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).

Can't edit this page? Just use this link to ask for help on your talk page; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

Search the frequently asked questions

Search the help desk archives and other help pages

Infobox Image

How to insert image on the infobox of page IMGTMC (talk) 04:07, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly the way you did in your sandbox. 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 06:15, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@IMGTMC: Most infoboxes only want the file name and then add their own formatting.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 10:30, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Did you actually take that photograph of Angelo Agcaoili? It matches one I see on social media and both the overall composition and the person himself look artificially created. DMacks (talk) 12:43, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Yes, as I assume that it for public use. Is there anything I need to adjust? If so, I would really appreciate if you could guide me please. IMGTMC (talk) 05:09, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@IMGTMC Yes, you took the picture yourself, or yes, you got it from his social media? If it's from his social media, you can't use it on Wikipedia. Someone else will need to guide you in what to do, and I think it will be deleted. David10244 (talk) 06:15, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Disabling Media Viewer for registered users

Has the option to disable Media Viewer for registered users been removed? Whenever I click on an image it displays in Media Viewer and there seems no way to turn it off. There used to be an option under Preferences|Appearance to disable it, but that seems to have disappeared. WP:Media Viewer and its associated talk page are no help. There's some information at the foot of that page about adding some code to global.js but I tried that and it didn't work. --Viennese Waltz 10:00, 4 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing has changed for accounts that have already disabled it. I can't speak to the possibility of disabling it, but when I click on an image, I go straight to the image description page, just as I have ever since disabling it originally. Nyttend (talk) 20:16, 4 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lucky you. I also disabled it years ago, but now when I click on any image it opens in Media Viewer. Please could you check your Preferences > Appearance page? Do you have a box to enable or disable it, like this one? --Viennese Waltz 07:49, 5 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Viennese Waltz, here's everything I get on that page. Edit the page to see the lines properly; it would take a long time to format it so it looks right when fully rendered.

Extended content

MonoBook (Talk | Preview | Custom CSS | Custom JavaScript) Vector (2022) (default | Discussion | Preview | Custom CSS | Custom JavaScript) Vector legacy (2010) (Preview | Custom CSS | Custom JavaScript) MinervaNeue (Discussion | Preview | Custom CSS | Custom JavaScript) Timeless (Talk | Preview | Custom CSS | Custom JavaScript) Shared CSS/JavaScript for all skins: Custom CSS | Custom JavaScript Shared CSS/JavaScript for all wikis (more information): Custom CSS | Custom JavaScript Skin preferences Enable responsive mode Adapt layout to screen size on mobile. Reading preferences Enable page previews (get quick previews of a topic while reading a page) You have to disable the Navigation popups gadget in your Gadgets preferences to enable page previews. Enable reference previews (get quick previews of a reference while reading a page) You have the Navigation popups and Reference Tooltips gadgets enabled, so you won't see previews provided by this feature. Depending on your wiki, the gadgets may have slightly different names. If you continue to experience issues, please review your gadgets and user scripts, including global ones. Date format No preference 12:01, June 9, 2026 12:01, 9 June 2026 12:01, 2026 June 9 2026-06-09T12:01:04 Time offset Server time: 12:01 Local time: 12:01 Time zone: Files Image size limit on file description pages: Thumbnail size: Some users may prefer thumbnails which are smaller or larger than normal. Regular size is 250 pixels. Diffs Don't show page content below diffs Don't show diff after performing a rollback Don't show the revision slider Advanced options Underline links: Show hidden categories Show a confirmation prompt when clicking on a rollback link Always enable safe mode Disable on-wiki scripts and stylesheets. Enable the user info card Show a button next to usernames to open a popover with information about an account. Math LaTeX source (for text browsers) MathML (experimental; no images) Client side MathJax rendering (for browsers with limited MathML support) SVG (MathML can be enabled via browser plugin) Explain mathematical formulae on hover. Languages Use a compact language list, with languages relevant to you

I can't see anything relevant. Nyttend (talk) 12:02, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. So, as I suspected, the option to disable Media Viewer has been removed for registered users. --Viennese Waltz 02:10, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing errors on Eric Stephens (cricketer)

Reference help requested. The ISBN in the book is 978-1-94907-46-8 - what is incorrect in this format? Thanks, DJohn73 (talk) 19:45, 4 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You only included twelve digits; ISBNs beginning with 978 are thirteen digits. Go back to the book itself and count the digits. If there are indeed only twelve, well, we can all blame the publisher for failing to comply with the standards, and someone else will have to help you because I won't know what to do. But if you missed one, just add it and things should be fine. Nyttend (talk) 20:35, 4 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Editor Nyttend is somewhat mistook. Twelve digits are given here by OP, in the article, thirteen are given. Compare the error messaging:

ISBN 978-1-94907-46-8 {{isbn}}: Check isbn value: length (help)

ISBN 978-1-914907-46-8 {{isbn}}: Check isbn value: checksum (help)

Still the advice has value: Go back to the book itself and make sure that the ISBN provided in the {{cite book}} template matches the value provided in the book. If there is a digit-for-digit match, wrap the ISBN with accept-as-written markup; which see.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:38, 4 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To the contrary: 13 is the worldwide standard. Ask any anglophone librarian (including me) about it, and you can get heaps of information. Nyttend (talk) 00:06, 5 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know that. But Qwerfjkl (bot) was highlighting Editor DJohn73's edit that created this broken reference (permalink) in which |isbn=978-1-914907-46-8 has thirteen digits. The attached error message is not complaining about length but is complaining that the checksum doesn't match the check-digit. Recalculating the check-digit (assuming that all other digits are correct) gives this:

ISBN 978-1-914907-46-3

but that is likely wrong, though worth the try, because neither google nor worldcat recognize that isbn as valid.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:42, 5 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly ISBN 978-1-914407-46-8 . TSventon (talk) 00:54, 5 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Looking at the picture of the back of teh book on Amazon, the isbn is ISBN 978-1914407-46-8. DuncanHill (talk) 00:55, 5 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks - the ISBN 978-1914407-46-8 seems to have worked, despite the actual book I have in front of me saying 978-1-914407-46-8 ! DJohn73 (talk) 10:40, 5 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@DJohn73 What you say is on the book matches what TSventon listed at 00:54 UTC. I don't think the placement or number of dashes is significant in ISBNs. TSventon's link works too, I believe, as does DuncanHill's. David10244 (talk) 07:03, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

EuroVolley 2026 tournament links

The 2026 Men's European Volleyball Championship and 2026 Women's European Volleyball Championship are both linked as a hatnote on each other page but also on 'See also' section then I removed it but the creator, ILoveSport2006, undid it without explanation so I reverted by linking WP:HATNOTE and WP:NOTSEEALSO in my edit summary but then got undid and their edit summary is this: As I mentioned based off my experience. The links are useful. Isn't it WP:OL?

