Wikipedia:Help desk

The Wikipedia help desk is a place where you can ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia. For other types of questions, use the search box or the reference desk.

• For other types of questions, see Help:Contents and Are you in the right place? If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
• Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
• We are all volunteers, so sometimes replies can take some time. Please be patient. Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
• If you need real-time help, you can join our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
• If you are a new editor, you might prefer to ask your question at the Teahouse, an area specifically for new users to get help with editing, article creation and general Wikipedia use, in a friendly environment.
• Remember to sign your post by adding four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your post. Alternatively, you can click on the signature icon () on the edit toolbar.

Click here to ask a new question
about how to use or edit Wikipedia.

March 18

How do I change Wikipedia's clock to local time (NYC as an example or Iowa City)? I'm referring to the digital clock used by Wikipedia with UTC

The digital clock on Wikipedia needs to somehow be edited to local time. How can Wikipedia editors change their clocks to local time (for example: Eastern Standard Time, Central Daylight)? Angela Kate Maureen Pears 04:01, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@Tropical Storm Angela: Go to your Preferences, then Appearance, then scroll to "Time zone" and you can set it to whichever time zone you prefer. ––FormalDude talk 04:09, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

I would assume there's no way to change the clock in the upper right corner of the screen from 24 hour format to 12 hour format? If there is please let me know as that would make it much easier for me to understand what time it would be in UTC. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 04:20, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: There is a way! Check out User:Guywan/Scripts/12HourFormat. ––FormalDude talk 05:27, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@FormalDude: The clock in the top right corner doesn't change to 12 hour format with that script. It's still in 24 hour. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:42, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

If you want comments to appear in local time, check out Wikipedia:Comments in Local Time and follow the instructions there. ––FormalDude talk 04:10, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Kimberly Newell

Kimberly Newell's birth place was Vancouver BC (not Nelson BC). Thank you!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberly_Newell?msclkid=576a6de9a67311ecbf7cb7f2f458aa9b — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.232.4.117 (talk) 04:29, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

You're going to want to discuss this at Talk:Kimberly Newell and provide a reliable source. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:12, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

The entry in the infobox still says Nelson but was piped to Vancouver by the OP 2 minutes after posting their query. I don't think this subterfuge is appropriate or helpful, so I have reverted it.

Although Nelson isn't specifically referenced, it is in accordance with the first link in the Article's External links section. However, the second and third of these links give Burbaby (a city adjacent to Vancouver).

I suggest that Spitzmauskc, the creator and main editor of the article who introduced Nelson should weigh up the available sources (not necessarily just those three) and either cite the most reliable, remove the entry, or mention the disagreement in the article's text. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.213.229.59 (talk) 21:44, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Nelson's birthplace is a bit unclear. It is given as Vancouver by the IOC and in her Princeton athlete bio, as Nelson on Elite Prospects, and Burnaby by the hockeyDB. I have no issue with changing her birthplace to Vancouver as it is well sourced and will do so. Spitzmauskc (talk) 15:03, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Template for 'Failed verification'

Hi. I found a Wikipedia article that states a person's exact birth date, with a link to a source. But the source only states the person's age, not their exact birth date. I'm inclined to add a Failed verification template. Am I being too picky? Ghastlyman (talk) 04:51, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ghastlyman I'd rewrite per source, especially if WP:DOB (living person) applies. Depending on what the source says, there are templates like {{Birth based on age as of date|52|2013|November|12}}, in this example the source from 12 November 2013 said the person was 52 at that date, it turns into 1960/1961 (age 60–61). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:27, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Ghastlyman (talk) 10:04, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

I am blind and I also do not understand how to format my citations. HELP PLEASE!

My father was Edward Joseph Lakso (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_J._Lakso). I noticed that there are several errors on his page, including the name he was born with (which was a different surname!) I have all sorts of documentation of proof for these things BUT I have recently gone mostly blind AND there isn't a chance on this earth that I will EVER understand your instructions about how to present the citations ANYWAY. Really. I just can't do it. I tried and tried and failed miserably. I really cannot understand it. I bow my head to anyone who is able to do this obscure thing. Is there ANY chance that someone could help me?

For example:

The page says he was born Edward Joseph Lakso, but that is not correct.

His name at birth was Edward Joseph Shea (III) but his mother and father broke up soon after he was born. Ed's step father married his mother shortly after that (21 Nov., 1936.) (I have no record of either the marriage or the divorce of Ed's bio-parents, so it is possible they weren't married, but the marriage record of Ed's mother to her second husband (LAKSO) has her using her first husband's surname (SHEA) so they WERE likely married and I just did not find the documents.)

I have at least two documents for these facts: My father's birth record that gives his name EDWARD JOSEPH SHEA and the marriage record for Ed's mother and her second husband Vaino Wayne Jalo Lakso

CITATION SOURCES: (1) California Birth Index, 1905-1995 - Author: Ancestry.com, Publisher Ancestry.com Operations Inc, Publisher date 2005, Publisher location Provo, UT, USA, repository Ancestry.com.

