English is not my mother tongue.
Those who have grown up with English probably have guessed this already.

You already do improve English in articles, but usually not on talk pages.

So if, on a talk page, [ someone who has grown up [ with English ( in America or Great Britain ) AND in an environment of good English ] ] feels that what I have written would be expressed better with a different word or in a different way, he/she/they is invited to add this in my contribution just behind the spot in [].

And it would be nice if you gave me a ping too.

What I find most difficult is to decide which one of these little words like: on, at, by or with is the best. What surprises me most is the usage of "with".

I almost never watch a thread in which I have written something.
So if you would like me to notice your answer, it is necessary to ping me;
unless, of course, when it is on my talkpage, where I automatically get a ping.

{how sweet -- and smart}
Source: Talk:Bleep censor #Exact Rules / (IP, 2011) (The complete sentence: ^[1])

{These upper class English definitely know how to express themselves courteously. :)) }
Source: Wikipedia_talk:Vector_2022 Stop contributing to Wikipedia if old layout is not brought back again.
Thank you Martin of Sheffield

Source: Piotrus

On a t-shirt:
"I have a beautiful daughter
I also have a gun, a shovel & an alibi"

Images: Search term: daughter gun
e.g. https://yandex.com/images/search?text=daughter%20gun

Wikipedia:Subpages.

User:Steue/: and * Insertions and List

User:Steue/abbr: Template {{abbr|B|def of [[B]]}} which delivers B

User:Steue/Anchor (template)

User:Steue/del (tag)

User:Steue/Images

User:Steue/Infobox

User:Steue/Links

User:Steue/Solidarity

Source: User's page / top / [Sandbox]
Condition: While there is yet no sandbox at all (in this users' page(s))

[User page]...[talk]................................................................................................[Create]............[Search ...............box]
"Creating User:Steue/sandbox" {page tile}

Jump to navigation {invisible link} Jump to search {invisible link}

Wikipedia does not have a user page with this exact title. Before creating this page, please see
Help:Subpages.

To start a page called User:Steue/sandbox, type in the box below. When you are done, preview the page to
check for errors and then publish it.

(i) Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted. Encyclopedic content must be verifiable through citations to reliable sources.

Preview

This is only a preview; your changes have not yet been saved! → Go to editing area

This is the user sandbox of Steue. A user sandbox is a subpage of the user's
user page. It serves as a testing spot and page development space for the user
and is not an encyclopedia article. Create or edit your own sandbox here.

Other sandboxes: Main sandbox | Template sandbox

Finished writing a draft article? Are you ready to request an experienced
editor review it for possible inclusion in Wikipedia? Save your work by
pressing the "Publish page" button below, and a button will appear here
allowing you to submit your draft for review.

{Great '''Standard--Edit-Source--Input-Field''', in it:}

{{User sandbox}}
<!-- EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->

Source:
Help:My sandbox

Source:
Wikipedia:Subpages

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)

• Help:Cheatsheet
• "Socrates established the fact that one cannot depend upon those in "authority" to have sound knowledge and insight." (article Critical thinking)
• Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians (found on User:Piotrus / one of his babel boxes)
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Classroom coordination (found on User:Piotrus / one of his babel boxes)
• Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (found on User:Piotrus / one of his babel boxes)

This section is only about it's name ( not it's use and functions ).

In: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking #Avoiding broken section links this is called a "'hidden comment"'.

In: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Hidden text.

In: Wikipedia:Manual of Style / {20} Miscellaneous / {5} Invisible comment(s).

And there is: Wikipedia:Comment.

I have it under "Hidden comment".

Back to #Hidden comment ( if you came from there ).

An anchor is created by the sourcecode {{Anchor|This is the target name for any link to this anchor}}.

Any anchor is (intended to be) the partner of a link, where

• the link is the starting point and
• the anchor is the [end point / target] of this link.

Generally an anchor can be placed almost any where, even in a table or the text below an image.

The target is, where the anchor is.

The target can be e.g. a:

• header of a chapter:
• paragraph,
• sentence,
• word or
• even a specific letter within a word or
• a specific sign (e.g. a comma or point).

Generally an anchor can be placed:

• before,
• within or
• after/behind

something.

Only if the target is a (single, meaning specific) sign, there is only either before or after this sign.
An anchor takes it's own space (in the source code) thus an anchor can only be placed before or after a sign.
In a browser/an article the reading/writing mark is always a "pipe". Thus a target can only be before XOR after/behind a sign, meaning: the target can not be the middle of a sign.

Generally there are two possible situations for any link-anchor usage/situation:
The anchor/target is:

• either within the same article
• XOR in another article.

If the the target/anchor is with-in the same article, there are two possibilities:

• either the target is above the link
• XOR the target is below the link.

