Wikipedia:Help desk

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

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

Ask a question

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

How to retrieve my 20 years' worth of edits?

In 2005 I began editing at Wikipedia using my IP Address as my username. Having just changed my broadband supplier I discover that my username is no longer recognised to login here. Who can help, please, to let me change my username and retrieve those past edits? - CLOFM ~2026-71910-2 (talk) 23:43, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Which 'username' are you referring to? I don't think it has ever been possible to register an IP address as a username. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:46, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Well when I joined Wiki in 2005 it certainly let me use my 12-digit number and plenty of people did do that back then. There's only one slot for entering our "username" when we login - unless you know otherwise! - clofm ~2026-71910-2 (talk) 00:07, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

PS - Andy, you can still see plenty of IP numbers as usernames when you view the history of an article. OK maybe not as many as once upon a time, but my username is still visible in plenty of histories. clofm ~2026-71910-2 (talk) 00:13, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Please tell us what username you have been using. We aren't mind readers. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:30, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Those IP numbers aren't usernames. It was never possible to use an IP as a username on Wikipedia; that was explicitly not allowed. Instead, if you edited without logging in to an account, it would use your IP like a 'temporary username' of sorts.

I think it is quite possible that you were editing logged out the whole time you thought you were using your IP as a username. In any case, it would be helpful if you'd tell us what that IP address was, so we can find your contributions. Athanelar (talk) 01:39, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

I think this person may have asked this question already, either here or Teahouse, within the past month(ish), and never answered that time either. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:10, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Presiously, if you did not create an account, your edits were attributed to your IP, which was assigned by your ISP. All those edits still exist and are still attributed to those IPs in article histories; if you know the IP, you can see the list of all if its edits. However, they could never be transferred to another attribution--neither a different IP if your IP changed nor an actual account if you created one. If your IP changed your contributions list did not follow you. Retaining "all your edits" even as you change IPs was one of the advantages of creating an account.

Now we have "temporary accounts" that are automatically created if you make an edit without creating a regular account. Like IP non-accounts, TA edits cannot be transferred, so if your TA changes, your previous edits do not follow you. Like IP edits, TA edits do not transfer if you change TA (but like IP you can always look up those old edits if you know the TA name). Unlike IPs, TA identity is designed to automatically live with your device, so if you switch IPs your TA stays the same and your history is intact. However, TA accounts automatically and non-optionally expire in 90 days, and might also change if you switch browsers or delete your cookies. If you make an edit afer that, you get a new TA with no contributions history.

Overall, the only way to retain beyond 90 days is now to create an account. And from that account, you can add a note that you previously edited using IP... and TA... so others can see that history of yours. DMacks (talk) 01:52, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-71910-2 What EXACTLY was your user name? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:06, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

A random sequence of twelve numbers. What's the point, anyway, it's not like the edit history can be retrieved somehow? JustARandomSquid (talk) 07:57, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

@JustARandomSquid With the IP, something like [1] can be found, and the OP might be a little happier. See also my comment below. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:05, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

This person claims to have specific knowledge of the numbers they were using. If they have the numbers, I want to help them. If in fact they don't have the numbers, I want to expose their lie. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 08:19, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

@JustARandomSquid No, it wasn't a random sequence of 12 numbers; it was a specific sequence of 12 numbers, which was apparently a fixed IP address for this user. David10244 (talk) 04:33, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

I meant random in the sense that there wasn't any logic to them. JustARandomSquid (talk) 08:16, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

@JustARandomSquid Right, IP addresses don't generally have a predictable structure. David10244 (talk) 03:45, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-71910-2 Find an article you know you edited. Look at the edit history, and find an edit you made. The edits you made with that IP are linked from there. If you made edits with several IP:s, repeat as necessary. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:56, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Aha! Thanks to everybody who has replied. I see now how my own memory has played a trick. As DMacks says: it wasn’t so much me *entering* my IP number as username in 2005 but simply starting to edit and by default my IP number became the index for my edits like a temporary account today. And thanks to Athanelar for your clarification and to Gråbergs Gråa Sång for the hint for reaching my history… I’ve been lucky to have the same IP address for 20 years, until now, but clearly I now must create a named account… As for AndyTheGrump (living his name to the hilt) and TooManyFingers, I have not mentioned that IP address of mine because the rules, published at the top of this column, say explicitly: “Do not provide your email address or any other contact information.” On balance, job done, so thanks all round. ~2026-71910-2 (talk) 12:21, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-71910-2 If you want, when/if you make a named account, you can note on your userpage something like "My previous edits can be seen at [2]." It's up to you, and as you say, revealing ones IP can have some unwanted effects, that's why we now have the WP:TA thing instead. Then again, your IP has been in the open for 20 years on WP, and still is, if one knows where to look. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:30, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-71910-2: I've found your old IP (which is unusually static), but I don't want to reveal it here, even though I didn't use TAIV directly to obtain it. Registering an account at Special:CreateAccount will give you a persistent account that'll last for as long as Wikipedia exists, even if your IP changes. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 15:56, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Watchlist labels

I keep getting pop-ups about watchlist labels, but these have no explanation as to what they are meant to be used for, or links to where further information is available. They are not mentioned in Help:Watchlist, so where is there any information about them? - Arjayay (talk) 12:07, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

I think these were deployed across various wikis literally within the last 24 hours or less, and I guess the local documentation hasn't caught up yet. It looks like mw:Help:Watchlist labels is the place to start. Ping @Samwalton9 (WMF) who I think has been working on this. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 12:37, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Thanks ClaudineChionh - although that page states "This page is currently a draft." and doesn't explain why you might wish to label things. - Arjayay (talk) 12:49, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi, yep, I'm happy to help if you have questions with this. It's a Community Tech project but I've been working with them on it. Claudine has linked the relevant help page, which we've been keeping up to date, so feel free to copy over text to the local help page. If you have any questions, bugs, or feature requests feel free to let me know here and I can get those documented and passed on to the team! Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 12:45, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Samwalton9 (WMF) As I posted above in an edit-conflict, that page states "This page is currently a draft." It also doesn't explain what the idea behind it was nor what it can be used for - please provide some examples. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 12:56, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

@Arjayay Good point! We hadn't got to finalising the page yet. I've just updated it, added images, and removed that Draft template. Is it clearer now? Is there anything there that you think could still be improved? Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 13:53, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks Samwalton9 (WMF) that is a lot clearer - but is it now linked from the pop-up? (I can't tell, as i dismissed them) - it is still not linked from Help:Watchlist, nor upon clicking the "Labels" link on my watchlist page - so how is a user supposed to find out about it? - Arjayay (talk) 14:05, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

@Arjayay When you're on Special:WatchlistLabels there is a Help link in the top right which points to this help page. As a local help page, I'll leave Help:Watchlist to be updated by local editors to include information about this feature or point to the MediaWiki help page. We might want to update the Help icon at Special:Watchlist to point to a more generic help page than the one that it currently links to, so I've filed T416179. We should also update mw:Help:Watching pages to point to our new help page too, we'll do that soon. Thanks for chatting this through - making sure new features are well documented can be hard! Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 15:02, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Making sure new features are well documented is an item to put on every development project's predeployment checklist. Why would a developer push something live with a documentation page that literally states that it is in draft form? Please adjust the WMF's basic development deployment checklists; that, at least, should not be hard. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:35, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

@Samwalton9 (WMF) How would someone know to "be" at Special:watchlist labels when they see the pop-up? The doc should be linked from the pop-up, and that should have certainly been step 1 of the implementation and tezting. If what I read here is true, it's incredible that this step was missed! David10244 (talk) 04:40, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

@Samwalton9 (WMF) I suspect that whatever bugs it might have, they're probably less important than this: whoever was dragging their feet complaining that this shouldn't be released yet, they must immediately (and permanently) be given the power to overrule the ones who decided to push ahead anyway. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:53, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

@TooManyFingers Could you elaborate on this a little? Do you mean that the feature should not have been released in its current state? I'd love to know why you think this if so! Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 12:01, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

@Arjayay I think my pop-up had a "next" button or something, and it disappeared after I had followed that to the end, like 2-3 clicks. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:40, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Yes Gråbergs Gråa Sång it did have a "next" and then a second screen - neither of which linked to, or explained, anything - and the only way to stop it popping up every time I went to my watchlist, was to click the "Got it" button - even though the only thing I had "got" was annoyed at the unhelpful pop-ups. - Arjayay (talk) 12:49, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi Samwalton9 (WMF) - For awareness, there's at least one other community talkpage that was wondering about the new feature: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red#Manage labels. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:05, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Looks like it currently doesn't read "Got it" as "don't show me this tutorial again". Can't imagine it won't get patched soon. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:46, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

• The large box covers up or obscures Watchlist notices. Failed experiment or WMF make-work project? Better gone than present. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:43, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
  • Click the button like it says. Two clicks and it goes away. The idea is that you could (for example) make a label called "socks" and add it to pages on your watchlist that you want to occasionally check to see if a particular sock has returned. Then you can choose to view only the pages with that label. Johnuniq (talk) 00:13, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

• Did that before I posted here. Please think of the tens of thousands of users who won't know to keep on clicking, and who will have to clear this needless box every time they look at their watchlist. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:42, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

  "Click the button like it says. Two clicks and it goes away. The idea is that you could (for example) make a label called "socks" and add it to pages on your watchlist that you want to occasionally check to see if a particular sock has returned. Then you can choose to view only the pages with that label."

  So you've added a feature without documentation, that I am never likely to use, and which obscures my Watchlist every time I try to look at it, and which I have to click twice to make it go away, because you know better than me what I "may" want to use? Have I summarised it correctly? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 02:01, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

  @Mr Serjeant Buzfuz Are you seeing the popup every time you visit your Watchlist? It should only displayed once - after you click 'Got It' they won't be shown again. Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 10:22, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

  If it's helpful Sam, I had this pop up on five occasions whilst on mobile, each time clicking the prompt. Looks to have stopped now. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:29, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

  @Samwalton9 (WMF) Why was this implemented without community discussion? David10244 (talk) 04:42, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

• See also discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) § A new feature added, without community consent. A prominent announcement of this new feature before going live might have prevented some complaints/confusion. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 23:21, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Consistent display of timestamps

I have a time zone preference set, but there are timestamps displayed that the preference doesn't affect. I don't like Wikipedia showing some converted and some non-converted times - I'd prefer them all to act the same. Consistency and reliability over convenience.

But convenience is nice too. I've seen at least one Wikipedia user script that says it will change Wikipedia's UTC to local time in places where that normally isn't done, but I'm not convinced it would be free of unintended consequences. I'd rather just switch off my time zone preference, see all of Wikipedia in UTC, and be certain Wikipedia is working right - unless there's some kind of indication like "Oh, tons of people use that script, it works great for me, never had a problem".

I'm not even sure I could identify all the possible pitfalls of messing with time display, let alone knowing how to check whether such a script deals with them correctly, and I figure there must be a good reason why Wikipedia doesn't show everything in everyone's local time by default.

Note: I have intentionally not linked to the script, because if I get much "Really? Never heard of that - where did you see it?" then I already know it's not for me. I don't want this to become an in-depth discussion of the particulars of running a time-display script and how to know where and whether it's behaving correctly; I just want to know if it's already in wide problem-free use. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 22:18, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

So what essentially do you want help with (summarise the 4 paragraphs above) ? AdmiralCarl (talk) 22:38, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

I want to know whether numerous people who each have many years of experience on Wikipedia use such a script. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 22:56, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

You mean scrips that change UTC time to the time of the user (I've seen those on user pages and their talk)? AdmiralCarl (talk) 23:01, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

The time zone setting at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering is part of MediaWiki and only affects times shown in MediaWiki logs like page histories, wathclist, user contributions. Signatures have the time stamp hard coded as page text like 22:18, 2 February 2026 (UTC). The English Wikipedia has the user-made gadget (a script) "Change UTC-based times and dates, such as those used in signatures, to be relative to local time (documentation)" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. It's disabled by default but you can try it without editing your common JavaScript. I tried it once but disabled it for several reasons. It uses am/pm (could be changed with a user js setting), it changes the displayed time after the page has already loaded, it makes it harder to refer to a post by its time (always use the original UTC for that), and also harder (at least for me when I was inexperienced with it) to work out what else the user was doing at the time. Special:GadgetUsage says 22,848 users (1,025 active users) have enabled it. It works correctly as far as I know but not everybody will like it. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:42, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll just switch my preference to UTC and be done with it. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 23:44, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Every few years I switch it to my local time zone, and then within a day I realize why I keep it at UTC. It's just too confusing with contribution history showing one time, and comment signatures showing something else. I know what my local time is, and I have the gadget enabled that shows the UTC clock in the upper right corner of any Wikipedia page, so I can judge how long ago a timestamp occurred. Good enough for me. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 07:31, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

To what extent does AGF apply to paid editors?

