I'm trying to properly format the citations in Forest 404 and noticed that two of the sources appear to be syndicated content from Press Association. Specifically, this source in the Irish Indepenent and this source in The Independent. How should I format the citations? At the moment I have Press Association listed as the publisher, but I don't think that's quite right. Is this a scenario where I'd use the "via=" parameter? TipsyElephant (talk) 01:19, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For the Irish Independent use: |agency=[[Press Association]]. Not obvious that The Independent sourced their article from Press Association so omit.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 02:02, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Can you please take a look at the Aesthetic Realism Talk page and the auto-archiving that is set up? It is supposed to archive after 14 days of inactivity with a thread of 4 or more posts. It doesn't seem to be working. Can you look at the code and see there is something that can be fixed to run the auto-archive? Thank you, Lore E. Mariano (talk) 01:24, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LoreMariano: The bot does not care about the number of posts in each talk page section; the code minthreadsleft = 4 tells the bot to leave four sections on the page. Currently there is only one section at Talk:Aesthetic Realism. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:36, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @John of Reading. Lore E. Mariano (talk) 12:07, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@John of Reading Is it possible to set the auto-archive by date stamp instead of number of threads--e.g., once a month? Lore E. Mariano (talk) 13:39, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LoreMariano: If you want the bot to archive any section once the discussion has died down, set minthreadsleft = 0. Then the bot will be free to leave the page empty. There's no option to have the bot look at the page only once a month. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:38, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@John of Reading Great. Thanks. Lore E. Mariano (talk) 17:24, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If a source cited by a user is listed in Oxford Bibliographies, does that guarantee its reliability, regardless of being published by a non-academic press? Hu741f4 (talk) 02:09, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unfamiliar with the name Oxford Bibliographies, Hu741f4. Just what is the publisher? -- Hoary (talk) 02:34, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please check this out, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sambhaji?markasread=334700739&markasreadwiki=enwiki#c-Akshaypatill-20250227044100-Hu741f4-20250227041200 Hu741f4 (talk) 02:39, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, Hu741f4, I am not going to read that wall of text. It turns out that Wikipedia has an article Oxford Bibliographies Online. This lacks any obvious warning signs ("Edwin Mellen Press", "lulu.com", etc). This does not mean that you can't have legitimate concerns. You're welcome to ask about "Oxford Bibliographies", but the place to do so is WP:RSN. Be sure to specify what claim it is that "Oxford Bibliographies" is being used to support. -- Hoary (talk) 04:42, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussions seems to be about using a book, Gajanan Mehendale's Shivaji: His Life and Times, which is included in Oxford Bibliographies, so any RSN discussion should be about that book not Oxford Bibliographies. TSventon (talk) 12:36, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please fix up the references - 12, 13 and 14 - they are all the same citation so shouldn't they all be linked in some way? - I cannot do this - sorry. Thank you in advance. Srbernadette (talk) 02:14, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Choose a name for the reference, Srbernadette. I'll call it "ECW". Choose any one of the three instances. In this one, change <ref> to <ref name="ECW"> (and note that there is no "/" in this); for each of the others, change <ref>[various details]</ref> to the much shorter <ref name="ECW" /> (and note that there is a "/" in this). If this poses a difficulty, then please say precisely what the difficulty is. -- Hoary (talk) 02:32, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HELP PLEASE!! I replaced ref number 13 (which is identical to number 12) with what you suggested - but it didn't work. Could you please check - sorry again. (Just to help you again - citations 12, 13 and 14 are all the same refs) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srbernadette (talk • contribs)

