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.
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.
Seeking Deleted Article and Talkpage
Hello, I am looking for a place where I can find deleted articles from Wikipedia as well as the discussion that surrounds why they were deleted. Specifically, I'm looking for the Wikipedia article associated with Leon Feingold. I heard that it was deleted from Wikipedia by Leon himself and he mentioned that he had written to the help desk before asking about why it was deleted and how to restore it. He said that at the time he had received a response that indicated that he was unable to undo the deletion himself and that somebody else needed to do it, possibly because trying to restore one's own article could be seen as a conflict of interest (COI).
The now deprecated URL of the article is en.wikipedia.org/key/Leon_Feingold, and it can be accessed via the Wayback Machine.
I was wondering if I could see the talk or the discussion about the article and why it was deleted. It definitely is on the WayBack Machine and can be accessed quite easily. Wondering if it's possible to restore and if not why it's not possible to restore.
This is more of a public service advisory than a question but it may pop up as an issue in questions you answer.
Be careful when using Google Chrome mobile (not sure if it applies to desktop) as the autotranslate feature can deceive you. For selected languages (I don't know how I accidentally selected them, but it included German, French and some others) the browser automatically translates without a prompt.
This can be an issue when visiting interwiki links on Wikipedia. For example I had a situation where I needed to analyse the accent used on the letter in a person's name but when a clicked on the "in other languages" button and visited the French Wikipedia article Chrome stripped all the accents in the title when it automatically translated. Very confusing for me.
To disable automatic translation in Chrome mobile open a new tab and then go to Settings > Languages > Advanced > Automatically translate these languages > Select each language and remove it.
I would like to say that Auto Translate is also in the Desktop version of Google Chrome. You can access the setting on desktop by clicking Settings then Languages. User PageTalkContributions Sheriff U3 22:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article draft
Hello! I am Kartik. I recently created an article of Srikant Dwivedi but it shows that it is Draft. Even after I published the article, I am not able to find the article anywhere on Wikipedia . Please help me with this. I spent almost 4-5 hours creating that article for my favourite person. Please help me ๐ KartikxShivyaSri (talk) 08:39, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the appropriate information to allow you to submit the draft. "Publish changes" should be understood to mean "save", it does not mean "publish this to the encyclopedia". New accounts cannot directly create articles.
You seem to have a connection to this person beyond them being your favorite, you took a picture of them and they posed for you. Please clarify. 331dot (talk) 08:43, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that your draft, if you were to submit it, is likely to be declined, as IMDB is not an acceptable source(it is user-editable with little editorial oversight). The other sources seem to not be signficant coverage. 331dot (talk) 08:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Contributions feedback
I'm looking at my past contributions and want to know what the +100, -100 things mean. The + numbers are green and the - numbers are red. I'd attach a screenshot but don't know how / if I can on Web Mobile. ChronicDumbass (talk) 14:04, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
KilimAnnejaro, since the reference for the previous height was a named reference, defined at the instance where you removed it for the newer source, the reference information had to be copied into one of any of the other references named "NGS" so the software would know how to display it. I did this here, adding your source's source in the same edit.I misunderstood your sequence of edits, which I apoloยญgised for in a second diff formatting an unrelated citation.In practice, people overwrite named reference definitions frequently enough that User:AnomieBOT performs the OrphanReferenceFixer task to rescue them from previous revisions. By far the best practice is to do this bit yourself. Folly Mox (talk) 18:19, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing this out. I updated Ken Eberts with his death date of August 14, 2024 and added a reference. The reason that the article hadn't been updated is that Wikipedia is a volunteer project with over 6.9 million articles and no volunteer got around to this update until now. Cullen328 (talk) 17:46, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On the editor stats page, under the timecard is the option to use local time instead of the UTC default. It doesn't seem to change anything when ticked though; has it been discontinued or is it just a browser thing my end? SerialNumber5412916:09, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, you must be on FireMox. I'm on Firefox ย :) thanks for the pics. I don't understand this at all, tbh. Literally the check button is 'dead'. Non-responsive. Bizarre. SerialNumber5412919:54, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It certainly sounds