Motivation: the german wiki entry does not show up when searching in the en.wiki.

After finding the german wiki entry and trying a tool like google translate, the result is less than perfect.

How do I proceed? Cbumb (talk) 15:58, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[]

@Cbumb See WP:TRANSLATE for the basics. One problem is that if you aren't fluent in both languages, you will struggle. One other issue is that very often foreign-language articles don't have the sort of good sources that allow you to show notability, as will be required for the English version. Depending on the topic, you might get assistance from one of our local project groups. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:44, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Thank you Mike, but the translation isn't my problem.

The main problem I am trying to solve is that when searching on the en.wiki, the de.wiki entry is not found. Unless you know that there is a german version on de.wiki, you won't look further. That is why I am trying to create an (identical but in english) one in the en.wiki.

I'm not worried about adequate sourcing, but that would be something to address later if necessary. Cbumb (talk) 16:56, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[]

If translation isn't a problem for you, then your best approach is to start a draft, or a subpage off your user page, and work on it. Once the article is in mainspace, it's easy to add new languages to the selector. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 17:16, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Found what I needed: Wikipedia:Translation#Translation from another language to English:

If the English article does not yet exist:

• you can create a starter article (at least a stub) in English, using the process described at Your first article; once you have created the article, tag it with a translation template, as mentioned above.
• or add a page request red link in the Requested articles Project section with the proposed title of the article which will contain the translation adding an interwiki link to the other language's Wikipedia page(s). Note that fewer people will likely see a request created using this method.

Cbumb (talk) 17:29, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Hello, @Cbumb.

Despite what that page says, unless you verify before you start that the German article has sources that are adequate according to the standards of English Wikipedia, then translating the German article will - at best - produce a draft that has been written backwards.

I strongly advise that by far the most effective way to translate an article which is not adequately sourced is to start from scratch, locating the requisite sources and (only if you can find them) summarising what the sources say with little reference to the original article. ColinFine (talk) 18:24, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[]

@Cbumb, I see that you have noted a conflict of interest in relation to de:Victor Hermann Umbricht on your user page. I therefore suggest that you use Wikipedia:Articles for creation rather than moving the draft to article space yourself. I have edited your draft to disclose that it is translated from de Wikipedia and added some basic formatting, I hope that was useful. TSventon (talk) 21:34, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Hi TSventon,

Thanks- I can use all the help I can get right now ;-)

But I am quite confused - I think I have noted that in the COI itself, do you mean its better to also put it in the article? Also, I don't see your edits in the draft (yet?) is that just timing? or am I looking in the wrong place?

Navigating this process is quite the nightmare so far. What is the advantage of using Wikipedia:Articles for creation over working on the draft (which I think is in my "sandbox"?), but to tell you the truth, I thought I got there going through W:Afc. Perhaps I didn't save properly and started new in the sandbox?

Can I move what I have, wherever it is, to W:Afc somehow, or start over? What is the advantage of using W:Afc over what I am doing now?

Thanks! Cbumb (talk) 21:50, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[]

@Cbumb, your disclosure of COI is fine. I have edited User:Cbumb/sandbox you should be able to see what I have done by clicking on "Viw history"

Writing a new article is hard, even if you are just translating from another language. The standard advice here is to learn a bit about Wikipedia before trying to write an article, if you are interested you could look at Help:Getting started.

Your draft is in your sandbox, should I move it to Draft:Victor Hermann Umbricht? You may have clicked on Wikipedia:Article wizard and then on "Practice in your personal sandbox", but it doesn't matter much. It is best to move the page rather than copying the code so the history is preserved.

You need to do some more work on the page to make it suitable for publication, I recommend reading Help:Your first article, if you haven't already. Make sure the subject is Wikipedia:Notable before spending too much time. Then when it is ready, you can either publish the article yourself, or get a reviewer to check it first, which is known as "Articles for Creation". The advantage of AfC is that an experienced reviewer will check the article and tell you if there are any problems, also it is recommended by the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest policy. The disadvantage is that there can be a long wait. In any case the article needs to be checked by Wikipedia:New pages patrol before it is indexed by Google. TSventon (talk) 22:57, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Thank you TSventon, much appreciated. Still trying to get used to how things work here. I compared what I saw in your latest version (Latest revision as of 00:04, 28 March 2026) and it looks to me like what I am seeing in what seems to be my latest version ( 22:38, 27 March 2026 ) in the source mode editing view?

If that is the case, this looks good to me. I am not sure if it should be moved it to "Draft:Victor Hermann Umbricht" as you suggest - (when I click on it I get "Wikipedia does not have a page with this exact title." which is what should be expected, I suppose). What would be the purpose if my 00:04, 28 March 2026 version is acceptable?

If this also looks ok to you, I would be fine with going ahead with publishing to AfC (if so how?) - but since you indicate this can take a long time, can it also be sent to Wikipedia:New pages patrol in the meantime? If so how? Cbumb (talk) 04:34, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[]

@Cbumb the article is not ready for publication yet. I think the subject is probably notable (suitable for an article in English Wikipedia), as he has an entry in the Historical Lexicon of Switzerland,. However English Wikipedia expects the information to be supported by inline references, and you have not done that yet. (As you can see German Wikipedia is different.) There are instructions at Help:Your first article#Citing sources, but to start with you could put <ref>...</ref> after the information and replace the dots with a web address for an online source.

To see the changes I have made you can click on the "view history" tab to see a list of changes and then "Prev" on one of the lines with my username, for example 05:01, 28 March 2026, where I removed some information at the bottom of the page.

You will only be able to move pages when your account has been live for 4 days, so you are not able to publish the page yet, even if it was ready.

The difference between AFC and new pages patrol NPP is that AFC is a check of a draft and NPP is a check of a page which has been published, so NPP can't happen before AFC. (Some AFC reviewers will mark articles as NPP patrolled when they publish them, but that is random.) Articles in the AFC queue are generally moved to draft names like Draft:Victor Hermann Umbricht as that means that a potential reviewer can see the page is a draft and what the subject is.

I have added some code to enable you to submit the article via AFC. I advise that both because of your conflict of interest and because you only have a day or two of Wikipedia experience. TSventon (talk) 06:00, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Thank you TSventon. Impatience with the process is on me.

I am also still battling with the user interface of this process, like the to me unpredictably popping up error message about incorrect nCaptcha , that comes and goes (I saw a comment that this was happening when you are < 10 edits or something, and it did go away yesterday, but now its coming back again, and stopping again... is this recurring for every different page (like Homepage, Sandbox etc.?)

Anyway, my main question right now is your point about inline references. I have tried to add some already, but it's hard for me to decide what details are worth referencing directly beyond what is listed right now - e.g., do I have to dig up references for the listed Honors? Every item mentioned in the LIFE segment, e.g. documenting that he was a court clerk in 1939-41?

These things are basically covered in the Historical Dictionary of Switzerland and the Neue Deutsche Biographie... is that not acceptable?

Perhaps you can point out some key items that would need more detail?

Thanks again! Cbumb (talk) 16:42, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[]

TSventon,

Some more thoughts on the additional inline referencing. (Looks like I can't edit my 16:42 entry after hitting the reply button).

One dimension I think needs consideration is that the COI issue. As I stated with the COI box, I am hopeful I can mitigate COI concerns by staying.as close as possible to the de.wikipedia (and fr.wikipedia) versions, with which I had no involvement.

I am sure I don't have to point out that the selection of references can easily be a means of biasing content. Introducing many new references will likely be a flag for the reviewer(s) to carefully scrutinize them - which is fine, but could lead to much more work = time etc., which motivates me to stray as little as possible from the original de.wiki. version. I get that the en.wiki reference standards are different, but I would prefer avoiding trouble.

Your guidance is much appreciated. Cbumb (talk) 20:09, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Cbumb, firstly Captchas, I think they are generated when you try to add external links and your account is less than four days old (or has less than ten edits). Four days isn't long.

On in line citations I would say cite everything. The article on Paul Trappen mentioned below is an example, there are just three references, but they are all given names and can be used more than once. The lead is often a summary of referenced information in the rest of the article, and in that case it does not need references. Wikipedia:Verifiability says references are needed for material whose verifiability is likely to be challenged. The article is mainly a list of roles and dates, so I would say all the information is equally likely to be challenged. From experience of German Wikipedia, inline citations are not required there, or at any rate not enforced. Also the German article was started in 2008 and the rules could have been different then. The earliest version of the article has an edit summary which suggests that it used Daniel Schwane's NZZ article. Do you have access to that?