Srbernadette, I see that Jessicapierce has cleared up the mess. That's kind of her, but not so educational. It seems that you logged out, and while logged out, made this edit. But what I'd invited you to do was both (i) to change any one of the three instances of <ref>{{cite web |title=Emmanuel College, Warrnambool |url=https://www.emmanuel.vic.edu.au/ |publisher=Emmanuel College, Warrnambool |access-date=28 February 2025}}</ref> to <ref name="ECW">{{cite web |title=Emmanuel College, Warrnambool |url=https://www.emmanuel.vic.edu.au/ |publisher=Emmanuel College, Warrnambool |access-date=28 February 2025}}</ref> and (ii) to change each of the other two to <ref name="ECW" />. (Within that, the choice of "ECW" was pretty arbitrary.) You got (i) wrong (perhaps I'd described it poorly), and you didn't attempt (ii). Little wonder that you got an error message. -- Hoary (talk) 04:34, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hoary and Srbernadette: In future you might try using the ReFill tool for this kind of thing, Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:41, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Mabbett, it's not the fault of ReFill that so many people using it don't bother to read or anyway to act on the clear instruction to check the accuracy of its results and, where appropriate, to correct these. But anyway they don't act on it. Which of course isn't to deny that many people do act on it. That aside, it's not clear to me how ReFill would have helped here. Srbernadette just needed to digest this about the reuse of references. (And perhaps still needs to do so. Srbernadette, please feel free to ask here about anything that isn't clear.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:25, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In Natural language, when you scroll down below References, there is a text box "Authority control databases". Next to that box there is a link saying "Czech Republic" and opening to a database. What is this link? Should it be there, and if no, how to remove it? Thank you! Lova Falk (talk) 06:53, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Lova Falk, that is a link to a unique identifier for that article on a Czech library system. This is explained a lot better than I can at Help:Authority control. Ultraodan (talk) 08:08, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply Ultraodan! Lova Falk (talk) 09:29, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On Type 072 landing ship i used a source from news.qq, which would normally constitute as WP:BLOGS, however it is published by the official PLAN account. If i remember correctly, last time I asked a similar question the answer was that as long as the publisher is reliable then it can be used, but I will ask just to make sure Thehistorianisaac (talk) 07:25, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thehistorianisaac, questions about the reliability (or not) of sources are better asked at WP:RSN. -- Hoary (talk) 07:39, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The information in the article and the links supporting it are outdated and untrue. The situation has changed. I want to add information that is relevant today in order to make Tamaz Somkhishvili’s article objective.

The article is under protection. I want to add additional information so that the article becomes relevant and objective. I found many links in the media space that will help make the article objective.

Here is an example of a link that gives current information about Tamaz Somkhishvili as of today.

James Wilson (2025-01-23) «Seeking Justice for Investors» https://eupoliticalreport.com/seeking-justice-for-investors/ Армен Меликян (talk) 10:49, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article is protected, but the talk-page of said article isn't. Please use an edit request there. Lectonar (talk) 11:15, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and updated the page. -Emily (PhoenixCaelestis) (talk) 13:25, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I've just suggested in the talk page certain amends to this page: Martin Green (musician) and outlined my connection with the person in question, I just wanted to check I'm suggesting amends correctly - absolutely great if I am and if it's just a matter of time for someone to check them then that's great. I've read a lot of the articles now and I think I'm doing it correctly. It's just to get a sense of what happens next. Thanks again, @Martinproduces Martinproduces (talk) 12:15, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Martinproduces. Thank you for being open about your COI. The most obvious problem was that you had nowiki tags round your {{edit COI/significant}} template, so that it did not get expanded, and - crucially - did not get added to the list of COI edits awaiting attention. I've corrected that. (I don't know how this happened - I suspect it's something the Visual editor does, but I've never used that). I haven't looked at the content of your suggestion - I know that generally we recommend splitting requests into smaller, independent sections, so that some can be accepted even if others aren't; but I don't know how that works with /significant. ColinFine (talk) 12:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, that will have definitely been my mistake for not being input properly, apologies for that, still getting my head around this. If it's better for me to just edit each section then I'm really happy to do so also - it's just so much of it isn't accurate/missing information I thought it might be easier to start from the beginning. But I'll await further feedback. Thanks again! Really appreciate it. Martinproduces (talk) 12:47, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to WP:ANI Helpful Raccoon (talk) 21:37, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

 – Slowking Man (talk) 21:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I figure if it's not someone will be able to point me in the right direction :) Apologies for the crude language in the title!