WP:AGF

Hello! Ive recently been working on the backlog of COI edit requests where I frequently encounter paid editors. I was wondering what yall's thoughts were concerning paid editors and assuming good faith. Do you think the "barrier" to assuming bad faith is lower? Thanks! - Otherwise (Talk?) 17:33, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Where is an example that made you ask this question?

It says "assume good faith", but it does NOT say "assume good work". Bad work is bad work. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 19:00, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

A disclosed paid editor from the Expedia Group requested removal of a section of an article regarding a scandal saying it was not related to the Expedia Group, only a particular subgroup of it. They claimed they reviewed the sources of the relevant section and that "Expedia Group is only mentioned in passing in two sources as a part owner of Trivago". When I examined the same sources, it clearly stated that the Expedia Group as a whole was involved.

In my initial response, I will admit I assumed bad faith and was passive aggresive. I since revised my reply to be more civil. I was just wondering what yall's thoughts were on this. - Otherwise (Talk?) 19:11, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

I'd recommend working on some of the more recent COI edit requests, if you're starting to feel a bit frustrated due to the creativity of the older requests. If ERs are just sitting there, there's a decent chance its bc the request is in some way deficient. One or more of long, biased, or poorly formatted.   MetalBreaksAndBends   (talk) (contribs) 17:06, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

I agree with TMF, @Mustbeotherwise. Paid editors who are new to Wikipedia (which many of them are) generally simply don't understand our policies on promotion, advertising, NPOV etc, and are here in good faith, trying to do something that they don't know might be impossible or forbidden. ColinFine (talk) 19:08, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

I've assumed good faith for all paid editors unless I have a reason not to. I feel like I should've worded my question a different way. I guess my question is, is it reasonable to have a lower threshold to assume bad faith for paid editors compared to non-paid editors? - Otherwise (Talk?) 19:54, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

The "official" answer is that it's the same as for anybody else: assume good faith until proven otherwise, and remember that people can do a lot of unproductive things in good faith.

My personal stance on the matter is that we have to remember what we ought to mean by 'good faith.' The usual way people seem to mean it is that anybody acting without disruptive or vandalistic intent is acting in 'good faith'. For me, though, 'good faith' means a good faith attempt to contribute to the encyclopedia: which means doing the necessary due diligence to familiarise oneself with our rules and standards to at least some extent before jumping headlong into editing, article creation, etc.

In my experience, paid editors most often are here with a singleminded intent to get their edits/draft published, and have absolutely no intent or desire to contribute to the encyclopedia outside of that. If it were up to most of them, they would happily create the most appalling, shoddily sourced, non-NPOV article you've ever seen and call it a day, because their goal is to publicise their company/employer/self, not to build an encyclopedia. They only care about meeting Wikipedia's standards because it is a barrier between them and getting their edits published. That, for me, is antithetical to 'good faith.'

If someone showed up to volunteer at a soup kitchen so they could record themselves doing it for internet clout, and as a result their food hygiene practices were subpar, they weren't interacting properly with the people coming in to get fed, etc, would anyone suggest they are acting 'in good faith?' In the Wikipedia sense of the word, they arguably would be, considering they aren't actively trying to sabotage the operation. But would anyone really think they're genuinely there to contribute to the operation? Of course not. Athanelar (talk) 19:16, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your thoughtful response. Well, I guess a better question would be, when is good faith proven otherwise? If an paid editor makes a false statement to support their change, do I still assume good faith? - Otherwise (Talk?) 19:48, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

If you can treat the false material as 100% false while assuming it wasn't their fault, sure. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:38, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

(However, I'm conflicted about this, because assuming good faith where it's clear none exists is IMO counterproductive and dishonest.) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 07:31, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

I just don't know to what end It's reasonable to assume good faith... A recent example, involving you actually, is this COI edit request. So many of their claims were misleading. - Otherwise (Talk?) 08:50, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Assuming good faith doesn't mean assuming they're right.

Maybe AGF should quote Hanlon's razor directly, if it doesn't already - i.e. if stupidity is enough to cover someone's actions, then there's no point in accusing them of malice. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:11, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

AGF is not how to edit, it's part of how to not get in a fight when you could have avoided it. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:14, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

When is good faith proven otherwise? I recall an incident where the subject of a biography tried to change it to be more favorable to him, was asked repeatedly to stop and use the talk page to propose requests, ended up being blocked for disruption, created a sockpuppet account to evade the block, and even hired someone to edit in his behalf rather than trying to appeal the block. Eventually he decided he'd suffered enough and came clean, admitting everything, but as far as I know the account is still blocked and the article is still in the state it was in before he came along. That's an example where an assumption of good faith became strained, and then impossible, within a short time. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 07:25, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Do you see anything on WP:AGF which exempts certain classes of people from its scope? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:18, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Spammers, vandals, scammers, paid editors who refuse to disclose, editors who mostly engage in personal attacks or vendettas, are all exempt as far as I am concerned. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 07:28, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Username change

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.