DATA GIVEN IN THIS SOURCE: Name Edward Joseph Shea Birth Date 20 Sep 1932 Gender Male Mother's Maiden Name Chiarle Birth County San Francisco

(2) "U.S., Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Swedish American Church Records, 1800-1946"

DATA GIVEN IN THIS SOURCE: Name Victoria Shea [her maiden name was CHIARLE] Gender Female Marriage Age 23 Event Type Marriage Birth Date 1913 Marriage Date 21 Nov 1936 Marriage Place San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA Church Ebenezer Lutheran Church Spouse Vaino J Lakso — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurie Lakso (talk • contribs) 09:02, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Basically you are saying that you are finding it challenging to edit because of personal reasons. While I sympathize with your condition, it is possible that the problem may not be about presentation, which could be easily fixed, but about the very reliability of your sources. Your attempts were probably rejected for the sources you provided were unverifiable or unreliable.-- Abdul Muhsy talk 12:38, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

We have specific places where we deem them to be unreliable. Church records and ancestry.com aren't really places we trust. I wouldn't worry about style or layout, but rather can we trust where the info is coming from. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:43, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Ancestry.com is not reliable, but the California Birth Index is a reliable primary source, and it has an entry about "Edward Joseph Shea, born 1932-09-20". (Of course, that may be a different person.) Church records are also reliable-ish primary sources, but those are not available online from my quick search. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:28, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@Laurie Lakso Hi there! Thank you for your interest in improving Wikipedia! Since you have a conflict of interest, you should not be editing the article about your father directly. Instead, you may post suggestions on the article talk page Talk:Edward J. Lakso with the best published reliable sources you have. Or, you may use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard if you find that easier. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 14:18, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Also, don't worry too much about properly formatting references. If you can provide just a plain URL to where the reference can be found, someone will come around eventually to fill in the details. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:24, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

• Welcome to Wikipedia, Laurie Lakso. Your attempts to edit the page (in 2019 and recently) were decent, but I think you have a significant misunderstanding about Wikipedia’s purpose or philosophy. Wikipedia articles about people do not aim to be an exhaustive description of that person’s life, career, or accomplishments. Wikipedia articles (about anything, not just people) should contain the documented facts about its subject.

The keyword is documented. Adding things such as He was also the line producer on the Charlie's Angels episodic television show, following Barney Rosensweig's brief tenure in that job with a reference to "personal knowledge" is not the way we do things. It might very well be true, but a reader cannot verify it. Even we cannot verify it - you might be lying, or mistaken; or even you might claim to be his daughter but be someone else entirely. That means that a lot of what you might want to add will not be added unless there is a published source supporting it (99% of the time, that means a newspaper article).

Now, removing incorrect information is much easier. If there are incorrect and unsourced facts in the article, you may remove them (or just tell us what it is and we will do it). If there are sourced facts that are nonetheless incorrect because the original source is mistaken: the official answer is that you need to take that up with the original source, not us; the practical answer is that you tell us what it is, if it is minor stuff, many editors (including myself) will remove the information altogether and leave a note for future editors that we are aware of an incorrect source.

Regarding the birth name (which is the only issue that you have mentioned explicitly here)... Our guideline at MOS:CHANGEDNAME says the birth name may be given in the lead [introductory paragraph] as well, if relevant... it is not always appropriate to list every previous name of a subject. If the only sources that give the name Shea are birth records, I do not think it is very relevant/appropriate to list the birth name (even if we have a good source for it). I have therefore removed the birth name altogether. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:28, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Should {{use mdy/dmy dates}} mandate their presentation in the wikitext?

Hi all, I was hoping if someone could comment on whether edits like this are helpful. In the article from the diff linked, most dates are in the mdy (February 14, 2022) format, but there does exist a few in the dmy (14 February 2022) format. I understand that adding {{Use mdy dates}} would present this to the user in the correct way. Meaning such edits would not make any difference to the overall presentation of the article. But still, it okay to change dates from one format to another?

I feel like this would make sense in cases where an article consists of dates formatted mainly in the date style used. In such cases, you're helping the article be consistent with its date formatting. But in cases where another style is predominantly used (ie. 2022-02-14), such edits would not need to be made. (I suppose 2022-02-14 is a special exception, since a lot of articles seem to have mdy/dmy being used but format dates like that).

So, to re-iterate my question, is it okay to change date formats in wikitext to the date format being used in the article in cases where the article already predominantly uses the said date style in the wikitext? Satricious (talk) 10:38, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

The dates in the edit that you are complaining about were all inside cs1|2 citation templates. Those templates read the {{use xxx dates}} template and apply the dictated style to the rendered citation. Because cs1|2 automatically renders dates in accordance with {{use xxx dates}}, there is no real need to have scripts running around changing dates in cs1|2 templates. If all that is accomplished by the script is a change to cs1|2 template date parameters then that amounts to a violation of WP:COSMETICBOT so the script should abandon the edit.

There is already a freely-available date-fixing-script (User:Ohconfucius/script/MOSNUM_dates.js). I suspect that it is also guilty of WP:COSMETICBOT, so I suppose that you can continue to use your script but I gotta wonder if we really need two scripts...