For "the following three links" the target (currently) is "the header line of the chapter "Anchor" ".

---

Link to the line just "above the header above"
Dis-advantage: Once the anchor is set, for editing it can NOT be accessed ( e.g. for any change ) from the "target section", but only from "the section above the target section".

---

Link to "Within the header above i.e. between the first/leading "==" and the actual header text"

---

Link to the line just "below the header above"

This is the best one of these three, because only the target line i.e. the header, and not any text lines above this target/header are visible.

---

( The target of the 3 links below is the header of the immediately following section; currently this is "Babelboxes". )

( Guide: After clicking in one of the 3 links below, you will have to scroll up a little, in order to come back to this section here and to be able to test the other 2 links. )

---

Link to the line just "above the header below"
Dis-advantage: Once the anchor is set, it can NOT be accessed ( e.g. for any change ) from the target section, but only from the section above the target section.

---

Link to "Within the header below i.e. between the first/leading "==" and the actual header text"

---

Link to the line just "below the header below"

This is the best one of these three, because only the target line i.e. the header, and not any text lines above this target/header are visible.

---

One application is: headers of chapters within an article:

If one wants to change the wording of "an already existing header (of a chapter, within an article)", one is in danger of creating a potential problem, because: if "somewhere in any article" there is a link to this chapter i.e. which uses "the current wording of this header", and one is changing the current wording, this mentioned link will no longer work, it will become a "red link".

Solution/prevention of this (potential) problem:
FIRST:
A: One creates an anchor to the old wording/version of this header and
B: places this anchor just below the new header.

And only SECOND:
One changes the wording of the header.

So, if one does know that there is a link to this chapter, one kind of must create such an anchor.
And especially if one does not know whether there exists a link to this header, one should always create such an anchor, just in case that there is a link to this chapter/header.

If the anchor is BEHIND the header text, this section's name, in the history, is easier to read and find.

One fast and simple way is: to add "<br>"s immediately before and after the text:

• one "<br>" at the beginning and
• two "<br>"s at the end of the text.

A much more time consuming way (in terms of: study, implementation and testing) would be to define margins. But by this one could define the margins more precisely, down to one pixel.

Seen on:

User:Chemical Ace ( 2023-12-06 )

See my section Brackets ( '[' and ']'s ) in headers !

The target of a link always is a header or an anchor.

Brackets within the target in a link ( i.e. on the left side of the pipe { "|" } ) would dis-able the link i.e. reduce the link to normal text.

From this follows:

A: If the target is an anchor, this anchor must not contain any bracket(s).

B: If the target is a header and/which contains a bracket or brackets, in order to get a link to this target to function, one solution is to:

1. place an anchor ( which does/must NOT contain any bracket ) at the target location,
2. pipe the link and
3. place the part which contains brackets on the right side of the pipe.

See #Hidden comment With references.

eg: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Images by Guillaume Vachey

{{collapse top|List of images up for deletion}}

Wikipedia:Substitution

WP:Edit requests

Generally they seem to make no problem.

However, there is ( at least ) one special case where brackets in headers do need special treatment, and this is ( see my section: ) [notes 1].

In wiki documentations it's got ( at least ) 4 names; you can see them ( upwards ) in my section <!-- -->.

In the sourcecode it looks like this: <!-- -->.

The wole "thing" is only visible in the "source code", that's why it's called a hidden comment.

Usage:

• I use it, e.g. before a box (created by a blank character at the start of a line) to make clear that I intentionally caused this box. Reason: Sometimes a box can get created un-intentionally, because a blank character got to the start of the line; and because the blank character is not visible in the source code, it can remain un-noticed.
  I also had the impression, that, in some talks, the box was not intended, but the newby did not check the result or didn't know what causes the box and how to get rid of it.
• sometimes I use it to mark the start and end of a larger section.
• sometimes: to show the name of the chapter above: When I'm scrolling up-wards, in my source code, I can read this name already at the bottom of this chapter. Nice to have, if I want to add something at the bottom.

There is something called an 'HTML comment'; I call it a "hidden comment".
In 'code view' it looks like this:

It:

• can be empty: <!-- --> or
• contain <!-- something -->.

Such a 'hidden comment', normaly, is visible:

• only in the 'code view', this means
• NOT in the 'final text view' output.

But, as you have seen above, a 'hidden comment' can be made visible in output if it is placed in nowikis like this:
<nowiki><!-- --></nowiki>.

It may or may not be placed in ( what I call ) a 'code box'. But even within the code box it needs nowikis to make it visible:
<code><nowiki><!-- --></nowiki></code>.

A 'hidden comment' does not even create any space.
Proof: This code A<!-- -->B  results in this: AB ( NO space between A and B ).