You have a conflict of interest because Victor Umbricht was your father, so your draft needs to be checked by AfC. You have to change the article a bit to make it suitable for English Wikipedia and that creates work for you and the reviewer. I don't think the reviewer will be concerned if you choose the HDS, the NDB or the NZZ as a reference for a fact. Obviously adding lots of positive adjectives would be a bad idea. TSventon (talk) 02:10, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Hi TSventon, thanks for your suggestions. Have a look at the current state - I believe I have added inline refs where it makes sense. Fortunately, all the relevant points I can see were covered by the references already there, I just added them inline where appropriate, so COI should be minimal. I was able to add direct links to the External links missing them (like the NZZ article).

Is there anything else necessary? Again, I would like to minimize my own footprint as much as possible to minimize COI concerns.

If this looks ok, Next Steps? Thanks! Cbumb (talk) 18:31, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Cbumb, the article looks good, do you want to submit it to AfC? As you have seen I have made some minor adjustments here and there. I have just removed an external link to a pdf, perhaps that should be readded as a reference, if so it would be useful to clarify what document pages are being used. I want to format a couple more links as templates, but that need not delay you. The article only has two sources, which is very low, but hopefully enough. Also it mostly lists what he did and when, with minimal analysis, but I can understand why you don't want to work on that.

Did you find any discrepancies between the article and the sources? The NDB has an award from Los Angeles in 1984, not in 1987, that may be worth correcting. I think the article title should probably be Victor Umbricht as that is what both sources (and List of Bilderberg participants) call him. German and English titles don't have to be the same.

Incidentally, I found two Wikidata items for you, so I merged them as Christopher B Umbricht (Q91143227). TSventon (talk) 00:01, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

I translated Paul Trappen from the German Wikipedia, and it was a lot of work. I know a bit of German but I am not fluent, so I did a lot of running a sentence back and forth between German and English in Google Translate, changing phrasing a bit until the bidirectional translations were stable. Much of the German article cited no sources, so I had to remove statements or find sources for them. This was also a lot of work. I added another source too. Within hours of my posting the translation, a bunch of edits appeared in the German version to update it, so I assume my version was used for that. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 16:53, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Thanks a bunch TSventon.

Q1: Move to AfC - Yes.

Q2: Agree. The link went to a lengthy PDF, of which only one segment is relevant: the Summary Record of the Secretary-General's meeting on UNROD on 26 April 1972 (p1-7.) What I have no idea about is how to create a link that selects that portion, not to mention that I have had great problems with the way refs appear to be managed here - when I was inserting the in-lines, for instance, suddenly the sandbox mechanism started added a new (identical) references (i.e., the small [1] and [2]), with a new entry and number below every time I did that...??? I was able to get rid of it, but there is a lot of the UI I still don't understand.

Anyway, could you add that PDF as ref [3] below and at the same spot in line as the UNROD-related [1][2], perhaps with additional info stating something like (Secretary-General's meeting on UNROD on 26 April 1972 (p1-7.) ?

Q3: Links vs Templates - gladly leave that to you since I have no idea what the differences are and how they work differently.

Q4: "minimal analysis" - yes, that is something I want to stay away from for COI reasons, and it is not my expertise.

Q5: Discrepancies - Yes I saw that, and don't really have a better suggestion that yours, to assume Mr Schwane has a typo and rely on the NDB date of 1984.

Q6: Title = Victor Umbricht - I don't know the better choice, I stayed with the full name Victor Hermann Umbricht to stay close to the de.wiki entry.

Q7: Merged Wikidata - thanks - no idea what that does but fine with me. Cbumb (talk) 02:08, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

TSVenton,

on second thought (re Q5: discrepancies): I prefer leaving it as is, since that reflects the info on the de.wiki, fr.wiki, it.wiki. I haven't been able to find a "tie-breaking" other source, so I prefer leaving it consistent with those entries. I did find some correspondence between some Swiss official thanking a US/LA official for honoring Victor Umbricht with the LA award, and that was in 1987, so there is that. I will continue to look for more, but leave it for now. Cbumb (talk) 11:57, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

TSVenton,

re: Q5: Discrepancies: Found one in the NZZArchives (1/15/1987, p.34): https://zeitungsarchiv.nzz.ch/read/7395/7395/1987-01-15/35 Cbumb (talk) 15:12, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Cbumb hi again. Firstly please could you "ping" me when you want a response. You can do that by copying [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] from my signature, you also have to sign your post. That means I will see your queries sooner.

Q2 and Q3: I will deal with those in the next day or so and let you know if I have any problems.

Q5: discrepancies. English Wikipedia has a Verifiability [policy, which] means that articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources, such as reputable newspapers and scholarly journals. The quote is from Help:Introduction to policies and guidelines, I have added a couple of words in brackets. Therefore we should rely on what Schwane wrote in the published Historisches Lexikon der Schweiz, rather than what he (?) wrote in German Wikipedia, which is not a reliable published source. I am less familiar with the policies of German Wikipedia: they will be somewhat different, and will have developed since the article was written in 2008. Obviously even reliable sources occasionally make mistakes, but footnotes help readers evaluate the evidence. (As an academic, you will know that better than I do.)

Q5 again: I don't have access to the NZZ archive, please could you quote what it says?

Mentorship: I see that you have asked your "mentor" a couple of questions, hopefully they will respond soon. Wikipedia:Mentorship volunteers agree to answer questions, they don't check all your edits.

P.S. Congratulations you are now Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed. TSventon (talk) 16:12, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Thanks TSventon,

I will try to ping from now on - not sure when to put the "TSventon" - here goes a try.

I have a screenshot from the NZZ 1/15/1987-p.34 notice, not sure if it will work if I just paste it here, since I don't have a copyright.

Following the popup instruction, I copied it to "Screen_Shot_2026-03-30_at_12.19.09_PM.png (744 × 361 pixels, file size: 437 KB, MIME type: image/png)", no idea if this works, or if I am violating some rule. Cbumb (talk) 16:33, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Hi TSventon, did the "ping" work yesterday? Also, you mention "you also have to sign your post" - not sure what that means or how to do it (is this specifically for "pinging"?) - I assume everything I enter and "publish" or "reply" is signed?

ad Q2: What about the PDF (https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/639451391017922190-0560011973/original/WorldBankGroupArchivesFolder1771226.pdf) you removed with the suggestion of adding it as reference, which I think is a good idea, as it illustrates the Bangladesh engagement for the UN/Worldbank mission.

Problem: only one segment is relevant: the Summary Record of the Secretary-General's meeting on UNROD on 26 April 1972 (p1-7.), but I don't know how to selectively link that from the overall linked PDF doc. You can do a find in the browser ("Summary record of the Secretary-General's meeting on UNROD

on 26 April 1972) when you are on the PDF, but I don't know if the specific segment can be in the link.

Anyway, I believe this is soon ready to submit to the AfC? If so, how to I do that?

Thanks!

TSventon Cbumb (talk) 13:45, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

@Cbumb, thank you for the pings. The location of [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] doesn't matter, you can put it at the beginning. The thing about signing is that if you edit a conversation to add a link to a user without adding a signature, the ping doesn't work.

I have added the reference, I don't think that it is possible to link to a page in a PDF, but the reader can search for the title. I looked up Biharis in Bangladesh and it seems some are still stateless.

I have moved the article to Draft:Victor Hermann Umbricht. I think the article is ready for AfC, to submit it just click on the blue button near the top "Submit the draft for review!"

The 1987 NZZ clipping is probably a copyright violation, so it will be deleted shortly. You could add it as a reference by adapting <ref>{{cite news |title=Globales Engagement vor der Globalisierung |trans-title=Global Engagement Before Globalization |url=https://zeitungsarchiv.nzz.ch/read/127577/127577/2008-07-14/9 |work=Neue Zürcher Zeitung |date=14 July 2008 |language=de |url-access=subscription}}</ref>. TSventon (talk) 14:26, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

TSventon

Thanks TSVenton.

About the signing - probably doesn't matter, since you got the ping, but I still don't understand what you meant with "signing" - I never tried to "sign" anything - is that automatic?

Thanks for the PDF reference. Works as is, but it would be nice if I/you could added an additional "Search PDF for "UNROD" to locate" at the end of the reference, or something like that?

I don't want to mess up the reference block, and I don't know how to access {reflist}, which is all I see in the source editing mode. So I don't know how to do that.

As to the NZZ - the link to the PDF alone is not a copyright issue, right? Since wikipedia allows paywalled references (correct?), I think we can leave it as is?

Other than that, I believe I'm ready to submit? Cbumb (talk) 15:45, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Cbumb, yes, I think you are ready to submit. For the rest:

Signing is the process that adds your username and the time and date to your edit. I think it is automatic when you use the Wikipedia reply tool, in any case it is obviously working.

The way references in the article work is the code for the reference appears following the sentences it supports and is displayed as a superscript number where the code is located and as a reference with the same number where the code {{Reflist}} is located. So the code for reference 3 appears after the word "(UNROD)". I have added the note you suggested to reference 3.