What's wrong with my explanation? I think it is a better one than just spewing Wikipedia links that people think we will read. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 13:08, 5 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

ILoveSport2006, among your last fifty contributions is the edit summary "As I mentioned based off my experience. The links are useful", used for edits to two articles. There's nothing about this matter in the talk page of either article. Where is the mention? And if you haven't read and digested MOS:NOTSEEALSO, please do so. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 02:29, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ILoveSport2006 If you want to contribute successfully to Wikipedia, you should definitely click on, and read, the pages that explain how to contribute successfully to Wikipedia. David10244 (talk) 10:46, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

links and text disappears by itself

Hi, I have been having trouble with the links I shared on my wiki page. It seems like one moment they turn blue and half an hour later it says page doesnt exist. But maybe worse is that I enter text and it is there when I open the sand box, but when I publish it is just gone. I have no idea how I will receive an answer with this request for help, but I hope you can sed me a notification or an email. Thanks in advance, Stefanie Namax71 (talk) 19:09, 5 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can you share more details? Your sandbox seems to have content in it right now. What happens when you click publish or try to add a link? ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 19:25, 5 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Namax71: I have fixed a lot of syntax errors.[2] See Help:Referencing for beginners. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:35, 5 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Namax71, although PrimeHunter did indeed fix a lot of syntax errors, he doesn't claim to have fixed the related problems. You should read, digest and act on what's written in the page "Wikipedia:Bare URLs". -- Hoary (talk) 22:23, 5 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it has all the content, but one paragraph is not showing when I push on publish page. So I need it to be visible on the main page, the one you go to when you click publish page. Thanks in advance! Namax71 (talk) 20:36, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Namax71: I fixed a new syntax error.[3] PrimeHunter (talk) 22:24, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That is awesome, Thank you! Namax71 (talk) 13:37, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mass typo fixing

Hello, two or so weeks ago, I noticed advanced searches for "2st" and "3nd" return over 340 results each, and realized that with that many results, I was bound to rack up a lot of edits merely fixing those typos, even if only a fraction are genuine typos. Then, a few days ago, I saw the article Commonly misspelled English words, and realized the advanced searches I have already done are only the tip of the iceberg.

So, knowing I may end up editing over 1,000 articles by completing advanced searches for dozens of these typos, I've came here for guidance on rate limits, best practices, etc, and consensus if there isn't a better way to do this, although I do have a few last things to say:

List of 4 large dashed points (I apologize for the wall of text)

  -  There are many different advanced searches, all of varying sizes, so I would imagine that filing AutoWikiBrowser requests would be cumbersome to do and for the performing user to complete notwithstanding the dash below, so in the event that any collection of typo fixes were incorrect, it would be less urgent to get the attention of a user that was editing rather slowly, versus somebody working on AWB at possibly 5+ EPM. However, I could very well be wrong on this, as AWB may be able to do more then what is stated at WP:AWB.

  -  Although these advanced searches may return several thousand results total, I know only a fraction are genuine typos, as references, abbreviations, quotes, proper names, and templates may contain the typo-like strings in question, but they won't be typos per the context they are in; e.g. THST restored the loco to operational condition... from Telford Steam Railway.

  -  These edits will be done manually, aided only by the advanced searches, so if I see several typos while in the edit window, I will most definitely fix those too, and typically will also scour the article for any other worrying symptoms, unless I have done so many edits consecutively that going down the list of potential typos becomes mindless enough to where I zone out, but I doubt that as I won't be editing very quickly.

  -  Per the above dash and the edits that I have already made that have been typo fixing, I will be editing at a pace of roughly one or potentially two edits per minute, so slower than most bots, although my edit summaries will of course be mostly the same.

- BlueEleephant (talk · contribs) 02:09, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you can file AWB requests, you can also get AWB or JWB yourself. I've used AWB quite a bit, and with a regex with a bit of regex tweeking, you should be able to limit yourself to genuine ones. Let me know if you'd like help there, or just come over to WP:AWB to discuss. And as for speed, on simple ones like that, generally it is easier to ask forgiveness on speed. And don't worry about number of edits, if 340 need fixing that's 340 edits.Naraht (talk) 02:27, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

you can also get AWB or JWB yourself Thanks, but although I do have 500 edits now, I doubt that I am eligible for AWB/JWB access, and even if I am, I don't think it would change much besides make typo fixing faster, which per my third dash above, likely won't be a good (or bad) thing. Additionally, I likely wouldn't need AWB/JWB for much outside of these typo fixes.
and with a regex with a bit of regex tweeking [sic] I know nothing about regex besides the fact that it is used in the spam blacklist, and although Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Regular expression has guidance on regex, I am not sure if that will be needed here, per the above bullet.
you can file AWB requests True, but wouldn't filing 30+ AWB requests be just as cumbersome for others and/or myself as making all 1000+ edits myself, especially considering they would have to tick off each request as {{done}}? (See last dash in {{collapsed top}})

With regards to the last sentence in your reply: I mostly knew that for (likely) uncontroversial typo fixes like here, edit speed isn't worth worrying about unless you are outpacing very fast bots like MonkBot, although non-script assisted edits don't commonly reach high editing speeds anyway. (See last dash) - BlueEleephant (talk · contribs) 02:45, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

BlueEleephantAlso, the query you have for 3nd is giving a *lot* of situations where is something like 3nd army group being a redirect to 3rd. Those can be ignored (or are at least a separate question as to whether they are logical redirects. If you want to see the ones that you'd hit, I'd suggest searching for insource:/3nd/ , that will give ones where that string actually occurs in the article. you can tweek that with insource:/[^a-z][0-9]*3nd[^a-z]/ to get rid of some of those three characters are in a longer text string, but still getting those where it is someone in 33nd place. That gave me 121 hits (before the regex timed out), but it looks like about half are valid things to fix. Of course at that few, you may want to do them by hand. :)

(It may not surprise you that I do regex as part of my job.) Naraht (talk) 02:36, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

the query you have for 3nd is giving a *lot* of situations where is something like 3nd army group being a redirect to 3rd. Those can be ignored ... Oh, I know, that is the neat part of how I do typo fixes based off of advanced searches: if I find an instance where the supposed typo isn't actually a typo, (see second dash) I will just skip it, or if it looks like it might be a typo, I will typically investigate further to see if it really is, which sometimes involves looking through cited sources, although this isn't always possible, unfortunately.

With regards to the third sentence of your comment, I have been aware for a while of the insource: trick, but I didn't realize how complicated it can get, wow. - BlueEleephant (talk · contribs) 02:54, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hit an edit conflict, with your further comment, oh well. Try a few, see how *you* work and go from there. And as for how complex the insource can get. I have the following in my commonly used entries in my browser

There are two levels of insource, one with double quotes which is sort of normal and the other with slashes which is where you use regex. (and I've got some regex insource queries that make *that* look simple that I actually use.)

You've got good instincts on this. Just take a small bite at the beginning. If it helps, you can ask my talk page as well, I'm on almost every day.Naraht (talk) 03:11, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Try a few, see how *you* work and go from there I already have! If you look deep enough through my contributions, you will see quite a lot of typo fixing, including quite a bit from advanced searches of typos listed at Commonly misspelled English words, but if I should do a trial run of ~30 or so typo fixes in a row, then I will gladly do so assuming the edits will not be disruptive, which was why I first initiated this thread.

Hit an edit conflict, with your further comment Oh, sorry then! Just a minute ago, I was involved in two sections simultaneously, so I felt the need to write a lot, which of course, are perfect conditions for edit conflicts. - BlueEleephant (talk · contribs) 03:24, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Posted to your talk page. No prob on edit conflicts, it happens. :)Naraht (talk) 03:28, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've completed a trial of 44 instances of "3nd", see my recent edit history, which represents about 4.4% of the total edits I'm imagining to make within the next few months, or even year, or so. Chances are, there may be other uses who would like to help complete advanced searches for typos on the master list, which would be nice as the effort could be split across users, some of which are far more experienced in mass typo fixing than I am, although for such tedious work, I wouldn't imagine very many would be interested, which is fine. - BlueEleephant (talk · contribs) 18:35, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

BlueEleephant I suggest looking at Wikipedia:Typo Team. There may be some useful advice on their project page, and their members may be interested in what you are doing. TSventon (talk) 18:56, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My method of choosing typos to fix is dominantly built on the guidance at that page, although I somehow didn't think about posting a link to this thread on WT:TYPO, which would certainly be a much better idea then posting a notice to here at WP:BOTN, which was my original idea.