I was looking at the article for NFC West and noticed a curious entry on the map, next to the marker for the Rams - the word "Bitch". I thought it was just garden variety vandalism that had gone unnoticed so went to edit the article to remove this, however there's no reference to it there.

Looking into it further, it looks like that there's an issue with the map itself - going to the Wikimedia Maps page, at around Zoom Level 6\7, it appears on the map.

I had a look at the Wikimedia Maps pages, and couldn't see a way to report a map issue - despite the only time I've spent in Los Angeles being solely confined to LAX, I am quite confident there isn't an area of LA called "Bitch" and if there is, is it an area of enough significance to show up at such high zoom levels?

Just wondering if there's anyone here who might know what the next steps here might be?

Thanks! Douglas 11:06, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

After looking around for a bit, it looks like this was vandalism on OpenStreetMap, which that map is being loaded from. Community members there already reverted it some hours ago, but it looks like the Wikimedia Maps server had cached the colorful name and displayed it to you. Personally I am not seeing it anymore, so I hope it goes away for you soon. Nyakase🐈‍⬛‍ (talk • guestbook) 11:36, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh good, thanks for that! :) I'm still seeing but it might be cached either somewhere on my end. Douglas 12:12, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps there's a Latin grammar school nearby that a helpful person wanted to add to the map, but they accidentally misspelled the name...

--Slowking Man (talk) 21:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The edit history view in the Android app has a graph at the top, with no axes shown, no label for what either axis would represent if it were shown, and no indication of scale. (It does however have a pale grey grid.) I'm guessing the x-axis probably represents time, measured in either hours, days, months or years, but what does the y-axis represent? Is it

• size of the article?
• frequency of page views?
• frequency of edits?

Does anybody know? Clearly it's meant to tell me something, and someone took the trouble to program it into the app, so it seems a shame not to have any idea what. Musiconeologist (talk) 19:38, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Musiconeologist: Okay, so I had fun, of a sort, spending time pulling threads in the app source code and finally got to the prize at the center. Your answer here: phab:T299181. It's a graph of edits to the article in the past year, by # of edits by month. So you were on track.

If wondering how the heck I found that: I went to the source code repository at Github, and traced the logic flow for displaying that edit history screen, and eventually got to the commit which added a REST handler to fetch the metrics: [1]. Don't mention it! I will say, the code could stand to be a bit more richly commented. --Slowking Man (talk) 05:17, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Slowking Man Well, it's more fun getting something to work than telling anybody else how it works and depriving them of the fun of working out what weird thing is wrong with it. ;-)
All that discussion of what to do with the extra space, and not one person suggested adding some text like edits by month and the max and min values . . . (I think that's the more useful information—how active the editing is.)
Anyway thanks for tracking that down. It was irritating me each time I looked at an edit history in the app. Musiconeologist (talk) 18:15, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Folks!!, Is uk post office stamps images allowed to to be used on Wikipedia. I've seen a few images of stamps posted here and there, some of them seemingly quite recent. These two are from 1965. scope_creep^Talk 23:17, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

c:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United Kingdom#Stamps. Those two are most likely public domain, though it's conceivable they reuse non-PD artwork. Any dating from much later than that are copyrighted for the author's life+70 years, so would only be usable in articles about the specific stamps themselves. —Cryptic 23:46, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's good. Thanks for that @Cryptic: scope_creep^Talk 21:07, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way to export every wikipedia article (like a wiki dump) as opposed to xml, which I don't like as much. MiniMikeRM (talk) 00:45, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about export all articles available on Wikipedia or a particular one ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 23:08, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All, I know that you can export one at a time but that would obviously take a while MiniMikeRM (talk) 01:51, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let's try our best to avoid the XY problem here. Instead, what I'm going to ask you to do is describe what goal you want to accomplish. "I want to take Wikipedia articles, and do Y". Maybe PDF will turn out to not be a good idea for going about what you want to accomplish. --Slowking Man (talk) 05:41, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I am seeking for your assistance to improve Marinduque State University page due to it has already became a university from its college name. But as per review, only few information were added. Hoping for your assistance and contribution from the expert editor and reviewer out there. Thank you. Filipinotayo (talk) 05:47, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Filipinotayo I'm immediately noticing two issues. Firstly, the article is inconsistent with calling it a university or college. Secondly, the entire "Campus" section is unsourced. Those are the most glaring issues. Ultraodan (talk) 05:59, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image here has arrow mark but has red arrow on it.