Linking to the NZZ website is not a copyright violation. TSventon (talk) 17:08, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

TSventon

Thank you!

Not very happy with the available "Tags", but you can't create new ones I guess (like "UN" "ICRC" or "International Mediation"... Oh well.

Submitted.

Thanks again for your help.

chris Cbumb (talk) 17:31, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Cbumb it is good to see that the article is submitted. I would suggest checking to see if AfC have responded with queries, ideally weekly. If you add an email to your Wikipedia account, you can get email notifications if a message is posted to your talk page or to a Help:Watchlisted page, see Help:Email notification.

The tags on the talk page are "Wikiprojects", which are groups of people interested in editing articles related to a topic. Many projects are now inactive, for example I added Wikipedia:WikiProject United Nations, which seems to have been merged with Wikipedia:WikiProject International relations. Are you happy wit the article's categories? They do a similar job. TSventon (talk) 18:21, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

TSventon

Yes, I think your additional tags/categories are fine.

Re: email - I am getting emailed notices when you reply - is that different for the AfC? Cbumb (talk) 18:28, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Cbumb, I just wanted to check if you had set up email notifications, I didn't when I first started. I also recommend watchlisting Draft:Victor Hermann Umbricht.

Incidentally, would you be interested in providing an image for the page? It could be either fair use, just for English Wikipedia, once the article is published, or freely licensed, which could be used on any Wikipedia. TSventon (talk) 19:05, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

TSventon

It looks to me like the draft:VHU page is on my watchlist, although I didn't create the watchlist, as far as I know...

As to an image, sure, but I will have to root around to find one that is not from a publication/newspaper etc. Since I am in the US, I will have to ask my sisters who are still in Switzerland if they have something suitable. If so, assuming it is some family photo, what next? Take a iPhone picture and submit - where to?

Take care.

chris Cbumb (talk) 19:17, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

TSventon

Hi TSventon,

just added a portrait - just took an iPhoto picture of a family photo - is that what you had in mind? Cbumb (talk) 02:34, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Cbumb, I was going to suggest reading Wikipedia:Uploading images, but didn't get round to it.

I had a look at the photo on Commons, do you know who took the photo and when? I recommend reading c:Commons:Copyright rules. The copyright for a photo generally belongs to the photographer and so does the copyright of a photo of their photo.

If the photo is not suitable for Commons it could be uploaded to en Wikipedia as a fair use image once the page has been published as an article. TSventon (talk) 03:26, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Hi TSventon,

Impossible to know who the photographer was, this photo has been in the family > 50 years, most likely taken in his office by a CIBA-Geigy photographer for unknown reasons, perhaps just for my fathers personal use, no idea.

re: "If the photo is not suitable for Commons it could be uploaded to en Wikipedia as a fair use image once the page has been published as an article." Not clear what you are saying - doesn't that sound like a chicken and egg problem? How can we "publish the page as an article" if I can't add the photo to the article?

Thanks! Cbumb (talk) 03:42, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

TSventon

OK, I did a Google "Image search" and got only 1 hit for the Portrait Photo: https://referenceworks.brill.com/display/entries/HACO/A9789024731800-04.xml

This is from Victor Umbricht's own book: Principles of International Mediation The Case of the East African Community (Volume 187):

The Hague Academy Collected Courses Online / Recueil des cours de l'Académie de La Haye en ligne

Author:

Dr. Victor Umbricht.

No idea what that means as far as copyrights & fair use, etc. It does suggest that he arranged for this portrait himself.

Let me know what you think. Cbumb (talk) 15:51, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Cbumb, I was just typing a response.

If the photo was taken around 1970 it could still be in copyright in Switzerland until around 2070. (1970 plus remaining life of photographer say 50 years, plus 50 years.) Generally the photographer would hold the copyright, unless there was evidence that they transferred it, which presumably isn't available in this case. You could ask at c:Commons:Help desk as they are more expert. If you or your sisters have photos you took yourself, then your or they could upload them to Commons as own work. Wikipedia and Commons have to be serious about copyright and obviously most editors are not copyright experts.

To clarify what I said about fair use, the draft can be published as an article without an image, then the image can be uploaded with a fair use justification and added to the article. I found an example, File:AKM Nowsheruzzaman.png, if you click on the link you can see there is a "Media data and Non-free use rationale" below the image.

I see that your mentor has not answered your questions, that could be because they were rather long. You might do better with something like "A helpdesk advisor, TSventon, has advised me to add inline references for all the facts in my new draft, Draft:Victor Hermann Umbricht. Is that correct, it seems excessive?" You have done the work now, but if you are still curious you could ask the shorter question at the helpdesk or the Tea House and I promise not to answer "Yes, I was right, signed, TSventon." TSventon (talk) 16:00, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

TSventon

Thank you, that sounds doable. I'll try to do something along the lines of your example (can I still modify the copyright annotation in the existing photo upload, or start over?). I obviously don't know if I can replicate things like the boxes showing the use rationale in your link etc, but I'll give it a try.

I also just emailed the above Brill publishers "help desk" (

https://brill.com/page/resources_rights

) to ask if it is ok to use the photo or what the process to get permission looks like.

The family photos we have otherwise are not suitable, e.g vacations (in bathing suit) etc.

chris

Cbumb (talk) 16:20, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

TSventon

Addendum: As I suspected, this is not easy. I tried to edit the Image, adding:

"This photograph is copyrighted and is NOT under a free license. However, it is believed that the use of this work in the article "Victor Hermann Umbricht": to provide visual identification of one or more specific individual(s), where the individual(s) concerned are deceased, and for whom there is no known representation under a 'free' license, on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. See Wikipedia:Non-free content and Wikipedia:Copyrights."

and got:

An automated filter has identified this edit as potentially unconstructive, and it has been disallowed. If this edit is constructive, please report this error.

Unconstructive? Cbumb (talk) 16:36, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Cbumb, again I was typing a response.

I think you need to start again for fair use on Wikipedia, but the policy is that you need to wait until the draft is an article. You can use Wikipedia:File upload wizard and select "Upload a non-free file", then you will be asked questions that populate the "Media data and Non-free use rationale" box. That should work, but if it doesn't you could ask a new question here or at the Tea House.

I don't know what happened with your Commons edit, but the reason may be that Commons does not allow fair use of non-free images. "Unconstructive" is Wikipedia jargon for edits that are incorrect, either deliberately or mistakenly. TSventon (talk) 17:09, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

We can think about what to do if Brill is able to clarify who owns the copyright of the current image when it happens. TSventon (talk) 17:09, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Who can help me document a Wiki page for my father, Bill Goodall, jazz bassist, who played with Tommy Dorsey, Tony Bennett, Frank Sinatra, George Shearing, Marian McPartland, to name a few. He's in published books and recordings with lesser-known musicians Steve Jordan's book and records (Here comes Mr. Jordan with Billy Goodall), Billy Butterfield's records (Fat Cat Jazz), Charles Peterson's book (Swing Era New York). Goodall70 (talk) 19:20, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[]

You might want to ask at the Music WikiProject, and describe what sources you have with significant coverage of your father. 331dot (talk) 19:23, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[]

I don't see anything more than passing mentions, which isn't going to satisfy WP:BIO. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:16, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Your post was far too large, and possibly a copyright violation. Just tell the top three absolute best sources. 331dot (talk) 20:52, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[]

I was attempting to copy and paste an extensive list of all the albums my father has played on, I didn't realize it was a breach of protocol. In my first attempt at supplying the top three absolute best sources, the first one "Here comes Mr. Jordan with Billy Goodall" my father's name was removed, in fact there is no mention that he's even on the album. I have this album and a few others, as well as some books with Steve Jordan. When this is corrected, would this be one viable source? Goodall70 (talk) 15:58, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

We're looking for the kind of sources described at WP:42. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:26, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Goodall70, as you have made this appeal and have enabled email, what's very likely is that you will be contacted by a self-described experienced editor, senior editor, moderator, administrator, or other species of poohbah of Wikipedia, who'll offer assistance (for a price). Such assistance is unlikely to be competent, if it's delivered at all. Ignore it. -- Hoary (talk) 23:34, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Relevant guidance is at WP:SCAM. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:53, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Hii, my talk page addition of new topic for improving a section of contentious topic page has been removed and I do not know the reason for it. In my opinion I made genuine and non bias attempt to improve the page but it was removed with no reason. The contentious topic template says only extended confirmed users are allowed to make edits - I implied that this applies to the main page and not talk page itself, this is what I understood from the wordings atleast.

My section was removed from the talk by a non administrator, are extended confirmed users allowed to that?, I thought they could only comment. Why is talk page being treated as private room. In my past readings of talk pages generally talk pages don't revert stuff. They are striked out or hidden with a comment for same. It feels harsh this way.