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:08, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Oh cool, thanks for the pointers! Yeah I'm abandoning my user script (for the most part). Shortly after I wrote it I suspected it would not be of much use so I came here to check whether such edits would be acceptable and whether something else already exists. I did not know about WP:COSMETICBOT and am glad I know about it now. I'll probably only use my own user script in very rare cases in which I'm already updating an article which I contribute to that happens to strictly format their dates according to the date style used (ie. 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine has all their dates formatted in the wikitext; I could then use my user script to aid me in changing any odd dates (for consistency's sake) while doing my own 'substantive' edits) Satricious (talk) 12:29, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk: The script by Ohconfucius also updates dates in the infobox and article text, so I don't believe the script is "guilty of WP:COSMETICBOT". However, some editors may be using the script to only update citation dates when it's not necessary. GoingBatty (talk) 14:25, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I know that, but when the only changes are dates in cs1|2 templates, that is a violation of WP:COSMETICBOT.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:31, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Some editors are unsettled by seeing different date formats when they enter edit mode, despite there already being a {{use xxx dates}} template; I am one of those. So long as a semi-automatic edit does not make inconsequential changes, there is no violation of WP:COSMETICBOT. In addition, there are also a non-negligable number of articles where citations are not wrapped in {{citation}} templates that may need aligning because autoformatting doesn't act on those, whereas the MOSNUM script changes those. One of my other scripts usually picks up numerous necessary changes. -- Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 13:19, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Repeating myself (with emphasis): when the only changes are dates in cs1|2 templates, that is a violation of WP:COSMETICBOT. It does not matter that [some] editors are unsettled by seeing different date formats; editor 'unsettlement' does not forgive cosmetic edits. Yes, I know that cs1|2 is not used for all referencing. Your script is obviously in compliance with WP:COSMETICBOT when it changes date formats in those references to be in compliance with an existing {{use xxx dates}} template because the format change is visible to the reader. When the script only changes dates in cs1|2 templates to follow the format of the existing {{use xxx dates}} template, that is a violation because the change is not visible to the reader – cs1|2 automatically renders dates in compliance with an existing {{use xxx dates}} template. When there is no existing {{use xxx dates}} template, edits by your script are imposing a format chosen by you or by the script operator so, again, not a violation of WP:COSMETICBOT unless all dates in the article are already in the desired format and there are no other changes.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:04, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Updating a Biography Help

I updated a biography page for John P Sanders. I am working with him so all of the content was approved by him. All of it was rejected. I want to add information about the philanthropy work he is doing now and more information about his career before he worked for the federal government. Do I have to cite every single detail about his life? I just don't understand why it was all rejected by Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SophiaPhiladelphia1995 (talk • contribs) 12:54, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi SophiaPhiladelphia1995. As you work with Sanders you have a conflict of interest, and will need to declare such on your talk page. Please read and follow WP:COI#howtodisclose before making any edits to the page. Looking at your edit (such as [1]), you are adding external links into the body of the pages, which is a no-no on Wikipedia. You are also removing sourced information. As an encyclopedia, we do not need the content to be approved by the subject. The article is about the subject, not written/maintained or chosen by the subject. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:01, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Lee, thank you for the information. So the reason the content was rejected was not because of sourcing issues but because of the external links and because I removed some information that was already within the page? And could I externally link something like the Blue Iris Fund, which is a new philanthropy that doesn't have a Wikipedia page at this time? SophiaPhiladelphia1995 (talk) 13:17, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

1. You need to stop until you have made full disclosure of your status as a paid editor. I've left instructions on your talk page.

2. If this Blue Iris Fund is so obscure that there are no newspaper stories about it, then no, don't talk about it.

3. Remember, we don't give a darn how Sanders wants to be seen. We are looking for substantive coverage about him from reliable sources, not how he pets puppies and gives money to charities. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:22, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Sophia, please have a look at my essay User:ColinFine/What Wikipedia doesn't care about. ColinFine (talk) 14:22, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Attribution for a copied deleted page

When submitting edits to Wikipedia, we all agree that "You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license." However, if the edited page is later deleted, then the hyperlink or URL will not lead to any page history showing who made what contributions. So, how does attribution work when the link is no longer valid? Is it lost forever? RudolfRed (talk) 18:17, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

If the page it deleted, then the content to be attributed is usually gone too, so it's attribution is irrelevant. If that isn't the case (such as an article being merged prior to deletion), then see Wikipedia:Merge and delete. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:25, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@Pppery: I am thinking more of the page being copied outside of Wikipedia, such as to a mirror. Even if the content is gone from Wikipedia, it still exists elsewhere and should be attributed to its authors. That is what I am curious about. RudolfRed (talk) 18:39, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Good question, RudolfRed. On WP:REUSE there is an overview of this stuff. The Re-use of text under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike section has a section on Attribution which implicity touches on your question. Also, the Re-use of text under the GNU Free Documentation License section says this:

However, please note that the Wikimedia Foundation makes no guarantee to retain authorship information and a transparent copy of articles. Therefore, you are encouraged to provide this authorship information and a transparent copy with your derived works.

---R. S. Shaw (talk) 21:05, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@R. S. Shaw: Thanks for info. RudolfRed (talk) 22:08, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Misrepresentation of Ukrainian Minister's statement in Wiki article on Wildberries

Hi-

Not sure if this is the right place to address this, but I could use some help. I'm a longtime Wiki reader but logged-in for the first time today to try to rectify something I found misleading. After reading an article on the AOL homepage about "grey" goods and a massive Russian online retailer called Wildberries I looked-up Wildberries in Wiki. I noticed the following:

"In July 2021, Ukraine imposed sanctions against Wildberries and its owner Tatyana Bakalchuk. Trade in military uniforms and Russian books was named as the reason.[15]"

That sounded like something trying to bolster Putin's claim that Ukrainians were prejudiced against Russian speaking people. That led me to the note section. The article referenced in #15 was in Russian, but ref. #16 was in English and said:

"Ukrainian Minister of Culture Oleksandr Tkachenko said Wildberries had been banned because it had sold Russian propaganda and uniforms of Russian soldiers on its platform."