When I double click on it, arrow mark is gone. Why is that ? HarryOrange (talk) 13:41, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@HarryOrange: The arrow is added on to the Wikipedia article, after the main image has been resized and displayed, using the {{superimpose}} template.

Clicking the main image shows it inits original form on WikiCommons. Bazza 7 (talk) 13:49, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I need to archive just one more citation in my article, but the source website (newspapers.com) has blocked me from completing the archive via the Wayback Machine. Numerous attempts to rectify the apparently simple problem with the source site have failed. I otherwise have full access to newspapers.com, so there's no serious issue involved. Could someone please archive https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-pennsylvania-herald-and-york-genera/158594062/ on the Wayback Machine and then post here the resulting archive URL so that I can add it to the article? I really appreciate your help! Tfhentz (talk) 16:02, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking at the Xbox (console) page's modding section and some of the methods mentioned and used are very out to date compared to what is used today.

I would like to put a "needs maintenance" or an "needs updating" banner on this section.

Anyone know how? It's been a while since I've done this.

Thanks,

Urbanracer34 (talk) 16:28, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Urbanracer34: see {{Update}} and {{Update section}}. It is helpful if you can explain the problem on the talk page and put a link to it to the template. TSventon (talk) 16:43, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've proposed the idea on Wikipedia talk:Vital articles#Create a timeline on a subpage that we add a subpage of a meline of level 3 vital people to Wikipedia:Vital articles, and the idea has reached acceptance. Now I'm wondering what the best way to add it as a subpage under it is, and if I should do anything in addition.

Thank you in advance for your help.

Wikieditor662 (talk) 18:03, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Adam tactical group.svg to Adam Tactical Group I can't because of protection. Zacharpolis (talk) 03:59, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But what you can do, Zacharpolis, is explain on Talk:Adam Tactical Group why this should be added and more particularly how it is that this logo is your "own work". This should persuade somebody there who (unlike most people at the "teahouse") understands the issues involved. -- Hoary (talk) 08:10, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

