia: You became extended confirmed in 2016. You can enable "Content Translation" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures. Maybe you have seen a message saying "On the English Wikipedia this tool is limited to extended confirmed editors". It doesn't mean you cannot use the tool. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:04, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Search box

I can no longer find the search box in the upper right corner. Bob Cabo (talk) 18:05, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

@Bob Cabo: Look for a magnifying glass icon at top of the page. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:08, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

It's in the upper left corner for me (desktop browser). ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 19:03, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Biography for Winfred Salisbury

Winfred Salisbury biographer. Do you know of a person who might want to write a full biography of him? ~2026-27093-40 (talk) 23:04, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Subjects of Wikipedia articles need to be notable, which usually means that they have in depth coverage in published reliable sources, see WP:NBIO for details. At first glance I can't find much online about Winfred Salisbury. TSventon (talk) 23:23, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

How do I add template documentation?

I added a parameter to my template and want to add documentation to the page. - coolgurl5555 ✈︎ (she/her) ✈︎ 02:35, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

@Coolgurl5555: See Wikipedia:Template documentation. I confess I usually cheat and just look at the source for a documented template -Arch dude (talk) 03:02, 5 May 2026 (UTC).

Is there any specific reason you recreated {{User mental health}} as {{Depression Wikibreak}}? You could have slightly edited first one.––KEmel49(📝,📋) 18:54, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Unable to publish edits, but IP is not blocked?

I wanted to make an edit to the Earth Song Wikipedia article, but for whatever reason the "Publish changes" button does nothing. It doesn't redirect to the altered article, it doesn't reload the page, and it doesn't seem to respond at all. If I wait a while on the page, a message comes up saying "There was an error while loading the form. To continue, you will need to reload the page." Reloading the page doesn't seem to fix the problem.

This has been a problem when I was logged out and when I was logged in, on both Chrome and Firefox. This is also a problem on my personal sandbox page. And as far as I can tell, my IP address isn't blocked from editing pages. Can anyone help? WinslowJosiah (talk) 04:16, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

How long has this been going on? There was a similar problem yesterday (UTC) at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Cannot publish any edits — Publish changes button unresponsive. TSventon (talk) 04:25, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I was just trying today.

Initially I tried making an edit without an account, but the "Publish changes" button was unresponsive, so I decided to log into this account (apparently the username existed, but the account didn't; I must be using this somewhere else I don't remember). But the "Publish changes" button didn't work when I logged in either. I also tried on Firefox, and (as of a minute or two ago) Edge, and still the button doesn't work. WinslowJosiah (talk) 04:31, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Two different users have also experienced this problem and asked for help over at the Teahouse; I figured they were unconnected, but it seems like too big of a coincidence for there to be three different editors experiencing the same problem within so little time. I could easily be wrong—I'm not incredibly tech-savvy myself so I don't know what could be going on, it just seemed strange to me. 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 04:39, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I have no idea what's going on either.

For posterity, here's the edit I wanted to make to Earth Song, in the "Production" section of the article; this is a fact I was surprised wasn't mentioned already, what with the fact that the alternate electronic drums demo ended up leaking online not too long ago.

According to drummer [[Steve Ferrone]], Jackson originally wanted electronic drums on "Earth Song" instead of acoustic drums. Ferrone made a deal with Jackson to create a demo using electronic drums on the condition that he would also create a demo using acoustic drums. Upon listening to the demo with electronic drums, Jackson almost reneged on the deal; however, Jackson ended up being so moved by the demo with acoustic drums that he started dancing across the room.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Dolbear |first=Mike |date=2017-04-27 |title=Steve Ferrone |url=http://mikedolbear.com/british-drum-icons/drummer-steve-ferrone/ |access-date=2026-05-05 |website=Mike Dolbear |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{Cite AV media |url=https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FM7ttAAtSHw |title=Michael Jackson "Earth Song" Session with Steve Ferrone |language=en |access-date=2026-05-05 |via=www.youtube.com}}</ref> The released version of the song uses acoustic drums.

Not sure if/when that "Publish Changes" button will start working again. I'll keep trying, but I doubt I can get it to work on my own. WinslowJosiah (talk) 04:45, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

WinslowJosiah, I've added your content to the end of that section; I had no issues whatsoever, and I can't explain what's going on. I mentioned your work in the edit summary, but if someone merely downloads a list of all editors in the revision history, you'll get left out; if proper attribution is important to you, go back and edit the page somehow at some point. Nyttend (talk) 05:42, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! I'm still having the issue with publishing changes; I'm not even able to create my own sandbox page. But hopefully that gets resolved ASAP, I'd love to make more edits. WinslowJosiah (talk) 05:52, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

WinslowJosiah, I've created your sandbox, although it's blank. Please try to edit and see what happens. Nyttend (talk) 06:01, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Same thing; nothing happens when I click "Publish changes", and eventually that error message comes up. WinslowJosiah (talk) 06:49, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I should mention that the "Show preview" and "Show changes" buttons work, and work immediately. Also, I don't have to press the "Publish changes" button for the error message to come up; it eventually comes up on its own. WinslowJosiah (talk) 06:52, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

WinslowJosiah are you including external links in the edits you can't publish? If so, as a new user you should get a capcha, so the problem could relate to that. After 4 days and ten edits you should be Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed and able to post links without capcha. TSventon (talk) 06:59, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Even putting only the phrase "This is my sandbox." in my sandbox page and trying to publish it is doing nothing. The only indication that I've even clicked the publish button is the slightly different way clicked buttons look on Chrome. I don't get it. WinslowJosiah (talk) 07:06, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Just tried on the Chrome browser on my Android phone, and I was able to press the "Publish" button to add content to my sandbox page. Still not able to press "Publish changes" on my laptop. WinslowJosiah (talk) 07:13, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Tried enabling Mobile view on my laptop, and the "Publish" button worked from there. I guess this is an okay workaround? But the "Publish changes" button still doesn't work for me in desktop view. WinslowJosiah (talk) 07:18, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

WinslowJosiah thank you for the update. Hopefully as several people have reported a problem, it will be possible to fix the problem fairly soon. TSventon (talk) 07:22, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! I also encountered this bug, but switching to mobile view fixed it. FeeB17 (talk) 14:26, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

FeeB17, this problem seems to affect new users and temporary accounts, it may go away when you have more than ten edits and your account is four days old as you should be Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed. TSventon (talk) 14:43, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I don't have the technical knowhow to have any idea what may be going on here, but since I thought of it: do you use any kind of adblocker or anything on your laptop that might be disabling some functionality? Or any other add-ons to your browser? Probably a longshot, but if so you could try turning them off. Just trying to think of what might affect some people but not others. dylansan (talk) 13:58, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I do have Adblock on Chrome, but this is also an issue on Firefox and Edge where I have no extensions installed. WinslowJosiah (talk) 20:44, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Where to report cordinated vandalism?