Then I copied & pasted part of the Russian article (ref. #15) into Google Translate and saw that the Ukrainian Minister had specified "anti-Ukranian books" in that article.

I firmly believe that the comment should be edited to say "anti-Ukranian books" instead of "Russian books" to be accurate:

"In July 2021, Ukraine imposed sanctions against Wildberries and its owner Tatyana Bakalchuk. Trade in military uniforms and anti-Ukrainian books was named as the reason.[15]

My problem is that I am finding the editing process WAY more difficult than I thought it would be and since the Wiki article on Wildberries is translated into many other languages I'm worried that this misleading interpretation of the Ukrainian Minister's words will serve to further Russian disinformation. Can somebody help me? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skeletonkeycollector (talk • contribs) 19:21, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Skeletonkeycollector, the editing process is that hard. Everything needs to have a reference, etc etc. This is meant to prevent people from spreading mis- or dis- information, although as you get more experienced it becomes quicker. Sungodtemple (talk) 21:17, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

– Hello, Skeletonkeycollector. When you don't know how to add or change information in an article, the general procedure is to go to the article's talk page, e.g. Talk:Wildberries, and add a new section (via "New section" tab at the top) to describe what changes you think should be made. What you wrote here is a good description; you can copy it from this page and paste it into the new section form on the talk page. A version of the heading you have here would be good in the "Title" field of that form. That article isn't too actively edited, and it's possible that your request won't be responded to for some time. Perhaps someone here will offer to take it up, or you can ask at the Teahouse. --R. S. Shaw (talk) 21:43, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Dear R. S. Shaw, Thank you SO much! You've been very helpful. I added this to the Talk page as you suggested. I'll check-out the Teahouse. Have a great weekend! Skeletonkeycollector Skeletonkeycollector (talk) 23:59, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Stop Media Viewer from reappearing after I "disable" it?

Is there a way to 100% completely, permanently and irrevocably stop Media Viewer from appearing? "Disabling" it only works for whatever image I am viewing and then for subsequent images it comes back. I will also put out there that it's the only thing that has ever approached the level of irritation of the Microsoft Paper Clip, which I didn't think possible. It triggers deep and visceral rage like only the Paper clip was ever able to do so there's definitely some weird UI psychology going on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Auenwald (talk • contribs) 22:22, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@Auenwald: AFAIK ou can disable the MediaViewer in Special:Preferences § Appeareance, under "Files" by unticking Enable Media Viewer
Note that after saving your preferences, you need to reload all open tabs you have for the english Wikipedia for the changes to take effect. Victor Schmidt (talk) 22:48, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

You mean while signed in, right? According to Wikipedia's instructions, that's not necessary, and I don't want to.

Further, the disabling function itself is just plain broken. It only works for the image you're currently viewing. As soon as I go to another image it comes back. Auenwald (talk) 16:56, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

@Auenwald: If you're talking about the desktop browser interface, then the Preferences setting (while logged in) that Victor described does disable the Media Viewer, and it persists for all image viewing, and it will be in effect whenever you are logged in (until you change the Preferences setting). --R. S. Shaw (talk) 22:10, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

March 19

Feedback on the New User Homepage

Hello! Does anyone know where I can go to provide feedback on the new user homepage? There doesn't seem to be a link to do so anywhere on it. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:31, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: I think that is part of the Editor Retention project. Trying asking at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Editor_Retention, if they can't help, hopefully they can point in the right direction. RudolfRed (talk) 01:44, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: When I tried to find out about this, I landed at this Mediawiki FAQ page (part of a "Growth" project). Looking around on that page, there are several places where they ask for feedback to be given at mw:Talk:Growth, so that might be an appropriate place. But there is also this enWiki page: Wikipedia:Growth Team features with an overview, where they ask for feedback on that page's talkpage. --R. S. Shaw (talk) 03:45, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

List of redirects to a specific page

A few days ago while looking up something else, I coincidentally came across a redirect - Gregg Turkington's Decker Vs. Dracula, as it were - which I then edited to point to a more thematically appropriate page. That did get me thinking just now: There has to be an obvious way to list all redirects pointing to any given page, right? If someone could show me the way, I'd be eternally grateful. Dr. Duh 🩺 (talk) 18:57, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Special:WhatLinksHere/List of Decker episodes then, under Filters click: Hide transclusions and Hide links.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 19:01, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, that's exactly what I was looking for. Pretty sure I've already been to that overview, but I guess the little filter box was too inconspicuous... Dr. Duh 🩺 (talk) 19:08, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Waiting for Approval vs. Publishing a Page

I have created a couple pages and edited some but not recently. Why should one wait for three months for "approval" with a waiting list of 3,000 +/-, versus just publishing it? I don't understand why one would wait. Please advise. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kdmoss (talk • contribs) 19:31, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Kdmoss. The Articles for Creation process is optional and it certainly has problems. However, if you move the current version of your draft to the encyclopedia, it will be checked out by members of the New Pages Patrol, and I consider it highly likely that it would be deleted. The person does not meet WP:POLITICIAN and the references are sparse. Cullen328 (talk) 19:44, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Is it considered good form to wait for another review if you fixed up a declined draft, or is the normal process just to move it to mainspace on your own? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:04, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Celebrate Women Images