---

Hey there! Can I change my username to have a space between DUOS and Global? I'm trying to create a page for my company, but it's not allowing me to publish a page without the corresponding name.

~~~~ DUOSGLOBAL (talk) 18:22, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello. Please see User talk:DUOSGLOBAL for important information. Your username needs to represent you as the account operator, not your company. Drafts are created via the Article Wizard. 331dot (talk) 18:30, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

If you're trying to create a draft about a company called Duos Global, do it at Draft:Duos Global not on your userpage.

But moreover heed 331dot's notice about changing your username. As it stands, you may be blocked from editing because your username is inappropriate.

Also thoroughly read WP:COI, WP:PAID and WP:BOSS before you think about creating a draft for your company. Athanelar (talk) 19:08, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

@DUOSGLOBAL: There is an even more fundamental question: is this company notable by our definition? See WP:NCORP there are perhaps 100 million companies in the world. Less than 100,000 of them are likely to meet our criteria for inclusion. Notability is the only absolute criterion for inclusion, and if the company is not notable, it does not matter which other rules, guidelines, or practices you follow: the company cannot have an article and if an article somehow sneaks in, it will be deleted. -Arch dude (talk) 23:51, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

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

New here

I just joined Wikipedia for the first time. Any tips on making and editing articles? Also what should I first do as a new member on Wikipedia? NoriAndris (talk) 20:45, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

First tip is don't even think about creating new articles until you've grasped the basics, and got a bit more familiar with how the place works. Beyond that, see Help:Introduction, and Help:Editing, and then find yourself something that suits your skills and interests. Take a look at articles on subjects you know something about. Could the wording be improved? Are there grammatical errors? If you are reasonably confident in your English-language skills, it isn't hard to find articles that could do with a bit of copy-editing. Or maybe the article needs more (or better) sources: this is a bit trickier, since we have fairly strict rules about what we will cite in articles - see Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Getting a firm grasp of our sourcing policy takes a bit of time, but it is an essential skill if you want to contribute new content. More generally though, my advice is to find something that interests you, work on that, and don't let yourself get bored. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:14, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

If you want suggestions for ways you can contribute, Wikipedia:Task Center may be helpful. – Scyrme (talk) 21:26, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

I have left some useful introductory links on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:43, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

where do i write article.

where do i write a article Casosos (talk) 01:17, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

See WP:YFA and then WP:Article wizard. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 01:22, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Also, please note it is not recommended that new users attempt to create a new article. Please get familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines before attempting. AdmiralCarl (talk) 01:24, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

This is not always the case. Many editors, including myself, spent some of their first edits drafting and submitting articles. I don't think we should be too down on people enthusiastic to give it a whirl. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 01:33, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Oh, ok. At the least, be familiar with Wikipedia:Notability. AdmiralCarl (talk) 01:35, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for being understanding.

I have researched some Generals of the First World War.

I have come across a SPINKS sale catalogue when his property was sold after his death.

The catalogue contains much more info about his life than is currently published.

How do I go about having it included?

Would someone be interested in helping?

This is not my work, I simply discovered it. Attribution will be the SPINKS the Auction House

Draft article

SPINKS AUCTION DECEMBER 2020

Auction: 20003 - Orders, Decorations and Medals

Lot: 2

Sold by Order of a Direct Descendant

LIEUTENANT-GENERAL

SIR CHARLES MacPHERSON DOBELL KCB CMG DSO ADC FRGS

(1869-1954)

Charles Dobell's collection of Orders, Decorations, Medals and archival memorabilia represents a comprehensive memorial to a soldier whose place among his peers was recognised by his inclusion in John Singer Sargent's group portrait 'Some Generals of the Great War'. The extraordinary collection offered here, amassed by an inveterate souvenir collector who - it is evident - rarely threw anything away, encapsulates a world long departed in a way guaranteed to make those with an interest in it reflect upon his long career.

Apprenticeship

Dobell was raised in the family home, the palatial Villa Beauvoir in Sillery, Quebec; his father had emigrated from Liverpool and become rich in the lumber trade. After preliminary education in Quebec, Dobell went to Charterhouse School in England in 1883 for two years.

Returning to Canada, he entered the Royal Military College, Kingston, in September 1886 as Cadet No. 221 and was placed in B Company. In 1890, Dobell graduated with Honours, his conduct being noted as 'Very Good'. He was marked 'Distinguished' in seven out of thirteen obligatory subjects, with the same mark in four voluntary subjects. He was Company Sergeant Major of his company and wore a proficiency badge for Artillery Practice with another for being top of his class in Equitation. He was awarded three 'subject' prizes, received the Lord Stanley prize, graduated fourth of his intake and was one of only four cadets recommended in 1890 for commissions in the British army.

In August 1890, he was commissioned into 1st Bn. Royal Welsh Fusiliers, then stationed in Lucknow but warned for duty on the North-West Frontier. The battalion arrived in Peshawar early in December 1890, by which time Dobell had joined and assumed command of F Company. Early in 1891, he accompanied the battalion on an expedition to punish recalcitrant tribes in the Black Mountains of Hazara: it was a short-lived but effective campaign that earned him his first campaign Medal.

Late in 1891, aged 22, he was ensign for the Regimental Colour at a parade in Peshawar. Just a few months before his death, aged 85, in July 1954, he was present as that same Colour was marched off parade for the last time, to be laid up in St David's Cathedral, Pembrokeshire, after seventy-four years' service. In so many ways, that Colour - now preserved in the Regimental Museum - characterises Dobell's loyal service to the Regiment that welcomed him in 1890.

Experience and Responsibility

Dobell remained with the 1st battalion for the next five years, living the life of a British subaltern stationed in northern India: he learned how to command men; he rode; he shot; he probably fished. He had been a member of Kingston's Gymnastics Class and had left the college marked as 'Distinguished' in Drills and Exercises; an accomplished horseman, he was clearly a very fit young officer. Having achieved a First Class mark in Gymnastics at Lucknow in June 1892, he returned to his battalion to become regimental gymnastics instructor in April 1893. Concurrently, he passed both lower and higher standard Hindustani and obtained qualifications in Transport and Musketry in 1894. Promotion to lieutenant came in November 1892 and was accompanied by the duties of acting adjutant in May 1893; during the same period, he changed companies three times, thus obtaining wide experience of the men of his battalion. He also took leave - no doubt to go shooting - and caught his fair share of the illnesses associated with life in India. The battalion remained in northern India until embarking for Aden in October 1896. Dobell continued on to Malta to join the 2nd battalion and become its adjutant. No sooner had he settled into the appointment with his new battalion than a crisis emerged that set him on course for advancement.

Tipped for Stardom

Crete's Greek population had long resented Turkish rule. Early in 1897, this resentment became sectarian violence: the Cretans proclaimed union with Greece and rose in rebellion against the Turks; the Turks responded, bloodily. An international force from the 'Great Powers' was assembled and deployed to Crete to control the situation; as part of that force, 2nd Bn. The Royal Welsh Fusiliers disembarked at Candia early in April 1897. Working with allies attempting to separate warring factions, while also exercising objectivity and military discipline, has become commonplace for British soldiers in the post-1945 world but was relatively new in 1897. The senior officers of 2nd Royal Welsh Fusiliers were very good at it and three brevet promotions were awarded in recognition. One was to Dobell, who was to be made brevet major when promoted to captain: the promotion and thus the brevet happened almost immediately and simultaneously in 1899.

The crisis in Crete being resolved in 1898, the battalion embarked for Hong Kong and arrived in January 1899. War broke out in South Africa in October 1899 and Dobell began firing off telegrams asking for permission to join any unit, anywhere, on leave if necessary: anything to be involved. Eventually, his persistence (and his father's influence) triumphed and by late December 1899 he was attached to the staff of 2nd (Special Service) Bn., Royal Canadian Regiment. In February 1900, he was given command of 2nd Mounted Infantry battalion and exercised it with such success as to be mentioned in dispatches and created a Companion of the Distinguished Service Order (DSO) in 1901.

In July 1900, long before his DSO was gazetted, he was recalled from South Africa to China to resume the adjutancy of the 2nd battalion, then engaged in suppressing the 'Boxer Rebellion'. Once again, Dobell served in an international force created by the 'Great Powers' for a peace-keeping role. Relinquishing the adjutancy late in 1900, he continued to serve in Peking until the final withdrawal of British forces from that city in 1901. In 1902, he passed the examination for entry to the Staff College, entering the College in January 1903. Thus, as a captain and brevet major, aged 33, with a DSO, three campaign medals and experience of both administration and field command, Dobell joined an elite cadre of future staff and general officers.

The Staff Officer

A photograph of the Staff College students in the intake of 1903, contained in one of Dobell's photograph albums, is an evocative image of a departed age. Sir Henry Rawlinson, later Field Marshal Lord Rawlinson, was the commandant; few officers are without campaign medals, many have DSOs and two have VCs; all are in their regiment's full dress uniform.

Leaving Staff College in 1904, Dobell was appointed temporary lieutenant-colonel to command 1st Bn. the Northern Nigeria Regiment, West African Frontier Force, in 1905. He commanded that unit in the Northern Nigeria campaign of 1906, being mentioned in dispatches twice and awarded the brevet of Lieutenant-Colonel, concomitant upon his being promoted major; he also added basic Hausa to his various linguistic skills.

Promoted substantive Major and thus brevet Lieutenant-Colonel in 1907, he returned to England to enter the War Office as General Staff Officer grade 3, to be promoted GSO2 in 1909, to be appointed ADC to King George V and brevet Colonel in 1910, to relinquish his War Office appointment in 1911 and to be promoted substantive Lieutenant-Colonel commanding 2nd Bn. The Bedfordshire Regiment in 1912, then stationed in South Africa. In time of peace, such rapid advancement was unusual and must reflect not only Dobell's innate talent but also his ambition, professionalism and connections. Command of 2nd Bedfordshires was short-lived: he was promoted substantive Colonel and temporary Brigadier-General in September 1913 and given the post of Inspector-General of the West African Frontier Force.

During his rapid rise in the Army in the decade 1904-14, he found time to marry, in March 1908: his wife was a widow with two daughters and would present him with a daughter, Judith, in South Africa in 1912. Earlier in 1908, he had saved one R.E. Ford from drowning in the lake at Stoke Park, Buckinghamshire, and received a Testimonial from the Royal Humane Society as a result: as with so many other papers relevant to his long career, this Testimonial is pasted into his scrapbook.

The outbreak of war in August 1914 found Dobell home on leave. Since it was evident that Germany's two West African colonies of Togoland and the Cameroons were vulnerable to attack, Dobell's advice was sought on how best to capture them.

Success in the Cameroons

Britain's principal targets were the colonies' wireless stations and the ports: the one able to report movements of British shipping in the Bights of Benin and Biafra to German surface raiders, the other able to shelter and re-provision the surface raiders. In addition, capture of the ports would enable a blockade to be established that ought to starve the colonies of Togoland and the Cameroons into submission, thus minimising the need for extensive land operations in an unfavourable terrain and climate. Thus Dobell advised, specifying that naval support of ground troops would be necessary.

Given command of British forces, and ultimately Allied forces, for the expedition, Dobell sailed with his staff for West Africa in S.S.Appam on 31st August 1914. By the time he arrived off the Cameroons port of Duala, on 25th September, events had overtaken planning and Togoland had already, effectively, fallen to British and French troops. Duala was briefly bombarded by H.M.S. Challenger and, increasingly encircled by British and French ground troops, surrendered, the German forces having already evacuated the port and retreated inland. However, although the coastal strip had been secured, a sizeable German presence remained in the interior. German tactics throughout the ensuing campaign reflected their strategy of holding ground and denying Allied forces overall victory in order to retain the colony as a bargaining tool for the end of the war.

German defence was stubborn and protracted: despite severe limitations in materièl and in Intelligence, its unity of purpose contrasted significantly with that of the Allies, all three of whom - British, French and Belgian - pursued their own nationally inspired aims and consequently failed effectively to work together. Dobell's experience, in Crete and in China, was unable to counteract that. The longer the campaign continued, the more attenuated through casualties the Allied forces became; there were limitations in the number and quality of reinforcements available. The campaign became one of attrition, largely fought by black infantry on both sides, until eventually German forces escaped into the neutral Spanish colony of Muni. Dobell could only direct the campaign to a limited extent, so diverse were the Allied forces engaged and so limited the communications, but his role in the eventual Allied victory, when it came in February 1916, was undeniably significant. It was recognised too: by the KCB and the Commander's Cross of the Légion d'Honneur in 1916, coming after the CMG in the New Year Honours of 1915 and promotion to major general in June 1915. By 1916, so stagnant had the campaign in France and Flanders become, any success of Allied arms had to be celebrated, rewarded and publicised and so it was for Dobell in West Africa.

Disappointment in Palestine

The logic of taking a General fresh from success in a torpid campaign in tropical Africa and appointing him to command a desert-based force in the Middle East may escape those equipped with 20:20 hindsight but, in mid-1916, that is what the War Cabinet did with Dobell. His first role in that theatre was as Commander Western Frontier Force in June 1916. He was then appointed Commander of troops on the Suez Canal and Eastern Frontier Force in October 1916, following promotion to temporary Lieutenant-General in September. In that role, he and his superior, Sir Archibald Murray, have been held responsible for the failure of the first two battles of Gaza in 1917. While not a wholly unfair judgment, it has been made in hindsight and with little appreciation of the circumstances, among which the evident chaos of the Middle Eastern Force's command structure, inadequate staff work and Intelligence and reasonable concerns about the Force's logistics, especially in relation to the wellbeing of its horses, loom large. The first two attacks on Gaza were certainly badly handled and the second disastrously bloody. However, small recognition has been given to the immense and successful preparation work executed by Dobell and Murray before their replacement by Chetwode (his Field Marshal's Baton sold in these rooms) and Allenby that led to the eventual capture of Gaza and then Palestine. That said, it was certainly not Dobell's finest hour: perhaps too much was expected of him by the politicians in London, always hungry for favourable headlines and expecting miracles.

Redemption in India

Despite the modern condemnation of Dobell for his part in the failure to take Gaza after two attempts in 1917, he cannot have been wholly damned in the opinion of the British War Cabinet since no sooner had he returned home than it sent him abroad again, this time to Command 2nd (Rawalpindi) Division in India. He remained there until 1920, serving during the 3rd Afghan War of 1919 and being mentioned in dispatches twice. Briefly officiating as G.O.C. Northern Command India in 1920, he returned home to go on half pay in that year and in 1923 retired as an honorary Lieutenant-General. In 1926, he was appointed Colonel of The Royal Welch Fusiliers and retained that post until 1938, being noted as a particularly active and attentive Colonel. Even after relinquishing the Colonelcy, he retained his links with the Regiment, throughout the Second World War and until a few months before his death.

Paul Whyatt (talk) 19:59, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

@Paul Whyatt - are you the same person as @Casosos?

In any case, this is not an acceptable place to put this kind of material. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:57, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

No I’m NOT the same person as Casosos, what would be the point? I thought the information I had discovered might be worthy of adding to existing material. ~2026-84066-3 (talk) 21:49, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion then - I didn't see why you'd be responding to Casosos's question by adding what you added. Your material might be able to be added to the appropriate article, but only if you remove all statements that look as if they could be your opinion or speculation. Every little detail needs to be credited to an independent reliable source. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 23:02, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

I’m going to drop this as life’s too short😊 ~2026-84066-3 (talk) 06:54, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

I feel that way often when I'm down in the weeds with something on Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign in when you edit. When you sign out, you become a temporary account, as seen by your signature in your last comment. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 07:04, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Page Deletion

Hi, I want to start an AfD (Articles for Deletion) discussion for the article École d'Informatique d'Électronique et d'Expertise comptable but the AfD discussion page link doesn’t seem to exist, and search returns no results. What to do? Weichan123 (talk) 06:07, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

@Weichan123 To fix the discussion page link please see full guide @ Afd footer CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 06:54, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