Apparently this article is suffering from repeated vandalism from unregistered account, with many editor in the talk pages suspect that it was from the subject of that article. This page is already semi protected twice, with vandalism already reverted. But where to report the users making that vandalism? I know WP:AIAV and WP:SPI exist but don't know if either of them is the correct place in this case, or should be reported in different place. - Ivan530 (Talk) 11:12, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

For an urgent issue that is not easily addressed at WP:AIV, such as evidence of a coordinated action or actions involving multiple editors, WP:ANI is the proper forum. 331dot (talk) 11:22, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Error while loading form

There was an error while loading the form. To continue, you will need to reload the page.

Have been trying to update this page, but keep getting this error. Page in question is WCFL

I've tried two different browers (Edge and Chrome) to no avail. MrRadio2 (talk) 15:35, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I have gotten it while trying to edit a grammatical error I made Joltikandmew (talk) 15:50, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

@Joltikandmew and @MrRadio2, Please ask this on Village pump/Technical as that would be the appropriate place to ask such questions.––KEmel49(📝,📋) 18:32, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

FWIW, I have recently had the same problem. My browser (Firefox) has just added a VPN function, and I may or may not have had it enabled at the time, so that may or may not be a cause. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-27434-43 (talk) 18:59, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Also refer to #Unable to publish edits, but IP is not blocked? and Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Cannot publish any edits — Publish changes button unresponsive.––KEmel49(📝,📋) 19:02, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

disease and cell shape

how can changes in cell shape causes diseases in microorganisms and why is shape so important that even a small change can cause serious problems? ~2026-27366-57 (talk) 16:42, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

This help desk is for asking questions related to Wikipedia, not a general help desk. You could try the reference desk. 331dot (talk) 16:45, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

How do i know if my IP is blocked?

I tried to make a light grammar edit and it wouldn't let me publish on Chrome or Edge. Tech issues on your end? Or was my address blocked? ~2026-27343-64 (talk) 17:11, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

If your IP was blocked you would not have been able to post this. I have seen sporadic reports of what you are claiming, though personally I have not experienced this. 331dot (talk) 17:15, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Probably the page you tried to edit was protected, can you please mention the specific page name.––KEmel49(📝,📋) 18:28, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Be aware, VPNs are often blocked. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:32, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Also refer to #Unable to publish edits, but IP is not blocked? and Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Cannot_publish_any_edits_—_Publish_changes_button_unresponsive.––KEmel49(📝,📋) 18:34, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

We're not yet sure where this issue is coming from, but several other users have had the same issue. For some of them, editing with the mobile view worked; does that work for you? 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 19:25, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Last name spelled wrong in source

 Courtesy link: Tubby Schmalz

 Courtesy link: Talk:Tubby Schmalz § Reinhart not Rhinehart

 Courtesy link: User talk:JFVoll § Spelling changes

I noticed than an article on here misspelled a last name, I went to correct it based on what the tombstone said, along with what a child's obituary said. This was reverted however and the user left a note that I shouldn't make changes based on "Reliable sources". My question is, should the article reflect what the source (which is not even online, just a news article from 1981) or how the family spelt it? JFVoll (talk) 19:43, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

It should reflect the sources, but if you can find reliable sources that are more correct then you can swap out the one currently listed with those. I ran into a similar situation with Bhad Bhabie while browsing ANI once. Tessaract2 (hello) 20:46, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

This editor will turn down any other sources. I don't even know I can trust wikipedia anymore if the attitude is a wrong source is better than that what the family used. JFVoll (talk) 20:52, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

The claim that I will turn down any other sources is not true. In this edit, I very clearly stated that one of the sources provided was helpful. Flibirigit (talk) 21:56, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

You still reverted it. You reject the picture of the actual grave stone. There's not many articles on Tubby Schmalz's parents. JFVoll (talk) 22:00, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

The revert was correct as per WP:RS. Findagrave is never a reliable source. This thread is also unnecessary as it triplicates the two discussions linked above. As per, Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines, please keep the discussion in one place. Flibirigit (talk) 22:05, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I was asking for help, but no point since you have all the answers. If a picture of a tombstone isn't good enough, why did you upload a picture of Tubby's grave.

You're making this a big deal because you can't admit your source spelt the last name wrong and to correct it because you dogmatically hold on to the idea that the source trumps what people write on their gravestone over the spelling of someone's name. JFVoll (talk) 22:09, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I never said I had all the answers. File:Clarence Vincent Schmalz gravestone.jpg is an illustration and nothing else. It is not used to cite or verify anything. I also never said that The Walkerton Herald-Times "got it right" as per this comment on your talk page. Just to be clear, that means there "could" be a spelling error. Also, by the same comment I stated that one of the sources you provided was helpful, and this comment clearly said a footnote is a possibility. Lastly, I asked for other reliable sources before a footnote is created. Please read what I said carefully. Best wishes. Flibirigit (talk) 14:19, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

I don't care anymore. You seem want a scholarly essay detailing his mother's maiden name which you won't find and you will shoot down other sources.

Also, if you're gonna gatekeep articles over an accidental letter, you better make sure the article has the right league, I should have followed Wikipedia policy (according to you) and left a condensing message on your talk page. JFVoll (talk) 16:46, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

It's probably worth pointing out that (a) it isn't particularly unusual to find inconsistency in the spelling of surnames, and (b) typo's on gravestones aren't that rare either. If there are reliable sources that suggest two different spellings, I'd indicate both, with a note explaining why. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:01, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

The issue is then what becomes a "reliable" source which leads then into whether wrong "reliable" sources have more impact then how the family (on their gravestone and the son's obituary) chooses to spell their own last name.

The last name was likely misspelled in the source because of the German origin and likely spelled phonetically. I'm at the point where I don't really care anymore, Flibirigit already ruined my day. JFVoll (talk) 23:30, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I have not "ruined your day". I replied accordingly as per Wikipedia policies. Please see above, and respond accordingly to move this forward. Flibirigit (talk) 14:19, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

JFVoll anyone can edit Wikipedia , so what reliable sources say is more important than what you know as a member of the family, see Wikipedia:Verifiability. I understand that is frustrating. However Wikipedia does not insist on "verifiability not truth".