Hola, después de leer cuidadosamente instrucciones para publicar imágenes durante el mes de Marzo para celebrar a las Mujeres, y como me gusta la fotografía, pensé darle un enfoque a las capturas que tengo sobre Mujeres de mi entorno con sus muy diversos trabajos, mismas que fueron captadas en sus áreas de trabajo, pensando que podría llevar a cabo. Posteriormente y al ir observando a detalle veo que es un proyecto con Mujeres en específico. Me gustaría me indicaran si a futuro tienen planeado hacer algo semejante o bien, podría tener la oportunidad de contribuir con el material que tengo. Gracias anticipadas. Floweronview — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2806:108E:21:1FDE:E98F:DFDF:F710:7CE3 (talk) 19:40, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello. If you do not speak English, perhaps you should consider participating in the Spanish Wikipedia. As for photographs, you can upload them to Wikimedia Commons, where they can be used in any language version of Wikipedia. →

Google Translate: Hola. Si no hablas inglés, quizás deberías considerar participar en la Wikipedia en español. En cuanto a las fotografías, puede subirlas a Wikimedia Commons, donde se pueden usar en cualquier versión de Wikipedia en cualquier idioma. Cullen328 (talk) 19:50, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Lester Holt

Why can't I find out anything about why Lester Holt leaving NBC Nightly News? I hate it when they just put someone else in and don't tell us why? Makes me so mad. Joyce Simms, Kansas — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jas833 (talk • contribs) 20:44, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Jas833 Please direct questions about the Lester Holt article to its talk page, Talk:Lester Holt. 331dot (talk) 20:50, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Joyce. I get the impression that you're not actually asking about the Wikipedia article but about the behaviour of the network. I'm afraid this Help Desk for Wikipedia can't help you with that. ColinFine (talk) 22:10, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

For what it's worth, Jas833, this podcast by Trevor Noah of The Daily Show seems to address your query. I haven't listened to it, but the introductory matter suggests that Holt himself wants to take up a different path in journalism to that of being a news-desk anchor.

Perhaps someone would like to use this as a source for adding to the Holt article. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.213.229.59 (talk) 03:05, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

I wish to rewrite a biography of a distant relative, Lewis Baumer, and need help in going about this

Hi

re https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Baumer

I have done a considerable amount of research about my grandfather's first cousin, a man whose surname I share but whom I never met. There is an existing very short biography on Wikipedia of him. This has errors and many omissions about his achievements.

My biography is fully referenced and is mainly about his professional life.

I have registered and have a username and password.

There are 2 issues:

As my biography is on a relative I have a potential conflict of interest, and am quite happy to submit my contribution to anyone in authority for scrutiny.

Secondly, as my biography is very much more detailed and in at least one place contradicts what is already written about him (a minor difference, not likely to be controversial), I don't know how to go about editing the existing text.

Harry Baumer (talk) 23:07, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Welcome Harry! First, I'd recommend taking brief glances at:

• WP:No original research
• WP:Reliable sources
• How to disclose a COI
• Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography.

If there's a glaring factual error on the article, I'd recommend proposing an edit request at Talk:Lewis Baumer. Unfortunately, if the only source you have to support a claim is your own personal research findings or experience, it can't be used. However, note that Offline sources such as printed books, public records, newspaper scans on microfiche, etc, can still be reliable sources with an appropriate citation.

You should also know that writing an article from scratch (as "rewrite" implies) is one of the hardest and most difficult tasks here. This of course does not thousands of novice editors from attempting the feat every day. As you gradually familiarize yourself with Wikipedia and its inner workings, I'd recommend working to improve the existing article text, with accurate and properly sourced information. Happy editing! RoxySaunders (talk · contribs) 23:48, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

March 20

Infobox policy

What is the general rule when it comes to infoboxes being added to articles? Should articles have multiple infoboxes? There are several featured on this page: 2006 Richmond spree murders and I wondered whether they should all be there or not? Is it necessary to have separate ones for each individual perpetrator or should this be avoided? What is the general rule of thumb because I can't find a WP:Policy page that answers this. Thanks. Inexpiable (talk) 08:06, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

@Inexpiable: I don’t think there’s a specific policy - it only comes down to how useful the multiple infoboxes are in conveying the information in the article. They could also have been added as the result of a merge. There is info about merging templates, but that’s not the issue here. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:46, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

MIchael Caruso Musician photo

There is an editor/administrator coming after profiles that have been here for years. questioning and deleting photos etc. One of the photos on Tamara Champlin's biography may have been questionable credentials, but the photo on Michael Caruso (musicians) profile was uploaded by its photographer (Redacted) who is the owner of "Fragments" handle.

On Danielle Nicole (musician) biography there is a problem with the Concord Records photo. Please look into this and any help you can give me I would appreciate.