Within such a 'hidden comment' one may place/use/have any kind of 'wiki code';
any 'wiki code' with-in such a 'hidden comment' has NO functionality.

Thus such a 'hidden comment' can be used to dis-able ( and make invisible in the output ) « currently not needed 'wiki code' ».

There are what one may call 'Simple line breaks'; they are created by the [ Enter ] key; therefore I shall call them 'keyboard line breaks'. 'Keyboard line breaks' are NO 'wiki code'. Because of this they do function within a 'hidden comment', in code view.

So, there is one exception for the content of a 'hidden comment': 'keyboard line breaks' do work within the 'hidden comment' for its content.

So, if one uses « several 'keyboard line breaks' in a 'hidden comment' » one can wrap this 'hidden comment' over several code lines, like this:

A 'hidden comment' has NO influence whatsoever on the functionalities of « the 'wiki code' which is out-side of the 'hidden comment' ».
Because of this a 'hidden comment' may be used within:

• lists ( In order to not create problems for visually impaired users who use screen readers, lists must not contain any blank lines. This also applies to those lists starting each item line with a semicolon. ),
• references and
• what I call 'formatting blocks'.

The following is the 'codeview':

Note: The "[CRLF]"s do not need to be put in the code; they are just there ( here in this example ) to show, that there is a 'keyboard line break'.

« some visible text ''before'' the 'hidden comment' ».<!--[CRLF]
Within are three[CRLF]
'keyboard line breaks'[CRLF]
-->
« some visible text ''after'' the 'hidden comment' ».

With-out the « wrapped 'hidden comments' » the source code would look like this:

* One<br>A long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item<br>B long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item<br>C long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item,
* Two
* Three.

Try to find the items !! -- Hard to read.

With the « wrapped 'hidden comments' » the source code would look like this:

* One<br><!--
-->A long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item<br><!--
-->B long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item<br><!--
-->C long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item
* Two
* Three.

Already much easier to read.

And even more easy to read with two <br>s:

* One<br><!--
-->A long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item<br><!--

-->B long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item<br><!--

-->C long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item
* Two
* Three.

A piece of cake.

All three result in the same; see:

Without:

• One
  A long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item
  B long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item
  C long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item,
• Two
• Three.

---

With one:

• One
  A long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item
  B long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item
  C long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item
• Two
• Three.

---

With two:

• One
  A long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item
  B long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item
  C long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long item
• Two
• Three.

For separating:

• « text from references »,
• « references from references » and
• « references from text ».

« some visible text ''before'' the ''first'' reference ».<!--[CRLF]
-->
<ref>The ''first'' long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long reference</ref><!--[CRLF]
-->
<ref>The ''second'' long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long reference</ref><!--[CRLF]
-->
<ref>The ''third'' long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long long reference</ref><!--[CRLF]
-->
« some visible text ''after'' the ''last'' reference  ».

This code <!-- « » --> could be a little help ( in the source code ) if you needed a certain set of characters:

( Reference: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility #Multiple paragraphs within list items / 3rd box. )

Wikipedia:Links --> Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking

For technical information about link formatting, see Help:Link.

For information on adding external links to articles, see Wikipedia:External links.

Blank lines between list items: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility #Lists

Source: Wikipedia:Notability

1. / (2nd Frame) ("This page in a nutshell:") / (last sentence):

The notability guideline does not determine the content of articles, but only whether the topic may have its own article.

2. (Next sentence, outside this frame):

On Wikipedia, notability is a test used by editors to decide whether a given topic warrants its own article.

3. There follow several mentions like this, re. own article.

4. But then (further below) there is this:
Wikipedia:Notability #Notability guidelines do not usually apply to content within articles or lists:

The criteria applied to the creation or retention of an article are not the same as those applied to the content inside it. The notability guideline does not apply to the contents of articles. It also does not apply to the contents of stand-alone lists, unless editors agree to use notability as part of the list selection criteria. Content coverage within a given article or list (i.e. whether something is noteworthy enough to be mentioned within the article or list) is governed by the principle of due weight, balance, and other content policies. For additional information about list articles, see Notability of lists and List selection criteria.

5. Wikipedia:Notability #Stand-alone lists (/ 1st real paragraph / last sentence):

Because the group or set is notable, the individual items in the list do not need to be independently notable, although editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with Wikipedia articles.

6. (/ 2nd paragraph / 2nd to last sentence):

Lists that fulfill recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability.

7. Wikipedia:Notability #Articles not satisfying the notability guidelines (/ 1st para / 2nd sentence):

Non-notable topics with closely related notable articles or lists are often merged into those pages, while non-notable topics without such merge targets are generally deleted.

Generally, "["s and "]"s ( brackets ) in headers require NO special treatment.

But when I tried to upload above title ( upon my user page ) without the nowikis, the wiki software complained.
I had to put it in nowikis, before it got accepted and executed as an upload.