Article Dhurandhar: The Revenge Talk Page section revert edit [1] `~ᴀɴᴋʀᴀᴊ ɢɪʀɪ🎇✨( C • Talk ) 16:24, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[]

It looks like someone already answered your question on your talk page. Do you have any questions that they didn't address? 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 (Ping me!) 16:31, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Nope, thank you. There should be way for everyone to atleast discuss ☹️ @JohnLaurens333 `~ᴀɴᴋʀᴀᴊ ɢɪʀɪ🎇✨( C • Talk ) 16:34, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Please see the note ('active arbitration remedies') at the top of the article talk page, and then read Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Due to extensive issues with disruption to the discussion by people clearly unfamiliar with how Wikipedia works attempting to argue their own opinions into the content (which isn't permitted - we base articles around published sources), we have unfortunately been obliged to restrict edits (other than simple uncontroversial requests for e.g. correction of typos) to contributors with more experience. This is clearly less than ideal, but the alternative can be so disruptive as to render actually fixing anything almost impossible. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:33, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[]

I understand that side of issues too, but it's easier to mass ban or purge comment than totally shut space for discussion, this is still my opinion and it seems current consensus is against that thinking. I think I received clarity, accept it with little sadness. `~ᴀɴᴋʀᴀᴊ ɢɪʀɪ🎇✨( C • Talk ) 16:37, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Unfortunately we can't have a rule, and then apply it selectively based on how valid we think the suggestion was. That would be too prone to bias, or at least allegations of bias. I wish there was a better solution, but then again I wish people could be a little more rational about what should be a simple article about a Bollywood movie, and not a stand-in arena for a debate about the influence of politics on Indian media, and a focus for the interminable India-Pakistan rivalry/conflict/tedium. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:46, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Agree with what you said! Poepple, Rationality, Internet are increasingly more toxic relationship. Hate (sometimes scared) to come on internet and post anything. Thank you, I won't chase 500/30 hope it happens someday on own 🙏. `~ᴀɴᴋʀᴀᴊ ɢɪʀɪ🎇✨( C • Talk ) 17:04, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[]

👁 Image
AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:14, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Merely continuing to edit in other areas of the encyclopaedia that aren't under extended-confirmed restrictions will let you get there eventually. Don't worry overmuch about it - contentious topics like that are probably the worst place for an editor to learn how to edit to begin with, since they're full of users who suffer no fools and are tetchy at best since the underlying topic is a bomb looking for a fuze. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:57, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

My page (with the above title) was published for public search/view for 15-years. Without any notification, my page was deleted from public view. I realize "citations" were needed, but I find the methodology too difficult to understand how I am to provide that information as well as correctly submit this for the administrators satisfaction. The nature of what I do can only be proven with links to the organizations I participate/membership (or have in the past). Those links were provided in my 1st drafts which DID appear on the original published page. Examples of those were: simple Google search of my name, link to ASCAP's ACE database, the RIAA awards I have received, the union (AF of M) I have belonged, the college I graduated from- Berklee College of Music, magazines articles about me. Since the creation of my page I have been inducted into the WV Music Hall of Fame. Please contact me at the email address on file to best instruct me on how to get my page published (undeleted). Thank you. Festerbunny (talk) 05:48, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

No, Festerbunny, you won't get a response by email unless perhaps it's from somebody offering to help you for a price. (Ignore any such "offer": it's most unlikely to result in a competent draft.) Please read WP:42 to see what would be needed for an article about you. If you would qualify, then I imagine that somebody other than yourself would eventually get around to creating an article about you. Incidentally, you seem to suggest that "[your] 1st drafts which DID appear on the original published page" might have been superior to later versions; however, at the end of the first day of its existence, the article told its readers for example: Barnhart wasted no time in infiltrating and familiarizing himself to club owners and managers as well as club promoters and doormen to eventually be on the A-list, and VIP memberships of some of the cities most coveted nightclubs. / This move was essential for networking with industry notables and procuring work. -- Hoary (talk) 06:55, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Your text was all either unsourced or sourced inappropriately, with the possible exception of the newspaper, which I am blocked from viewing. I'm surprised it lasted so long before it was deleted Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:39, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Hello, @Festerbunny.

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.

If there are not enough such independent reliable sources to base an article on, then Wikipedia should never have had an article about you in the first place; but we were less careful about this in the past.

The only way that an article about you could be published is if somebody showed that you met WP:NMUSICIAN - which still requires the multiple independent reliable sources to base the article on. ColinFine (talk) 10:05, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

If anyone contacts you about resuscitating the article, see WP:SCAM and don't fall for it. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 20:01, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

I see someone removed the bold from the names in the leads of a few pages I have done and said that this is because it's only done for redirects, but I'm confused because I was only following what I've seen done on basically every page I've ever seen, and some of them weren't redirects. Is this a very strict rule, or does it matter that much? For instance, this page doesn't say anything about a redirect at the top, Disappearance of Amanda Campbell, and it is using bold, Springfield Three, Ylenia Carrisi, etc., and many more. None of these that I can see are redirects, and they're doing the exact same thing with just the name of the person in bold in the lead. Unless the redirect is not obvious on these or I'm missing it, but I don't see anything about it, as it usually says at the top when a page is a redirect. Any clarity here would be great, thanks. ItsShandog (talk) 15:48, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

See MOS:BOLD. Without seeing the specific articles in question, it's hard to say whether bolding is appropriate, and there will always be edge cases. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:53, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Killing of Chloe Mitchell, Disappearance of Steven Cooper, these are the pages it was removed from and they're similar to the examples that I have sent. ItsShandog (talk) 15:56, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Also MOS:BOLD is saying "Boldface is often applied to the first occurrence of the article's title word or phrase in the lead." Would their name not be the title word or phrase? It is basically the focus of the whole page and I would argue the title word or phrase as the page is focused on them and their disappearance. ItsShandog (talk) 16:02, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Those are probably edge cases: the name isn't the full title of the article, and it's presumably the death/disappearance and surrounding events that are the focus, since these aren't biographies. If you think it's important, you can either discuss it on individual article pages, or maybe bring it up at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Remember though that bolding is never necessary to understand anything in this context: it's really nothing more than a typographical convention, and sometimes overused by contributors who mistakenly think it is some sort of requirement. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:12, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

@ItsShandog: MOS:BOLDALTNAMES says:

If an article is about an event involving a subject about which there is no main article, especially if the article is the target of a redirect, the subject should be in bold:

Azaria Chantel Loren Chamberlain (11 June – 17 August 1980) was an Australian baby girl who was killed by a dingo on the night of 17 August 1980... (Death of Azaria Chamberlain, redirected from Azaria Chamberlain)

So your examples should be bolded. If you make an edit which adds bold then you can say "per [[MOS:BOLDALTNAMES]]" in the edit summary. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:14, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Thank you! ItsShandog (talk) 16:26, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Hi @ItsShandog:, thanks for your message on my talk page which I will also reply to, but I have to say I disagree with this. The cases mention are not an application of MOS:BOLDALTNAMES, because the name of the affected individual is not a "significant alternative name" for the article about the killing. It is a redirect from a related topic, which is different. My opinion is that we emphatically should not bold the name of the person, per MOS:BOLDTITLE, which says "When the article title appears verbatim in the first sentence, it should be in bold. In articles where the article title does not appear verbatim in the first sentence, boldface is not used." These cases are neither the article title verbatim, not are they a significant alternative name, instead they are just part of a longer sentence detailing the fact that there was a killing/disappearance etc. Please let's leave them unbolded. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 20:07, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

@Amakuru: My above quote from MOS:BOLDALTNAMES is about exactly this situation. The example is Death of Azaria Chamberlain. The post to you was about Murder of Ashling Murphy, and Ashling Murphy redirects there. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:44, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

(Arriving from WT:MOS) @Amakuru: It's not an application of the first sentence of BOLDALTNAMES, but the later bit (quoted by PrimeHunter above) certainly applies here. Given that the Azaria Chamberlain example is explicitly included in the MoS as good practice, I can't see what's different in (in particular) the Chloe Mitchell or Steven Cooper examples above. In both cases I think the MoS says to bold. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 20:58, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Well, I guess that's in black-and-white then, but I am deeply surprised by that. That clause seems to completely contradict the sentiment behind the whole rest of the MOS:BOLDTITLE guideline. Why should such titles be exempt from the overall rule that we don't bold partial titles? In these cases, writing it that way gives undue prominence to parts of the overall subject of this article over others. The article isn't about Amanda Campbell it's about her disappearance, and frankly if you're going to bold one part of it then it would be preferable to bold all of it. Amanda Campbell disappeared is worse than Amanda Campbell disappeared IMHO.