Here is the reply I received: @Paulhus15: I didn't remove the photo. I only asked about it at c:COM:VPC#File:Michael Anthony Caruso.jpg. The photo was tagged for speedy deletion by another editor named c:User:Jeff G. (see c:User talk:Fragmentsforart#File:Michael Anthony Caruso.jpg) and then subsequently deleted by a Commons administrator named c:User:Túrelio. Once the file was deleted from Commons, it was removed by a bot from the Wikipedia article. If you feel an error was made, you can always post a message explaining why at c:User talk:Túrelio. For reference, though, the fact that a file has been used for a long time doesn't mean it's was uploaded under an acceptable or verifiable license; it could just as easily mean that no body bothered to check the file's licensing for a long time. The same image can essentially be seen used online as the cover art of a single by Caruso that was released at least two years prior to photo being uploaded to Commons, and almost always in such cases more formal verification is needed for such a file to be kept. So, if the photographer who took the photo had previously allowed it to be used for the cover art before they uploaded it to Commons, all they will likely need to do is follow the instructions given in c:COM:Licensing images: when do I contact VRT? and the file can be restored after VRT verification. -- Marchjuly (talk) 15:12, 20 March 2022 (UTC) Paulhus15 (talk) 16:00, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy ping: Marchjuly —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:32, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Paulhus15. This type of issue needs to be worked out on Wikimedia Commons which is a separate project with a separate group of administrators. In the case of the photo of Michael Caruso, the image appeared as cover art on one of his recordings two years before the image was uploaded to Commons, so that created genuine concerns about the licensing of the image to Commons. It was deleted for that reason. The photographer will need to provide convincing evidence of their identity and their intention to freely license use of the photo by anyone for any purpose. Wikimedia projects are very strict about copyright and licensing, unlike many other websites. Cullen328 (talk) 18:07, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Paulhus15, I see that you wrote elsewhere Mr Caruso is personal friends with the photographer who took the picture and I approached her to get a login and upload for him. It was picked at another time to go on his single of "Shoo Rah". Nothing to do with the photo itself. Before you just remove something the facts should be checked out That wording is not crystal clear but if you logged in on behalf of the photographer and uploaded the photo, then that is not legitimate. Only the copyright holder herself can freely license the photo and that power cannot be delegated to a friend or associate. It must be done properly, because it is a legal transaction. Cullen328 (talk) 18:16, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

I will see that she re-uploads the photo Paulhus15 (talk) 18:31, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

​​@Paulhus15:There's no need for her, you or anyone else to reupload the photo. Deleted photos aren't gone forever and they can be restored by an administrator when the need arises. That's what happened in this case, and the Commons administrator who deleted the file restored it so that it can be further discussed at c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Michael Anthony Caruso.jpg. You and the uploader can discuss things there if you like, but most likely the best way to resolve things is going to be for the uploader to send her c:COM:CONSENT to Wikimedia VRT as explained in c:COM:VRT#Licensing images: when do I contact VRT?. If she does that and there are no problems with the email, her consent and the file's licensing will be verified by a VRT member and c:Template:Permission ticket will be added to the file's page to let others know that the copyright holder's consent has been verified.

The other file you're asking about here (File:Danielle Nicole (EP).png) is a non-free file uploaded locally to Wikipedia. Non-free content use on Wikipedia is quite restrictive as explained in WP:NFC#Background and each use of a non-free file needs to comply with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. Non-free album covers are almost always only allowed to be used for primary identification purposes in stand-alone articles about the albums they represent as explained WP:NFC#cite_note-3; so, that is why the file was WP:PRODded for deletion. If you disagree with this assessment, you may WP:DEPROD the file; in that case, the file's non-free use will be further discussed at WP:FFD. I'm not a Wikipedia administrator but I do have quite a bit of experience with files; I wouldn't have proposed that the file be deleted if I thought there was a valid non-free use for the file. The fact that the file has been used for a longtime doesn't make the use comply with relevant policy. If a stand-alone article about the album is created, the file could be used there; however, the article about the album would need to meet WP:NALBUM to avoid being deleted. If you want to create an article about the album (EP) at Danielle Nicole (EP), then you can. Be advised, however, that someone recently tried to do such a thing, but they subsequently redirected the article to Danielle Nicole because they felt it didn't satisfy the notability criteria for a stand-alone article.

Finally, you should try to refrain from posting real world identifying information about Wikipedia or Commons account holders on any Wikipedia page, unless they've already done so themselves. Even when your intentions are good, doing such a thing might be seen as a violation of WP:OUTING and could possibly create problems for the other person as explained in WP:REALWORLD. If the copyright holder of this photo wants to log in to her account and identify who she is, then she can; you should, however, refrain from posting any links or making any such connection publicly until she does so. If you feel this information is relevant to some discussion, you can always use WP:EMAIL to make it known to an administrator since all administrators are set up to receive emails. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:27, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

thanks for your help. I do a lot here myself and I am aware of the rules as well. Paulhus15 (talk) 08:11, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Roberto Herrera, Higinia tapia, Sergio MALDONADO

Occidental FAMILY ANSI — Preceding unsigned comment added by Higiniatapia1 (talk • contribs) 20:03, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

@Higiniatapia1: Did you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:05, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Someone has authorised me to use one of his photos but doesn't want to write at Wikimedia

A friend has authorised me to use some of his photos (they've never been published on Internet) but doesn't want to write a written authorisation on Wikimedia. Can I update the file anyway? Dr Salvus 21:33, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