You are trying to improve Wikipedia by correcting an error, Flibirigit is trying to improve it by insisting on reliable sources. Hopefully it is possible to satisfy both of you by adding the correct information with reliable sources. Could you add your sources for "Reinhart" on the article talk page? TSventon (talk) 16:10, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm done. Flibirigit made this into a mountain over the spelling of the mother's maiden name in the article. Wikipedia can continue to have it wrong because there's no "reliable" sources. The result is that I can't trust Wikipedia anymore because some users care more about wrong sources than the actual truth. JFVoll (talk) 16:29, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

A footnote has been added with the two reliable sources currently available. I have NEVER claimed there are NO reliable sources. Have a great day. Flibirigit (talk) 17:53, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

JFVoll, you shouldn't trust Wikipedia to be totally free of errors. (Or any other source for that matter.) Sources make mistakes and then Wikipedia editors make more mistakes. TSventon (talk) 18:05, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Semiprotected article

Hi, when I want edit this article I got the semiprotected note: Battle of Nicopolis

Note: This page is semi-protected so that only autoconfirmed users can edit it.

Or this protection only againts IP edits?

So I dont understand how possible, that a brand new user how can edit this with edit war: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Nicopolis&diff=prev&oldid=1352690188

The user is obviously WPNOTHERE https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Targaryenlerhakl%C4%B1d%C4%B1r&diff=prev&oldid=1352663592 OrionNimrod (talk) 20:10, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

The user Targaryenlerhaklıdır is semi-confirmed; they have 34 edits, which is enough. I noticed in your edit summary you were surprised someone with a red link can edit; that doesn't mean anything about their status, it just means they haven't made a user page. No comment on the underlying dispute. Tessaract2 (hello) 20:12, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Tessaract2 I was surprised not because of red, but just registered some days ago. OrionNimrod (talk) 23:08, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

They registered enough days ago that they've been autoconfirmed when paired with the edit count. - Purplewowies (talk) 05:03, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Questions about NOTDATABASE

WP:NOTDATABASE

The majority of this was copy-pasted from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation#Sanity checking myself, so I'm sorry if it seems pieced together. I don't want to have to write this block of text again.

So the other day I declined a draft at AfC named Draft:All Known Little Ships of Dunkirk for being database-like. The draft contained pretty much every single little ship that participated in the Dunkirk evacuation. The vast majority of these ships had absolutely no information on them. Since the page was almost a thousand rows long, it was heavily lagging my PC despite running a gaming CPU with 16gigs of RAM. I don't know if lower-end Android phones could handle this.

For his part, he argues that since this is such an important topic and there is no true "centralized" table already, this provides encyclopedic value. There are other existing pages on this exact topic, such as:

• List of ships at Dunkirk
• List of ships involved in the Dunkirk evacuation
• Little Ships of Dunkirk

So I was not sure what other new pages are necessary. He argued that his new page would complement the others, so its not a duplicate. Though I've never seen a fork like that before. I do agree with him that this is provides some form of value, but I argued in the reply that this is not what Wikipedia is about, that we focus on summary-style content. You can see my discussion with him here.

As I was writing this, I noticed that he copy pasted the entire table into the existing List of ships at Dunkirk, so you can see what I'm talking about. Hell, the article is now the 96th largest page at 512,000 bytes.

My concern is whether every single ship should be included on Wikipedia. I argued that we should include the ones we have more information about (like at least the ship type), omitting the ones for length's sake that we don't know anything about other than their name.

This is more so of a question about WP:NOTDATABASE - what value does including hundreds of ships with no information add? Pages like Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election exist and contain excessive amounts of raw data, which most definitely would make them a database, so where do we draw the line? I don't want to get it wrong, especially not in front of a newer user who may take my words at face value.

I'm inclined to give him a pass and let him publish the page, because I see the value in the information, but:

• huge length
• details lacking
• page relies heavily on one/two sources (the org is one dedicated to these ships, but of course they could make mistakes).

EatingCarBatteries _{(contribs | talk)} 00:26, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

The creator of the draft blanked it and affixed Template:db-author to it, so it has been deleted. -- Hoary (talk) 01:13, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Yes, but they then chose to add it all to List of ships at Dunkirk. This is less of a question about the AfC process and more so about WP:NOTDATABASE EatingCarBatteries _{(contribs | talk)} 02:12, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

EatingCarBatteries, quite what "database" covers in the "no thanks, not for en:Wikipedia" context doesn't seem to be defined. (And I'm not urging anyone to provide a definition.) But whichever draft or article includes this, it's clearly a database, and exemplifies what Wikipedia is not, or anyway what we're told it's not. If it belongs on some web page, then that page shouldn't be part of any Wiki^p/_media project that I can think of. -- Hoary (talk) 09:46, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

I agree, and have reverted in List of ships at Dunkirk (diff). Sam Sailor 11:08, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

he argues that since this is such an important topic... The correct (and only) answer to this line of argument is that there are no special considerations which outweigh the usual criteria for inclusion; i.e., notability and what Wikipedia is not. Athanelar (talk) 20:52, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Strange hidden category bug

Hello, I just made an edit to French First Republic where I removed a ref that was never defined in the article (so it was generating a citation error). See before Special:Diff/1352756139 and after Special:Diff/1352779437 (look at the refs at the bottom).

When I removed the stray ref, I added a "citation needed" template, which normally adds a hidden category "Articles with unsourced statements from May 2026." But take a look at the hidden category at the bottom of the article (a redlink): it has a stray comma in it. "Articles with unsourced statements from May 2,026"

What a strange bug. I assume it's because the CN tag is in the infobox? Have you all ever seen this & know a way around it, or how do you suggest I fix this? I'm hesitant to just remove the CN tag, because the statistic needs a source. Chao Garden 🌱 (hi) 06:19, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

The infobox code expects stat_pop1 to be a number, and is applying numeric formatting to any numbers it finds there. If the statistic has a reference, or in this case a {{cn}} tag, then that has to go in the ref_pop1 parameter. Fixed by Special:Diff/1352785466. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:01, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Oh, that makes sense - thank you! Chao Garden 🌱 (hi) 07:08, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

When a named reference isn't defined, I always check to see if it had existed in a previous revision, using wikiblame (forcing search for wikitext). In this case, it looks like it really never was defined. However, based on the name of the reference, I was able to locate the book it was probably referring to, and it's on Internet Archive. It's not available to borrow, but by searching for "million" I was able to locate text on page 43 claiming the population of France was "over 29 million" in 1800. I'm not sure where the 32 million number in the article came from (including colonies)—maybe you can find more information?