Looking at this history of this carve-out, it has been around for a long time, since this 2013 edit, but was based on a discussion in which only the proposer and one other editor contributed. I would definitely !vote to nix that part of the guideline and stick to all non-bold if we were to discuss the matter now.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:37, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

@Amakuru: "Amanda Campbell disappeared" is the type of non-verbatim title MOS:BOLDTITLE says not to bold when the article title is Disappearance of Amanda Campbell. "Amanda Campbell" isn't a rephrasing of the article title so MOS:BOLDTITLE doesn't apply, not even the part which say not to bold, but something else like the followihg MOS:BOLDALTNAMES may apply. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:50, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Yeah, but it's in the same spirit as the non-bold rule. Don't bold the whole title, and also don't bold part of it. At Coventry City 2–2 Bristol City (1977) we don't bold Coventry City and Bristol City even though it could be said that the article is about those two things. And yes, I know that's a different case form an article with a direct redirect from the bolded topic, but the same principle applies. The lead should reflect the actual topic of the article, not some other topic that happens to redirect there because it isn't notable enough for its own article, and also happens to form part of the article title. The 2013 change was nonsensical and against the wider spirit of that guideline.  — Amakuru (talk) 00:08, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Yeah, but it's in the same spirit as the non-bold rule: as you allude, that's exactly why the exception is needed. The other key guideline is WP:BOLDREDIRECT: Terms that redirect to an article or section are commonly bolded when they appear in the first couple of paragraphs of the lead section. So the same principle doesn't apply -- the fat that it's a redirect is a crucial distinction. Removing the carve-out in MOS:BOLDALTNAMES wouldn't change the guidance, it would just make it less clear. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 06:21, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Comment faire pour accéder à wikipédia ~2026-19726-71 (talk) 16:17, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Bonjour. Si vous aimeriez, vous pouvez trouver le Wikipedia Français à fr.wikipedia.org. PolarClimates (talk) 17:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

As a heads up to the commentors, I've done exactly what was suggested for the FAQs on both Talk:Sambhaji and Talk:Shivaji and will also be reverting any new name-change requests on either talk page and WP:RFPP/E (which is also getting spammed with this) on discovery. I would not advise blocking any users who make such requests at present; they're all either TAs or otherwise throw-away accounts and blocking will do hardly anything based on history. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 15:19, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Hi Team. I am Mari Kim, myself in wikipedia. I have been trying to change my profile photo for so many years and it has been so difficult, I'd like to succeed it this time, Please. How can I change my profile photo? Artistmarikim (talk) 20:52, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

See WP:A photo of you for guidance. Athanelar (talk) 21:38, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

When sorting the list here List of Victoria Cross recipients by campaign by 'Dates', oldest first works fine, but when sorting newest first, the top two rows are 1879 then 1857–1859 (then 2013 etc..); can anyone have a look please? Or suggest anything I can try?. JeffUK 23:04, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

@JeffUK: You use VisualEditor where it may be hard or impossible to see what happens and change it. I fixed it in the source editor.[2] The whole column uses awful code to make the sorting but I'm not dealing with that mess and merely fixed the two rows by using the same bad system. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:34, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[]

...I thought to myself "I've got time, I bet I could spend it fixing that". Then I opened the editor. What. the actual. heck. (Might still see if I can spend time fixing it. But not until I've finished some other low-priority off-wiki task that I actually want to do, ha.) - Purplewowies (talk) 00:34, 31 March 2026 (UTC) Three hours later... Done! - Purplewowies (talk) 03:50, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Kudos, Purplewowies! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 13:03, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Thanks, I use both where appropriate, I looked at the code too and knew I didn't have a hope of even understanding it! JeffUK 14:25, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

👁 Image
 Courtesy link: Draft:Turkish Young Academy

Hi, I added a page about Turkish Young Academy of Science its a long time i couldn't get a respond. May i have information about process and when it would be added to wikipedia? Thanks OpenNote (talk) 07:06, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Your draft is submitted and pending. As noted at the top, it could take some time before it is reviewed, as this is a volunteer driven process. Please continue to be patient. 331dot (talk) 07:45, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Could someone add hat notes in the article J. J. McCarthy to James Joseph McCarthy, John Joseph McCarthy and Joseph J. McCarthy? The page is protected and I can't do it. ~2026-19998-19 (talk) 09:32, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Done. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:28, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Hi, could someone please move Giulio Gatti-Casazza to Giulio Gatti Casazza (without the hyphen)? This appears to be the correct form of the name (see also [3]). ~2026-19904-11 (talk) 11:13, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

The primary place to discuss this is at the article talk page: Talk:Giulio Gatti-Casazza. But doing a quick check, I note that all three references in the article are about "Gatti-Casazza", including the hyphen. Feline Hymnic (talk) 11:20, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Even the page you link to uses both forms. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:24, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Hello everyone, I'd like to write an article about current whale rescue efforts in Germany. A whale has been swimming in the Baltic Sea (outside its natural habitat) since the beginning of March, and since then it has been in the Media. He first became stranded nine days ago, was rescued, and has now become stranded four more times. It's a huge drama and media event; live streams are getting millions of views, it's dominating the news in Germany. He is also featured in international media, including BBC, CNN, Guardian, ... I'd really love to create an article about it; is it relevant enough? I'd say yes, since there's in-depth coverage. Unfortunately, the German Wikipedia doesn't see it as relevant, so I'd like to make an article Here. Sorry if I'm in the wrong section and thank you for your help! KatastrophenKommando (talk) 12:59, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

On English Wikipedia, the criterion is WP:Notability, which can be fulfilled by the requirements summarised at WP:42. If you have three sources good in all the respects detailed there, an article should be possible, and I'd be surprised if there weren't three or more such sources.

You've been here long enough to know about WP:Your first article and the WP:Article wizard, so I say – go for it! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 15:27, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Thank you! I'm looking forward to preparing the article later. :) Do you have any good name suggestions? I'm still quite unsure. Thanks! KatastrophenKommando (talk) 17:29, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Not offhand, but don't worry about it. When a reviewer accepts the Draft and moves it to a new title (without the "Draft:" prefix), it can be given any title you or they think better. For now, just use something relevant, however clunky. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 19:33, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Someone has vandalized the article entitled "Dear Jonas.". In the text of the letter from Donald Trump to the Prime Minister of Norway, they have added two short paragraphs threatening a "murder spree" against Iran with the help of Israel. These paragraphs were not part of Trump's original letter ~2026-20095-19 (talk) 15:49, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Fixed. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:53, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Why language links are now sorted by language code, rather than by native name of the language? For example, Finnish (Suomi) is now listed under F, rather than S, because its language code is fi. I think that the old version is better. --40bus (talk) 16:43, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

This is the English-language Wikipedia. Quite a large percentage of monolingual Anglophones (Google AI suggests 95%) will have no idea that what in English is called Finland is Suomi in its own main language, and would be confused by such an ordering.

(Of those (5%) who do, I bet many will have been stamp collectors at some point. I was, but in any case I have also visited Finland.)

So Suo mi. Clarityfiend (talk) 14:18, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I may have learned it at an Universala Kongreso de Esperanto. —Antonissimo (talk) 04:49, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

{The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 19:26, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

It had always been ordered by the native name of the language (romanized if not written in Latin alphabet) since I found that list many years ago. I looked the link to Finnish Wikipedia by searching "Suomi", under S. And I know native names of more languages than their language codes, so the ordering by native name should be the best option. And some languages have language codes not similar to English, e.g. Georgian ka and Irish ga so this new ordering does not always make it clear to English speakers. --40bus (talk) 19:32, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

I don't really like the change either. It seems to have been done in February (meta:Tech/News/2026/09), because the mw:Extension:InterwikiSorting was considered legacy code that no-one wanted to maintain anymore: phab:T253764. MKFI (talk) 19:51, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

"And I know native names of more languages than their language codes, so the ordering by native name should be the best option."

What you know, 40bus, may not be typical for the majority of users, but in any case the point is moot since that seems not to be the functional criterion used. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 09:26, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@40bus: So where, in your preferred sorting order, does 中文 go? Bazza 7 (talk) 11:34, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

中文 (Chinese, zh) would go under Z, as it is Zhongwen. Similarly, 日本語 (Japanese, ja) would go under N, as it is Nihongo, and 한국어 (Korean, ko) would go under H, as it is Han'gugeo. The links of languages wrotten in other scripts would be ordered by romanized native name. --40bus (talk) 15:46, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I just deleted something under G4 and salted it. By my count articles on that topic have been deleted something like 11 times since 2005 at 3 different titles. At least 4 of those 11 times were at AFD. Here's the thing - we should and do cover the topic, but coverage of the topic is spread out across several different articles instead of consolidated into one article. Covering it all in one article would be a violation of WP:SYNTH.