If they own the copyright, they must either upload the images themselves or give you a document that releases the copyright,(with the understanding that the image can be used for any purpose, including commercial). 331dot (talk) 21:38, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Dr Salvus. I don't believe you're going to be able to use your friend's photos without them explicitly giving their consent to do so if they are unwilling to upload the photo themselves and use the c:Commons:Wikimedia VRT release generator. Wikimedia VRT doesn't accept forwarded third-party consent emails to the best of my knowledge; so, your friend is going to need to email VRT themselves if you upload the photo for them. Moreover, you should explain to your friend what it means to give their consent for their photos to be uploaded to Wikipedia (or Commons). The only types of free licenses that the Wikimedia Foundation allows are ones that would essentially allow the photos to be downloaded by anyone anywhere in the world at anytime and reused for any purpose (including commercial and derivative reuse). So, your friend can't only give their consent for only you to use the photos and for the photos to only be used on Wikipedia. Before asking your friend to agree to anything like this, you might want to take a look at a c:Commons:Licensing, c:Commons:License revocation and c:Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia for reference. It would be even better for your friend to carefully read through those pages to make sure they understand what uploading their photos mean. Finally, emails between VRT members and copyright holders are not made public and VRT members will not reveal any details or discuss specific about the emails anywhere on Wikipedia. They might answer some very general questions, but they are actually not allowed (per an agreement they sign) to discuss specifics. So, your friend can email VRT and the contents will remain private only be visible to VRT members. All that anyone else will know is that the copyright holder's consent has been verified due to the c:Template:Permission ticket added to the file's page. If your friend agrees to do this, they should upload their photos to Commons since Commons is better suited than Wikipedia to host such files because Commons files can files can be more easily used by any Wikimedia Foundation project. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:04, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Dr Salvus, your friend the copyright holder ("YFCH") can instead publish the photos on the web -- in such a way that they'll be open to all (thus not at facebook.com or similar) -- and there declare either (A) that YFCH waives all rights to them and donates them to the public domain, or (B) that YFCH copyrights each under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license. When you can truthfully cite one or other of these two declarations, you can upload each photo to Commons. -- Hoary (talk) 23:15, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary and Marchjuly: he doesn't even want to do what you've said Dr Salvus 23:40, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

he's also asked me to take a screenshot of the photo so there would be no information about his activity on metadatas Dr Salvus 23:42, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately then, I don't think there's a way to upload the photo in away that will ensure it avoids deletion. What type of photo is it and how would it be used on Wikipedia? In some cases, a copyrighted photo can be used as non-free content, but the associated policy is quite restrictive and it would clearly need to be demonstrated that the photo has been published somewhere with the copyright holder's consent for it to avoid being deleted for not meeting non-free content use criterion #4. If your friend is unwilling to post the photo anywhere online or in some other print publication, then uploading it as non-free content would be a non-starter. Just curious as to why your friend wants the photo to be used, but is unwilling to do the things that would make it easier to use. Random unattributed photos aren't really going to allowed to be used in any Wikipedia articles per WP:IUP; so, the provenance of the photo is going to need to be stated somewhere on Wikipedia (usually in the description on the file's page). Simply stating "photo from my friend who wishes to remain anonymous" is almost certainly not going to be considered sufficient. You taking a screenshot of the photo or scanning the photo isn't a transfer of copyright ownership as explained in c:COM:SCREENSHOT and c:COM:2D copying; so, your friend's consent is still going to need to be verified. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:01, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

@Dr Salvus:Your friend can transfer the ownership of the copyright to you, in the form of a "writing": a paper document with the original copyright holder's signature. It is then yours and you can upload to Wikipedia as the copyright owner. Wikipedia has no need to verify your ownership status unless someone challenges it. As the copyright owner, you are free to license it to Wikipedia under CC-BY-SA, and also license it separately back to the former owner under a completely unrestricted license. -Arch dude (talk) 00:32, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

How to get search to recognize NYC

If I do a search on: List of Carnegie libraries in NYC

I get no hits. This is because the page is named:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Carnegie_libraries_in_New_York_City

I think Wikipedia should know that NYC is a synonym for New York City. But, can I add " (NYC)" to the title and that will add NYC to the search results?

Don Wiss (talk) 22:49, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

@Don Wiss: The only way to make pages appear in the search result is to create them. For the purpose you describe, it seems creating a redirect from List of Carnegie libraries in NYC to List of Carnegie libraries in New York City would be the technical solution to the problem. Victor Schmidt (talk) 22:56, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Not everyone in the world knows that NYC is New York City, so Wikipedia prefers not to use acronyms in article titles. See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Abbreviations#Acronyms_in_page_titles.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:14, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

March 21

Is The Ukraine members of NATO?

When I typed the in to the address bar something like this. This is the first thing people see is something like The Ukraine joined NATO in 1992. but actually the Ukraine aren’t members of NATO and it does say that further down in the article but the first thing people see is yes they joined in 1992 but that’s maybe true but it’s not true today where they’re not members of NATO they got out in 2010! This is very worrisome people are going to see on wiki. That it says The Ukraine join NATO in 1992. So they’re going to take for granted that they are members but they only wanted to join after that aircraft was shot down a few years ago. I thought wiki. Was telling me the truth whether good or bad . This article is going to sway a lot of people saying we should help cause of the NATO act. But I don’t think we should get involved Canada 🇨🇦 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnycab66 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Johnnycab66, you seem to be commenting on one article, though you don't say which article it is. Whichever article it is, it has its own talk page (clearly linked from the article). Please comment, or make a suggestion, at the foot of that talk page. -- Hoary (talk) 01:02, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

@Johnnycab66: Was this from a Google search? Google knowledge graph pulls from a variety of sources in an often unclear way. RudolfRed (talk) 01:53, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

@Johnnycab66: Ukraine has never been a NATO member. If you enter something other than a url in your browser address bar then you probably get search results or an attempt to answer a question from an external search engine like Google. Wikipedia has no control over what external search engines display. If Ukraine–NATO relations is a search result then a search engine may display an excerpt like "Ukraine became a member of the organization on 10 March 1992" which is part of a longer sentence with "inviting Ukraine to join the RPAS (Ukraine became a member of the organization on 10 March 1992)". We don't reformulate articles just because a search engine might take something out of context and give a wrong impression. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:16, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Please note that the preferred name of the country is Ukraine, without "the". See Name of Ukraine#English_definite_article. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 13:34, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Golden Globes website reilable?