their members may be interested in what you are doing Considering the typo team has over 1,000 members, I am honestly surprised I never thought about alerting the project, my mistake! - BlueEleephant (talk · contribs) 19:40, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I started something similar a few years ago using JWB. It needs a semi-automated human effort and is certainly not a bot task. You have plenty of good ideas and I wish you every success, but the main reason I stopped was lack of certainty over what the correct text should be. "3nd" may be a typo for "2nd", "3rd" or something else – "end" is only a fat finger away. Deciding which is right in each case may take some research or even be impossible. Of course, higher numbers also go wrong. The ordinal suffix should usually match the last digit but beware of exceptions such as 11th and 112th. Certes (talk) 20:49, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, higher numbers also go wrong. The ordinal suffix should usually match the last digit but beware of exceptions such as 11th and 112th True, although now that I have mostly completed an elaborate advanced search graciously provided by Naraht, I will soon be moving on to other advances searches, like "2st", which also returns a whole lot of results. The only plausible correct texts here should be 2nd & 1st, since the string "qst" is unlikely to be found in many articles outside URL links and links to the magazine. - BlueEleephant (talk · contribs) 23:20, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking this task on, and good luck! That search produces good results but times out. In general, insource:/whatever/ alone is very inefficient and does not complete, because it has to test every word of every article. Adding insource:3nd without the slashes produces more results and avoids overloading the servers but at the expense of missing cases where 3nd is part of a word such as 23nd – these would need separate searches. There will still be false positives such as the interlinear gloss 3nd and a few postcodes but they should be obvious. Certes (talk) 10:22, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have now completed another round of 53 typos, this time from "2st", which now represents 9.7% of 1,000 possible edits.

Considering nobody from WT:TYPO has came here yet, maybe @Chris the speller would be interested / have some guidance. - BlueEleephant (talk · contribs) 18:05, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A good, quick WP search is

~"2st" insource:/ 2st /

but most hits require considerable research to determine what they should be changed to, and that is more digging than I usually want to sign up for. Chris the speller ^yack 19:10, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

It doesn't seem like anybody has had opposition to this project yet, so if it continues to stay that way, then I suppose I will boldly go ahead and fully begin mass-fixing typos from the master list. (See above) - BlueEleephant (talk · contribs) 01:46, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Uncategorized redirects

Is there a way to get a list of all uncategorized redirects on Wikipedia? Category:Uncategorized pages seems to exclude redirects, and Category:Uncategorized redirects does not exist. – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 13:33, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Scyrme.

I suspect PETSCAN can do this (though I have never used it myself). ColinFine (talk) 17:11, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly, but I'm not sure how I would configure it to do so. – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 18:41, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone knows how PetScan could be used to do this, I'd very much appreciate the help. – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 14:30, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It may be possible with PetScan but there are a lot of uncategorised redirects. This Quarry query shows just the 2428 in mainstpace beginning with "Aa". Category:Uncategorized redirects is a nice idea but its members would, by definition, be ineligible for membership... Certes (talk) 14:58, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding ineligibility for membership, you could say the same about Category:Uncategorized pages. Regardless, I'm not proposing to create Category:Uncategorized redirects; I'm just looking for a way to find uncategorized redirects. – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 16:03, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"A lot" is right. I'm actually seeing more uncategorized redirects in mainspace (6115073) then categorized ones (5802125). It's a little worse if you look specifically at redirect categories (per WP:Categorizing redirects, all normal redirects should be in at least one): 5486104 categorized, 6431094 not. At the other end of the spectrum, there are 28 redirs with more than a hundred categories each and three with more than 200: Constitution of the Food and Agriculture Organization with 219, Constitution of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation with 213, and Constitution of the World Health Organization with 210. —Cryptic 16:57, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this. Looking at the table for the 28 redirects with more than hundred non-rcat categories, it looks like the table is a bit off since some of the titles actually list multiple redirects with pipes separating the titles. Not sure why. – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 19:26, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nvm, I think I understand what's going on with this table. Those are articles with the same stats, and the pipe has just been used to list them.

I've gone ahead and made sure all those entries with more than 27 categories have at least 1 rcat, even if it is just a drop in the ocean when compared with the over 6 million redirects without any categories.

If I've understood these figures right, there are ~316,021 redirects that have a normal article category but no rcat, which means most redirects have neither (if these figures are right). – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 21:58, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alternate template for OpenStreetMap?

I'm wondering if there is an alternate template that directly uses OpenStreetMap over Wikimedia Maps. I'm wondering about this for a park, specifically Brian Piccolo Park, because OpenStreetMap's map of the park has a much more informative map over Wikimedia Maps, although the only template I see uses Wikimedia Maps. If there is not a more informative template, would it then be possible to upload a screenshot of the OpenStreetMap map, of course with given credit, or is that not allowed for whatever reason? Thank you! SonOfYoutubers (talk) 19:07, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@SonOfYoutubers The map in the infobox of that article is already from OSM and you can click on it and then zoom in so that what you eventually see is pretty much what you would get directly from OSM. If you want to investigate further, you should probably take a look at OSM's own wiki about collaborating with Wikipedia. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:31, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael D. Turnbull It's doesn't seem to be the same, given that Wikimedia Maps is a separate service. When you zoom in, you don't see the fields like on OpenStreetMap, such as the baseball fields and the soccer/football fields. But, based on the link you gave, I'm assuming it would be possible to just screenshot the map and just follow the guide it gives for crediting OpenStreetMap, if I'm not mistaken? SonOfYoutubers (talk) 18:55, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@SonOfYoutubers Yes, you can use Commons:template:OpenStreetMap and if you need some examples, then check by using the "What links here" tool and looking at file locations. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:46, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What links here

Hi, please consider the page Berkeley Timesharing System. The question "what links here" produces a list [4]. Is the average frequency of the links kept anywhere? How is that list sorted? Thanks in advance. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 18:15, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Yesterday, all my dreams....

What do you mean by "the average frequency of the links"? They're just links: they don't change (unless somebody edits an article), and they don't have a frequency. ColinFine (talk) 19:36, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. If you look at [5] it states that the page was viewed 157 times in the last month. I was wondering how many of those 157 came from Multics vs Memory paging last month. Does that clarify my question? Thanks Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 23:35, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the wikinav tool below. Cheers. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 13:42, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Yesterday, all my dreams...: The top right of WhatLinksHere has a "Help" where Help:What links here#Overview says: "The list is sorted by page ID, i.e., by date of creation of the page." The search linksto:"Berkeley Timesharing System" can give four sort orders under "Advanced search". User:PrimeHunter/Search sort.js can give ten sort orders. See also mw:Help:CirrusSearch#Explicit sort orders. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:19, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but do any of those give what I mentioned to Colin above? Are those numbers even saved anywhere? Thanks Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 23:37, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If I remember rightly, WhatLinksHere lists pages by the sequence in which they were created: the oldest page appears at the top. For some reason, the counter gets reset when a page is deleted and restored, so if I deleted Multics and restored it (even immediately), it would go from position #1 to position #75. Nyttend (talk) 10:08, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You are right about how that works, I think. But as is Multics does not have a number 27 next to it that says in the last month 27 clicks within Multics led to the page Berkeley Timesharing. I wonder if that number 27 is stored anywhere and gets updated every month. Thanks. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 13:07, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Such a thing is theoretically possible for a webpage — my library's Primo discovery layer can report how many people clicked on a specific link on a specific page — but the Wikimedia developers don't generally publish this kind of data. If you talked with one of them, you could ask I suppose, but (1) given the size of Wikipedia, I can't imagine them systematically publishing this kind of data, and it's hard to imagine them publishing even a subset of it routinely; (2) be aware that there's a significance chance that a request for a single bit of data might be turned down; and (3) I have no idea who the developers are, so you'd have to go find some of them yourself. Nyttend (talk) 12:10, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and please see the tool mentioned below. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 12:50, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

WikiNav may provide the answers you seek. If not then you can download the raw Clickstream data to perform custom analysis. Certes (talk) 12:28, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In one word: Fantastic. The results it gives are eye opening. I tried Leonard Kleinrock and most links to him come from Claude Shannon, not the Arpanet. The existence of this system should be publicized, it is eye opening indeed. Thanks. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 12:49, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. I'm profoundly surprised that they publish this kind of information. Special:Statistics shows that we had 65,749,430 pages a few moments ago; I wonder if it's possible to generate a report for all of them? Now that I see the format, I'm less surprised, however; I envisioned a single file providing data for each pair of pages — I expected something such as "In TIMEPERIOD, Alnus acuminata was accessed 0 times via List of deputies general of Álava". Nyttend (talk) 22:02, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The report for all pages is here. It excludes pairs with fewer than ten clicks for privacy reasons (and to keep the file size reasonable). It only covers mainspace (potentially 7,193,000 articles and 377,000 dabs, though rarely visited pages will not appear). An old version that I have stored contains 20 million internal pairs. Views via redirects are counted with their target rather than separately. Certes (talk) 08:54, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, who wrote that tool? You? It is very useful. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 17:05, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Yesterday, all my dreams...: There's a gadget that can be enabled in the user preferences called MoreMenu which adds a set of common analysis tools to the page menu. It does not include WikiNav by default, but perhaps its maintainer (I think that's MusikAnimal) could be persuaded to add it?