@Weichan123 The easiest way to start an AfD is to use WP:TWINKLE, which handles all of the relevant filing and tagging in a single button press. Athanelar (talk) 12:40, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

@Weichan123, the discussion is up and I have contributed. It is a good idea to search for reliable sources when you nominate for AFD per WP:BEFORE, I couldn't find much. TSventon (talk) 20:09, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Definition

Is there a definition somewhere of what counts as a "revert"? So far I've found detailed lists of n "exceptions" without much detail about what DOES count as a revert.

How closely does it need to resemble the previous version?

Does just removing something count as a "revert" to before it was added?

Late Night Coffee (talk) 11:37, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

We have Wikipedia:Reverting..I find it rather comprehensive. Lectonar (talk) 11:39, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Any method that successfully gets rid of (more or less all of) someone's previous edit, counts as a revert. But "editing their edit", so it's still there but you changed it some, is not a revert. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:40, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

And yes, just removing something that got added is definitely a revert. (But again, not if you only changed a certain part of it.)

Equally, adding back something that they removed is also a revert. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:44, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

@LateNightCoffee I think, if any of this came to a dispute resolution, they would look at the pattern of how the person acted. If it looks like Person A really intended to undo whatever Person B had done, they would probably call it a revert, no matter how it was accomplished. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 19:30, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

@TooManyFingers I don't want to make a formal complaint. I just wanted to tell someone to stop removing my contributions to a page. But I wanted to check I was right about the rule first. They delete various things, often things I've added, about 3 times per day. Late Night Coffee (talk) 06:08, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

It's an article with a one revert rule. Late Night Coffee (talk) 06:09, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

You seem (just at a glance) to be making massive and controversial changes to a very controversial article. I'm not convinced that you're really doing valuable things to that article, at least not all the time. I think, on that article, you need to back off, slow down, and make better quality smaller edits. I'm not seeing you as "the good guy" at all in those conflicts; I'd be reverting a lot of it too. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:49, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

If what you're adding is being reverted, the proper approach is to start a discussion about including it, not forcing it back in after the revert. The purpose of WP:1RR is to prevent edit warring, not to give first-mover advantage to someone wanting to include disputed content, which would flip WP:ONUS over. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 16:06, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

واتساپ تلگرام و اینیستا یوتیوب

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.

---

من چگونه میتوتنم مثل دو ماه پیش از برنامه‌های گوشیم استفاده کنم~2026-78245-5 (talk) 12:29, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

This help desk is solely for asking questions concerning using the English-language Wikipedia. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:33, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

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

Why are my corrections being changed back

I am making changes to a professor's page, whom I personally know. Why are the changes being changed back. I am making corrections. Brendaskent (talk) 18:34, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Because the changes you made aren't corrections at all, and you didn't tell the truth about what you were putting. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:51, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

@Brendaskent Please familiarise yourself with the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle. When someone reverts a bold edit you made, your next course of action should be to discuss with them why they reverted you, not to continue to try to push your changes through; doing so is called edit warring. Athanelar (talk) 21:14, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Also @Brendaskent that therefore means you have a COI, if I know someone personally I can’t add information which is unverified about them, f they have told me their favourite colour is blue, but no secondary sources say it is blue, then I cannot add that the person’s favourite colour is blue, despite it being true (that rhymed 😅). The Grenadian Historian (Aka. Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a) (talk) 12:33, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Category 2

Hi
Years ago I created Category 2 and published it under GFL. It's a valuable example in the subject of Category theory. My page will be lost when the Web site is gone. So I think of contributing as an article here. Any consideration or objection before I start?
Thanks, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 17:13, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

The big consideration is that Wikipedia doesn't accept original work of any kind. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:40, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

Not original work; only documentation. For a mathematician, a simple example. The cited page notes "... suggested by Fred Linton in the first message to the Categories List on the day of 2008-02-15." Category 2 is just a simpler example parallel to category Set under the heading Category_theory#Examples. The heading is Examples but currently there's only one. Category Set is a more difficult example for a novice. If you object to 2, can you suggest another example simpler than Set? PeterEasthope (talk) 04:37, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

You should probably look at Wikipedia:Alternative outlets - it has suggestions of other places to publish your material. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:49, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

@PeterEasthope Also, especially considering the fact that it isn't very long, make sure that some paper copies exist. Websites disappear, hard drives fail, but you can't switch off a piece of paper. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 23:03, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

PeterEasthope, you say My page will be lost when the Web site is gone. Is there something inadequate about this and the other Wayback scrapes? -- Hoary (talk) 11:08, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I guess Category_theory#Examples can cite the page at Wayback. Similarly, many other external pages can be cited rather than be in Wikipedia. Thx, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 04:47, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Question about pronunciation in articles

Hi, it's me again. I added the Tamil script and pronunciation of a subject in this edit. Is this MOS-compliant? I couldn't find any info in it for putting text in the original script like that. thetechie@enwiki:~$ she/they | talk 05:48, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

I don't have the MOS in my head the way some people do, but I like the way you've done it and I see nothing wrong at all. MOS:FULLNAME is what governs this, as far as I know. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 06:54, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

I believe the bad example they give for Gaddafi's name is not being criticized for using a non-English writing system, but criticized for being a huge unreadable mess. Yours is simple and well done. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 07:00, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

the Manual of Style states: Avoid the use of Indic scripts in lead sections or infoboxes. Instead, use International Phonetic Alphabet pronunciation guides, which are more international. Exceptions are articles on the script itself, articles on a language that uses the script, and articles on texts originally written in a particular script. I think this is an okay exception as it is a biography about someone from Tamil Nadu, who speaks Tamil, and likely has an accepted Tamil spelling of her name. -- Reconrabbit 15:50, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

To clarify this, as per WP:INDICSCRIPT the Tamil script is not acceptable, but the Tamil IPA is. - Arjayay (talk) 15:54, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, that makes sense. -- Reconrabbit 16:03, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks - I never knew that. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:49, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

I understand, thank you all for the advice. I will add only the IPA to Indian subjects going forward. thetechie@enwiki:~$ she/they | talk 18:13, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

French station

Hi! The page Val d'Or station exists, but unfortunately neither Saint-Cloud station nor Template:Transilien Line L are picking up the link. Could someone help? Thanks! PalleyCov2030 (talk) 10:01, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

I created a WP:REDIRECT from Le Val d'Or station, which has fixed the issue. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:05, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Close Account

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.

---

How do I DELETE my account? Joncheatwood (talk) 16:10, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Accounts cannot be deleted, but only vanished, as every edit must be attributed to a user. ArthurPlummer (talk | contribs) 16:12, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

(ec) Deleting an account is not possible for legal reasons, as all edits must be attributable. But you can request a vanishing, see WP:VANISH- however, you have no edits other than here. Just stop using and abandon your account. 331dot (talk) 16:13, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

If you want to delete your account because you want a new username, you can have your existing account renamed. See WP:CHU for more information. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 01:57, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

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

Issa Boulos

Hi, my name is Issa Boulos. There is a Wikipedia page about me but it has a lot of discrepancies and wrong information. How can I correct this? Iboulos (talk) 17:34, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Please use the edit request wizard to propose changes to the article about you. 331dot (talk) 17:38, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Iboulos, first please read, digest, and think about Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks and Wikipedia:FAQ/Article subjects. Then respond to User talk:Iboulos#February 2026. If you are successful, then declare your "conflict of interest" on at least one (preferably both) of User:Iboulos and Talk:Issa Boulos. And finally do what 331dot suggests immediately above. -- Hoary (talk) 22:48, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Help with deleting a page submission

 Courtesy link: Draft:School the World

Hi: We had an intern help us try to submit a page on behalf of our non-profit last semester. She did it under her personal account which I don't know and has stopped responding so we can't get her help in deleting the submission. Can you help. The submission was for School the World, an education NGO based in Boston.

Thank you! Lara.hoyem (talk) 20:15, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Drafts are automatically deleted if they haven't been edited in over 6 months, so there's no need to do anything. Athanelar (talk) 20:56, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

I'll add that because it's at the draft stage, the public is not going to be finding it anyway. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 21:05, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

@Lara.hoyem Given what your intern wroteon 4 December, she had a very poor understanding of what conflict of interest means. Interns are paid editors if writing about the organisation they work for and are required to make a formal declaration of that status. However, if you have no intention of taking the draft forward, there is nothing you need to do now. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:47, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, Mike. We understand the conflict of interest issue now and won’t be taking that draft forward.

Just to confirm procedurally: does the existing draft need to be deleted or otherwise closed before any unrelated editor could create a new draft in the future, or can it simply remain until it expires? Appreciate the guidance. Lara.hoyem (talk) 23:00, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

It can remain until it expires. After it expires, it can be resurrected for further improvement by making a request at WP:REFUND. Or it can be created anew. If you want to delete it to start afresh, let me or another administrator know the situation and we can easily delete it. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 01:56, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

I would like to delete the article. She is not eligible to submit due to her conflict of interest so she will not be resubmitting it at all. Thank you for your help. Lara.hoyem (talk) 15:49, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

 Done, it's deleted.

A point of clarification: The only venue available for editors with a conflict of interest to write articles is in draft space, submitting an article for review. Therefore, she is eligible to submit it. We expect COI editors to submit drafts via the WP:AFC process instead of editing in mainspace.

You may start afresh, or you may recover the draft with a request at WP:REFUND. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 20:35, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

She is eligible to submit drafts, but must adhere to WP:PAID as well as WP:COI. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:01, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

THANKS! Lara.hoyem (talk) 00:17, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

For the record, everyone's edits must be under their own account. It is not permitted to share accounts or have a "role" account that is passed on to whoever has a certain position over time. DMacks (talk) 04:24, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Delete a redirect page to move an article

I want to delete the redirect page Canon PowerShot SX280 HS. Can someone check if I did it the right way?

I know the procedure in the german wiki, but here I am a bit overwhelmed how to do this. Skranon (talk) 20:49, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

What you've done is fine, but WP:RM/TM is the best location. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:52, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

That isn't a redirect page, and would not be deleted. You are likely thinking of a different page that is actually a redirect to that one. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 01:53, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

3 minutes before your comment, a user deleted the redirect page and also moved the page to its name. So yeah for you it looks like a normal page. Skranon (talk) 10:12, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Having Trouble Connecting to Wikipedia from Tablet

Im using a tablet from T Mobile but couldn't get into Simple English or the Regular English Wikipedia even while I'm using a strong password nobody else knows and I'm always with every day. Making matters worse, the systems wouldn't allow me to even change my password into a stronger code. Can somebody please help me with these situation problems here? Angela Kate Maureen Pears 20:54, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

What exact message are you receiving on your screen, when it doesn't work? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:59, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

The login system kept telling me the username and password were incorrect when they were not. Furthermore, the login system also wouldn't let me change my password to a stronger one. For some unknown reason I cannot log into my own actual account even though my password was correct. Angela Kate Maureen Pears 21:09, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

So you can't log in, Tropical Storm Angela. That is indeed a problem. I hope somebody has a suggestion. (It's not something simple, like accidentally having CapsLock on when it should be off?) But the systems wouldn't allow me to even change my password into a stronger code.... Furthermore, the login system also wouldn't let me change my password to a stronger one. That's reassuring. Or rather: of course. The ability to change somebody's password when they're not logged in could have disastrous consequences. -- Hoary (talk) 22:16, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

@Tropical Storm Angela You are clearly logged in at present since your posts here are correctly identified with your account. So is the real problem that your tablet device doesn't let you log in while the device you are using currently does? If so, the issue is with the tablet, not Wikipedia. If you really want to change your password, you should be able to do so now in this session and then go back to the tablet to ensure it stores the correct credentials. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:37, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Profile picture

How does one insert a picture as an avatar? Mospeada11 (talk) 23:14, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

There are no avatars or profile pictures here on Wikipedia. Athanelar (talk) 01:14, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

@Mospeada11 Computer avatars have an article, with images. Any picture is inserted according to the instructions at Help:Pictures; the files are normally stored on our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. If you wish, you can put a picture of an avatar on your own user page. However, we don't use them as part of our signatures. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:32, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

The Jarrett House Article

Hi. I am the General Manager of the Jarrett House. We are coming close to completing our renovation and I was recently made aware of our presence here on Wikipedia. While we are extremely excited to see this, it is somewhat disturbing to see the statement listed in the article about the tragic death of one of our beloved workers and local resident. I would ask that this statement be removed as it not only is disturbing to the staff, but mainly to be respectful to the surviving family members. The statement is not really anything that should be listed on Wikipedia, as other historic hotels do not have such information posted on their descriptions. Thank you for your attention to this. Your cooperation would be most appreciated by many people here. ~2026-84651-3 (talk) 05:39, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

I'll let somebody else handle this, other than to say that although the cited source for this briefly mentioned incident in the article The Jarrett House has succumbed to link rot, it survives here. -- Hoary (talk) 07:44, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

History doesn't disappear because time has passed. This was an event in the history of The Jarrett House that mattered enough to be reported.

Note that Wikipedia is not censored for anyone's benefit. This is a policy: WP:NOTCENSORED. If the information you find disturbing is cited to a reliable source, then it's public information, and it's fair game to include in the article. Whether it should be included is not for you to decide, it's for the community to decide, and you have made no proposal on the talk page about it.