I'll leave it to you add the reference if you like. Hope this helps! dylansan (talk) 13:29, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

insource:"Lyon_Bloomsbury_1994" finds two other articles which define the reference nearly the same way:

• Lyons, Martyn (1994). Napoleon Bonaparte and the Legacy of the French Revolution. Bloomsbury. p. 232. ISBN 978-1349234363 – via Google Books. (paper ISBN 978-0333572917)
• Lyons, Martyn (1994). Napoleon Bonaparte and the Legacy of the French Revolution. Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 232. ISBN 978-1349234363 – via Google Books. (paper ISBN 978-0333572917)

I guess the edit [1] copied the refname from one of them without realizing you have to copy the definition. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:06, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Aha, that's probably exactly what happened, thank you for finding those! I didn't think to use insource. (lesson learned)

And also thank you @Dylansan, originally I walked through the edit history to try to find this reference. I wasn't aware wikiblame existed so I'm definitely bookmarking this for my toolbox. Chao Garden 🌱 (hi) 14:11, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Good shout with the "insource:" search. I'll have to add that to my toolbox. Unfortunately, page 232 of the book does not include the "32 million" number given in the French First Republic article, instead giving 44 million at the Napoleonic Empire's greatest extent (without naming a specific year). So I'm unsure how that source ended up there. Hopefully the "over 29 million" figure on page 43 is sufficient until someone can find another source. dylansan (talk) 14:16, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

references

I had been including the same complete reference that was used previously in the same article. I noticed an orange alert that I should just use the abbreviated one (eg.just </ref>, rather than the full info about the reference.

So I tried doing that, but now the reference note (the superscript numeral) does not appear, and rather the < / ref> appears in the article.

If you'd like to see what I mean, it's in the section labeled 'Awards' in my article on Terry Roberts (educator).

Thanks for your help with this! Wendy Ikoku Wendy Ikoku (talk) 16:53, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Wendy Ikoku I have fixed the references, you need to add " /" , e.g. <ref name="WMA2012" />. TSventon (talk) 17:03, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

@TSventon Thank you, thank you, thank you!

I so appreciate your help!

Wendy Ikoku Wendy Ikoku (talk) 17:15, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Can Wikimedia content be relicensed under a non-commercial license?

See User talk:Bruce1ee#Licence release. Is it permissible for Wikipedia contributions to be released under a CC‐BY‐NC‐SA‐4.0 licence? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:10, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

@Redrose64 No, I don't think so. Wikipedia licenses are WP:CC BY-SA, and one of the conditions of the "SA" bit is that you have to use an equivalent license on re-use (see WP:REUSE for full details). The "NC" is attempting to restrict the next user to not use Wikipedia's content commercially but that's not allowed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:10, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

The copyright holder can release content under any license they like. It's just that if you publish to Wikipedia, CC-BY-SA needs to be one of them. Elli (talk | contribs) 16:15, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Since the section header mentions 'Wikimedia' (meaning anything under the control of WMF), some parts of MediaWiki such as Help:Editing pages, clearly states that its under CC0 (public domain) JuniperChill (talk) 22:01, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

5 man weave

5 man weave

My Grandfather was Franklin C Cappon head coach of Princeton Univ. Basketball. I am 78 years old and have been researching this. I do not know how to add anything to Wikipedia.

Extended content The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

https://www.nba.com/wizards/news/princeton_061228.html

On the Offensive: Inside the Wizards "Princeton Offense" ehernandez December 28, 2006.

"In the summer of 2003, the Wizards joined the Ivy League when Jordan was hired as head coach. Jordan brought the Princeton offense with him. Like the buzz created in New Jersey, there was genuine excitement back in Washington."

"HOW JORDAN BECAME A BELIEVERIt was in Sacramento that Jordan got religion. He was an assistant coach to Gary St. Jean, along with former Princeton coach Pete Carril. Carril stayed on when Jordan took over as head coach late in the 1996-97 season. He absorbed the offense from Carril and he became an ardent believer that an offense more than a half century old could make a difference in the modern NBA."

"“Being an assistant under Peter Carril at Sacramento really helped me understand the offense. I feel like that I was fortunate to learn it from the ‘Master’ himself, instead of learning it second-hand. I received great lessons and learned about the origin of the offense,” Jordan recalled."

"The weave may even go back further than Jordan thinks. According to the Princeton Alumni Weekly, it was Franklin “Cappy” Cappon that put the five-man weave offense in place when he was hired to coach the Tigers back in 1938. It’s been described as an offense that keeps all five players in motion with players handing the ball off above the key, in order to create open shots and lay-ups."

"The offense is as much game plan as it is tradition now at Princeton. It may have started in 1938 with Cappy Cappon, but the coaches that followed at Princeton worked off his blueprint."

"Butch van Breda Kolf, who once coached the Lakers in the NBA, was one of the coaches who enjoyed success with the weave offense at Princeton. Pete Carril replaced van Breda Kolf, and in his 28 years at the helm the Tigers earned a reputation as “giant killers” by running the weave that started in 1938."

"The Princeton offense used to be rare in the NBA game. It has not taken over the league, but it has certainly made its mark in New Jersey and Washington. And in this business of basketball a mark is defined by post-season success."

"This article was originally printed in the second issue of the 2006-07 edition of Wizards Gametime, the official gameday publication of the Washington Wizards."

---

Princeton Herald, Volume 39, Number 18, 1 December 1961. Funeral Saturday For Cappon, Coach

https://papersofprinceton.princeton.edu/princetonperiodicals/?a=d&d=princetonherald19611201.2.9&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN-------

"Mr. Cappon developed a style of play known as the "Cappon weave" which was almost as celebrated in basketball circles as the Princeton "single-wing" offensive in football. Confronted in most years by limited basketball material, he relied heavily on the five best men, playing them as much as possible, a practice that produced "iron-man" units that operated, when at their peak, with almost automatic precision."

---

Daily Princetonian, Volume 79, Number 3, 4 February 1955 Tiger Quintet to Play Dartmouth Before Winter Carnival Crowd

https://papersofprinceton.princeton.edu/princetonperiodicals/?a=d&d=Princetonian19550204-01.2.23&srpos=2&e=-------

Captain Hal Haabestad, jump shot artist who has suffered several off nights in early games this year, will lead the Orange and Black. John DcVoe, John Easton and Sophomore Don Davidson will also team up with pivotman Dick Batt in Cappon's weave pattern.

---

There are many more articles giving credit to Cappy Cappon for the '5 man weave' If you could help me, I would surely appreciate it. I would like to have this entered into Wikipedia before I am no longer able to convey this information. Katherine Cappom Gallagher Tonkin KATCAPPGALLTON (talk) 20:41, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

The best place to begin a discussion of this is on Talk:5 man weave. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 22:17, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

paid wiki entry?