Even if not, it is possible to add it manually just for yourself, if you're interested. – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 22:22, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks but I have bookmarked that page and remember the url as well. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 17:03, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

EasyTimeline error issues..

Greetings:

How can I fix an error as I was trying to modify an already set table under the EasyTimeline template? Because it says "Timeline error. Could not store output files" even when I'm trying out a preview of said edit. Any ideas?

jlog3000 (talk) 18:36, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnluisocasio: It's a known bug. Just wait for it to be fixed. See #EasyTimeline extension fail to work on multiple articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:46, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. And I see. I guess I'll let it play out and see what happens. Because I was planning to like make small re-edit modifications on some table graphs under that extension. But thanks for the hint at least. jlog3000 (talk) 19:51, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Rikki Peebles

Rikki Peebles sang the song for the uk 1987 entry he has written many tracks for other groups released his own music and doesn't have a wikipedia page can anyone set one up ? Tonyhitmantaylor1969 (talk) 22:13, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Tonyhitmantaylor1969, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Thank you for your suggestion, but there is not really an effective place to make this sort of suggestion. (There is a place, called requested articles, but the truth is that most suggestions there never get picked up).

Some of your wording, "have a Wikipedia page", and "set one up", makes me think that, like many people, you think of Wikipedia as a bit like social media, where people "set up a page for" themselves or their friends. But it really isn't like that. The basic activity is not "set up a page for", but "write a well-sourced neutral encyclopaedia article about" - which is a task that takes a good bit of work.

The article should be based not on what the person says or wants to say, or what their friends or associates say, but almost exclusively on what people who have no connection with the person have chosen to publish about them in reliable publications. So the task of creating such an article starts with finding sources about the subject, sourcs that meet all the conditions in WP:42. Unfortunately, for most people - even artists and creative people - there is simply not enough independent material published about them, and so no article is possible (the Wikipedia jargon for this is whether they are or are not notable).

So for somebody to write an article about Peebles, they would need to start by finding several places where people unconnected with him have published in some depth about him. ColinFine (talk) 22:25, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There was an article on English Wikipedia at Rikki (British singer), however it was changed to a redirect as not notable. Other Wikipedias have different rules so there is a German article at de:Rikki (Sänger), for example. TSventon (talk) 14:00, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My father

hi , my father played soccer in the states circa late 50s early 60s I didnt know much about it , I think the team was called the eagles or german eagles his name was John Henry Fenwick, any ideas he came back to scotland because of Vietnam. Any help would be great thanks ~2026-33709-74 (talk) 22:38, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This desk is for help with Wikipedia, so I think your question is out of scope. You could try Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. I have one suggestion, which is see if you can access ancestry.com via a library. Presumably you know more details about your father and you could look for yourself without sharing the information here. TSventon (talk) 01:01, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@~2026-33709-74 Exactly what kind of help are you asking for? David10244 (talk) 11:01, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Account Role

Hello, I would like to inquire about the process to become an admin. Thank you for your guidance. DominicHeal2000 (talk) 05:56, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:RFA for one of the two main ways editors become admins (admin elections are the other). That said, most candidates need at least 10,000 edits, among other things, to be considered, so if you're thinking of running yourself, you've a long way to go. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 06:23, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hi DominicHeal2000. There's some general information on this in Wikipedia:Request for adminship and Wikipedia:Administrator elections, but the vetting process can be a bit harsh so you might also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Advice for RfA candidates just to get a bit of a feel for what it entails. Generally, Wikipedians selected as admins are those who have demonstrated to the Wikipedia community that they have a really good grasp of most of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and how they are to best be applied. They also tend to fairly experienced at editing across a variety of different areas of the project. While there's no specific number of edits one needs to have made or a specific number of years one needs to have been editing, users with a fairly low total edit count like yours (if you're asking about you yourself becoming an admin) tend to scrutinized a bit more than perhaps someone with a more established editing history simply because there's less for others to base an assessment on. Furthermore, the fact that your account is also described as being retired might make some question your motivation for becoming an administrator. This doesn't mean becoming an admin is impossible per se; it just means it might be a bit hard without a more established editing history, and you might find many telling you "not yet". -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:29, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Admin here - being an admin isn't really that big a deal. Yes, you get some extra tools to use; but those tools bring extra responsibilities. It's really better to wait to be nominated. When I was first asked about whether I would like to become an admin, I didn't think I was ready, and said so. A couple of years later I was ready, ran and passed an RFA. A big factor in gaining the confidence of other editors is how you handle yourself when disputes occur. Mjroots (talk) 08:29, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article of the day nomination

Is it required to be a major contributor of a featured article to be able to nominate it? Looking at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests I see a lot of nominations that have the nominator be the "major editor" and I just need clarification if it's compulsory or optional. Soccer Tees (talk) 09:56, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

[Attempting to answer your question led me to discover that User:Raul654 hasn't edited in years. Nyttend (talk) 10:05, 8 June 2026 (UTC)][reply]

@Soccer Tees: Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests says: "Editors who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article before nominating it for TFAR." PrimeHunter (talk) 11:27, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

withdrawals

I keep getting a request for information regarding my withdrawals but I have never made any.

Just to let you know that we need some additional information to process your withdrawal. this is a copy of the request Les McCloskey (talk) 10:48, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Les McCloskey: I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 7.1 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:52, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like something a scammer might write to get information and use it illegally so be very careful. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:57, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox NRHP

I have created an article about a house on the National Register of Historic Places: "Lulu Hopping House." I have essentially copied the code in "Infobox nrhp" from similar articles into my article. For some reason the resulting infobox does not call the usual 2nd line, "National Register of Historic Places." Everything else works as expected. It does call the secondary listing, "NM State Register of Cultural Properties." I cannot see the difference between my Infobox and those on similar articles. G.H.Jarrell (talk) 15:24, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@G.H.Jarrell: The line depends on refnum. refnum = SG100012951 doesn't generate the line and doesn't make a link at "NRHP reference No". refnum = 100012951 would do both but the link would be the broken https://npgallery.nps.gov/AssetDetail/NRIS/100012951. Do you know a working link? PrimeHunter (talk) 15:49, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Stumbled into that. The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) gave me "SG100012951" and that's what shows up at NRHP "pending nominations." Guessing that NPS hasn't posted the application even though they notified the SHPO that it was accepted. In any case, the naked integer "1000012951" as "refnum =" lets the form call the line "U.S. National Register of Historic Places." NPS is being quirky: What's the "SG" supposed to do? (Confuse me, I guess...) Resolved, at least for now. Thanks, GHJ G.H.Jarrell (talk) 02:57, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The two-letter prefix on the refnum indicates what kind of action the NRHP is taking. "SG" is the nomination of a single property, "MP" is the nomination of one of multiple related properties, "BC" is boundary change, etc. The trailing numerals are unique. Andrew Jameson (talk) 12:09, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@G.H.Jarrell: Weekly List 2026 05 01 confirms it was listed and gives the same SG number:

NEW MEXICO, BERNALILLO COUNTY,
Hopping, Carl and Lulu, House,
737 Edith Boulevard SE,
Albuquerque, SG100012951,
LISTED, 5/1/2026

I guess content will eventually show up at https://npgallery.nps.gov/AssetDetail/NRIS/100012951 but I don't promise it. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:28, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

photographer's mark on the picture

I've uploaded a free license picture, but it has a small photographer's mark in the bottom-right corner. Is it ok? Mirenathecat (talk) 17:24, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

For reference, this seems to be about File:K (&TEAM). April 6, 2026. "The Devil Wears Prada 2" event in Tokyo.jpg. @Mirenathecat Please confirm:

If that is the image you are asking about.
If you are the photographer.
If you are not the photographer, can you confirm that the licensing information provided on Fliker was provided by the person who owns the copyright?