Is the Golden Globes website considered reliable for use as a source of date of birth in Wikipedia? [2] Thanks in advance. --76.14.122.5 (talk) 05:06, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

I would say Golden Globes is only borderline reliable as that information is probably provided by the actors' agents, and actors are notorious for falsifying birthdates. Per WP:DOB: "Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources", so confirmation from other sources is desirable.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:01, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Is there a way to easily switch between mobile and desktop versions of articles?

A quick search showed no results applicable to my query.

Several people have linked me to various pages using a mobile link, and I haven't found a easy way to swap to desktop (I think my mobile automatically request the mobile version in the reverse)

If not, I don't know how to suggest such a feature, or if such a feature has been discussed before, or if wikipedia would look into using CSS media query to detect if a user is on mobile or not.

Even a simple button that is disabled when the screen width drops below a certain width. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FogCraneGio (talk • contribs) 06:05, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

If you are viewing a mobile page in a browser (as opposed to the Wikipedia App), then at the very bottom of the page is a line of links, one of which is "Desktop". Click that, and the browser will show the desktop version. (At the bottom of a desktop view page is an inverse link labeled "Mobile view".) - R. S. Shaw (talk) 07:00, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

@FogCraneGio There is a tiny link named "Desktop" at the bottom of all Mobile view pages. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 07:06, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for helping and replying.

I can't see it. What are some of the links near it? FogCraneGio (talk) 13:15, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Terms of use * privacy policy * desktop mode. It's right at the bottom of the page. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:19, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

OK, I see it. Thanks!!

As the issue has been resolved, do I somehow remove the topic from the help desk area? FogCraneGio (talk) 13:35, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

It will be archived automatically in a few days. And maybe someone else has the same question and can benefit from the archived answer. —Kusma (talk) 13:53, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Language link for High Commission of Pakistan, New Delhi

I received a request from a user that the French article of the one linked above is currently not appearing in the Language sidebar. I assumed that it was as simple as putting its info in the Wikidata entry, but it's asking me to merge something with a something else? Basically something I don't have the mental capacity to learn or am complicating. Could somebody guide me about what I'm doing incorrectly? Panini! • 🥪 06:15, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Panini!, you can merge d:Q27031139 and d:Q56307034. -- Hoary (talk) 08:03, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Question regarding ref access date

I've asked this in the Teahouse but failed to get a response, so I thought I'd ask here. Copy-pasted from the Teahouse:

I'm still a beginner here and one thing that kinda confuses me when citing sources is the access-date parameter. It seems simple: just write down the day, month, and year on which you accessed the source. My question is:

If I already cited some particular source, and then I go back to editing the Wiki article so I can add more information, and in order to do that I need to access the source again: do I have to change the access-date to the one I'm currently accessing the source on? So, if I for example added a reference on March 5, and a few days later, on March 8, I'm again accessing the website I referenced, do I change the access-date to March 8, or do I keep it as March 5?Castlepalace (talk) 15:18, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

@Castlepalace, answered at the Teahouse. It may take a while for a person who knows the answer to a question to get to it. StarryGrandma (talk) 15:46, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Maybe I was a bit too impatient but I saw other questions asked after mine get responses, so I figured maybe it'd be worth it asking here. I[User:Castlepalace|Castlepalace]] (talk) 17:05, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

@Castlepalace: Please keep in mind we are all volunteers. Nobody is on duty here, there is no predetermined order nor any schedule of answering. A question gets answered if some editor happens to find it, who knows the answer and has enough time to write it. This often takes just a couple minutes, sometimes several hours and even a day or two. There is WP:NOHURRY, just let things go --CiaPan (talk) 19:31, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Castlepalace. The point of the access-date parameter is so that we know when somebody checked the site to see that it was good, and contained the information that it is being cited for. Also, if the site goes away, or is edited to remove or change the relevant information, the access-date can be useful in finding an appropriate archived copy. Whether to update the date on a later visit is a judgment call: if it's only been a few days, there's no point in worrying. If it's a year since it was checked, then it might be helpful to update it. One factor is how often the site is likely to change. If it's a scan of a book, or it's a PDF, then it may never change, and it's not that important when it was accessed. If it is a site that gets actively updated, then it might be helpful to update the access-date often. ColinFine (talk) 16:26, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much! This is super helpful. Castlepalace (talk) 17:06, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Edit Request Template

I made a comment on the Talk page of "Francois Fenelon" and added an Edit Request. A template has now been added to that entry in the Talk page, stating unequivocally that the "user has an actual or apparent conflict of interest".

Is that meant to be literally true, or is it just a lack of flexibility in the template? I put the Edit Request because I was unsure of the legitimacy of correcting a grammatical error in a quotation and wanted a second opinion. (I have since added a comment justifying correction.) Should I have used something other than an Edit Request, or can the edit request template be broadened to cover my circumstances? 110.174.110.132 (talk) 15:19, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

The edit request templates are meant to be used when the person who placed them either cannot make the edit themselves (because of the protection level of the page) or should not make the edit themselves (because of a conflict of interest). It sounds more like you weren't sure the edit should be made at all, and were wanting to start a discussion to gain consensus on the edit. No template is needed in that instance. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:25, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps I should have just waited "a while". But the F F Talk page is pretty quiet: previous entry 2014. What do I do to get attention if no-one responds (and how long should I wait)? 110.174.110.132 (talk) 15:49, 21 March 2022 (UTC)