I WAS JUST contacted to pay $399 to have a wiki entry put in for Roc Ordman, me. I used to have a wikipedia page, and was an editor in the early days. I was kicked off and my page deleted because of an anti-semite colleague who resented a Jew having a page when he did not. We were both professors. I was the banner headline of USA Today for discovering the optimum dosage of vitamin C. It would be great to have a wiki page again. But I would prefer not to pay $399. Is there an editor who might look at my achievements and do it for free. My website, nutritioninvestigator.org gets a million visitors a year. Thanks, Roc Ordman Rocordman (talk) 20:45, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Don't pay. You're being targeted by a scammer. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^MUSHROOM 20:48, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roc Ordman what has changed since this deletion discussion? and please note that your website getting "a million visitors a year" confers zero notability. Theroadislong (talk) 20:53, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

That is definitely a scam; don't reply and see WP:SCAM. 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 20:58, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Rocordman.

If you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability (which are mostly about what has been published about you by people wholly unconnected with you, rather than about anything you are or have done) then there could be an article about you in Wikipedia. (The consensus in 2016 and 2019 was that you didn't meet those criteria).

If there is an article about you, whoever writes it, please note that the article will not belong to you, will not be controlled by you, will not necessarily say what you want it to say, will be almost entirely based on what those sources unconnected with you have chosen to say about you, not on what you say or want to say, and will be open to being edited by almost anybody in the world except you and your associates: you will be limited to making edit requests that an uninvolved editor will review. See WP:PROUD. ColinFine (talk) 22:21, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

DESKTOP ICON

HOW TO ACCESS SHORT CUT FOR DESKTOP ICON LIST ~2026-27581-76 (talk) 23:09, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-27581-76: What do you mean by desktop icon list? This is a help page for the encyclopedia Wikipedia. If you refer to something else then you can try asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing but please make it clear what it's about. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:04, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

John Hicks (disambiguation)

Hi, why is there a hatnote at the top of John Hicks (disambiguation) pointing to John Hicks (album)? Shouldn’t the latter be included in the disambiguation page itself instead? ~2026-27645-89 (talk) 23:20, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

It's there because @Clarityfiend: put it there in 2023 and nobody has moved it since. I have no idea why they put it there. DuncanHill (talk) 23:27, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

It's classified as a human name dab page. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:37, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

JT Daniels photo

Hello! The old JT Daniels is from almost a decade ago. I recently snapped a photo when I was with JT in a bar. His appearance has and he’s aware the photo was taken! ~2026-26486-86 (talk) 01:43, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi @~2026-26486-86, if you would like to upload it under a free license, I would recommend looking at the guide at Wikipedia:A picture of you. (It's called "A picture of you", but you being the photographer is actually more important.) ScalarFactor (talk) 02:14, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Embroidery

Diff/1352941081

What is a dates error, and how do I locate what to fix in my edit?

Thanks, Wakewriter (talk) 04:45, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Wakewriter, I was going to explain it and let you do it, but someone fixed it while I was writing. Basically, there was an invalid date format (|date=2007-05) in a citation, and when it was changed to |date=May 2007, the problem went away. The citation is Cheah (2007), in section § Origins. Mathglot (talk) 04:59, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Wakewriter, your citation had the date "2007-05". While this would make sense to a human reader, the wiki has to handle many different cases. In the help section CS1 errors, the format you used falls under "Ambiguous date range or year and month", because "2002-03" could mean either "March 2002" or the multi-year range "2002–2003".

I've updated your citation to "May 2007". Blepbob (talk) 05:05, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Page layout

How does one recover the contents list on the left hand margin of a Wikipage? ~2026-12178-57 (talk) 06:41, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-12178-57: Click the icon to the left of the page title. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:20, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Help archiving

The Internet Archive would not archive this page. Can someone help me archive it.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:53, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

@TonyTheTiger It took a while but is now here in the Archive. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:02, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Michael D. Turnbull, Thx. What was the trick.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:22, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

@TonyTheTiger None that I'm aware of. I have a link to the IA on my userpage as I use it quite regularly. I copied the URL exactly as you had it here and pasted it into their URL box. I got the expected message "this is available on the web" and checked that the saving had started. It finished after about 2 minutes elapsed. It may be relevant that I have a fast PC with Windows 11 and MS Edge browser. Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:19, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Edit count list

Why does this archived page show me with the same count as Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:35, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi TonyTheTiger - If you look at the "List" section on that archive page it states "This is a list of Wikipedians sorted by edit count as of 22:06, 6 May 2026 (UTC)." AFAIK it has archived the old text, but that includes an instruction to retrieve the latest results, which it does. That page never includes the current figures, just calls for them from the latest versions of the 1-1000, 1001-2000 etc. lists. - Arjayay (talk) 12:45, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Because that older version of Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits transcludes the current contents of Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits/1-1000. To see the edit count from 8 October 2015, you have to look at the 8 October 2015 version of ~/1-1000 (29).

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:59, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Nesting {convert} templates

For maritime and aviation articles there is a convenient {{convert}} template for Nautical miles, with a default setting that generates two outputs, i.e. it displays Nautical Miles (NM) plus (kilometres ; and statute miles).

e.g. {{convert|17|NM}} gives... 17 nautical miles (31 km; 20 mi)

There is probably a way of turning that ugly "mi" into "miles", but for now that is a secondary issue.

If I wish to use the NM input (because that is how it sometimes arrives), but only display the output in landlubber's terms, I can use

{{convert|17|NM|0|abbr=in|order=out}} which yields...31 km (20 miles) , which is perfect.. if you live in France and préférer les kilomètres'.

Now the question; whilst the above is fine for metric countries, what if I need to specify miles first, then km? (i.e. for non-metric countries). So far I have drawn a blank with the various template options. Normally it would involve order=flip, but that only flips input /output when there is a single conversion, whereas here I am trying to flip the two outputs. Plus I have already used order=out, and I'm guessing it is not possible to use two different options for the same parameter.

I have constructed a solution, but it involves nested templates, and this is right at the limit of my computing abilities, so another pair of eyes on my solution would be appreciated.
The theory is that first I convert NM to statute miles (single output), outputting the result as a number (only). This number can then be used to feed the second template, producing miles & (km) as the result. FYI the "3" is to specify 3 decimal places for precision at the first conversion stage, otherwise we are at risk of rounding errors at the second stage. The end result is typically an approximation to the nearest whole mile or km.

{{convert|{{convert|17|NM|mi|disp=number|3}}|mi|abbr=out|adj=ri0|0}} gives... 20 miles (31 km) ...result!