~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 17:32, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

1. Yes, this is the image.

2. I'm not the photographer.

3. The photographer uploaded the pictures to Flickr at my request Mirenathecat (talk) 17:38, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

And the license was discussed and agreed with the owner Mirenathecat (talk) 17:44, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Mirenathecat Thank you for answering my questions. I will note that our image use policy says that "Free images should not be watermarked, distorted, have any credits or titles in the image itself or anything else that would hamper their free use," and " All photo credits should be in a summary on the image description page." So we would need one without the watermark. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 17:48, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So is this considered a watermark? Mirenathecat (talk) 17:51, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would consider it one. But I'll let others weigh in who do more image work than I do. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 18:00, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's strange that the previous time I asked the same question here the answer was "that's ok". But after that I encountered the rule you're mentioning... ~2026-33863-64 (talk) 18:07, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is a crowdsourced volunteer project of considerable complexity, and anyone at all is free to give answers on this Help desk, which has no 'quality control' other than others pointing out mis-statements. Sometimes even long-experienced editors get things wrong, and newer editors, knowing less than they think they do, do so more frequently. Double-check everything against linked policy and other pages. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-27434-43 (talk) 03:01, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your answers and advise! Mirenathecat (talk) 16:24, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Mirenathecat What license, exactly, was discussed? Some things uploaded to Flickr are not licensed for commercial reuse. License holders who say, for example, "this can be used at Wikipedia but nowhere else" are misunderstanding Wikipedia's licensing requirements. Your photographer might know all of this, but it's worth verifying. David10244 (talk) 11:07, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The picture has CC BY-SA 4.0 license. So it seems to match Wikipedia rules.

The problem was the small author's mark in the bottom-right corner. Mirenathecat (talk) 14:13, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Its fine that you uploaded it, but someone may just remove the watermark. That's the freedom to edit part. --GRuban (talk) 14:20, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. Thanks! Mirenathecat (talk) 15:10, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Contributions

Have been a member since 2019 and contributing annually. However my account shows no contributions. Could the reason be that my user name is not my email address, and my contributions have all been in response to email requests? Sincerely RABrown R1944B (talk) 19:04, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@R1944B: If you mean donations then they are not connected to user accounts. The "Contributions" link shows your edits. Special:Contributions/R1944B now shows your above post which is your first edit. You can also edit articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:35, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am not knowledgeable enough to edit articles, and I did mean donations. Thank you for your prompt response. RAB R1944B (talk) 04:33, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@R1944B Right; no one's account lists their monetary contributions to Wikipedia. Thanks for donating. David10244 (talk) 11:09, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing errors on Citizen Vigilante

Reference help requested.

Thanks, ChristianKarnick (talk) 21:13, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @ChristianKarnick.

It's telling you that you haven't specified the title of the item (|title = ...) which is required.

I'd have inserted it, but that website is not available in my region - I guess the title might be simply "Citizen Vigilante", but maybe it's something else. ColinFine (talk) 22:43, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ChristianKarnick I fixed it for you. ColinFine was correct about the title. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 00:21, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The 99ers

Hi I wrote the first draft of the script The 99ers with Jamee Decio. You can confirm by googling it on deadline or call Netflix or the WGA. We worked hard on this and there is a good chance we will get some writing credit. Please update. Thanks jill Mazursky Dingoandwinnie (talk) 08:18, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This could only be included if there is a published Reliable source stating it, that can be cited for verification. Can you provide a link (or bibliographical data if not online) to such a published source?

Also, please specify/link the Wikipedia article this relates to: There is no Wikipedia article titled The 99ers (hence that link being red) and mentions of the term elsewhere do not seem relevant to a scripted work. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-27434-43 (talk) 12:45, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have just lost many hours of work! How to retrieve?

Hi. In clicking around to understand how to insert a photograph when it didn't work the first time, which led me to leave a page and agree to changes not being saved (I never imagined it meant that many hours of work!), I now can't find what I had done over the last few days. It's strange that Wikipedia says that all changes are saved, but one can nonetheless screw up the way I have.

I have looked in the revision history, and the most recent it lists is 20 May, but I have worked on this new as yet unreviewed page over the last two days.

All help most appreciated! If I have to do it again, of course I will, but if I don't have to, you will have my eternal thanks!

Alison Jean Lester Alison Jean Lester (talk) 10:53, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you did not press "Publish changes" (which is the button which saves and makes public any changes you made to a page) then your work is lost. Athanelar (talk) 11:02, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Learning, as so often, the hard way! Alison Jean Lester (talk) 13:27, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Alison Jean Lester: If the browser tab is still open then your browser might remember something if you click back until you reach the edit page. You can also try Special:EditRecovery but it's probably disabled. It cannot recover edits from before it was enabled. For another time, many browsers allow you to open a link in a new tab by pressing Ctrl while you click. Then you can return to the old tab later. I also sometimers copy a large edit to a text editor but that may not work in VisualEditor. It works in the source editor. You can switch to it on a pencil icon at the top right of VisualEditor. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:18, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the tips. Alison Jean Lester (talk) 13:28, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Alison Jean Lester The only other edit you made with your account was Draft:Charles Gorham. If it is something else you worked on, then I'm afraid it is lost. Maresa63 ^Talk 12:36, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you're right. That's the one, and the work is gone. I will take a break and start again! Thanks. Alison Jean Lester (talk) 13:28, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Publishing a Wiki Page and getting approval

Asked and answered on the Teahouse. Please don't post the same question on multiple pages. (User is soft-blocked for username) ColinFine (talk) 14:53, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Hi! I am in the process of seeing if my second submission of a Wiki page will be approved and I have not heard anything via my email or through the status on the page. Is there any way I can contact support or see what the status of my page is? Are there any tips on receiving approval or avoid getting denied again? BlaineTurner Advertising (talk) 13:41, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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.

JFK Airport

Just a point of fact to be researched....The Port Authority of NY & NJ does NOT Own the Airport...The Land IS owned by the City of New York....The Port Authority leases the land ...The last lease renewal was in was on 2014 for 40 years....

https://www.osc.ny.gov/files/audits/2018-01/sga-2017-14s28_1.pdf ~2026-34112-99 (talk) 14:49, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please bring this up on the talk page for the relevant article, where people with knowledge and interest in the subject are more likely to see it. ColinFine (talk) 14:54, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Genuine question, why isn't there an article on the phenomenon of "Vanity Pages"/"Vanity Articles"?

I know they're prevalent as hell, I've seen dozens on BJAODN. ~2026-34037-64 (talk) 16:50, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There is. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Object Class: Drygioni} 16:55, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

oh- ty ~2026-34037-64 (talk) 20:57, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Questions Concerning Misunderstandings about Wikepedia page creatio

Hi, my name is Juliette and I started a wikepedia accoun through wikiedu with a university class last semester. I enjoyed the experience a lot and wish to contribute more to new articles, but have a few questions concerning the last one I wrote.