You or someone else blanked that statement, and I have restored it. Because you have a conflict of interest, you shouldn't be making any substantive changes to the article directly. Use the WP:Edit Request Wizard to propose changes on the talk page, and a neutral editor will review your request. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 07:44, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

"The talk page" which Anachronist refers to is Talk:The Jarrett House. It's where you, ~2026-84651-3, and Davallison may make your case. -- Hoary (talk) 08:11, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

This matter has been resolved after talk page discussion by several uninvolved editors. To the manager of the Jarrett House: I assume that there will news coverage when the renovations are complete and this historic hotel re-opens. Please return to the Help desk at that time, and editors will assist you in updating the article. The hotel is definitely notable and worthy of up-to-date coverage on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 21:43, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Determining the actual displayed page size

For Gun laws in the United States by state, there are many "transcluded pages". Is there some way to determine the displayed page size as opposed to the amount of wikitext in the page code? --Jax 0677 (talk) 09:34, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Jax 0677 yes, see Wikipedia:Post-expand include size#How to see the current post-expand size. TSventon (talk) 21:49, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

@TSventon:, what does "Post-expand include size | 760,014/2,097,152 bytes" mean? --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:14, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Jax 0677 it means that the "Post-expand include size" or displayed size of the page is 760,014 bytes, out of a possible maximum size of 2,097,152 bytes. TSventon (talk) 22:22, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

@TSventon:, thank you for your assistance today! --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:36, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

@Jax 0677 and TSventon: That's not the meaning of post-expand include size (PEIS). It means how much content in total was transcluded from other pages during evaluation of the page, including content passed between templates without being part of the final page. The source text of the page doesn't contribute to PEIS so a huge page without transclusions would have PEIS 0. If you want the size of the final wikitext after everything is evaluated then you could use Special:ExpandTemplates and find the size of the "Result" field, e.g. by saving it to a text file and let your operating system say how large the file is. For Gun laws in the United States by state I get 332 kB. PEIS is much larger at 733 kB because a lot of content is passed around two or more times during evaluation. Some downloaded content like images doesn't contribute to either of the sizes. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:58, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

I want become Editor

Hi, I started editing Wikipedia about two days ago. I’m reading the guidelines and trying to learn properly. I’m also a digital artwork creator and have uploaded some of my creative work to Wikimedia Commons. As a new editor, can I help by improving articles or giving feedback, and is it possible to become a page reviewer later? ButterflyCat (talk) 09:52, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi there, thank you so much, and welcome to the community! You absolutely can improve articles. You don't have to be a page reviewer to do that, such as by formatting pages per the manual of style, adding citations, or copyediting. You can also give feedback on talk pages of articles or drafts, or talk pages of users who create them. If you have a good track record for this, you can request the permission so you can "patrol" pages so they are indexed on search engines like Google! There are many things to do on Wikipedia, feel free to see the Dashboard for some tasks you can help out with. jolielover♥talk 11:20, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! I’ll focus on improving articles and learning the process first. ButterflyCat (talk) 11:26, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Lars Knudsen

The Lars Knudsen redirect currently points to Danish researcher Lars Ramkilde Knudsen, but there is also Lars Knudsen (producer). Should this be a disambiguation page? ~2026-83879-4 (talk) 11:06, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

When there are only two subjects involved, it is more usual to place a hatnote at the top of each article linking to the other. Were there four or more, a disambiguation page would certainly be appropriate. If there were three, opinions might differ on whether hatnotes (each with two links) or a disambiguation page would be preferable. Hope this helps, and further opinions welcome. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 19:07, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

A disambiguation page is needed if there is no primary topic (WP:NOPRIMARY). That can be true even if there are only one or two articles. TSventon (talk) 21:38, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Grokipedia

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.

---

Could we cite Grokipedia as a reliable source, why not? ~2026-84056-6 (talk) 11:23, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

It's AI generated, so no, it's not a reliable source. It has many errors and hallucinations. 331dot (talk) 11:26, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

We also don't cite "wikis", including Wikipedia itself. jolielover♥talk 11:28, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

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

Ibrahima Cissé

Ibrahima Cissé currently refers to the footballer born in 1994, but there is also Ibrahima Cissé (footballer, born 2001), which includes a disambiguation note despite its disambiguated title. Should Ibrahima Cissé be converted into a disambiguation page? I don't believe there is a long-term primary topic. ~2026-83879-4 (talk) 11:27, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi ~2026-83879-4. You might want to ask about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. This kind of thing has probably come up before regarding other articles about soccer/football players, and that particular WikiProject might have worked out an approach to applying WP:PRIMARYTOPIC specifically to such articles. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:20, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

I refer you to my answer to you about Lars Knudsen above. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 19:10, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Viewing my Lists?

I’ve made a number of lists. How do I view my lists? Thanks.ZZBUFF (talk) 13:28, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

What lists are you referring to? Your account has no edits other than this one. 331dot (talk) 13:29, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

@ZZBUFF: If you refer to a feature in a Wikipedia app then maybe mw:Wikimedia Apps/Android FAQ#Reading lists and offline reading or mw:Wikimedia Apps/iOS FAQ#Saved Pages and Reading lists can help. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:52, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Help on getting our page approved

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.

---

Hey Guys,

I am really seeking some help here. I organized to have a page done for one of our icons in Trinidad. He really would like and in my view deserves to have one done while he is still around for to see it as he is really getting down in age. Can someone take a look at it and tell me what I may need to do to have it approved?

that is the link. Really looking forward to some assistance! Thanks a Mill! Onemoretime1234 (talk) 13:34, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

I fixed your link, the whole url is not needed. The draft seems to also be at Draft:Anthony T. Bryan. You may resubmit that for a review to get feedback.

As you seem to have an association with him, please read WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 16:03, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

@Onemoretime1234: Refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode:

• https://www.foba.fatima.edu.tt/interview-with-professor-anthony-bryan-2015-hall-of-achievement-inductee/ doesn't help for eligibility or biographical claims (connexion to subject). Interview.
• We don't cite ResearchGate (no editorial oversight). We much prefer one cites the papers it collects from their original journals.
• https://cpccaribbean.org/team-members/anthony-t-bryan/ doesn't help for eligibility or biographical claims (connexion to subject). Bio from an organisation he co-chairs.
• https://cpccaribbean.org/publications/oil-dorado-guyanas-black-gold/ is 404-compliant, likely hallucinated.
• https://oilnow.gy/featured/rivalry-in-the-guyana-suriname-basin-the-holy-grail-of-oil-and-gas/ is 404-compliant, likely hallucinated.
• https://cpccaribbean.org/guyana-oil-discoveries-caribbean-potential/ is 404-compliant, likely hallucinated.
• https://scholarship.miami.edu/articles/peace-development-and-security-in-the-caribbean-by-anthony-t-bryan/ returns a 404 error and is likely hallucinated. (One or two random 404s in a large list of sources is link rot more often than not, 3+ 404s in a small sources list like this is a sign of inhuman authorship or at the very least a lack of care in source assessment.)
• https://www.guardian.co.tt/news/bryan-time-ripe-for-southern-caribbean-energy-bloc-6.2.1903475.9a5807d02a is malformed (it returns an HTTP 400 "Bad request" error).
• https://sta.uwi.edu/news/releases/release.asp?id=21927 is a non-sequitur; the source doesn't say anything about Bryan and is instead about a speech the vice-chancellor of The University of the West Indies gave.

I strongly suspect that an LLM was used to at minimum source this draft. There is no way, assuming a human was involved in the process, that there should be four 404s and a 400 in a reference list nine strong. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:40, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Onemoretime1234.

Trying to create "a page for somebody" to make them happy is a really really bad idea. Please see WP:PROUD for some of the reasons why it is not recommended.

Also, Wikipedia has no deadline, and trying to urge editors into helping you meet your deadline is more likely to annoy them than to get a positive result.

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) 17:18, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

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

Help

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

---

Hi what do I need to do again for our page to go live ? Onemoretime1234 (talk) 17:37, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Please see the replies to your post above. 331dot (talk) 17:40, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

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

Why was our page deleted?

Why was our page deleted? We were told to fix the references,so we were working on those. Some brand new ediotor deleted the page. We submitted a couple of days ago and were still workng on the draft and a brand new editor (this is what it says on his page). How can we get this fixed.

The editor was This page does not exist. The deletion, protection, and move log for the page are provided below for reference.

• 11:19, 7 February 2026 MPGuy2824 talk contribs deleted page Draft:Jona Denz Hamilton (G15: Unreviewed LLM-generated content (communication intended for the usersee bottom sections, "this article..." "this Wikipedia entry..." etc is obvious LLM.)) Tag: Twinkle

. ~2026-80504-8 (talk) 15:26, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

MPGuy2824 isn't a 'brand new editor'. He is a 'new page reviewer'(someone who reviews new pages) and an admin (hence being able to delete articles/drafts). As for why the draft was deleted, you have already been told - 'obvious LLM'. If you are unhappy with this, I suggest you discuss it with MPGuy2824. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:34, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

To add to Andy's reponse, see WP:CSD#G15. ArthurPlummer ( :) | talk | contribs) 15:38, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

~2026-80504-8, if you are Jeff.p.godoy, please remember to log in. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 08:15, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

"Our page"? Who is this "our" you refer to? Is the account accessed by multiple people? ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 15:19, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

See Your first article. One of the pieces of advice given there is not to use WP:LLM. Please write the text yourself and ensure that it is reliably sourced. Also you would need to establish that the subject is notable enough for an article.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 15:39, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

want to add a reference page to oppose the page below

The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History Can you please send me a link where I can update and leave you for review the contents or links on the "page for review". Thanks.

https://answering-islam.org/Muhammad/index.html

JohnRathnam2026 (talk) 18:04, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure what exactly you want to do, but you may propose changes at Talk:The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History. 331dot (talk) 18:27, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

The article The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History is not a ranking of the hundred, or the ten, most influential people in history, JohnRathnam2026. It's merely an article about a (perhaps rather silly) book titled The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History. So you are, I am, anyone is free to disagree with what's written in the book; but our opinions are rightly ignored (unless perhaps we happen to be published by reliable sources). -- Hoary (talk) 23:09, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Viewing Reading Lists

This is probably very simple to anyone else. But I have made many reading lists of topics. I can’t figure out to view them, how to see all the Reading Lists I’ve made. Thanks for any help. ZZBUFF (talk) 00:18, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

ZZBUFF, while logged in to en:Wikipedia as ZZBUFF you haven't made any list. You also don't seem to have made such edits to other-language Wikipedias or to other Wikimedia websites while logged in as ZZBUFF. -- Hoary (talk) 07:15, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @ZZBUFF.

Reading lists are a feature of the Wikipedia mobile app: they are not supported on the desktop or website version. If you are asking about a way to view your lists within the app, I don't know: WP:VPT may be a better place to ask.

There have been many requests to add them to the desktop system (see for example m:Community Wishlist Survey 2021/Mobile and apps/Have Apps reading lists available on Destop/Mobile) but as far as I know they have not so far been added.

One way to create and curate your own reading list that you can see on any platform is to create files in your user space and put links to articles in them. ColinFine (talk) 12:07, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Is this source significant coverage

I have a quick question regarding sigcov- could anyone look at this link and tell me if it meets WP:SIGCOV? I'm editing HDF Explorer right now, so I'm figuring out if this would count as external coverage -- I'm leaning toward no

https://un-spider.org/links-and-resources/gis-rs-software/hdf-explorer-hdf-group

Thebest8382 (talk) 00:56, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

No, this isn't significant. Significant has long paragraphs of text that are all about the topic. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 04:57, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Thebest8382, that's a routine database directory listing. It is the 21st century equivalent of a telephone book. So, the answer is "no". Cullen328 (talk) 10:17, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Original Research?

Hello! Is this article definitely compliant with the requirements? Specifically, is it not original research? I don’t see any sources among the ones cited that periodize USSR history according to the reigns of Lenin, Stalin, Brezhnev and so on. Senya48 (talk) 16:13, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm not seeing the thing you described. Could you please be more specific? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:17, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Currently, the sources cited in the article deal with the history of the USSR, but none of their authors identify or treat the period from 1927 to 1953 separately as the era of Stalinism. These are merely a selection of works on Soviet history that cover various specific aspects. The notion of a distinct “Stalinism period” is not articulated or established in any of the provided sources. Maybe I’m wrong, but when a concept or period is only mentioned in passing in the sources and not actually presented or named as such by them, that amounts to original research. At present, none of the existing citations/references is headed or described as “History of the USSR (1927–1953)” or uses any similar periodization label. Senya48 (talk) 17:26, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

This is quite a long article with over 100 references. If there are sections/pieces that you think aren't suitably sourced, you would be best to mention this on the talk page, or mark individual bits with {{failed verification}}. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:31, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Frankly speaking, my concerns apply to the article as a whole, rather than to specific sections. Historians likely do not periodize the history of the USSR into distinct eras according to the last names of state leaders, as I have been unable to find any source on the internet that asserts the opposite. Senya48 (talk) 17:37, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Having an article on the "Stalinist Era" is not Wikipedia:original research as reliable, published sources exist for the term. Whether it is the best periodisation for the history of the Soviet Union is a different question. TSventon (talk) 18:01, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. Senya48 (talk) 18:03, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Senya48, unsurprisingly, we have a well-referenced article Stalinism which begins Stalinism is the means of governing and Marxist–Leninist policies implemented in the Soviet Union (USSR) from 1927 to 1953 by Joseph Stalin. Perhaps some of those references could be added to the article in question or you could do your own search of the massive historical literature on this era. Cullen328 (talk) 00:00, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

notability and self publishing

If a notable critic publishes their review on their YouTube channel, is their review considered self-published and therefore ineligible for use on Wikipedia? Or does this not pose an issue under Wikipedia's policies? Vastmajority20025 (talk) 21:52, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

See WP:SELFSOURCE. ArthurPlummer ( :) | talk | contribs) 21:58, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Yyou could say "Critic so-and-so noted on his YouTube channel that...." if so-and-so is notable enough to have a standalone Wikipedia article that you can link to, and provided that the video is just an extension of the critic's primary profession. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 23:36, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Per WP:RSPYT, Youtube is considered to be a reliable source only if the content there is verifiably posted by an otherwise reliable source. Athanelar (talk) 00:06, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

...provided that it's in the video creator's area of expertise. A Nobel laureate in physics making a video about election fraud wouldn't be considered a reliable source on that topic regardless of the Nobel Prize effect. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 01:14, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