Q. Is the above ok, or is there a better solution?

WendlingCrusader (talk) 14:13, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

@WendlingCrusader: {{convert|17|NM|mi km|0|order=out}} gives 20 miles (31 km). PrimeHunter (talk) 14:50, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

If it's useful even though it's not what you're doing, the following with the original NM still visible (I was focusing on some stuff that wasn't hiding the NM) spells it out: {{convert|17|NM|mi km|abbr=off}} 17 nautical miles (20 miles; 31 kilometres). Adding |sp=us will additionally change the spelling of the full-worded km, 17 nautical miles (20 miles; 31 kilometers). Putting it all together with PrimeHunter's would only marginally change the output, though (by spelling out "kilometers" spelled exactly that way)... 20 miles (31 kilometers). - Purplewowies (talk) 16:06, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

My thanks to both of you. WendlingCrusader (talk) 17:37, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Nudes?

people who posted them without wearing clothes ~2026-27715-67 (talk) 20:06, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~2026-27715-67.

What is your question about using or editing Wikipedia? That is the only kind of question which is in scope on this page. ColinFine (talk) 20:13, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

If this is about nudity on Wikipedia, know that Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED, though something like a nude photo generally needs to be relevant to the topic. I imagine people who patrol recent changes do a pretty good job of catching when someone just adds a nude image to an article for fun. - Purplewowies (talk) 20:37, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps the OP refers to people who post to Wikipedia while themselves being nude. I confess I myself may occasionally have done this (from the privacy of my own home, prior to or immediately after a shower), but am typing this while fully clothed. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230l195} ~2026-27434-43 (talk) 22:05, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Use of "White"

Is there an official policy or guideline on using "White" (with a capital W) to refer to people of European descent? I'm sure this issue has come up before, but I can't immediately find the relevant discussion. Tevildo (talk) 21:49, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Tevildo, there is some manual of style guidance at MOS:BLACK. Perhaps there should be another shortcut at MOS:WHITE. TSventon (talk) 22:05, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. I would certainly support the creation of MOS:WHITE (and perhaps MOS:BROWN), which I probably would have found myself. The guideline currently says "[M]ixed use (Black, but white) is also acceptable if editors at a particular article find it appropriate", so it would appear this needs to be decided on individual article talk pages. Tevildo (talk) 23:27, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

In my experience, "Black" seems to have originated and been used as a kind of racial pride thing. "White" is therefore often used in contrast to that, by the kind of people who complain that there's no straight pride month or white history month.

I would personally capitalise neither (I think capitalising Black is performative); but if you must, certainly don't capitalise 'White'. Athanelar (talk) 11:12, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

@Athanelar: I can't see where MOS:BLACK says "certainly don't capitalise 'White'". In my jurisdiction, the word is capitalised in formal ethnic-classification definitions. Bazza 7 (talk) 12:25, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Which Wikipedia is not.

Anyway, you're right that MOS:BLACK identifies it as acceptable, I was speaking from opinion and perspective. Athanelar (talk) 14:11, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

I think we can agree that White is a politically-charged term to be treated with caution, and I was hoping the guideline would - well - provide guidance. Alas, it doesn't. Tevildo (talk) 22:39, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

I have took it upon myself to create MOS:WHITE. Viva la horde, ~ GoatLordServant^(Talk) 14:16, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be MOS:white? --GRuban (talk) 22:45, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

The informal rule seems to be that they’re all uppercased. MOS:BLACK is. Viva la horde, ~ GoatLordServant^(Talk) 18:18, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

No confirmation code

I never received a confirmation code and then it said you will send you an email when I said recover my account and I never got the email and it's the same email for years. What's going on. Then below this box it says Log in or create account whichever I've already done and that's not my problem. You weren't sending me any kind of email. How long does it take for you to send an email. ~2026-27747-39 (talk) 01:32, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Get rid of that automated account I don't want it. You didn't send me an email confirmation code you didn't say me in email to reactivate my account. You can't do that I don't want anything to do with it. ~2026-27747-39 (talk) 01:34, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Now suddenly the code is showing up. I thought things were automatic these days. ~2026-27747-39 (talk) 01:34, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Then after a long wait and trying to figure out what the hell was going on you finally send me a confirmation code and then you tell me it's an incorrect confirmation code. Wikipedia certainly isn't as good as it used to be apparently. No more donations from me. ~2026-27747-39 (talk) 01:43, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-27747-39: I receive mails from Wikipedia within seconds but in general, not just at Wikipedia, sent emails can be delayed or disappear for the recipient for various reasons, often their own email provider. If you have a webmail then check if there is a spam folder. Wikipedia accounts and donations are not connected. You can donate without having an account. It's optional to store an email address in a Wikipedia account. If you have an account and know the password then you usually don't need email. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:59, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @~2026-27747-39. The "you" you are talking to here are the thousands of volunteers who choose to give their time working on the content of Wikipedia.

Hardly any of us have any knowledge or involvement with the software and systems that make Wikipedia work. If you have problems with the system, WP:VPT is a better place to ask for help - but still, please don't shout at them.

Your post is the equivalent of going into a bank that you have problems with and shouting at all the customers who happen to be there. It is likely to annoy people and make them unwilling to help you, without achieving much else. ColinFine (talk) 09:05, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Anyway, if you don't like email login verification (which isn't ideal), use two-factor authentication instead. This has been available to all users since December 2025.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 09:18, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Translated or source-language names?

Is there established consensus and/or WP policy or guidelines on whether to use translated names or source-language names?

As a frequent editor of Brazil-related topics, I often come across article titles that are translated versions of the source-language name (such as Unified Health System, Socialism and Liberty Party, etc. which seem to have been made by editors, and are not found in any sources (since most are in Portuguese). I personally am very much on the side of not translating names unless there is an established translation in English language sources, but was unsure on what the consensus is in this situation. CVDX (talk) 01:42, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

The general guideline is MOS:USEENGLISH, which says The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject that is most common in the English language. This may or may not be an official name or translation. A WP:REQMOVE listed on Talk:Unified Health System suggests that that name is used by English-language sources (though I have not verified this myself). ScalarFactor (talk) 03:08, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the guidance! Would it be appropriate for editors to make their own translation if there is none in English language sources? That was not clear to me in the MOS link you shared.

As for that specific article, only one source uses it as a proper noun, while the other one just describes it as an unified health system. Although I have found other scholarly publications using that name, there are also other names being used. CVDX (talk) 05:46, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

CVDX where there is no established name in English language sources, I think it is reasonable for editors to make their own translation if most articles in a category such as Category:Government agencies of Brazil use translated titles, which suggests that English language sources for similar organisations use translated titles. As you say MOS:USEENGLISH doesn't tell them what to do.