The article I wrote is FOKUPERS, but,

When I look it up, I only see the german version, even if I have a canadian english browser, and the result of the page I wrote does not appear before the German version, which I do not understand.
At the start of the page the following appears: ''This article relies largely or entirely on a single source.'', but I have referenced more than 9 different sources, therefore I do not understand this aspect either.
When I look up the history of the page, my edits and word additions do not appear, neither does my creation of the page, which I also find pretty frustrating because I wanted to review those.

Could any of these questions be answered or reviewed for me please?

Thank you!

Juutaime2 (talk) 17:41, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In order:

I don't see any reason why the de.wp article would show up if you're not on de.wp. Cross-project redirects to other language editions of Wikipedia generally aren't A Thing.
I agree with you on that tag, and will remove it shortly.
Literally everything is still there in history. This might be tied into the de.wp issue of bullet 1; you're likely looking at the history for the de.wp article.

—Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Object Class: Drygioni} 17:44, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot to the both of you for your answers! Juutaime2 (talk) 18:02, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

More information:

if you search for the article on Google (etc.) you won't find the new article until it has been reviewed by WP:NPP or until it is 90 days old.
the single source tag was added in early April, when there was only one source, so it was appropriate to remove it.
nothing to add. TSventon (talk) 17:56, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot to the both of you for your answers! Juutaime2 (talk) 18:03, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Juutaime2, by the way, shouldn't there be a tag on the article talk page linking to the class page, as at Talk:Canadian Abortion Rights Action League. TSventon (talk) 18:47, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi this a great question! Its hard to say, I wouldn't Know how to add it, but I also went through different pages from other students in th same class and some also did not have that 'tag' such as Designing Hope or Legal Aid Manitoba.. Let me know if there is a way I can add it that you know of. Juutaime2 (talk) 13:03, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Juutaime2 Hi, it seems that {{Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment}} should be "added and updated automatically by dashboard.wikiedu.org whenever course assignments are added or removed for a particular Wiki Education course". So you should probably ask your tutor what they or you need to do. TSventon (talk) 13:37, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Juutaime2 Did you ask this question before, either here or at the Teahouse? David10244 (talk) 11:12, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I apologized to that. Indeed, I won't do it again. Juutaime2 (talk) 13:30, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dummy Hoy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dummy_Hoy#Personal_life The difference between "D" and "d" the meaning is very much different. "D"ummy m means inability to hear and to talk while "d"ummy means stupid or idiot person. www.signforhoy.com is a new additional. ~2026-34118-83 (talk) 18:05, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@~2026-34118-83 Please raise any suggestions for improvements to an article on the article talk page, i.e.Talk:Dummy_Hoy. Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:55, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Highlighting text

Is there something like failed verification span for long quote? I think the highlighting would make the full extent of the quote easier to discern than a small indicator at the end of the last sentence. TPI81AF (talk) 18:28, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This might need to be discussed at Template talk:Long quote. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Object Class: Drygioni} 18:30, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Take Down Pages As Soon As Possible

Hello,

Please take down the following pages ASAP due to misinformation, intent to harass, vulgar content, etc. :

(1) Prince Albert (genital piercing)

(2) Christina piercing

Most Appreciatively,

Christina Scarlett (Redacted) Csc1255 (talk) 19:26, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

These articles are covered by WP:NOTCENSORED. They are not intended to offend or harass.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:29, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Csc1255: Yes, if there are reliable sources about a subject to satisfy Wikipedia:Notability then Wikipedia can have an article about it no matter how offensive some people may find it. If you think the pages have misinformation then you can discuss it on the talk page. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:24, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How do I submit something for RfC?

Hi

WP:ELIT project and others in the electronic literature /Wikipedia community have been working on a list of notability criteria specifically for electronic literature. How do we submit it for an RfC? Thanks! User:LoveElectronicLiterature/Notability (ELIT) - Wikipedia LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 19:29, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:RFC for all the details. Athanelar (talk) 20:47, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My User Page Is Not Appearing in Google Search

Hello,

I have created a Wikipedia user page, but I noticed that it does not appear in Google Search results.

User page:

User:Jews News (Harvard)

Even when I search for specific terms related to the page, including “Behrad Ahmadi”, I cannot find the page in Google.

I would like to know whether Wikipedia user pages are intentionally excluded from search engine indexing, or if there is any issue preventing this page from being indexed.

If there are any guidelines or requirements regarding search engine visibility for user pages, I would appreciate your clarification.

Thank you for your time and assistance.

Kind regards,

Behrad Ahmadi Jews News (Harvard) (talk) 19:39, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:INDEXING. It could take up to 90 days for it to appear. Do you have a particular need for it to appear in search engines quickly? It isn't intended as a social media style page. 331dot (talk) 19:45, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Jews News (Harvard). Like many people, you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is.

Wikipedia is a collaborative online enyclopaedia - that's all. It is not social media, and it is not a directory.

The main part of it should consist of well-sourced neutral non-promotional articles about notable subjects ("notable" has a specific definition that is not quite the same as in normal use): those are the part which is normally exposed to outside search engines.

User pages are part of the collaboration, not part of the encyclopaedia, and they are not normally indexed by search engines. They are for editors to introduce themselves to the editing community and display something about themselves as Wikipedia editors. A small amount of biographical information beyond their activity in Wikipedia is allowed, but it should not dominate the user page.

Note also that writing an article about yourself in Wikipedia is so monumentally difficult that is it very strongly discouraged. ColinFine (talk) 20:03, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The first thing to say here is that user pages should not contain CVs or excessive biographical information, which is what User:Jews News (Harvard) does. This type of material is suitable for a Facebook or LinkedIn profile but not Wikipedia. Also, Wikipedia has no control over what external search engines do.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:47, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The second thing to say is that, on English Wikipedia, the User: namespace is automatically noindexed via a software setting. Search engines which respect that request will exclude User: pages from their results. This behaviour deters the use of Wikipedia as a host for publishing résumés and other promotional material. Certes (talk) 20:01, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can any one create article for me

If any one can do this plz say i will contact him Jews News (Harvard) (talk) 20:11, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You can put it in WP:Requested articles.

Note that if anyone contacts you off-wiki and says they'll write an article for you, it's probably a scam; see WP:SCAM. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 20:14, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Before requesting the article, it's worth quickly checking that the intended subject is notable. That link gives general guidelines and links to more specific requirements for popular types of topic such as people. We don't clutter the encyclopedia with pages on non-notable topics – for example, there's no article about me. Certes (talk) 20:53, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In the deleted user page, we learned that the editor was a student of IT. There was no mention of graduate status, so I'd guess an undergraduate. No achievements were claimed, no references were provided. I noticed no suggestion that even a skilled and experienced editor could generate a viable article about this person. The heading above lacks a "?", but it's a question; the answer to it is "No they can't". -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 21:45, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Jews News (Harvard) I think you misunderstand what we do here- articles here summarize what independent reliable sources say about the topic, not what it wants to say itself, such as posting your resume. Posting your resume is exactly what social media is for. 331dot (talk) 22:28, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

IAbot (2)

Thanks to Kailash29792, I finally could reach here to ask the same issue that Kailash had before. Not sure why that error also appears on On My Mind (Ellie Goulding song) article, although I tried removing all archive.today links and even clearing the whole citation which is only supported by archive.today. Could someone please help me for this? Camilasdandelions (✉️) 01:29, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your atttempted edit contained an archive.today link for Hot 100 Songs – Year-End 2016 (this link: [6]) Danski454 (talk) 15:09, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Im try to become best version of me .. how can u solve this problem and make me batter

help ~2026-34302-52 (talk) 05:29, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is the help desk for Wikipedia. It's where you can ask questions about editing Wikipedia, not general questions about life. Good luck, though.