like a browser issue. I think even html / css that disables tickboxes will grey them out rather than leaving them unselectable with normal styling. I suppose if you're able to replicate in a different browser / on a different device, then a report to VPT might be in order. Folly Mox (talk) 21:37, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ย Courtesy link:ย User talk:Bkonrad ยงย West LondonI don't view the comment as objectionable. People revert each other all the time, which is no big deal. If someone reverts your edit and explains the problems with it, correcting the problems and retrying is usually an option, or discussion on the talkpage per WP:BRD. Reverting the revert then showing up at someone's usertalk all I may have been wrong but that doesn't mean you get to revert my edit because i said the wrong thing seems less polite than the response. Folly Mox (talk) 21:52, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Size5football, I read that bit differently: I understand it to mean nonsense; i.e. :wikt:bollocks ยงย Noun sense 2, rather than 3.I do understand now why you felt the comment was so rude. It's certainly direct, but I'm not seeing a personal attack there.On the substance of the matter under discussion in the talkpage thread, it is true that a hatnote stating "West London" redirects here at the top of the article West London is incorrect, and a bit confusing: it seems like the kind of thing that would be left around in error following an article title change.In any case, it looks like an uninvolved editor has incorporated the link to West End of London you've been wanting to include, using a more accurate hatnote template, so hopefully the reversions can stop with all involved satisfied about the outcome. Folly Mox (talk) 13:47, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The statement I may have been wrong but that doesn't mean you get to revert my edit because i said the wrong thing. is ... untrue / rubbish / not how Wikipedia works; the editor whose correct reversion was reverted just expressed it a little more forcefully. No attack on the editor, just a comment on the statement. PamD17:42, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The page on The Region Palestine has been heavily altered with information both added and removed this is not right and is misleading
several paragraphs on the region of Palestine have been removed completely while others have been altered to create a Jewish presence on the land and not an Arab/Muslim presence. The page was altered to say that Judaism existed since the beginning and this is not true, there was a renaming of the west bank which is against international law, and there was a clear effort to distort history, and rewrite it fit a narrative, and for the sake of history this cannot be allowed. 186.45.212.244 (talk) 21:27, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, only users with accounts that are 30 days old with 500 edits are permitted to discuss anything related to the Israeli-Arab/Palestinian conflict, due to special rules in place. I will post these on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 21:36, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
IP Address
Hello Wikipedia, i edited on wikipedia page called Fall of Constantinople, and i didnt even ralize that i was logged out, so i got my IP address leaked, please remove it. Nikolaass31 (talk) 23:52, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to write an article "College Hockey Bluebloods" and it was pushed back to me to make further edits but I can't find it yet. Can someone help me find it? Jackmar1 (talk) 02:17, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I recently have been editing the List of campus radio stations, which covers multiple countries. The United States section has grown to dominate the listing by at least a 4:1 ratio and could possibly grow another 50 percent. For this and other reasons, I believe the section warrants its own page, as is the case with the List of campus radio stations in Canada (a much smaller listing). Using the Talk page, I have alerted the most active editors to the possibility and only one has responded, expressing their support. Hence, I would like to proceed with WP:Splitting. Originally, I thought this would entail a simple procedure, but after reading through the main topics and help pages on the subject, I'm stymied. Is there admin or other assistance available for doing this? BTW, I also would like to use a slightly different name for the new page: List of college radio stations in the United States. Allreet (talk) 02:53, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wonderful! I read this procedure before, and because some concepts are relatively new to me in terms of hands-on, the "headspinning" got in the way. With your assurance, I believe I can get over that. I'll follow the step-by-step as necessary and do the best I can. If I have any doubts about the end result, I'll ping you here. Many thanks. Allreet (talk) 15:36, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pointer needed to guideline regarding adhering to established terminology and characterisation
Hello, after spending some time browsing and searching, I figured I'd better ask an expert who can point me to the editing guideline, or MoS article, which states that text of WP articles should adhere to established or universally adopted terminology and characterisation and avoid deviating from it or inventing something new.