Unified Health System was moved on 15 October 2025, almost seven months ago. You could ask Jeffrey34555 about reversing the move, but it may be too late. I can't see a notice of the move at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Brazil. TSventon (talk) 11:01, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Andrew Depaz

I received an email from someone named Andrew Depaz who claims to be a Wikipedia editor. He asked if I would agree to have him set up a Wikipedia page about me. First he briefly summarized my academic contributions and then he wrote: "I wanted to ask if you would be interested in having a Wikipedia page summarizing your career and contributions. If you wish, I could help compile publicly available sources and draft an outline for your review." Is this a legitimate email request, or is it some sort of spam? Thank you, Daniel Burnstein Professor Emeritus of History, Seattle University ~2026-27832-11 (talk) 06:39, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

No, it's spam/scam. No legitimate Wikipedia editor will ever ask someone if they want an article written about them. They'll either write the article without consulting you, if you're notable, or they won't. In fact, you probably shouldn't be consulted to "review" an article about you as you have a WP:conflict of interest. - Purplewowies (talk) 06:51, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Whenever I write a BLP, I consider it courteous to contact the subject if possible, to let them know, ask if they have any concerns, and advise them not to edit it directly. I point them to WP:About you, and ask them to provide a recording of their spoken voice and, if needed, a photo. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:01, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

That's fair. I think I zeroed in on "for your review" as "you get to decide what goes on your 'profile'" (as in clear "don't do that with a COI") and decided to just closely stick to "remember you have a COI" advice. - Purplewowies (talk) 17:47, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

WP:SCAM may be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:38, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Climbers

Dear assistant, My friend and I recently became the first climbers from Armenia to summit Ojos del Salado. We would like to have this achievement documented on Wikipedia and are seeking guidance on the proper process for doing so. Could you please advise on who can assist us with this registration and what steps are required to arrange such a publication? Best regards, Artur Gasparyan ~2026-27782-49 (talk) 07:04, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-27782-49 Where on Wikipedia do you think it would be appropriate to "document" this? Look at Ojos_del_Salado#Mountaineering_and_tourism for example, IMO mentioning you would fit poorly there, since it doesn't mention any climbers at all. And what WP:RS, independent of you, can you provide that noticed this happened? WP is not here to promote you.

You might want to consider trying this at Օխոս դել Սալադո (հրաբուխ), but that is something you'll have to do/discuss at the Armenian Wikipedia. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:36, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Various companies (or individuals) may claim that they will have this achievement "registered" for you (if you pay them). Ignore any such claim. -- Hoary (talk) 08:35, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

What's special about being the first person from a particular country to climb a particular mountain? How is your nationality in the slightest way of any significance? AndyTheGrump (talk) 08:38, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

What is a dark web

?? ~2026-27943-23 (talk) 08:32, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Dark web. AndyTheGrump (talk) 08:34, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Higher quality image

I don't know how to upload files, can someone overwrite this low-res photo File:Michael Giacchino.jpg with the high res original https://i.imgur.com/rySpGK3.jpeg ~2026-27503-96 (talk) 15:53, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

This photo was uploaded in Wikimedia Commons as described in summary section where also says that this image source is flickr from where it was originally taken along with compatible licence. That Imgur image given by you can't override original image because it doesn't have any Compatible licence.––KEmel49(📝,📋) 17:12, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Its literally a crop of this https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/9/95/20161108015352%21Michael_Giacchino.jpg from Wiki Commons ~2026-27503-96 (talk) 17:46, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Yes, That's what it says on image history.––KEmel49(📝,📋) 18:24, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

I've reverted this image to uncropped version as another cropped version already exists.––KEmel49(📝,📋) 18:37, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Just for future reference, the cropping of the file was contrary to c:COM:OVERWRITE. It was most likely done in good faith, but it was a mistake nonetheless. Similarly, it would've been better to request a c:COM:SPLIT instead of reverting back to the full version just in case someone somewhere was using the cropped version: reverting will cause the cropped file to be replaced by the full version wherever it was being used. I've requested a split and hopefully things will be sorted out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:20, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

XCR info

Am I (a non-extended-confirmed editor) allowed to revert changes made by other non-XC editors in areas under extended confirmed restriction, for the purposes of enforcing the restriction? CheeseAndJamSamdwich (talk) 18:45, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

(I believe) Only administrators can actually "enforce" a restriction. Non-admins that are EC/XC can revert edits within the restrictions. You may remove blatant vandalism, but if the edit is not vandalism, just a violation of an EC restriction(like editing about the Arab-Israeli conflict), you can't revert that as a non-EC user because that's an edit in the topic area. 331dot (talk) 18:55, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) To my understanding, no. I believe I have seen arbitration enforcement requests declined because one user was not XC and thus not supposed to participate in the topic at all. ScalarFactor (talk) 19:40, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

WP:ECR has the relevant guidance, and as the others have said, there is no exception presented there which says that a non-XC user can revert another non-XC user in order to enforce the XC restriction. Athanelar (talk) 21:06, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Reference Desk archiving

Hallo. A technical question : After how long are topics on the Reference desk archived? ~2026-22534-68 (talk) 21:03, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

I'd probably ask at Wikipedia talk:Reference Desk. 331dot (talk) 21:06, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

It looks like after 14 days, e.g. in Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities April 21 was archived at 02:37 on 6 May 2026. TSventon (talk) 21:12, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

"Woman" or "female" as adjective?

I've searched a bit for information on a policy or consensus here on Wikipedia about whether to use the phrasing "first woman (noun)" or "first female (noun)" when relevant. (Yes I did read Wikipedia:Writing about women and did not find the answer to my question there, nor in Wikipedia:Manual of Style.) This is not in reference to the lede of an article about a subject, but instead about a milestone mentioned on another page (specifically here the 2026 Kentucky Derby and whether to refer to Cherie DeVaux as the first female trainer to win the Kentucky Derby or the first woman trainer to win. AP's Stylebook and The Guardian's style guide both support "female" when used in conjunction with a noun, as opposed to the compound-noun "woman (noun)". Does Wikipedia have a policy on this? Weelilbit (talk) 00:27, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Weelilbit you could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red if you don't get an answer here. Please add a link here rather than having two conversations at the same time. TSventon (talk) 00:52, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

I don't believe we have a standing MOS guidance on this. However, simple English convention should tell us that "female (noun)" is objectively correct. Saying something like "the first woman (noun)" I find tends to be an overcorrection from people who are (rightfully) icked out from the use of "female" as a noun, but wrongly think that applies to all uses of the word "female."

Purely on a grammatical level, "female president," "female CEO," "female firefighter" etc are correct. "woman president," "woman CEO," and "woman firefighter" are not, and make the writer sound like a caveman. Athanelar (talk) 01:40, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Athanelar, I think linguistic tastes differ, I searched for "first woman or first female" (without quotes) online and found articles like this. TSventon (talk) 02:13, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Even that article says; And yet it’s so easy to sound disrespectful when you point to a female anything. The term hails straight from biology, harsh with the smell of chloroform and oblivious to our human distinction between sex and gender.