I'm tempted to make a page to go at the main title (the one that has gone through AFD 3 times). Sort of like a disambiguation page. But usually a disambiguation page is something like "XYZ can refer to XYZ book, XYZ movie, XYZ song, XYZ place . . ." What I'm thinking is more like, "You may have arrived at this page because you are looking for information about XYZ or ABC or QRS or LMNOP..."

Do we have pages like that? I don't think that's really a disambiguation page. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 19:44, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[]

Would a Category be of any use? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 09:22, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Hard to tell, given the lack of details, but Wikipedia:Broad-concept article may apply. Clarityfiend (talk) 14:24, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

yo i’m Ozzie, formerly "rave(Crowny)" my article thingy randomly got edited and reposted without any explanation ??? It got dragged into a debate (which eventually ended with the disagreement on article-status and was downgraded to a draft) like over five months ago .. i’m kind of confused why (SOMEONE!! i will not name) tried to do a bold move like this … but whatever pleases the soul and mind ig. Anyways, can someone help me? rave (talk) 00:37, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

On Wikipedia, users don't "own" any article or draft. (see WP:OWN) Material submitted to Wikipedia can be edited, used, and redistributed by anyone (if appropriate attribution is provided, see WP:ATTREQ). It looks like Veyhola decided to make some changes to the draft and publish it, presumably because they're confident the issues with it were resolved. You'd have to ask them about it. – Scyrme (talk) 00:56, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

ok, thanks. rave (talk) 21:40, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Special:Diff/1346472248

The source I'm using does not list specific authors names it only lists them as Britannica editors. How should I change the citation to make it better?

Thanks, Mc12354 (talk) 01:21, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Mc12354, |last=Editors |first=Britannica implies a writer whose first name is or was Britannica, born into a family with the unusual surname of Editors. Simply cut this. -- Hoary (talk) 02:16, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Requesting admin to restore blacklisted Draft:Joey Primiani. Jpblackofficial (talk) 01:44, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

It's not blacklisted; it's deleted in accordance with Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Joey Primiani. An editor could request undeletion at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Such a request would of course have to argued persuasively. That seems unlikely, so I'd suggest that you give up on Joey Primiani. -- Hoary (talk) 01:53, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

It actually is blacklisted, too. —Cryptic 02:18, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

It indeed is. I realized this less than a minute ago and was about to correct my misstatement, but you beat me to it. -- Hoary (talk) 02:21, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

WP:UPE? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:49, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

User:Pigsonthewing - It isn't UPE because it is autobiography. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:52, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Since when did WP:PAID exclude autobiography? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I don't think that Joey is paying Joey to write Joey's article. Joey might be though, I don't know Joey. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 08:30, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Special:Diff/1346502160

I need the help adding a citation to the article.

Thanks, Janak Bhatta (talk) 06:13, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

You say |website=https://www.onlinekhabar.com/ -- but "website" should specify the title of the website, not the URL of its top page (or any other page). Additionally, please read up on title=, script-title=, and trans-title=; all three are explained in Template:Cite web/doc. -- Hoary (talk) 06:37, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Hi! For April Fools, I'm thinking of filing a joke ANI against an alt made specifically for the joke. Would it be acceptable to make such a joke there (if properly tagged as humour). If not, is there a place a joke ANi would be allowed? QwertyForest (talk) 07:09, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

See WP:APRILFOOLS. Things that are added as jokes may not always be as funny as they seem to the person who posted them.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:10, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@QwertyForest I think that would be okay, as long as you're tagging it properly and you think the folks over at WP:ANI would find your bit funny. Making alts for such purposes is acceptable. If it doesn't go over well, then that's alright too; there's no punishment for having a joke not land.

Best of luck! (she/they) T - C - Em🐈ail me! 07:36, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

This is a bad idea. WP:FOOLS says "Posting jokes on the Noticeboards is not advisable." CodeTalker (talk) 23:40, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Irritable bowel Syndrome page Other Agents section. Edited in Source editor, and the following error message was displayed on the page; Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).====Other agents Re-edited the page with the correct reference. The section now shows the correct citation and it is visible in the references section. However the error message is still displaying. How can I remove the error message. Carol A Howell (talk) 14:08, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Look for the text string <ref></ref> and remove it.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:19, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Now done. Somebody probably just added it by mistake. Clarityfiend (talk) 14:22, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Thank you Carol A Howell (talk) 14:57, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

for school assembly on theme new beginning ~2026-20286-95 (talk) 14:11, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Hello, @~2026-20286-95.

I have no idea what that message means. Have you a request about using or editing Wikipedia? That is the only thing that this page is for. ColinFine (talk) 15:01, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

While doing WP:NPP I came across a lot of disambiguation pages with titles like 和徳, 和德, 昭二, 昭二 (disambiguation), 一秀, 嘉德, 國光. I think these probably go against WP:ENGLISHTITLE, and should be deleted as per this decision in December 2025: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/강동호 - although maybe there are good counter-arguments? Anyway, AfD says to use group nominations when several pages have the same potential reason for deletion. But how do you actually do a group AfD nomination? I usually use Twinkle to nominate from the individual article. Lijil (talk) 18:51, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I won't nominate these disambiguation pages for deletion as I found a deletion review explaining that it's fine: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2023 October 12#樂天 and there is in fact a whole Category:Disambiguation pages with Chinese character titles.

I'd still love to know how to nominate a group of articles for deletion though! Lijil (talk) 18:59, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@Lijil: See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#How to nominate multiple related articles. You can nominate the first with Twinkle. I don't think it has a feature for the others. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:01, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Thanks! Don't know how I missed that! Lijil (talk) 00:03, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

The rule of thumb here is whether the disambiguated term is ambiguous only in the foreign script - 一秀, for example, can be read as Isshu or Kazuhide in Japanese, Yixiu in Mandarin Chinese, or Il-soo in Korean, all four of which have articles in the English Wikipedia that would in isolation merit redirects from that title. The reason 강동호 was different is because (as I understand it; I don't speak Korean) that's always pronounced and romanized as Kang Dong-Ho. —Cryptic 00:34, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Who could I speak to on a very controversial subject and try to hold on the story. ~2026-39610-0 (talk) 23:07, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

We'd need to know more details. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 23:24, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Given the single topic of every one of this TA's reverted talk page edits, I have my suspicions about the subject, though it's true they haven't said that that's what this is about. - Purplewowies (talk) 00:50, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

If it is anything whatsoever to do with the material they have been posting, they clearly have a fundamental misunderstanding as to the purpose of Wikipedia. This is an online encyclopaedia, which bases article content on material from published reliable sources. Whatever information they have on anything else is of absolutely no relevance here. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:12, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

My son just turned pro and turned 18 on the 25th, so I think he can legally have a wiki page now, just wanted to make sure. I also wanted to know how I can create a page for him or have someone help create a page for him?

thank you ~2026-20318-54 (talk) 01:57, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Our ability to read minds does not exist, and as such we can't begin to consider researching sources, let alone writing an article based off of those sources, for such an article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 02:00, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

~2026-20318-54, you do not have to be 18 to have a Wikipedia page. Prince George of Wales had a Wikipedia article before he was born. Here is what the article looked like, when he still had a week to go. The Wikipedia page of Princess Charlotte of Wales was started eight months before she was born. But they were highly WP:Notable at birth, or earlier. When your son is notable, he can have a page, too. But someone else will have to write it, not you. Mathglot (talk) 03:23, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@20318, can I assume by a "wiki page" you mean a Wikipedia article? If you instead mean a Wikipedia account, then your son is more than welcome to create their own account and start editing.

It would help for you to give us more information on who exactly your son is, that they might be eligible to have a Wikipedia article about them. You mentioned your son "turned pro", is he an athlete of some sort?

In any case, I would advise you not to try to write an article about your own son, as it's a clear conflict of interest (see WP:COI). (she/they) Talk to me, I don't bite! - See my edits 04:38, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Hello, @~2026-20318-54, and welcome to the Teahouse.

It sounds from your question that you believe that somebody (such as a sports person) can "have a Wikipedia page", which will advance their career (you didn't say that last bit, but I'm guessing that that's your hope).

This is not how Wikipedia works. We talk informally about people "having" an article, but that is misleading. If your son meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability (which is mostly about what has been independently published about him, not about what he is or has done), then there could be an article about him. Such an article would not belong to you or him, would not be controlled by you or him, and would not necessarily say what you or he would want it to say. It should be almost entirely a summary of what those independent commentators had chosen to say about him.

And if he does not meet those criteria (which is probably the case, for an 18-year old, though there are exceptions) then no article about him will be accepted at present, whoever writes it.

My advice would be to forget about this. If he is or becomes notable in Wikipedia's sense, then probably somebody will eventually write an article about him.