I'm learning how to use Inkscape, so I figured I would practice on some WP images that have been flagged for vectorization. Vectorification? Anyway, this file seemed like an easy enough one to start with. I've created the SVG and am ready to upload. The instructions strongly imply that I should "improve" the file here first, then move to Commons. But when I go to "upload a new version of this file", I am stymied because it won't let me change the file type (or even the file name, which is also not great). So... what exactly am I supposed to do? And, thinking about this further, the current image looks like crap because it was shrunk as a non-free image. Well, that's great but my SVG could be expanded to the size of a billboard. So, which is it? Is it a non-free image that should be kept tiny and used under fair use - or should it be converted to a vector so it can be scaled up infinitely? Matt Deres (talk) 14:34, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Matt Deres If you now have a good .svg for that file, I'd be inclined to upload it to Commons via the Wizard, giving it a suitable name with file extension .svg. The existing file is a .gif and can't be renamed as an .svg. Once you have placed your new file into Cincinnati Celts, that old .gif can be marked for deletion on en:Wikipedia, as we don't need it any more. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:59, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be inclined to do that as well, but I stupidly did the work before realizing that the file had been flagged as being fair use - Commons doesn't accept fair use images. I made the new file myself, but if the image is copyrighted, I don't have the authority to release it. Like, this is also an SVG file, but it's flagged as being copyrighted and so is not suitable for Commons. Don't get me wrong; I doubt anyone is going to come hunting down WP for infringement of a logo for a sports team that was defunct a century ago, but I want to do the right thing as well. Matt Deres (talk) 21:17, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But the Image page uses {{PD-textlogo}}, which says that for reasons of simplicity, it cannot be copyright, and so is in the public domain. This means that you can upload it into Commons with the same justification. ColinFine (talk) 22:12, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article from si.wikipedia.org si:เถเถซเทเถงเทเถฑ เถธเทเท เทเทเถฏเทโเถบเทเถฝเถบ, a school, looks more like a school website page rather than a wiki article. If this page was to be in the english wikipeia, what would be the changes done to this article? As in what will be removed based on what criteria and such. No guidlines regarding these exist on the si.wikipedia, so im trying to bring it upto en.wikipedia standards. Pls help VihirLak007/duh.20:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm having trouble getting the page translated, but the list of subjects, the school song, and the vision/mission would all likely be removed from EN.wiki. The alumni would all need either a valid wiki-link or a reference to support notability. Matt Deres (talk) 21:27, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sice you dont want to help, thanks for the response and references you made. Leave it like that i dont have time to deal with a redirection for years. Leutrim.P (talk) 23:15, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
After looking at your talk page I noticed that you appear to have a great interest in anything Kosovo. And while it is great that you like your country, you need to remember that Wikipedia is only interested in information that can be found in reliable sources.
The three categories that you are talking about have been recommended for speed deletion. So I don't think that it would be wise to rename categories as they are being deleted. I would first deal with the speedy deletion before thinking about the renaming.
And as far as the NATO related request, just be cause they did not bomb all of balkans does not mean that they bombed it. It would be like saying Nazi Germany did not get bombed, cause not every inch of the land had a bomb land there. Do you see?
Actualy im totaly blind, where is the topic about reliability , i cant see it? can you?
If no one wats to help fix them, its totaly fine, i understand it.
Your vision is totaly unbased in this case, that redirection leads to the bombing of RF Yugoslavia (serbia and montenegro) which it doesnt have the whole big territory it had before 1990, so in this case you dont have a point, its a fraction of balkans only one country, so you cant pretend it bombed Europe if it bombed, Belgrade. You could say "Nato bombings in europe" not bombing of europe. It should be first lingualy correct, so it can be politically correct later.
I am an administrator in Albanian Wiki and contributions in there were related in similar topics in here, thats why. I have a big list of things to do and didnt have enough time to make good articles here, which i might do in the future. I dont think there is anything wrong in writing about Kosovo, Abkhazia or even Australia. Everyone can find a place in their best field where are better prepared for. Ex. Im not so good in physics.. Leutrim.P (talk) 23:29, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You maybe an admin on a different wiki, but when you are on the English Wikipedia you need to follow the rules here.
Looking at some of your previous replies you appear to not be willing to follow the correct process. If you are unwilling to follow the correct channels you will not get very far without issues. And the editor that responded is trying to help, by telling you the correct way to do it. The Nazi Germany bombing was an example. You also have to remember that we don't have the same background of the topic as you may have. There is nothing wrong with you writing articles that you want as long as they are:
Sheriff U3, we often handle requests for querants at this venue, and using arcane processes has very little to do with follow[ing] the rules (for example, misplaced or malformed requests are often corrected by editors experienced in the relevant process). We usually only straight up refuse to help people directly if: it's something we don't want to do / think is a bad idea; or, it's Srbernadette asking for someone to fix trivial citation template parameter errors for the umpteenth time.If fielding requests at the Help Desk, I'd encourage you to aspire to increased helpfulness. I feel your comment above comes off as condescending.In this case, it looks like the OP has created the respelled categories, and emptied the misspelt ones into them. The misspelt ones are already tagged C1 so this should see resolution in a week's time. Folly Mox (talk) 12:07, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
November 4
Odd question.