(As for becoming batter, the article Batter (cooking) might be useful to you. /j)

^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 05:41, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Are we sure they're not referring to the character from OFF? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Object Class: Drygioni} 06:07, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Messed up editing

Hi, I messed up editing an entry - APEC. They have a new chair - China, was trying to update but now formatting is off EdwardPang2020 (talk) 14:09, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I fixed the problem with this edit. In this edit, you had inserted a stray "}}" in the |leader_name1= field, and when you reverted that, you restored a version with an improperly closed {{URL}} template in the |official_website= field. Deor (talk) 14:54, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hide Wikidata edits in my watchlist

My watchlist shows Wikidata edits that are for the same entries as an article I have watchlisted. For example, since I watchlisted Daylight saving time, I see Wikidata changes such as this one. How can I adjust my watchlist settings so I don't see Wikidata edits? Jc3s5h (talk) 15:45, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Jc3s5h: Go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-watchlist, scroll down to the "Advanced options" heading, untick the box that says Show Wikidata edits in your watchlist. – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 15:51, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That worked, thanks. Jc3s5h (talk) 17:05, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A beginner's question: how do I add stylized text like "This article is about _. For the _ see _ (__)" to the beginning of a page?

The text doesn't show in the editor. ~2026-34251-92 (talk) 16:05, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Those are called "hatnotes". They're added by templates placed at the top of the page. See WP:HATNOTE for more information. – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 16:09, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Adobe Acrobat shortcut

I hope someone can help with this. An Adobe Acrobat shortcut has started appearing on Wikipedia articles, and I'd like to remove it or make it disappear permanently. I'm assuming it's something to do with preferences, so could someone point me to the right place? What I'm seeing is a circle at the bottom right of the screen with the Adobe sign in it, and a drop down menu. Thanks in advance, This is Paul (talk) 18:17, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@This is Paul: Do you see it at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Example?safemode=1? If you do then it's probably added at your end, maybe by a browser extension. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:42, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting back to me. Yes, I could see it. It looks like it's something Wiki-related as there was an option to go to preferences. I do have a couple of browsers extensions installed so perhaps they've been updated. I've managed to remove it though. Cheers, This is Paul (talk) 20option to go to:23, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

I don't know whether "preferences" went to Wikipedia preferences. Adobe software and many others also use that term. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:55, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mess up deletion

Complaints about a deletion resulting from an AfD, or pleas for the reversal of such a deletion, are a waste of time if, as in this case, the title is salted. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 06:14, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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.

~2026-34372-89 (talk) 23:57, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Heelo, I have just crosschecked the deleted Martin Luther Nyanzi article which had passed articles for creation with even substantial edits from different users but one of the editor whom I think have combined to withdraw this subject from Wikipedia deleted with it and even deleted the article before giving editors more room for discussion. I see this in a way a persona person can create an article and again goes on another device to show that maybe the page is being researched by more people so this Is what these editors are also doing to one similar subject. Then it means those who reviewed and those who made substantial edits never accessed the sources used. A non significant person can never appear in a government newspaper but these people treat East Africa as West, in Uganda there are many people with real work but news is limited that's most subjects here on Wikipedia Nyanzi is more notable than them butvjust for somepeople here on Wikipedia like Daily Monitor as a reliable to prove, On daily Monitor]] a biography [[article about someone can be bought through editors but in New Vision its not. So, Wikipedia help undelete the Martin Luther Nyanzi article it passes WP:GNG and WP:BIO as the reviwer of AFC approved it and even patrolled, the articlecan be improved on the way too. Thanks ~2026-34372-89 (talk) 23:59, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"A non significant person can never appear in a government newspaper"? What an utterly ridiculous statement. Anyway, the reasons for deletion were adequately explained, [7][8] and regardless of how many anonymous temporary accounts and sockpuppets appear, we aren't going to assist. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:07, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

but this never required using such adjective ridiculous or just because you whites think you're above Africa but it's okay. ~2026-34372-89 (talk) 00:23, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Broad unjustified allegations of racism will only land you a block. Electricmemory (talk) In solidarity 06:13, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The substantial edits were not from temporary accounts if you're to check the revisions. I suggest article to be draftified for more development or taken to main space. ~2026-34372-89 (talk) 00:28, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Help

every time I tried to edit a Wikipedia article it always gets changed no matter how hard I try Liamthecheeseman (talk) 06:38, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Liamthecheeseman Please see the messages on your talk page, and note the importance of Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:32, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Guidance on Creating a Wikipedia Biography Page

Dear Wikipedia Support Team,

I hope you are doing well.

I would like to seek guidance regarding the creation of a Wikipedia biography page for a senior government official serving in the Office of the Principal Scientific Adviser (PSA) to the Government of India.

Could you please advise on the following: - The eligibility and notability requirements for creating a biography page for a public official. - The process for submitting a draft biography through a Wikipedia account. - The appropriate platform or section within Wikipedia where such a draft should be created and submitted for review. - The documentation, references, and reliable sources that are typically required to support the biography. - Any conflict-of-interest or disclosure requirements that should be followed if the submission is being made by someone associated with the individual or their organization.

I would appreciate any guidance, resources, or links that can help ensure that the submission complies with Wikipedia's policies and standards.

Thank you for your time and assistance. I look forward to your response.

Warm Regards, Tushar Jha ~2026-34214-86 (talk) 08:28, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

For eligibility, see Wikipedia:Notability (people). Biographies of public officials are subject to the same criteria as any other subject. As for the rest, see Help:Your first article, Wikipedia:Reliable sources, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, and possibly Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. If you yourself are the subject, note that we strongly discourage such articles, and see Wikipedia:Autobiographies. Note that creating an acceptable article is a difficult task for a new contributor, and we'd recommend gaining more experience with more general editing before attempting this. Note also that you will find it very difficult to create an article without first creating an account here. AndyTheGrump (talk) 08:44, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You may use the Article Wizard to create and submit a draft.

Elected officials have their own criteria, but non-elected government officials have the same criteria as anyone else, the notable person criteria. We do not want to know what the person says about themselves, we want to know what others say about them, especially with critical analysis and commentary as to what exactly their impact is.

Writing a new article is the most difficult task to perform on Wikipedia, it is not recommended as the first task a new user does. It is best to first gain experience and knowledge of Wikipedia by editing existing articles. It's even harder to write a new article if you are writing about someone you know or yourself. 331dot (talk) 08:47, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

why use invoke?

when editing 2026–27 in English football#Managerial changes, i found several entries with {{#invoke:cite|web|...}} instead of the usual {{cite web|...}}

searching wikipedia dont give reason or guideline when to use invoke. should i turn every entries on that section to use invoke, or i change the entries that use invoke to use cite web? (edit {{cite web|...}} instead of {{cite|web|...}}) Lokiretro (talk) 10:56, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Lokiretro: {{#invoke:cite|web|...}} is more efficient but less editor friendly so it's usually only used when a page may break template limits otherwise. See Help:Template limits#invoke syntax. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:16, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

When using a template instead of "invoke", it should be {{cite web|...}} not {{cite|web|...}}. The latter will cause citation errors. – Scyrme (talk/solidarity) 11:39, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the correction. I should write as you suggested, I will edit my post Lokiretro (talk) 11:46, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

ethics of having someone improve my page in exchange for payment

I am an economist with an existing Wikipedia page. I was recently approached by someone who says they are a regular Wikipedia contributor specializing in economics, offering to expand and improve my page. As a freelance writer, this person is asking for payment for their services. I wanted to know whether this falls within Wikipedia's ethical boundaries, and how much (if any) text I can contribute to such a project. I am also wondering whether there is any history of such offers turning out to be scams. ~2026-34511-66 (talk) 18:37, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That is almost certainly a scam (see WP:SCAM). A regular contributor would never ask for payment. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (They/them • Ping me!) 18:41, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