However, I have used "[ ... ]"s ( 'brackets' ) in an other header ( : [ Notability or non-notability ] of items in "lists with a notable title" ) with-out any problem or complaint.
So, it seems that it is not the brackts themselves, alone, which cause the problem, but the special use/function of this combination with the word "notes" and a number.

( Background about "[notes 1]": )
This was an un-usual kind of "reference note" which I noticed in:
the article Reddit / (top right) (frame {"box"}) / "Available in" [ Multilingual ]

Above "notes" is also in two other notes in this article.

SourceCode:

| language = Multilingual<ref group="notes">The site's display interface is available in several common languages, but most of its user-submitted content is written in English with no built-in translation feature. Individual subreddits may opt to cater to a specific language, only allowing posts, comments, etc. in that language.</ref>

But below there is as header:
{9} "Explanatory notes"

1. ^ The site's display interface is available in several common languages, but most of its user-submitted content is written in English with no built-in translation feature. Individual subreddits may opt to cater to a specific language, only allowing posts, comments, etc. in that language.

2. ^ Reddit can be viewed without an account but registration is required to submit, comment or vote.

3. ^ Previously written in Lisp, then rewritten in Python in 2005.

---

In the source code below there is:

== Explanatory notes ==
{{Reflist|group=notes}}

== References ==
{{Reflist|30em}}

"Section" { chapter, header, heading, title }

CRT
(Found in: (article) HP-150 / (the box) at the top right / (section) "Display".)

Wikipedia:Don't-give-a-fuckism (Humour and Peace of mind).
{Link actually found on the user page in the German WP.}

The example to which the following relates is: [[Page name #Section name]].

In Help:Link #Specifics the first sentence says:

"When a link contains a section title (as in the examples above),
the title actually points to an HTML anchor on the target page."
{Bold added by me.}

Cognition: This means: The wikitext is "only" the user interface;
and below/behind [ this user interface / every wikitext ] actually is HTML code.

That means: Every wikitext is "translated", by a program(me), into HTML code.

This means: The wikitext saves us (editors) from having to edit in HTML.

Dash unequals Hyphen.

Singular they ( found on [ User:WanderingWanda #Pronouns ] ).

Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines

The usual word is: "indentation", respectively: "indentation level(s)".

Wikipedia:Indentation ( short: WP:INDENT ).

{{outdent}} or {{od}} (identical result).

Result:
1st contribution.

2nd.

3rd.

4th. The following {{od}} is on a blank line. This does NOT out-dent the following line.

5th.

6th contribution.

7th contribution. The template has got to be in (at the start of) this line which shall get out-dented.

In Wikipedia:Indentation #Outdenting there are more options to tell the template how many steps to the left the out-denting shall be done.

A

B

C

D

Answer: No.

Template:Do not archive until

Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines / # Editing others' comments / * Fixing format errors / second bullet:

"removing bullets from discussions that are not consensus polls or requests for comment (RfC)".

Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines #Editing others' comments

Is possible.

I just did it with: Talk:Bag pudding.

However: if I then search for "Bag pudding", this Talk page is NOT delivered.

I think: it should.

Maybe it takes a little while, before it is integrated into the index.

I had created alltogether four links to this talk page.

---

It's possible, the wiki software let me create it,
but it does not seem to be a good idea to do so, because it already got deleted for exactly this reason.

In detail:

A couple of hours later I found (at the top of a page) an alert.

I clicked on the icon and found a note that the page got deleted.

I clicked on the note and found a log page, which read that the page had gotten deleted 4 hrs after I had created the page. There was NO explanation besides "Talk page without an article page".

Honestly: This information -- I did know already, because I created this page.

There was NO link to a WP: ... page.

The user name was [user:Explicit].

I clicked on the user name and found: it was/is an admin.

But after I had opened this note once, after the second click on this icon, there was NO more information about this note to be found.

Plus: Now it does NOT even appear in my "Contributions" list.

If I could not remember the user name of the deleter, I could not even write to him.

If I didn't have a link to this page e.g. here on my page, I did not even have any sign/"proof" that I ever created this page.

If I didn't have a copy of this page in my computer all the work which I had put in would be lost.

Now all the 4 links (to this page), which I created, are red links.

I would have liked to ask this deleter: "Before you deleted this page, did you check, wether any pages/links link to this page?"

I think this subject/issue/procedure should be improved.

Annoyance of animated gif, for example in the article GIF
{Not yet tested or done.}

Add "importScript('User:Alexis Jazz/Hammertime.js');" to Special:Mypage/common.js (source) to have a button on every article page that stops the window (JavaScript window.stop) which should halt animated GIFs in most browsers.
Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 10:31, 9 October 2020 (UTC)