John Duncan

Wouldn't John Duncan (artist) be ambiguous, since John Duncan (painter) was also an artist? ~2026-88427-9 (talk) 22:24, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

An artist is different from a painter. Artists deal with art, painters deal with paint. No, it would not not be ambiguous. ArthurPlummer ( :) | talk | contribs) 22:26, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

In this context, ArthurPlummer, a painter is a specific kind of artist. Both Duncans are artists.

@~2026-88427-9 both articles have the appropriate disambiguating hatnote at the top, clarifying who each article is about. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 22:34, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, it is ambiguous, both John Duncan and John Duncan are or were artists. DuncanHill (talk) 22:29, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Except it's not ambiguous anymore, because the first thing you see is an explanation and a link. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 22:55, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

John Duncan (artist), we're told, is "an American multi-platform artist". The multiplicity of platforms isn't described as including canvas, walls, or other paintable surfaces. "His events and installations are a form of existential research, often confrontational in nature", whatever that means ... well, it's an article created twenty years ago by an SPA, so no great surprise that it contains many gems, just one of which is Bus Ride sexually stimulated unsuspecting passengers on a city bus with a liquid poured into the ventilation system in order to observe the results; the premise -- that there exists a liquid which if poured into a ventilation system sexually stimulates those who are ventilated -- is, I humbly suggest, bollocks. The work of John Duncan (painter) isn't obviously confrontational in nature or anything else, but his last work "was completed in spite of the critical antagonisms Duncan was facing at the time", in which the "critical antagonisms" go unexplained. These two people are effectively distinguished by the combination of (A) artist/painter and (B) a hatnote on John Duncan (artist). Their respective titles aside, the article John Duncan (painter) is in moderate need of improvement and the article John Duncan (artist) in acute need of same. -- Hoary (talk) 22:56, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Heh. Reminds me of the movie Orgazmo. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 23:33, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

I hadn't heard of Orgazmo, Anachronist; what I read reminds me of Flesh Gordon, or what little I saw of it before I dozed off. But back to the article John Duncan (artist): its lead describes the man's "existential research" etc in the present tense, yet it's sourced to something published in 2001. I'm so ancient that 2001 doesn't seem so long ago, but even I couldn't perpetrate the present tense here with a straight face. And yet people (especially at the teahouse) routinely claim to have trouble finding articles that need improvement. Strange. -- Hoary (talk) 00:00, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Orgazmo wasn't pornographic, it was about making pornographic films, and featured a device that you could aim at innocent passersby to give them instant orgasms. Your mentioning Bus Ride reminded me of that. But you're right, both articles can use cleanup. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 01:08, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

How did we go from ambiguity between two names to this? ArthurPlummer ( :) | talk | contribs) 01:11, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Now you've added your own ambiguity to the mix: is it "What is the world coming to?" Or "What, is the world coming, too?" TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 03:53, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, Anachronist, I'd understood. (Incidentally, I found Flesh Gordon far less pornographic than soporific.) A difference between Orgazmo and Bus Ride is that the former is presented as amusing fiction, whereas Wikipedia uncritically recycles a credulous account of the latter (sourced to John Duncan: Work 1975-2005, a book by John Duncan). -- Hoary (talk) 02:01, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Where can I get some of this liquid? Asking for a friend. Chuntuk (talk) 14:02, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

How can I delete a page?

I created a Wikipedia page for a fellow artist and she would like to delete it. How is this accomplished. Dmichaele (talk) 22:51, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Pages may only be deleted by administrators. ArthurPlummer ( :) | talk | contribs) 22:54, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Please see this FAQ, Dmichaele. -- Hoary (talk) 23:00, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

So, you want to improve it the article or still want it deleted? ArthurPlummer ( :) | talk | contribs) 23:03, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

The only article you have created recently is rather old and has contributions from many editors, so it cannot be deleted by request. You moved it to a new name, leaving a redirect behind, which is the correct situation because the article may be found by searching for either name. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 23:25, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

@Dmichaele: Is there a reason you want this article deleted? What is your relationship with David Eaton? Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 02:26, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Is this about Seiko Hatano? asks Orangemike, at 23:17, 8 February 2026

How should state-backed interference on a page be reported?

Recently, the EU East StratCom Task Force put out a post essentially calling for the brigading of the page Kaja Kallas (among others) (see https://x.com/EUvsDisinfo/status/2020487309024448836). I went and put on the talk page that they did this as a heads up, but I have a feeling that I should probably do something else to report this, is there anything more I should do or is just putting it on the talkpage enough? AlexChillOut (talk) 07:01, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Let WP:AN or WP:AN/I know. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 07:17, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you :) Added it to WP:AN/I AlexChillOut (talk) 16:41, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Fwiw, also commented on at User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#The_Wikipedia_wars_and_Russian_disinformation. I guess in a broad sense, WP:COIN might be the place for general discussion, but I think there are at least two ongoing related rfc:s, Talk:Kaja_Kallas#RfC:_Footnote_in_infobox_birthplace and Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#RFC:_Baltic_bios_infoboxes_question. I don't think everyone on the side EUvsDisinfo opposes are Russian baddies. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:23, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Melt inclusion

Special:Diff/1337404324

I got this error and don't quite understand where it was introduced. I would like to fix it, and it would be great to get some help on this.

A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)

Thanks, S — Preceding unsigned comment added by SCSHI (talk • contribs) 07:17, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

You have "date=2015-09", SCSHI. I don't think this is permissible. By contrast, either "date=2015-09-27" or "date=September 2015" would be, I think. (My choice of "27" is of course meaningless, other than to illustrate a date format.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:09, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! SCSHI (talk) 20:03, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

@SCSHI  Done Full Clean up. CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 08:18, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Pageview statistics

Wikipedia:Pageview statistics appear not to have run this morning (UTC), 9 February. Has this been discussed or reported anywhere? TSventon (talk) 14:08, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

@TSventon: I guess you mean https://pageviews.wmcloud.org. There is a report today at meta:Talk:Pageviews Analysis#Feb 8, 2026 - Not showing numbers for views of any page. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:25, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

The report seems to be working today, 10 February. TSventon (talk) 12:47, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

What's wrong with my referencing?

I've just written an article on Bertrand Pierre Castex, which has been assessed against B-class criteria by MilHistBot. It comes up good for all areas except "Referencing and citation". The article is liberally peppered with references, all to RS, so I don't really see what more I need to do to get across the line to B-ness. I'd ask the reviewer, but it's a bot. Chuntuk (talk) 14:16, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

@Chuntuk: I presume that the bot follows guidance at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Academy/Citations and references, which I am not familiar with. If you have questions about the guidance, I suggest asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. Generally, if you have questions about a bot edit, you can usually ask the bot operator on their talk page, but I suggest asking the project in this case. TSventon (talk) 14:35, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Help with Speciesbox

Hello all, I just created Bythinella conica and the species is being shown as B. c. - this was my first try at building a taxobox. Why's the specie being shown like that and how can I make the whole name show up? Cheers! Barbalalaika 🐌 20:05, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

@Barbalalaika: It appears the first words in taxon are automatically abbreviated to a letter. There was a space before the ref so it probably thought the ref was a word and abbreviated the first two words. I have removed the space and now only the first word is abbreviated. Is that OK? I don't know the practice in the field. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:16, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Ahh thank you, learnt something. Yes, it's fine now :) Cheers Barbalalaika 🐌 21:19, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Your Article: "The Gumps"

Your page isn't complete as there's no mention of the song "Andy Gump" from 1923. I own a player piano roll for this song from that year whose lyrics are based on many of the characters in the comic strip. If you want, I could transcribe the lyrics and forward along with a copy of the roll box label. Thank-you. - Mark. ~2026-90579-5 (talk) 20:10, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

The piano roll and lyrics prove that the song exists, but they don't prove that neutral reporters were interested enough in that song to write about it. If you can find discussions of this particular song in newspapers, magazines, or other reliable reporting, that would be great. (Mere mentions don't count.) But just showing that the song exists is not enough to get it included. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 21:44, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Notability would be required for an article about that song and/or that piano roll. Notability is not separately required for each part of an article about a notable subject. Inclusion of this song in the The Gumps is a matter of editorial judgement. -Arch dude (talk) 21:56, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Sorry @~2026-90579-5 - I was wrong. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 01:30, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

You could transcribe and put it on Commons, but Wikisource is actually a more appropriate location. I'm not sure of the best way to establish the provenance. But an image of the roll box label is a start. Where are the lyrics? on the roll itself? if so, it may be awkward to add images of the original. Since it's from 1923, it's now in the public domain and you are not violating any copyright, wherever you choose to put it. After it's on Wikisource, you can reference it from the Wikipedia article. You are actually referencing the roll, not your transcription, and your transcription is a courtesy copy. -Arch dude (talk) 21:51, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Oops. Thanks for your efforts, but the lyrics are already online :here, so you can add that as the reference. -Arch dude (talk) 22:42, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Please upload a picture of the box label to Wikimedia Commons, using this page.

You can then add the image to the article, or drop a note here and someone will do so for you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:40, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Sri Lanka Artistes

I am a free lance journalist like to contribute details of many artistes in Sri Lanka to add to your contents ~2026-90068-7 (talk) 22:16, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

If the details you want to contribute have already been published in Wikipedia:Reliable sources, they might be included. But if the details are not yet published, or if they're published in other kinds of sources, Wikipedia won't accept the material. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 01:35, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. I have left some useful introductory links on your talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:37, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Editing suburbs near Paris’ articles

On suburbs near Paris, it states that they are suburbs of Paris, when they should say they are suburbs near Paris in order to prevent people from thinking they are actually part of Paris. The reason I am asking for this to be done for me rather than doing it myself is because there are a ton of articles like this. HamzaTheGreat2007 (talk) 22:30, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

"Suburbs of Paris" is the correct terminology. You should see your talk page, as several editors have been trying to talk to you about this. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:40, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

In English, a 'suburb' is an outlying, generally residential, area considered part of a larger city, and thus it wouldn't make sense to suggest that there were 'suburbs' on the perimeter of Paris that weren't suburbs of Paris - where else would they be suburbs of? Note that this is an unofficial designation, and depending on relevant legislation, the suburb may have its own local government, rather than being legislatively part of the larger city. Whether Wikipedia should describe a specific locale as a suburb of another would depend on what sources cited say. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:43, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

If they were actually part of Paris, they couldn't be called suburbs! The thing you're calling a mistake is exactly correct and shouldn't be changed. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 01:39, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Um, what? 'Part of Paris' in what sense? As I've stated above, whether an area is described as a suburb or not has nothing to do with legislation, and instead depends on how sources characterise it. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:58, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

I do not know if this is an English variation issue, but in American English, the word "suburb" is never (or extremely rarely) applied to an area within the city limits of the large city. It is applied to smaller cities and towns and villages or possibly unincorporated communities that surround that core city but are not formally part of it. Cullen328 (talk) 02:05, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

If that is true, then presumably sources won't be found to characterise areas within US city limits as suburbs ('City Limits' in non-US contexts can be a rather amorphous concept: see e.g. London, which has an inner 'City' - the 'Square Mile' - and a larger area administered by the Greater London Authority which is (approximately) what most people would be referring to most of the time when describing something (e.g. The houses of Parliament) as being in 'London'. In some contexts, for some people, even the GLA area isn't considered the outer limit of 'London', taking instead the M25 as the border) If we follow sources, the issue doesn't arise. If articles are characterising areas as suburbs without such sources, they probably shouldn't be, but they need to be looked at in context - we can't generalise, and shouldn't be deciding for ourselves. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:26, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

This is explained at suburb#Etymology_and_usage. In UK English it just means "residential area outside the city centre". See e.g. wikt:Category:en:Suburbs_of_London which is full of places that are in London. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 10:27, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

'Part of Paris' in what sense?

The sense in which the person who asked the question was erroneously using it. The sense in which Paris is not a suburb of Paris. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:20, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

On what basis are you claiming that it is erroneous? Cite your source, or at least explain why you think it is erroneous. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:27, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

I.e. any sense under which Paris is not a suburb of Paris is good enough TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:30, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

That clearly isn't answering the question I asked. At no point did the OP suggest that Paris was a suburb of Paris. You stated earlier that If they were actually part of Paris, they couldn't be called suburbs! Justify that with a citation, or at least with a clear explanation. Are you attempting to apply preferred terminology in one context (e.g. Cullen's description of how it works in the US), rather than the broader terminology applied elsewhere (see my remarks on London)?. If so, that isn't how we do it - we go by sources. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:39, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm all for going by sources. I'll stop arguing. Sorry. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:41, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

It isn't possible to define "suburb" without the "urb" that it's related to. And it isn't possible to define it as being that "urb" either. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 02:40, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

I think the real takeaway here is that 'suburb' is a functional description (of a peripheral locale providing residential accommodation for a larger city or conurbation) rather than a legislative one, and that the way this description is generally applied may well vary considerably from one country to another. As a functional description, it is essentially opinion (I've not seen a formal definition, and there are obviously going to be edge cases), though one that probably doesn't merit wording as such if sources are clear. I'd argue for example that it is entirely reasonable to describe Surbiton as a 'London suburb' in Wikipedia's voice, given that it is not only widely described as such, but actually serves as the archetype for 'leafy London suburbs'. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:09, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

HamzaTheGreat2007, the correct expression in English is suburbs of Paris. Suburbs of New York are never part of New York, and suburbs of Paris are never part of Paris. French does it just like we do, and even uses the same preposition, of. The French preposition de (lit: 'of') in the expression, une/la banlieue de Paris means "a/the suburb/s of Paris", so they exclude parts of the city when using banlieue just like we do in English with suburb. Mathglot (talk) 10:06, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm surprised no one mentioned Île-de-France. Its pretty much the term used to mean Paris and its suburbs. As others said, it might be best to add 'Suburbs of Paris' or 'Paris region' since everyone knows Paris but may not have an idea of what Île-de-France is about (or may think it means a random region of France). JuniperChill (talk) 19:11, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