But if you decide to press on with this: My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 17:29, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Are redirects like Werner Hoffmann (pilot born 1920) to List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross recipients (Hn–Hz) wanted, and if so, are such people then to be added to disambiguation & family name pages? --KnightMove (talk) 03:06, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@KnightMove It depends on if the subject would be notable enough for their own article.

If the subject would be considered notable, it's better to have a red link than a redirect to encourage article creation, and so the redirect should be deleted. I will note that the redirect you're talking about used to be an article, but an editor blanked and redirected (WP:BLAR) the page to its current target in 2017 because they think the subject failed notability; check the redirect's talk page. If you contest that, then restoring the redirect to an article would probably be better than deleting it.

If the subject would not be considered notable, then yes, the redirect should exist so that other parts of the encyclopedia have something to link to. However, in that case the link to the redirect at that list should probably be plain text instead of a link, per WP:SELFRED, or depending on the sort of list, the list entry should be removed. I'm not too familiar with inclusion standards for lists, so I don't know which of those two would be more appropriate. (she/they) Talk to me, I don't bite! - See my edits 04:29, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

KnightMove, I disagree with MEN_KISSING on this one: It is better to have a redirect, and to include {{Redirect with possibilities}} as one of the Rcats on the redirect page.

Secondly, which Werner Hoffmman does the redirect even refer to?

One of them is linked, but how do we know that's the right one? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 07:44, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I believe they mean the second one, which in the list is linked to the mentioned redirect. That table is going off of my screen, what the heck!

I suggested that (if the subject is notable) the redirect could be deleted, because redirects that don't have much coverage at their target and could be expanded into an article are frequently deleted at WP:RfD, per WP:RETURNTORED. Although, it's possible that the list entry is enough substance to prefer redirecting there instead of having a redlink. (she/they) Talk to me, I don't bite! - See my edits 07:59, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

MEN_KISSING, ah, I see. Well, I guess it depends how one reads #10: ...and the target article contains virtually no information. One row in the table may or may not fit that description. In these cases, I try to wear my reader hat and not my editor hat. The reader wants to know *something, anything!* about the guy, so that argues for keeping the redirect. My editor hat wants to know there is no article, so that argues for a red link. But—this editor uses a user script, so I *still* know it's a redirect, because it has a different color, voilà! (And because I like to go the extra mile, I even have a trick so I know not only that it's a redirect, but a redirect with possibilities. 👁 Image
) Seems like a coin flip, or which hat you are wearing, though. You should maybe get the script. Mathglot (talk) 08:12, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

below is the error message that occurs when searching or following link to J H Stead page. I'm not technically literate, would aomeone be able to advise what does it mean and can it be repaired. TIA, Rich.

[ee413b0d-7e14-4b01-8016-4b37b7a4b0ff] 2026-04-02 11:45:42: Fatal exception of type "Wikibase\DataModel\Services\Lookup\EntityLookupException" FFS7thGo (talk) 11:49, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@FFS7thGo: J. H. Stead currently works for me but Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Intermittent database access errors shows some server problems today. Try again. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:03, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Hi there, when I go to save pages I get the error "internal_api_error_DBConnectionError" anywhere between 0 and 2 times, and this has happened since this morning. When using AFCHelperBot it tries to save the talk page message notifying the decision and fails, which could lead to someone being improperly notified of a decision. Any help or guidance would be greatly appreciated. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 12:43, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

P.S. when saving this page I got "[21bfadbb-f915-433f-94c4-fae0e4cd3758] Caught exception of type Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBConnectionError" twice JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 12:43, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

As @PrimeHunter mentioned above, Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Intermittent_database_access_errors suggests this is an ongoing problem. Madam Fatal (talk) 15:16, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

...but hopefully short-term. Try again in a few hours. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:55, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I'm confused about this website and need your help. I was trying to send a message to actor Michael York. Somehow I thought he could be reached through your website. Is this possible on this site? I thought I was doing the right thing but now I'm not sure. Thank you for your help. DonaldDeMaio (talk) 18:30, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

This is an online encyclopaedia, not a means of communication with the subjects of articles. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:39, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Many of our articles, particularly ones about companies, include email or website addresses for their subjects, often in the Infoboxes usually found at the top right of the article.

It happens that Michael York's article infobox contains a website address. You might be able to contact him (likely indirectly, via an agent or other associate), using that, but you would not be doing so 'through' Wikipedia. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 23:15, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Unfortunately the linked website seems to have been usurped. TSventon (talk) 23:20, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

This claims to be "the official [Facebook] page of Actor [sic] Michael York". Whether or not it is is beyond my expertise. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:48, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I am a pro wrestler and in the past helped another pro wrestler i know personally fix the incorrect info on her page that stated she was married when she is not. I got asked to help by her because she’s not good with computers. After i fixed it she asked me if i could change the profile pic to one she provided. I tired to do that last time and it turned into a whole issue. She contacted me again today with the same request because someone keeps putting up an “ugly” pic of her as she puts it. Last time the issue was with incorrect info with the licensing. Even though she has permission from the photographer to use it where ever i’m not sure what the correct info i need to provide that i need to add. Can someone please show me an example of what is needed so i can provide it? Thank you for any help! Mikeywhatnow (talk) 22:05, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@Mikeywhatnow: Her having the permission is meaningless as she isn't the one hosting the image. Show her WP:Donating copyrighted materials and tell her the photographer is the one who would have to follow the instructions on that page. (If it isn't the photographer - i.e. the photo was a work-for-hire - then whoever holds the copyright would need to.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 22:11, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@Mikeywhatnow You might also want to have her read through WP:A photo of you which has guidance on how article subjects can provide us with photos of them. Athanelar (talk) 23:44, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Hello, I am in the middle of editing an article and thought I could continue to do so by moving it from my user/sandbox page to draft mode. I never intended to submit the article for review, yet somehow this happened on accident. I've read and followed instructions on how to move the article back to my user/sandbox page. Is this possible? I don't see it yet and don't know if it takes time for this to be approved/appear or if I'm unable to do so. I just want to keep editing it, but privately. Thank you for your help! Lally MM (talk) 02:22, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@Lally MM: Your latest move was to User:Lally MM/sandbox/Husam M. Alshareef draft. That's allowed but I have moved it to User:Lally MM/sandbox which is apparently what you want. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:07, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Maqluba (Malta)

first link geology i a porn link

sadly on a very good entry ~2026-20709-68 (talk) 09:42, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Good find. I've removed both uses of the usurped link. Athanelar (talk) 09:53, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@Athanelar Here's an archive:[4]. Not sure how we cite this without including the original link. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:56, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I guess we could just include the archive url as the original URL; I would probably advise against including the link at all, though, since someone may well remove the archive link at the start to try to see the original site and get jumpscared by the Russian porn site. Athanelar (talk) 09:59, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Oops, I already included the archive URL as the original URL. CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 10:13, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I think I handled them all: six articles contribs. (I outright removed it only from Lake Bermudez; feel free to put the proper |archive-url=.) — DVRTed (Talk) 10:17, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Made an edit per WP:USURPURL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:21, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

How do I change billing method? Jsgeology (talk) 14:49, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

This is the help desk for the English-language Wikipedia. Since we do not bill anyone for anything, I have to assume you are asking your question in the wrong place. I suggest you direct your question to whoever is sending you the bills. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:51, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

If you are referring to donations to the Wikimedia Foundation, you will need to direct your inquiry to them directly; you may email donate@wikimedia.org 331dot (talk) 14:58, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I've created the page Category:21st-century Mexican ceramists (my first time creating a category) and I'm not sure I've done the parent categories correctly. The new category is not appearing as a subcategory on the pages for the parent categories. Feedback please? Thanks much. Monkeysoap (talk) 17:21, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Looks right to me, @Monkeysoap. You probably didn't wait for the parent categories to be updated. ColinFine (talk) 17:34, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

(edit conflict) Monkeysoap and ColinFine the coding error was adding colons to the categories. [[:Category:Mexican ceramists]] adds a link to the category, while [[Category:Mexican ceramists]] adds the page to the category. Generally, when I create a category, I try to copy the code from an existing category and adapt as needed. The text at Category:20th-century Mexican ceramists was {{Ceramists by nationality and century category header}}, so I copied that and it seemed to work. TSventon (talk) 17:39, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@Monkeysoap: You used VisualEditor which has its own way of doing things. If you try to write wikitext then it often wants to display the wikitext instead of adding it as code. Click the menu icon ≡ in VisualEditor and select "Categories". But if you edit a category page then it's often best to look for a similar category and use the source editor to adapt the code. In this case it didn't even need adaptation but could be copied directly. {{Ceramists by nationality and century category header}} automatically gets the information it needs from the page name. Click a pencil icon at the top right to switch between VisualEditor and the source editor. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:29, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