{{PD-UA-exempt}} https://www.facebook.com/Adamtactic/ Zacharpolis (talk) 11:56, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So, Zacharpolis, you're not the copyright holder. Then start by correcting the mistakes on c:File:Adam tactical group.svg. Once you've done that, make your request on Talk:Adam Tactical Group. -- Hoary (talk) 12:04, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you wear suit? Zacharpolis (talk) 13:14, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hoary, don't ping me again. If you don't help. Zacharpolis (talk) 13:15, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all, There is an article that was deleted and turned into a redirect, American Communist Party. It was decided to be deleted, with some information moved to the pages for History of the Communist Party USA and Jackson Hinkle. I am interested in salvaging the article and improving it to add it to the mainspace. Is there any way to find the article in any history or junk areas? Help would be appreciated. -Emily (PhoenixCaelestis) (talk) 16:07, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is the AfD discussion, by the way. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Communist Party -Emily (PhoenixCaelestis) (talk) 16:15, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@PhoenixCaelestis: The content has been deleted so only an admin will be able to retrieve it. I suggest asking Ad Orientem, who closed the deletion discussion, on their talk page and presenting any evidence that we should have an article there. TSventon (talk) 16:38, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PhoenixCaelestis. The community concluded by an overwhelming consensus that the subject did not meet our standards for encyclopedic notability. This of course can change. But I would need at least some evidence that either the situation has changed or that there was evidence of notability that was missed in the discussion. If you can provide some concrete evidence of notability, I would consider restoring the article and moving it into draft space. Best regards... -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:54, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly every other American political party has its own page, even ones that only exist in one state or ones that only lasted a handful of years in the 1800s. The ACP has an entry in Wikidata, and has been covered by several small media outlets. One member even won a seat in Orange County, Vermont. Yes, it hasn't been covered by, say, the New York Times or the Washington Post, but it's because there's simply no reason for large national news outlets to report on a frankly eccentric splinter group of a party that's over 100 years old. If you go digging, the information is there. Plus, when the article was initially made, it was pretty much day one of the party's creation and next to no information about it had been released. With lots of time having now passed, I feel it's enough to warrant an article for this political party. -Emily (PhoenixCaelestis) (talk) 20:36, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @PhoenixCaelestis. I suggest you find three sources that clearly meet WP:42, and present them to @Ad Orientem. ColinFine (talk) 21:31, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PhoenixCaelestis, most people reading this (including Ad Orientem and myself) have other priorities and interests. We're not going to go digging. How about you go digging, and here, in this thread, link to three reliable sources (all of them independent of the ACP) that deal with the ACP in some depth? -- Hoary (talk) 21:31, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and found five sources that I feel cover the party and meet WP:42.

https://www.thefp.com/p/american-communist-party-maga

https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2024/07/american-communist-party-launches-as-reconstitution-of-communist-party-usa-several-clubs-deny-inclusion-in-party-declaration/

https://unitedworldint.com/36094-executive-chairman-of-the-american-communist-party-we-are-preparing-for-a-systemic-and-constitutional-crisis/

https://www.repubblica.it/venerdi/2024/11/08/news/elezioni_usa_trump_comunista_vermont_viaggi_da_fermo-423605605/

https://us.politsturm.com/the-essence-of-the-acp

I was also unaware of this until now, but there is an entry for the party on the German Wikipedia. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Communist_Party

Thanks, all. -Emily (PhoenixCaelestis) (talk) 21:47, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@PhoenixCaelestis Ok. I am satisfied that there is enough coverage to justify restoring the article and moving it into draft space. I will send you a link once I've finished. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! -Emily (PhoenixCaelestis) (talk) 22:17, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@PhoenixCaelestis The page has been undeleted and moved to Draft:Communist Party USA. This is not an endorsement of the page or the claims to notability. But I think there is enough to justify recreation so it can be worked on in draft space. I suggest submitting it for review once you think it is ready. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:22, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Minor goof, it appears you draftified the full CPUSA article rather than the old ACP article. Just wanted to let you know in case you didn't realize. -Emily (PhoenixCaelestis) (talk) 22:28, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've cleaned up that goof. The restored draft is now at Draft:American Communist Party (2) (Draft:American Communist Party already existed). This feels like a total waste of admin time and effort given that. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:34, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @PhoenixCaelestis. de:American Communist Party has three non-independent sources, and one unreliable one that doesn't even mention the subject. It is therefore of little use in creating an English article. ColinFine (talk) 22:31, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PhoenixCaelestis, please see Draft:American Communist Party. -- Hoary (talk) 22:34, 3 March 2025 (UTC) Edit clash with Pppery (and possible misunderstanding); striking out. -- Hoary (talk) 22:38, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Draft:American Communist Party (2). Draft:American Communist Party was a preexisting draft from 2024. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:36, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If the ACP is described as being part of "the larger MAGA Communism movement", readers may appreciate an article on MAGA Communism that describes the latter as larger than a single "American political commentator and influencer". -- Hoary (talk) 22:50, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I just started this list List of Hungarian explorers. You can see the text alignment is "center". Do you have any idea how can I make the alignment as default to "left" but only in the description table? OrionNimrod (talk) 21:55, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@OrionNimrod: I used {{Table alignment}}.[2] PrimeHunter (talk) 22:55, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]