The insistence on hammering the term "woman" into serving as an adjective (in cases where one would never say a "man doctor" or a "man lawyer") is, even as observed in that article, a matter of overcorrection. Which, to be fair, does happen all the time in linguistics. It's called hypercorrection, see hyperforeignism for one of my most hated examples (it's what causes people to pronounce the 'j' in 'beijing' like it's a French word). In this case, the perceived "clinical" tone of the word "female" (arising from its use as a noun in often misogynistic contexts) is causing people to hypercorrect and avoid using it even as an adjective. Athanelar (talk) 02:50, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

I think linguists generally prefer linguistic descriptivism to linguistic prescriptivism. Another example of people sometimes preferring "woman" as an adjective is the 2024 discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 9#Women foos. TSventon (talk) 03:33, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Generally speaking, the terms man/woman and male/female can be used as nouns, but the former is what you'd use to refer to humans outside of a clinical context. The terms male/female can also be used as adjectives. You'll sometimes find people using man/woman as adjectives, but that can be a flag that someone is over-correcting or trying to push a subtle POV in their writing. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:33, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

I recommend using the word that the preponderance of reliable sources use when writing about Cherie DeVaux. It is not the role of Wikipedia editors to impose their own linguistic preferences. There is no worldwide certified correct usage of the English language, as there may be within France for their language. Cullen328 (talk) 04:35, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Using Recent Changes

How do I get "next page" or "older" on Special:RecentChanges?

I was expecting something like this at the bottom, but I see nothing

(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | older 50) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

I looked for "recent" on the FAQ page Wikipedia:FAQ. I glanced at RecentChanges discussion page but it seemed hopeless to find something there, so I'm asking here. Also, how to filter out (hide) Talk pages from Page Creations? I don't see an option in the filters or the drop down filter check boxes. Firefox 150. Thanks. ~2026-28037-16 (talk) 05:55, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Near the top of the list of recent changes on the right side of the screen, underneath the "Namespaces" and "Tags" buttons, there's a dropdown menu that lets you select how many revisions and how many days back it will display. Not sure about filtering talk page creations. Squeakachu (talk) 06:32, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. I tried that. The limit there is 500 entries. If you modify the URL directly you can get up to 1000. With the majority of the entries being Talk creations, you can only see back about 3 hours 20 minutes. Clicking the Pages checkbox seems to have no effect. ~2026-28037-16 (talk) 07:08, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

To my second question: I found the Namespaces button, which allows me to select :Articles, which is seems to hide the Talk pages. Doing that with 1000 entries mod, I get about 14 hours, a definite improvement, but my main question remains. Thanks. ~2026-28037-16 (talk) 07:21, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-28037-16: If you are looking for page creations then Special:NewPages or Special:NewPagesFeed is better. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:28, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Perfect! That does it all, exactly as I am seeking. Thank you. ~2026-28037-16 (talk) 16:53, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

What's the procedure for requesting TAIV assistance in identifying TA-hopping editors?

I haven't done anti-vandalism editing in a while. One of the things that one used to come across before the temporary account system was IP-hoppers making similar disruptive edits to several articles from a range of IPs, which used to be simple enough to identify. Now that special permissions are needed, what's the procedure to request assistance in identifying such edits? I previously asked at WT:Temporary accounts but didn't get a response. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:14, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

About sources

I was wondering if someone could tell me about source that are good for wikipedia, like how do we identify if a source is good or bad or of high quality or low? 𝑾𝒊𝒌𝒊.𝒄𝒐𝒘𝒃𝒐𝒚. 09:18, 9 May 2026 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki.cowboy (talk • contribs)

See WP:RSP. You need to edit your signature to add talk page link, otherwise your signature won't be treated as a legit signature and a bot will continue to add that unsigned comment.––KEmel49(📝,📋) 12:09, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Actually I also want to fix that, I have seen your account many times before, your signature is pretty cool, how can I make mine like that to? I also want to add that clipboard icon like stuff. 𝑾𝒊𝒌𝒊.𝒄𝒐𝒘𝒃𝒐𝒚. 12:14, 9 May 2026 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki.cowboy (talk • contribs)

It's cool, isn't it? You can also make your custom signature and design it accordingly. There are various tutorial and example available at WP:SIGTUT. I used emojis (paper-pencil and clipboard) linking my talk and contribution page respectively. You have to add your signature to your preference menu and check the box Treat this as markup.––KEmel49(📝,📋) 12:24, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

how is my new signature looking? 𝙒𝙞𝙠𝙞.𝙘𝙤𝙬𝙗𝙤𝙮𝙮𝙮 🦬18:15, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Cool.––KEmel49(📝,📋) 18:20, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Mosque city of Mohammadabad

Diff/1353277772

Thanks, Messiaindarain (talk) 09:32, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Fixed in diff. Best, Sam Sailor 10:48, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Secondary source nesting

If I am drafting with the help of secondary source A, and it references secondary source B, should I include a reference to A (more courteous, and more recent) or to B (closer to the primary source)? Masato.harada (talk) 16:05, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

@Masato.harada If you have checked both sources and they back up your summary, why not include both? Some readers may only be able to access one of them and having two is hardly WP:CITEBOMBing. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:19, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Editing link in table

Hi. I've added an actor, Carlos Carrasco, to the Cast list of the page for the film The Fisher King. The link went automatically, without giving me a choice, to a disambiguation page, and I've been unable to replace that link with one to the actor's page. Can you tell me what to do to change the link? Thanks. Stevebal (talk) 20:07, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

@Stevebal: The cast list is in a template parameter so the normal way to make links in VisualEditor cannot be used. You have to use the source editor syntax which is [[Carlos Carrasco (actor)|Carlos Carrasco]] to produce Carlos Carrasco. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:15, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Excellent. Thanks. It was the syntax I didn't have right. Stevebal (talk) 02:47, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Iliad

Reference help requested.

What am I supposed to do?

Thanks, Mevsherd (talk) 03:43, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

Fixed one of them; I'm not sure what was after the date in the field but it was not a date :) 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 05:18, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

Newcomer task tag

Hello, can an edit filter manager remove the Newcomer task tags on this edit? Thanks, A Wondrous Raven (talk) 04:53, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

Assyrian in New Zealand

hi there I just need help to correct some information on Wikipedia report about Assyrian in New Zealand. The Assyrian Association Inc New Zealand in Wellington supports integration and hosts cultural events like community picnics and New Year's Eve This Association no longer registered in New Zealand so hopefully someone can fix the report about Assyrian in New Zealand. Thanks Shlama 1 (talk) 08:25, 10 May 2026 (UTC)