How to creat a sqau

hi Yiotro1 (talk) 04:41, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

This help desk is solely for answering questions regarding using Wikipedia. Even if we knew what a 'sqau' was (it doesn't appear to be a word in the English language) we wouldn't answer it here. AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:52, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Sorry I mean square and I will go to teahouse from now on thankyou Yiotro1 (talk) 05:25, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Apostrophes

For different types of English used in quite a few articles, we often use "'s" for singular nouns such as "Charles's" (which I've added to) from Rise of the Planet of the Apes (since this is an American film, for reference, one of the plot section quotes reads Charles's condition returns as his immune system becomes resistant to ALZ-112.).

However, I have a general question: on other articles, should we use the "'s" for singular nouns for different forms of English (i.e. British, Australian, etc.)? Thanks, sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:54, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

That is an apostrophe, not a comma. Its placement is decided by how the possessive is pronounced as well as the variety of English in use. The Oxford Manual of Style says US English is more likely to support ... genitive possessives ... with British English tending instead to transpose the words and insert "of": e.g. "the effects of the catharsis" rather than "the catharsis' effects". There is more information the apostrophe article. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:38, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Generally, yes; see the WP:Manual of style (not the Oxford) at MOS:POSS. Mathglot (talk) 09:44, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

@Shantavira: Sorry about that. I've corrected the header. Also, Mathglot, thanks for the response on this.

Anyway, for the plural names of a family, should the "'s" format be used when they have an "s" in them like the Kongs in Donkey Kong 64 or the Flintstones from The Flintstones? sjones23 (talk - contributions) 10:55, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

For the plural of a surname when it's not possessive, there must not be any apostrophe, and an s must be added even if there already was one - if the name already ends in s, stick in an e for padding. "The Burnses were here yesterday, but the Flintstones, the Joneses, and the Smiths were not".

(Fred's actual family name is Flintstone, not Flintstones.) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:26, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

(Assuming it is the family pet, not Fred's alone, thus the Flintstones's pet.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathglot (talk • contribs) 00:50, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

You are compliant with MOS if you code Kongs's and the Flintstones's pet, Dino, but if that grates on your ears, just reword to avoid it. Mathglot (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 11:54, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Gotcha. Also, to @Mathglot: you might have forgotten to date your comment by mistake, so I've done the honors. We all make these mistakes from time to time. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:00, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Just a note to say that S Jones's edit's timestamp addition is appreciated. Mathglot (talk) 00:50, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

For the possessive/genitive singular, isn't the norm for most names ending in -s to just use an apostrophe by itself? That is, Charles' not Charles's. – Scyrme (talk) 01:47, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Scyrme, no. Wikipedia uses the Wikipedia:Manual of style. See MOS:POSS. Mathglot (talk) 10:55, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I know Wikipedia uses the MOS, I just don't have every guideline and shortcut memorised. Looks like the MOS recommends that in cases where the final S would be omitted, the text should instead be rephrased so the suffix isn't necessary, though you're right that it doesn't omit the S when the suffix is used rather than avoided. Strange that the only exception is for abstract nouns preceding the word "sake", rather than just abstract nouns consistently. (I know it's to preserve common idioms; I still think it's strange.) – Scyrme (talk) 21:18, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Reference link

Hello

The article on Romanian grammar: Romanian grammar has a set of links to external web resources under it's 'References' section. Unfortunately, one of the links directs to a website that apparently displays pornographic material. The link is found under reference no. 11 (an article by Maria Aldea in Romanian). ~2026-91452-2 (talk) 10:48, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Fixed here. Thank you for reporting. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:56, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

How to deactivate my account

Due to work reasons, my IP address keeps jumping repeatedly. I registered an extra account and want to deactivate it. I hereby declare that I did not intend to do so БегарьІс (talk) 10:50, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

There is no way to "deactivate" or "delete" an account; just log out and stop using it. You may request that it be vanished, see WP:VANISH. 331dot (talk) 10:51, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

How should I operate БегарьІс (talk) 10:55, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Please help me close the following account

温室雏菊，Biekeaersi БегарьІс (talk) 12:17, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. Following your guidance on WP:VANISH, I hereby formally request the vanishing/closing of my two accidentally created alternate accounts, as I will only use my main account User:БегарьІс.The accounts to vanish/close are:1. 温室雏菊2. BiekeaersiReason: They were created unintentionally due to frequent IP changes from my work network. I have ceased using them and declared this on my user page.Please proceed with vanishing or renaming these accounts to a closed state. Thank you. БегарьІс (talk) 12:39, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

You need to follow the instructions provided at WP:VANISH. 331dot (talk) 12:44, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Film

Hello, I want to change the title of my article. It should be capitalized instead of lowercase and I don't know how to do it. Can anyone help me? It says Temo re and should be Temo Re.

this is article Temo re

Thanks Nanita2008 (talk) 11:56, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

We talk about "moving" articles, rather than "renaming" them. See WP:Moving a page.

In this case, I have done that for you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:11, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Andy thank you very much Nanita2008 (talk) 12:29, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm asking you about my money refunded

How is my account application ~2026-90844-7 (talk) 12:17, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

This is the help desk about Wikipedia, which is free to use. You seem to be lost. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:32, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps the user wants the money they gave to the Wikimedia foundation back? And for some reason they think creating an account will aid them in that endeavour. The Grenadian Historian (Aka. Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a) (talk) 12:36, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Or perhaps they have paid money to a scam merchant in the belief that they are paying it to somebody connected with Wikipedia. If that is the case, @~2026-90844-7, I'm afraid there's nothing we can do. Please read WP:SCAM. ColinFine (talk) 15:59, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

"This article needs additional citations..."

Hello, This is my article Temo Re Here is a baner "This article needs additional citations for verification."

I have added citations and sources for verification. What do I need to do now to remove this banner? Thanks Nanita2008 (talk) 13:17, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps Wp:WTRMT can help you with removing maintenance tags, although I sometimes find the rules hard to understand on whether it has to be an uninvolved editor who changes it, but perhaps I have misread it before. The Grenadian Historian (Aka. Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a) (talk) 13:40, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

yes i read Wp:WTRMT but i dont think that i have right to delete this baner arbitrarily Nanita2008 (talk) 14:27, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

I wouldn't say you need to do anything to remove the banner, but you probably shouldn't remove it if you created the article. However, please note that while you may have created the article, now that it is in mainspace it isn't "your" article. At this point anyone can edit it, including removing the banner. As having the banner there doesn't harm the article in any way, and may in fact may lead to improvement, I wouldn't worry about it. DonIago (talk) 15:03, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank You very much. Nanita2008 (talk) 15:34, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

@Nanita2008 Just a note: one citation was included exactly the same twice in a row for the same item; another citation was used twice in different places. I gave those citations names, and removed the duplicates. The result is neater and easier, and nothing was lost or changed except the unnecessary copying. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:13, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Non Admin Closure in Discussions

Hi! I just closed the page Template:Verizon 200 at the Brickyard with the result of delete, but it has come up with speedy delete on there. There were options for like tags review, ready to delete, ETC. I am a Non Admin and am aware I should be careful with these things. To avoid any scrutiny for non admin closures in the futures, I just want to ask, what should I tag it with when doing a non admin closure for template deletion? It was still in use on some pages, but none in mainspace. As a non admin, I am very careful with what I close in discussions. I generally only close discussions where there is clear consensus, or re list when it is pretty clear there is no consensus, and I probably would be like this if I was an admin anyways. So what are some instructions anyone, particularly admins would give me when handling this situation? Or any situation of template deletion, as it is the only one I am pretty sure where non admins can close discussions as delete. Any instructions, tips suggestions, or just anything I should learn around this? Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:10, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

First of all, non-admins should never close a discussion where the result of that discussion will require admin tools; such as closing to delete. To my knowledge, templates are no exception.

You can see the guidance for non-admin closure at WP:NAC. Athanelar (talk) 20:23, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Athanelar Well I've seen other non admins close discussions that have resulted in delete. It might be this way because some templates require removal before deletion. And a lot of the time, the closing admin is different to the deleting admin. Servite et contribuere (talk) 20:26, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

In general non-admins aren't supposed to close as delete when they can't delete, but templates & categories are a bit different, since they need to be removed from pages before they get deleted anyways, is my understanding. Those are the two listed exceptions I see at WP:NACD. ScalarFactor (talk) 02:58, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Chandragupta II

Reference help requested. In Chandragupta II, I added a reference (reference number 75) but it displayed error in red, because the authors' names were only written in the first name category. However the issue is, I am unaware of how to add more than one author names for the source (for the first and second names' categories). I would greatly appreciate if someone could fix it for me. Thank you. Thanks, Pinkish Flowers (talk) 18:52, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Pinkish Flowers. Please read the documentation at Template: Cite book. I suggest that you try to solve this problem yourself. Currently, three editor names are shoehorned into the parameter for the author's first name. That generates an error message. You can see that you can add editor parameters to the template, as explained in the documentation. Lots of extra parameters are not included in the basic, stripped down version of citation templates, but can be added on a case by case basis. This is such a case. Cullen328 (talk) 19:12, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

How do those with accounts bookmark or save pages for easy retrieval later?

How do those with accounts bookmark or save pages for easy retrieval later? I have created an account several years ago. I would like to be able to save or bookmark certain pages for quick retrieval at a later date. How's a brother do that?  :) LansingMike (talk) 19:32, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

If just bookmarking it with your browser doesn't work for you (eg. you need to access the page from a computer that isn't yours, so you need it to be saved to your account), you can add it to your "watchlist" (Help:Watchlist) by clicking the star icon next to the "View history" link at the top right.

The star icon

Note, when you add something to your watchlist there will be a little popup with a drop down menu. If you want you want save the page permanently, rather than for a limited time, make sure it's set to "Permanent". (I think it's permanent by default, but you should check to make sure.)

Any pages you add to your watchlist will be listed on your "Edit watchlist" page. You can find that page by first going to your watchlist then clicking the link near the title of the page labelled "Edit watchlist".

You can find the main page for the watchlist by clicking on the icon at the top right that looks like a menu (three horizontal lines stacked) with a little star in one corner. It's next to the icon that looks like a symbol of a person. If you can't find the icon, it might be because you scrolled down the page. Scroll to the top, it should be there. – Scyrme (talk) 20:20, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

So you know you've found the right page, here are links that will take you to the pages I'm talking about directly:

• Watchlist, main page: Special:Watchlist
• Edit watchlist: Special:EditWatchlist

– Scyrme (talk) 20:25, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

If you have access to any sort of online note-taking thing, you can paste them there.

In desperate moments, you can send an email to yourself with links pasted in.

Use whatever suits your purposes, and don't worry about the rest. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 20:27, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Better yet, if you improve the article, it's not only added to your watchlist by default, but you (or anyone knowing your username) can find that article in your contributions. Doug butler (talk) 22:12, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Absolutely true - though using this as a bookmarking system certainly wouldn't be for everyone. I've made little edits on many things that I'm not interested in saving for later. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 22:27, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Watchlists are nice, but it's a lot simpler to just add a list of links on you user page. -Arch dude (talk) 00:03, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

That's true if there's only a few, though if there's lot it may be easier to just click the star than to go to the user page and edit it manually each time.

@LansingMike: If you'd rather make a short list on your user page, but are unsure how to make one, just click this link: Special:MyPage. You can edit it like a normal article, and you can then find it again later by clicking your username in the menu with the person-shaped symbol in the top right. For more information about user pages, see Help:User pages. – Scyrme (talk) 00:18, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Ezra Tucker

Why isn’t the amazing artist Ezra Tucker not on Wikipedia? I am an active donor. ~2026-91426-5 (talk) 22:39, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

The short answer is that Ezra Tucker is not on Wikipedia because no one has written a Wikipedia article about Ezra Tucker. That doesn't mean that someone shouldn't write about Ezra Tucker, just that they haven't yet. I just did a quick Google search, and it seems like there may be sources that could be used to write about him, if someone was interested.

By the way - being a donor or not being a donor has absolutely zero impact on the content of the encyclopedia. But thanks for helping keep the lights on I guess. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 22:51, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-91426-5 why not write it yourself. Wikipedia is open to anyone and everyone (so long as you use proper sources and follow the rules), if you think a page needs to be written go for it. The Grenadian Historian (Aka. Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a) (talk) 09:21, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

I deleted the entire content of the article and rewrote it.

Hello, my article about the georgian writer and actor Temo Rekhviashvili has been deleted several times. Due to the lack of sources, I deleted the article completely and started over. In my opinion, I have cited enough sources in this version of the article to confirm his popularity. Do you think I am wrong and should it be deleted again? Nanita2008 (talk) 23:07, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

This is article: Draft:Temo Rekhviashvili Nanita2008 (talk) 23:12, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Drafts can be submitted to articles for creation for review. To do this, paste {{subst:submit}} at the top of the article. – Scyrme (talk) 23:33, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

@Nanita2008: Taking a quick look, it seems like the references you have are for his works rather than him as an individual. I thought the Publishing Perspectives reference might be about him, but it only lists his name once in passing as one of the guests, mentioning which award he won but nothing else. These references may work for establishing notability for his works, but not necessarily for a biography about him as a person. It may help to include some more biographical details with references which are about him as the subject, not only works he has written or starred in. I don't think this means you need to delete and start over, just that it would help to add more. – Scyrme (talk) 00:02, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

@Nanita2008 Please note that having more sources is not the goal - the goal is better sources. If you had only three sources but all of them were excellent, it would be enough. But if your sources are not good, even having 100 of them doesn't help.

There's an informal description of the best sources, at WP:42. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:43, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

@Nanita2008: when you blanked the draft, you removed the review history. Please don't do that. I have restored it for you now. --bonadea contributions talk 06:33, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

@Nanita2008 it is important for you to know that popularity does not guarantee notability and notability is not inherited from, for example, an artist's works to the artist themselves. Athanelar (talk) 12:25, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