With regards to conflict of interest/paid editing in general, directly editing pages with which you have a conflict of interest is largely discouraged. But, you (or a publicist/firm) are more than welcome to use the COI edit request system to make any suggestions. ^MetalBreaks_AndBends (One for all) 21:58, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you would like your page expanded, I, and many other editors would probably like to help you out! End (talk) 22:19, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

AfD submission opinion

I submitted an article to AfD, but after the discussion of other editors, I myself believe the article should be kept provided it gets filtered (the article contained a lot of promotional language which I removed before doing the AfD)
I'm personally not sure what to do though, as I don't think closing this one myself is right, and I'm not super knowledgeable about the AfD rules. Link to AfD Discussion SuperCode111 (talk) 23:12, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@SuperCode111, You don't need to worry about closing it; experienced editors will close it when the time is right. If you want to withdraw, you should comment that you are withdrawing it, followed by a reason. For now, just focus on other things. CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 23:23, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delete your earlier deletion rationale, but you are free to strike it out, and to follow the struck-out rationale with a retraction. As an example (cartoonishly simple, for brevity): ~~This article sucks. Delete it.~~ I now realize that the subject is notable, and withdraw my nomination. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 00:30, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ISBN error (allegedly)

What's currently reference 10 (the one starting Hélène Roussel. "German-speaking artists) in the article Eric Isenburger brings the error message {{isbn}}: Check isbn value: invalid character (help). But the ISBN link ({{ISBN|978‑3‑11‑029058‑5}}) works as expected (or anyway does when I select WorldCat among all the options), and I (sleepily?) fail to see anything amiss. I'll now present it again, this time with no "nowiki" cloaking: ISBN 978‑3‑11‑029058‑5 {{isbn}}: Check isbn value: invalid character (help). (Ugh! But it works.) Any ideas? -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 00:27, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

replace the U+2011: NON-BREAKING HYPHENs with U+002D: HYPHEN-MINUS.

{{ISBN|978-3-11-029058-5}} → ISBN 978-3-11-029058-5

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:46, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Facepalm Thank you, Trappist the monk. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 01:38, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

2020s Portal Icon?

It's 2026 already and we haven't a 2020s portal icon. Do we need to wait until the decade is over? How were the decadal portals created since Wikipedia itself began? Is there a procedure, a test bed, what? Let us assume that half tech & half brain would stand for the 2020s from 2026 onward given the rise of AI. What would have served for the previous portion of the 2020s? Crypto‽ COVID-19‽ Or is there a signature toy? Etc. kencf0618 (talk) 00:30, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Shifting to Template talk:Portal. I'm casting a wide net. kencf0618 (talk) 00:35, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

manuel of style for non fiction books

Is there a manuel of style for non fiction books? there is one for novels, but for non fiction... Vastmajority20025 (talk) 04:24, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently not, @Vastmajority20025.

As you have no doubt seen, MOS:NOVEL is part of WP:WikiProject Novels, but there isn't a corresponding Wikiproject for non-fiction books. (MOS:BOOKS redirects to the obsolete WP:Manual of Style/Wikipedia books, which was about something different) ColinFine (talk) 07:23, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that MOS:NOVEL could probably be applied pretty well to non-fiction books, plot and principle characters would be less relevant but the rest all makes sense. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 07:38, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of spaces from infobox

I have noticed a large number of edits removing spaces from infoboxes, which makes them more difficult to edit using Wikitext editor. I have just asked an editor why they were removing these spaces and was told that they were not removing them, despite the diff showing that they were being removed. I asked if they were using the visual editor, and was told that they were. Could someone confirm whether this is a deliberate function of the visual editor, and, if so, why it was so programmed, as it makes no difference to edits using the visual editor, but makes editing Wikitext more difficult. - Arjayay (talk) 10:18, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is the way Visual Editor behaves when it edits the content of a template. It appears to read all the fields in and then write them all out again without keeping track of spaces at the end of a field. I suspect it was the simplest way to implement the function of editing the content of templates. References, so important on the English Wikipedia, seemed to be an afterthought in the design of VE. StarryGrandma (talk) 17:49, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake

You have a “Steven Hayes Dacus” called the first foreign CEO of “Speedway” and you have him born in America? Not ~2026-34604-42 (talk) 13:50, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@~2026-34604-42: I guess you mean Stephen Dacus. If you saw a page claiming he is the first foreign CEO of "Speedway" then please link it. There are pages saying he is the first foreign CEO of Seven & I Holdings but that's a Japanese company which owns Speedway (store). PrimeHunter (talk) 14:33, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There appears to be no mention of a Steven Hayes Dacus in any Wikipedia article, and we have a sizeable number of different articles about entities which use the name 'Speedway'. Which article are you talking about? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-27434-43 (talk) 14:34, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Overall Quality of Huamea Controversy Page

I was looking at this page: Controversy over the discovery of Haumea

To me it reads like a story, has bad tone, and includes a lot of irrelevant information. The majority of the references do not support the content, or are broken. I have marked the page as such, but since it is marked as a "good article" I just want to double check that I'm doing the right thing (I haven't added tags to an article before). I wrote in the talk page that I'll wait 14 days before restructuring.

It would be great to have someone quickly check the article to see if my concerns are correct. BennBluee (talk) 15:46, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to have become a GA in 2009, when Wikipedia's standards were very different.

If I were you, the first step would be to reassess the article against the good article criteria and strip its GA status if need be (there's no need to have any special status or permissions to do this) Athanelar (talk) 17:24, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@BennBluee Actualy, it failed 3 times and then passed at Talk:Controversy_over_the_discovery_of_Haumea/GA4 in 2010. You could check whether the passed version is substantially different from the current one. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:28, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Will do, thanks! BennBluee (talk) 17:29, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey how are you ? What’s the best email to send for a complaint

False information ~2026-34687-31 (talk) 17:12, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Unless it's somehow sensitive false information, probably the best place to start is the Talk page for the article in question. DonIago (talk) 17:18, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

v t e Wikipedia help pages
*Visit the Teahouse* or the Help desk for an interactive Q & A forum. FAQs (?) Reference desks (?) Noticeboards (?) Cheatsheet (?) Directories (?) Village pumps** (?)
About Wikipedia (?)	Administration Purpose Principles Policies and guidelines What Wikipedia is not Disclaimer (parental advice) Making requests Who writes Wikipedia?
Help for readers (?)	FAQ Copyright Glossary Mobile access Navigation Other languages Saved pages Searching Students Viewing media
Contributing to Wikipedia (?)	Advice for young editors Avoiding common mistakes Etiquette Simplified Manual of Style Simplified rule-set "Ignore all rules" "The rules are principles" Style-tips Tip of the day Your first article (article wizard)
Getting started (?)	Why create an account? Introductions by topic Graphics tutorials Picture tutorial IRC (live chat) tutorial VisualEditor user guide
Dos and don'ts (?)	Accessibility Biographies Biographies (living) Categorization Consensus Discussions Disambiguation Images Leads Links Lists References Tables Titles (of articles)
How-to pages and information pages (?)	Appealing blocks Article deletion Categories Citations/references Referencing for beginners Citation Style 1 Cite errors References and page numbers Convert Diff Editing Minor edit toolbar edit conflict Find sources Files Footnotes Image deletion Infoboxes Linking (link color) Logging in Merging New page review Page name Renaming pages Redirect Passwords Email confirmation Reverting Simple vandalism cleanup Talk pages (archiving simple archiving) User contributions WP search protocol
Coding (?)	Wiki markup Barcharts Calculations Characters Columns Elevation Hidden text HTML Lists Magic words Music symbols Sections Sounds Tables Templates Transclusion URL Visual files
Directories (?)	Abbreviations AI Departments Editor's index Essays FAQs Glossary Guidelines Manual of Style Policies Tasks Tips Tools
Missing Manual Ask for help on your talk page (?)