What's the easiest way to find check an article for outgoing wikilinks to disambiguation pages? (I am overhauling Hyperoctahedral group and see that one of my edits was tagged as adding a disambiguation link; I would like to find it, and any others that lurk.) --JBL (talk) 18:30, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

It does not work when you are currently editing the page, but at a glance (or before switching to edit modes) User:Anomie/linkclassifier script and stylesheet combined make disambiguation pages obvious by highlighting them with yellow. -- Reconrabbit 19:05, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@JayBeeEll, @Reconrabbit: I use my account Preferences to display all links to disambiguation pages in orange; it's under Appearances in the Gadgets section. Bazza 7 (talk) 19:12, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Lovely, thank you both! --JBL (talk) 21:46, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I need help because my Rainbow Six account is disabled and I can't play ranked matches. ~2026-20761-22 (talk) 22:42, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Sorry, this is not a general help desk for the entire internet, just Wikipedia. I suggest you find a forum specifically for Rainbow Six. 331dot (talk) 22:46, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I’ve inputted <span> style="color:#ffb6c1"-[[User:Coolgurl5555 | coolgurl5555]] 🩷 ([[User Talk:Coolgurl5555|talk]])([[user:Coolgurl5555/Guestbook|sign]])</span> <span> style="color:#bf73ea"(she/her)</span> with the intention of colour my pronouns differently from the rest of my signature. But, as you can see from my signature below, something’s very wrong. style="color:#ffb6c1"- coolgurl5555 🩷 (talk)(sign) style="color:#bf73ea"(she/her) 23:33, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

<span style="color:#ffb6c1">-[[User:Coolgurl5555 | coolgurl5555]] 🩷 ([[User Talk:Coolgurl5555|talk]])([[user:Coolgurl5555/Guestbook|sign]])</span> <span style="color:#bf73ea">(she/her)</span>

- coolgurl5555 🩷 (talk)(sign) (she/her)

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:51, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Thank you! style="color:#ffb6c1"- coolgurl5555 🩷 (talk)(sign) style="color:#bf73ea"(she/her) 00:11, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Okay now a further question. How do I colour the links the same? - coolgurl5555 🩷 (talk)(sign) (she/her) 00:18, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

As Trappist the monk has shown, the style= should be inside the span tag, not just next to it. -- Reconrabbit 00:00, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Thank you style="color:#ffb6c1"- coolgurl5555 🩷 (talk)(sign) style="color:#bf73ea"(she/her) 00:12, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@Coolgurl5555: Hi! See Wikipedia:Signatures § Treat as wiki markup. There are a few things wrong with your markup:

Current: <span> style="color:#bf73ea"(she/her)</span>
Fixed: <span style="color:#bf73ea">(she/her)</span>
You're immediately closing the span tag (with >), so the inline CSS aren't being applied. 

Current: <span> style="color:#ffb6c1"-[[User:Coolgurl5555 | coolgurl5555]]
Fixed: -[[User:Coolgurl5555 |<span style="color:#ffb6c1">coolgurl5555</span>]]
You need an element with inline CSS inside the wikilink to override the "color" property that's applied to all <a> elements

Here's the final code with all that fixed (note: I only colored your username and pronouns, so it doesn't go over the 255-character limit for custom sig):

-[[User:Coolgurl5555|<span style="color:#ffb6c1">coolgurl5555</span>]] 🩷 ([[User Talk:Coolgurl5555|talk]])([[user:Coolgurl5555/Guestbook|sign]])</span> <span style="color:#bf73ea">(she/her)</span>

that renders as:

-coolgurl5555 🩷 (talk)(sign) (she/her). You definitely should pick another color for better contrast (see this). — DVRTed (Talk) 00:15, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

If I am looking for in the log of a noticeboard such as WP:ANI or WP:ANEW for an incident that occurred on a particular date, what is the simplest way to get to the right indexed archive of a board that has hundreds of pages of archives? Maybe I ought to know this as an experienced editor, but I don't. Maybe I knew some years ago and have forgotten, just like higher math.

That is, what is the quickest way to find the archive for WP:ANI or WP:ANEW for, say, 23 June 2023? Robert McClenon (talk) 23:49, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[]

The first thing I thought of was to type in "23 June 2023" to the "Search noticeboard archives" on the main page for ANI. This gave me the result of IncidentArchive1132 pretty fast. I don't know how you would do it for ANEW though, since looking for pages prefixed with a forward slash doesn't seem to work. -- Reconrabbit 00:05, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@Robert McClenon: I don't know which problem Reconrabbit refers to. The search on "23 June 2023" includes Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive469. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:11, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

For some reason I thought the 3rr archive was under /Edit warring, that's where I went wrong. -- Reconrabbit 01:42, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Well, that date was random, not one of the dates I am looking for. But the answer is simply to search for the date. There will always be a hit for ANI archives, and almost always for ANEW. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:41, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

First, where is the documentation for the Search feature? Second, if I want to search an archive for entries with both of two strings, is the AND operator recognized, or is there some other way to do an AND search? Robert McClenon (talk) 03:41, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

In plain text, Help:Searching; actual documentation is somewhere around mw:Help:CirrusSearch. Within the former page, H:BOOLEAN implies that all searches are implicitly done with every term connected by AND unless stated otherwise (OR, NOT...) If you go to Template:Administrators' noticeboard archives/Search and type in Baby Globe to the Incidents search bar, you'll get back every page in the Incidents archive that includes both the words Baby and Globe. -- Reconrabbit 03:50, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I can't remember or discover the name of the template that asks for editing help on an article. I just added a note to Talk:Ohio_State_University_abuse_scandal but I didn't know how to draw editor help there. Thanks. David10244 (talk) 01:01, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

{{Help me}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:48, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Hello,

I was looking at the Wikipedia page for the village of Acme, and noticed that the climate data is from the 1961-1990 data range (dead link but citation info). For Acme specifically, more recent climate data is not avalible, but when it is for other areas, should it be used? Is there a specific reason 1961-1990 is used?

Many Thanks
Napets007 05:06, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Aren't you 3 days late with this query? {The poster formerly known as 87.981.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 14:48, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Hello,

I'm not sure what you mean, can you please elaborate?

Napets007 02:37, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Is there any guidance in the Manual of Style that says royal styles/titles etc such as "His Majesty", "Her Majesty", or "His Royal Highness" should be italicised? I've seen italics used on various royal pages for these, but I can't find anything in MOS:ITALIC that supports doing so, so I'm wondering whether I'm looking in the wrong place. ItsShandog (talk) 07:49, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I can't imagine why those should be italicized (or even italicised). I've never seen it in the "real world", so why should it be adopted here? Clarityfiend (talk) 09:41, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I was wondering about that. I've seen it on so many royal pages that I assumed it was the norm, but I wasn't sure why. I think editors are doing it to separate the title from the rest of the sentence so it doesn't blend in, but I always thought titles should either be quoted or just integrated into the sentence. So I wasn't sure what the correct approach was when editing them. ItsShandog (talk) 09:56, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Could you bring up a couple examples of this happening? -- D'n'B-📞 -- 10:06, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Yes, if you look at Queen Victoria's page in the titles section at the bottom, "Her Royal Highness" is in italics, and on the Queen Mother's page, if you look in the marriage section, that is also in italics. ItsShandog (talk) 11:08, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

More examples are: Prince Albert, Princess Helena of the United Kingdom, Princess Louise, Duchess of Argyll in the titles section's. ItsShandog (talk) 11:13, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@ItsShandog: That's likely covered by MOS:WORDSASWORDS. Bazza 7 (talk) 12:03, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Yes, please post an example link from the beginning another time so we know what the post is about. Our edit notice also asks for it twice. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:39, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

I'll make sure to do that next time — my apologies. I'm still a bit confused about the MOS:WORDSAWORDS point, though. Does the guideline the previous editor mentioned actually apply here? I've read it, but I'm not sure whether it's relevant in this situation. ItsShandog (talk) 19:44, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

It sounds relevant to me. I suppose it could be discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Royalty and Nobility. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:04, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

@ItsShandog: I suggested that because the text is discussing the application of those words for a specific purpose. It's similar to, for example, writing that the name for a medical expert is doctor. If you really don't like the styling, then use double quotes, although I think they add clutter. Bazza 7 (talk) 21:49, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Hey, I'm finding vandalism very hard to spot on Special:RecentChanges. I have to wait until I can hit 'refresh' again, and usually nothing is vandalism. Is there an easier way to do this? As lately I am using Twinkle a lot. Thanks. Fijimeddars (talk) 12:26, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Isn't the absence of vandalism a good thing? AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:31, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

Of course, I was just asking if there was an easier way to spot vandalism. Fijimeddars (talk) 12:33, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[]

In the search filters, you can set it to only flag edits that are likely problematic, very likely problematic etc. Play around with those until you find a balance you like. Athanelar (talk) 01:30, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[]