Do we have to use the words used in sources to describe places and things, or do we use the most accurate words? For example, if a source calls calls a quarry a cave, despite it not being a cave, do have to abide by the words used? My specific example for this would be the previous revision of this.
@Kingsmasher678, this is a tough question to handle in general. We're not obligated to say things that are wrong when we know they're wrong, but we are also supposed to avoid original research. Can you find no sources that call it a quarry? -- asilvering (talk) 01:15, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about that particular case as there are some sources that do list the site as a quarry. My real question is the semantical differences between "quarry" or "tunnel", and "cave", and if it would be appropriate to change from one to the other, depending on what the site actually falls under, based on the sources description. A very common issue with cave related articles is the mistagging of rock shelters, quarries, and mines as caves. For example, the page for Mega Caverns used to describe the structure as a cave, though it is a mine/quarry. TLDR: Is it acceptable to use a more accurate term for a formation/location even if that term is not used in a source, as long as the source provides evidence that it falls under that term?
I believe I've encountered a new account using a large-language model in a consensus building context. It's clear to me, anyway, but I don't quite know how to deal with this. Is there an equivalent to (Personal attack removed) I can use for LLM-generated content, as now there is non-trivial discussion underneath? Departureโ (talk) 00:34, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Departureโ, we have Template:AI-generated inline, which renders as: It is designed for articlespace, but usage in a discussion should be ok. (As with other templates in this vein, usage of the |certain= flag will remove the question mark at the end of the superscript link). The template accepts a |date= parameter as well; I'm not sure if User:AnomieBOT is scoped to add these outside mainspace if one is not included.We don't quite have a policy on LLM usage yet, but what we do have is at WP:LLM. Since using a chatbot in a discussion is pointless and lazy, collapsing the entire contribution as suggested just above by asilvering is probably the better option. We don't have user warning templates for AI generated text outside mainspace, but a custom message on the editor's talkpage would be appropriate if you haven't done that already. Folly Mox (talk) 11:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article history...
Hello again!
I come back to the Help Desk regarding the article I'm working on, Glaiza de Castro. I recently checked the article history and discovered that the user who created the article, User:Mervin 110694, is a suspected sockpuppet.
If I will make a WP:GAC or WP:FAC nomination for the article in the future, will this fact affect the nomination process?
No, this I don't believe that this should have any impact on the process. Both of those areas review articles based on their own merits, not who created them.
I am trying to go through Category:Caves and remove/move things that don't qualify. Is there a way that I could search for precedent or consensus about this category and what should be included? My general feeling is that all of the manmade caves should be moved into categories that clearly delineate them as such, leaving the natural caves as the default, as a natural void is the primary definition of the word cave. However, if there is a previous precedent I would like find it before I start a big project.
Kingsmasher678, does Category:Artificial cavesย (6) work for your project? Recategorising constructed caves into this category should be non-contentious (it's already a subcat of Category:Caves, but not diffused by location).To answer the general case, the associated Category talk: page is a good thing to check, but this namespace sees very little activity. The next step in a search for category discussion or precedent is the WP:CFD archives, like this one.Folly Mox (talk) 11:49, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, thank you! I am going to make some subcategories for Category:Artificial caves, likely specifying which group/religion created them. Other than that, I am going to completely exclude quarries and mines from the category, only adding religious or culturally important places to that category, and since there is no precedent that I can find, the seems like a "be bold" situation.
No, self published books do not merit inclusion in Wikipedia in any form, sorry. List articles are not meant to document every possible member of the list that might exist, only those that merit Wikipedia articles, and to do that, your book would need to meet the definition of a notable book, which is unlikely for self published books(which anyone can do). 331dot (talk) 09:16, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If people unconnected to you were to write books or academic journal articles about you (making you notable), your book could be mentioned in a Wikipedia article about you. If those same people wrote books or articles about your book, it could be notable too, and warrant a Wikipedia article. Both of those situations are quite unusual, and you absolutely must not write an article about yourself or your book, nor ask your friends to write those articles. Nyttend (talk) 04:24, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Copy edit
Hi, I have copy edited this article and its my first copy edit specifically on an article other than what i create or edit usually. Can anyone tell whether i did it rightย ?
Hi, thanks for copyediting the article and asking for feedback. There are a few things that I don't understand (I am unfamiliar with the topic):
Why capitalize nagar in nagar panchayat? I think it's a foreign term but not a proper noun, so I would leave it uncapitalized but italicize it, and maybe add "(town council)" as a translation for its first use.
Does a source say that the Guntur district "stands out"? If not, we should just state the fact that it has two corporations while the others have one each.