My page Pam Sheyne

Pam Sheyne (now at Draft:Pam Sheyne)

Hi, I need to make some updates to my wiki page. Is it appropriate for me to do that myself or should that be done by someone else? it. Please advise. Many thanks! Pam Pam Sheyne (talk) 23:25, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

@Pam Sheyne: See WP:EDITREQ and Talk:Pam Sheyne. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 23:27, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

@Jéské Couriano: I don't think she's asking for help about edit requests. She's asking for advice about whether it's appropriate to edit an article that's about herself. – Scyrme (talk) 23:35, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

And what Jeske has said is that she should make edit requests. The autobiography policy discourages direct edits(with some exceptions). 331dot (talk) 23:41, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Ah, fair. It looks like the most user friendly way to do this would be to use Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard/COI, which provides instructions. – Scyrme (talk) 23:48, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi Pam Sheyne. I've added some general information to your user talk page intended to help editors like yourself. The information contains (blue) links to more detailed Wikipedia pages that contain information you should find helpful. You might also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Relationship between the subject, the article, and Wikipedia because it also pertains to your situation. It's important to understand that even though there exists a Wikipedia article about you, it isn't really your Wiki page per se in the sense that you have any editorial control over it. So, any changes made to the page by not just you but anyone are going to need to be done in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Finally, Wikipedia:Username policy#Real names and Wikipedia:Wikipedia is in the real world. Users are allowed to use their real names as the username when editing Wikipedia; however, every edit they make with their account will be publicly visible. Because of this, accounts for users whose username is the same as that of a specific identifiable person (e.g., someone with a Wikipedia article written about them) are sometimes blocked as a precaution against damaging impersonation. If this happens in your case, don't worry; you'll be given guidance on things you can do to have your account reinstated in good standing. It looks like another account named Pamela Sheyne was once used to add a photo to the article; so, now there are essentially two accounts claiming to be you who have or who are trying to edit the article. Such a thing isn't an ideal situation for Wikipedia and is probably going become an issue if the other older account shows up again and tries to edit the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:24, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Note for @Pam Sheyne and indeed everyone else here that I have taken the liberty of draftifying the article to Draft:Pam Sheyne. The article was entirely lacking inline citations, which of course is a major WP:BLP issue, so rather than blanking the unsourced content (read: the entire article) I have draftified it for Pam or anyone else to improve the sourcing and submit the article through AfC.

Pam, now that the article is a draft you are free to edit it directly. Please read through WP:NMUSIC and Help:Your first article to see how you can get it up to standard. Athanelar (talk) 12:21, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

When published, the article was well sourced. It is remarkable that those sources have been removed (in February 2018!), and that their removal was not picked up by edit patrollers. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:33, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

It would almost be better, if every Wikipedia article about a person was renamed. Instead of calling the articles "Firstname Lastname", they'd all become "Summary of the Significant Coverage of Firstname Lastname by Reliable Independent Reporters, With No Material From Firstname Lastname or Their Supporters".

(I DID say it would almost be better) :) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 18:13, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Ecosystem service

Special:Diff/1337694895

I have added an in-text citation (#42) for the "Ecosystem service" page, but it is saying there's a referencing issue because of the dates. I believe it is because the journal article I'm using does not include a specific day, so the in-text citation/reference also does not have a specific day. What would be the best way to rectify this?

Link to the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1337694895

Thanks, Sweetpotat (talk) 00:08, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Sweetpotat, in place of "2025-03", write "March 2025". -- Hoary (talk) 00:13, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

google maps

i used to be able to click on coordinates and it would open a new tab where i could click on google maps. that feature no longer seems to work.please advise.....i really liked that feature... mechmike12 (talk) 00:34, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

@Mechmike12: It works for me except it doesn't open a new tab but stays in the same tab. For example, on Anchorage, Alaska I can both click at the top right and in the infobox. Both links go here: https://geohack.toolforge.org/geohack.php?pagename=Anchorage,_Alaska&params=61_13_00_N_149_53_37_W_region:US-AK_type:city(291247). That page includes a Google Maps link. What happens for you? If it works for you but fails on some other pages then please give an example. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:21, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

GeoHack pages were down for a day or two, until sometime yesterday I think. (Well, not down exactly, but one was shown a page lacking the usual links to various online maps.) It still looks somewhat wonky to me, but it seems to be working now. Deor (talk) 12:18, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Adding easily checked statements to a Wikipedia article

Hi. I would like to add the following sentence to the Wikipedia article on the song "Babe I'm Gonna Leave You":

---

The main repeating bass line in the Led Zeppelin version uses the same sequence of relative note intervals and relative note durations as the main repeating bass line at the start of the verse of the 1966 Summer in the City (song) by The Lovin' Spoonful.

---

To my mind, just listening to the first 7 seconds of Led Zeppelin's version of "Babe I'm Gonna Leave You" and the first 14 seconds of The Lovin' Spoonful's "Summer in the City" makes it very clear that the above statement is true. But I'm not allowed to just state that?

I found a Facebook post by some guy 3 years ago who made the same point (using less precise wording than my statement uses). So if I just included a link to that less precisely worded Facebook post, then I could add my above sentence to the Wikipedia article on the song "Babe I'm Gonna Leave You"?

Please let me know. Thanks a lot. Bjdpc (talk) 10:25, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

No original research is a central policy of Wikipedia: we don't write based on our own thoughts and findings, but based on those of reliable sources. A "Facebook post by some guy" is not a reliable source. Unless some reliable source has commented on this, I don't think Wikipedia should include it. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 10:33, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

We generally do not include random facts in Wikipedia articles simply because they are true. The question is not whether someone can verify that fact by listening to the song, but rather why we should mention such a random piece of trivia at all?

The need for reliable sources is twofold; firstly to verify the information, but also to demonstrate to us that the information is significant enough for reliable sources to have commented on it. For example, you'll notice that Wikipedia biographies don't tend to make a point of mentioning peoples' hair or eye colour even if these things are easily 'verifiable' merely by looking at their photos.

And as mentioned, some random facebook post is not a reliable source. Athanelar (talk) 12:15, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

If you can find where well-known reporters from trusted publications thought this was important, like it got serious coverage in a Rolling Stone article or whatever, then there would be more of a chance of putting it in. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:56, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

How to get my profile on Wikipedia?

I’m running for U.S. Senate. How to get my profile on Wikipedia? ~2026-93391-0 (talk) 11:37, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn’t made up of “profiles” like LinkedIN, Wikipedia biographies of living people are about people who have enough secondary and reliable sources to be written about (and must be notable enough), holding a public office can demonstrate notability but you’ll have to hold the public office first, and then you would also have to state your conflict of interest as the subject, meaning you can only put verifiable information on the article (which you can make via AFC although autobiographies aren’t advised). The Grenadian Historian (Aka. Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a) (talk) 11:56, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

As a mere candidate you would not meet WP:NPOLITICIAN, unless you already hold elective office or are more broadly a notable person- notable for something other than being a candidate. And even of you were, you or people associated with you shouldn't be the ones to write about you, see autobiography policy and conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 12:11, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

A Wikipedia article on a politician can only be drawn from how reliable independent publications have analyzed their career in politics. A candidate has no career in politics (yet). Wikipedia's article about any person is to document what the public already knew about their career. (Using myself as an example, the public knows nothing of my career, so there couldn't be an article about me. It's not a platform for me to tell about myself.) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:50, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Getting elected will probably do it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:18, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

A boy is blocking me from changing a generic title to be more specific

This article Chinese independent high school is solely about independent Chinese high schools in Malaysia. The title right now is too generic and I've added Malaysia in brackets to the title however a boy keeps reverting it. The boy is Singaporean Chinese so he does not understand the topic but keeps on reverting all my edits. I do not know how to proceed, please help me! Thank you. N niyaz (talk) 12:27, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Please do not refer to contributors as 'boys', or make assumptions based on ethnicity. As for your attempt to rename the article, you omitted a closing bracket, for a start, which was clearly inappropriate. I suggest you start a civil discussion on the talk page, and if that doesn't reach consensus, seek dispute resolution. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:43, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

There is already such a discussion, but belligerent and uncivil. No wonder that it's not going anywhere. I think the move (with corrected parenthese) is fine, but the tone here and in that discussion isn't. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:50, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

@N niyaz: just to let you know that there's WP:RSPM Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 23:46, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Error with excerpt template

On the page Guadalupe River an excerpt from the page July 2025 Central Texas floods is showing formatting for an image thumbnail link in addition to the images (multiple image template). Is it possible to remove the formatting? Thank you! Tsarivan613 (talk) 15:46, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Tsarivan613.

I think you mean Guadalupe River (Texas).

I've never looked at {{Excerpt}} before, but I see that certain templates are excluded by default, and I suspect it is somehow not treating {{multiple image}} correctly. But I haven't looked closely.

You're probably best asking at Template talk:Excerpt ColinFine (talk) 16:38, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

I have added |files=0 to omit transclusion of files.[3] PrimeHunter (talk) 20:15, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

I can't edit this page

why I can't edit Hinduism? I am "extended verified confirmed user". Vastmajority20025 (talk) 17:17, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

@Vastmajority20025 I can open the source editor on that article, as usual. What error message do you get when you try source editing? Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:31, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Vastmajority20025. You appear to be autoconfirmed, and that article is only semi-protected. Nor have you tripped any edit filters. What happens when you try? ColinFine (talk) 17:35, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Are you perhaps seeing the warning note that says that only autoconfirmed users can edit it, and thinking that that is telling you you cannot edit it? ColinFine (talk) 17:36, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull:

@ColinFine:

hello to you too colin, it got fixed, maybe it was an app bug. Vastmajority20025 (talk) 20:57, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Pam Sheyne

Hi I am Pam Sheyne. I have some issues and additions needed on my page (which has been put into draft by an editor) and wondering who can do that for me as I don't believe I am able to do that for myself. Please advise, thank you! Pam Sheyne (talk) 18:32, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

@Pam Sheyne As I said in your earlier thread, now that the article is a draft you are free to make changes to it directly. Make sure to read WP:NMUSIC and Help:Your first article before you consider submitting the draft for review. Athanelar (talk) 19:11, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you Athanelar. This site is very confusing and hard to navigate. I apparently have another page but I'm not sure how to delete it.

I reviewed and submitted the draft and it is currently under review. Pam Sheyne (talk) 19:27, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

The page that was here last week was deleted, when the material from it was turned into a draft so that you could edit it. (Unless you mean there's yet another page here somewhere.)

What I'm about to say is not strictly true, and it's not a Wikipedia rule either - but I have a feeling that it would help, so here goes: I think that from your point of view, the only things allowed to go into your article are what you would call "All the things that have been said about me in the press without my knowledge and without my cooperation". TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 22:44, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Translate a german written page into English

Hi how can i add the translation of this page in german in englih ? I don't think i have the editor right or how can i submit it to be translated ? thank you Jojoraebbit (talk) 19:28, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

de:Alex Márquez (Filmeditor) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jojoraebbit (talk • contribs) 19:29, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, @Jojoraebbit.

The German article de:Alex Márquez (Filmeditor) is not sourced adequately for an English Wikipedia article, so a direct translation will not be acceptable. The one existing source may be usable, but it is presumably a tertiary source: we generally require at least three reliable secondary sources, each meeting all the criteria in WP:golden rule.

In English Wikipedia, 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.

So in order to create an English article on Marquez, it will be essential to find at least two more sources which meet all the criteria, and then write an article based entirely on those reliable independent sources. It may be possible to translate parts of the German text, but if that includes information which is not in those reliable independent sources, those parts should not be in the English text; so it is likely to be more effective to treat the English article as a new article, and use Articles for creation. ColinFine (talk) 20:38, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

broken image on page

Can you fix the broken image on this (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Fox) page? ~2026-94934-8 (talk) 22:50, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

From what I saw, there is none. If it does actually exist, could you please specify where in the article the "broken image" is? ArthurPlummer (talk | :) 22:55, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

How do I send my page to others

I would like to invite others to take part in my caused Frontline4god (talk) 01:12, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

What page do you mean? What's the cause? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 01:31, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

@TooManyFingers: based on the username, I believe that the "cause" has something to do with the North American/European far-right Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 01:34, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Help Reviewing a Draft Article

I've submitted a draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Van_Neistat at AfC. I'd appreciate any feedback or a look-over. HodgeBrad (talk) 01:25, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

I think you've very badly misunderstood what's needed, to write an article like this. You have barely anything worthwhile to say about Van Neistat, because hardly any of your references are even about him. To write a Van Neistat article, you need large major sources that are literally about Van Neistat - not about his brother, not about their iPods, but about him. Where there's no interview, and the reporter goes on and on for multiple paragraphs telling about Van Neistat's entire career (not just one event in his career). TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 01:41, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

HodgeBrad, remove all references that are interviews. Remove all references that are brief passing mentions. Remove all references to YouTube videos unless they are from the official channels of major media outlets. Remove all references that focus on his brother. Remove all content verified only by the references you just removed. Only keep references that devote significant, in-depth coverage to Van Neistat as a person. Is there much left? Cullen328 (talk) 01:48, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

wikimedia.org is creating user pages on other language wikis

Hi from not so Sunny Australia,

I received welcome notifications from Wikipedias that I have never never edited] caused b"What you see on this page was copied from https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Wakelamp. Wakelamp (talk) d[@-@]b 02:33, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

@Wakelamp: It's not related to the meta page. Your tewiki account was created 28 January 2026 [4], maybe because you clicked a link to the wiki while logged in. Somebody posted a welcome message to te:User talk:Wakelamp two hours later. meta:Requests for comment/Welcoming policy discusses a proposal to disallow welcome messages to users without edits. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:52, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

That's an automatic occurrence

See mw:Help:Extension:GlobalUserPage and the edit notice that appears when you are in m:Special:EditPage/Special:MyPage Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 02:54, 12 February 2026 (UTC)