The article says that every district has a municipal corporation, with one having two corporations. With a total of 17 corporations, this would imply that there are 16 districts, but it says there are 26. Moving this to the article's talk page since it's not really a problem with your copyedit.
Helene Spilling and Martin รdegaard are now married, according to VG. [1] It shows that on the Norwegian National Register of Citizens and has been widely reported. Helene has changed her name to Helene Spilling รdegaard, so in her Wikipedia article, would every mention of Spilling need to change into Spilling รdegaard? I'm not familiar with these name changes. Usernameisoccupiedtoo (talk) 14:16, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Usernameisoccupiedtoo Given that the marriage was very recent, almost all of the sources for the article will use her maiden name and per WP:COMMONNAME that will still be the article title. MOS:NEE says that the married name should be in the lead of the article (as it now is) but I don't see any need to repeat that surname everywhere. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:38, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Logging in
I have tried every username and email address to try to reset but i am not getting any email reset stuff... I have donated every year so maybe I dont have an account but it makes me think I do. 173.68.158.26 (talk) 14:25, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Donations have nothing to do with accounts. They are not linked. If you know you edited a particular article you can examine its edit history to make sure you get your username right. If you do have an account and the password reset does not work, you will need to create a new account. 331dot (talk) 14:33, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This IP has been creating drafts regarding children's media, and insisting on adding them to related categories before they've been moved to mainspace. I've added draft category templates, which are then removed by the IP(hope I havent been violating 3RR there) with no communication following the message left on their talk page. I'm puzzled as to where I should go to report this, WP:AIV seems inappropriate and WP:ANI seems too extreme. This issue might get handled thanks to me posting this, but where should I generally go for instances of editors misusing draft articles? LaffyTaffer (talk) 23:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why isn't South-East Melbourne one of the top results? If I didn't know otherwise, I would expect it be the leading search (before the Phoenix and the Magic), since it's identical to the search term, except for a single punctuation character. Nyttend (talk) 02:12, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Talking about inappropriate or too personal topics with other people on Wikipedia
Hi everyone, sorry to open a new question here out of nowhere again. I have an important question to ask you all now.
Well, you see... it seems part of the reason I was banned on the Hebrew Wikipedia was because I talked to them by mistake about drugs, alcohol, and getting laid(sex). I understand these topics are very personal and intimate, and might be considered inappropriate sometimes. Or, as I see things now, maybe its not just "sometimes", but "always". Is that true? Its not allowed to talk to other people on Wikipedia, about drugs, alcohol, and sex? if so, why are these topics so wrong and rude? We have articles on these things and there are full details including explicit photos about these things, so why its okay to leave these articles with the explicit content. But, when I try to talk to other people on Wikipedia about alcohol, drugs or sex, they appear very nervous, worried, angry, disappointed... and I can understand these things arent to be discussed publicly or between people who dont know each other at all, or good enough. But as you all probably know, we have articles about these things including explicit photos. And deep inside, we all watch porn sometimes, we all drink and become drunk sometimes, and we all take medications. And we all get laid. I'm sorry if I sound rude or maybe even crossing the line as they say. But, I must receive a clarification about these things before I explode out of confusion and numbness. With all that being said, if its not allowed to talk about alcohol, drugs and sex on Wikipdia with anybody, then I'll do what you say and will stop talking about it with anybody else on Wikipedia. We're all here to make Wikipedia a better place, and I'm part of this amazing community and all that. I dont "think" the community here is amazing, I KNOW. So if you're so amazing, I hope you can please give me a reply about what I'm asking now, despite how intimate, personal, and controversial alcohol, drugs and sex can be. Of course, What happened on Hebrew Wikipedia that got me banned wont happen here ever again. You can be sure about that. I just need a detailed answer about what I asked now. Thats all I need, and I'll continue editing like I always do because I love Wikipedia so much. Noam Atadgy (talk) 02:17, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is an encylopedia, not social media, so unless your disclosures have some bearing on article content, it isn't appropriate. There are plenty of other sites where you can do that sort of thing. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:08, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Remember that the Hebrew Wikipedia is a separate project. We have no influence over their policies or who they choose to ban. 331dot (talk) 08:51, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Noam Atadgy, I doubt it was the "intimate" content of your chat that got you banned. I suspect it would have been the same if you'd persisted in chatting about stamp collecting. We, and the editors at he:WP, are here to build encyclopedias, not to chat. Maproom (talk) 09:12, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
