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

January 28

Marlborough College

I have added a "Marlborough College, c.1891" (this should be the caption) file which is WAAAAAY too big. Please repair. Also, Ref number 28 is connected/ close to a line which has the word "circa" - a link - which goes nowhere. Please place the correct link for "circa" if you are able. Thanks. Srbernadette (talk) 03:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

I've added |thumb |Marlborough College, c.1891 to the file link, to make the image thumbnail-size and add the caption. I'll leave any further tweaks to someone else who's more familiar with details of the syntax. Musiconeologist (talk) 03:47, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Relief on City Pushpin Maps?

Hello all,

I have been trying to keep the relief on the pushpin map on my home city Wikipedia page along with for example the capital of Port-au-Prince but someone says relief is not to be used and reverts my changes on both relief I add.

Please help. Thank you all. Just want to do my best editing Wiki’s.

I did read the Wikipedia help guide regarding relief and pushpin maps & it even shows pushpin maps with relief. NightExplorer96 (talk) 03:31, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

@NightExplorer96 It may be that the other editor knows of some long-standing convention for how to show these maps in infoboxes but you can certainly ask them to justify their reversions: that's the basis of our normal bold, revert, discuss cycle. The best place to do that is on the Talk Page of the relevant article, with a ping to inform them you want to have the discussion there. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:45, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

NightExplorer96, if you're talking about this edit, I suspect that it's related to the purpose of the map — the current map shows the city's location in relation to the provinces, but the provincial boundaries are very difficult to see in the pushpin relief map, since it concentrates on topography rather than legal boundaries. However, for major US cities it's quite common to show multiple pushpins in the infobox (cf. Chicago), so I don't understand that aspect of the initial reversion, let alone the unexplained second reversion. Nyttend (talk) 19:44, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the insight Nyttend. I almost forgot but for example if you take a look at the Glasgow UK or Edinburgh UK Wikipedia pages I went ahead and added maps showing the location of these cities within the UK with relief and those revisions were approved by senior members, so I believe that is okay?

I do agree that multiple pushpin maps are helpful such as showing the location of cities within a large map area :) NightExplorer96 (talk) 21:45, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, as far as I know it is indeed a long-standing convention to use relief maps only for physical geography like rivers, lakes, mountains, etc., not human places and jurisdictions, because borders and subdivisions are not or barely visible on the relief maps. I have trouble finding such past discussions, but there is Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps/Conventions which indicates that regular location maps are for "Countries, political entities, cities."

Since there is such an inconsistent use all over WP (and editors are just changing it back and forth to whatever anyone likes), it is clear that this might need better and clearer direction, like being adopted in a manual of style. I suggest to start a centralized discussion on this. What would be the right forum? -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 21:18, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Hopefully you are not upset with my changes P199. I did take a look at the link you posted and it shows a topographic map near the bottom and it can be used for human settlements as the topography can be useful extra information. This is what I read:

“Backgrounds for maps of vegetation, agriculture, human settlements as topography may explain a lot with these”

Just doing the best I can :) NightExplorer96 (talk) 21:40, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

The problem is far bigger than just you. The reason I reverted you is because several of the changes you did are on my watchlist. But I can't watch everything... So, I see there is zero consistency for pushpin maps. If you really want to "do the best you can", then standardize the convention across the articles. Anyway, I am considering a new centralized discussion on this. Regards, -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 22:08, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Okay.

It seems like Wikipedia is not as friendly to users editing and have not had a real great editing experience. Seems like many other users have had similar problems with editing pages and how they are talked to.

My experience does not make me want to contribute much anymore.

A discussion on this is fine and seems like the best way to go. NightExplorer96 (talk) 23:57, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Don't give up too soon! It looks to me as though you've got some fairly focused kinds of editing you're interested in, which I think means you can find your way.

Maybe you do this already, but one suggestion I'd make is to take a look at an article's talk page before doing anything more than light copy-editing. This can help alert you to anything contentious that's come up before, and maybe give you an idea of what people think needs doing to the article. (I say maybe because sometimes the comments are very old and have since been addressed.) Musiconeologist (talk) 18:26, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

More so just seems like there is a lot for me to learn and I do apologize. Hopefully we can have a good conversation regarding this topic! NightExplorer96 (talk) 03:03, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

@NightExplorer96: Sorry, I didn't mean to put you off and I do hope that you will continue to contribute. But it's true that you need to have a thick skin to edit here, and unfortunately, the policies, guidelines, and manuals of style have grown quite a bit over time - impossible to know them all. I recommend starting by improving article content and gradually you will get more comfortable and knowledgeable about WP. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:28, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

I'd say the required skin thickness does diminish with time though, once you get more of an idea where the minefields are and begin to realise whats actually going on—e.g. that a fiercely worded talk page message was a template that someone thought they were meant to use, not words they wrote, and they were just another ordinary user like you. Musiconeologist (talk) 18:12, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Directionality in the Visual Editor's source editor

In the old editors (2003, 2010), a key combination like Ctrl-Shift-X (in Firefox) switches the directionality of the text in the editor itself (independent of the directionality of the text that will be displayed when the page is saved). This also works in the search bar. It does not work in the source editor of the Visual Editor. How does one change the directionality of the text there without changing any of the source text/markup? (IOW, I'm not talking about setting the directionality using "div" or "span" tags. I just want to change the direction of the text I am looking at when I first open the editor on a page or section.) - dcljr (talk) 03:35, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Dcljr. You may have more chance of an answer at WP:VPT. I don't use the VE myself, but I understand that it has limitations, and this could be one of them. ColinFine (talk) 13:15, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

How to set up two columns

I reworked the article New York Tennis Club Open and noticed five redirects going to it. I requested they be deleted w/o success. But, OK. My reasoning is at "New York Lawn Tennis Club Fall Tournament", under "Category:Defunct tennis tournaments in the United States." I really wanted to know the following. I asked a question about this article last Dec., and have one more. This is in regard to Paul Martin (illustrator), under the heading "Tennis." I'm trying to get a section in two columns, without putting it in a colored box. I can't figure out how the template {col begin and col break} works. I just adjusted the width numbers so it looks decent on my desktop. Maybe I should use another template like {div col}. I just want two columns (under subheadings, Wins and Runners-Up), and for it also to appear decent on mobile devices. JimPercy (talk) 17:45, 28 January 2025 (UTC) UPDATE. Solved on my own. Please ignore. JimPercy.

Reuters as author

I came across a citation using this Reuters article (https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/chinese-ai-startup-deepseek-overtakes-chatgpt-apple-app-store-2025-01-27/) that lists Reuters as the author. Is it then fine to use author=((Reuters)) in the citation to get around the generic author warning, or should it be treated as anonymous and left blank? Truthnope (talk) 19:52, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

No need to be redundant. Do this:

{{cite news |date=January 27, 2025 |title=DeepSeek hit by cyberattack as users flock to Chinese AI startup |work=Reuters}}

"DeepSeek hit by cyberattack as users flock to Chinese AI startup". Reuters. January 27, 2025.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 20:06, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Better to use "|agency=Reuters" per the comment in the Examples section: "A news article released by a news agency and having no credited author". Clarityfiend (talk) 03:46, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Sure, when the work is some other entity like the newspaper given in the example you highlight. When the content is provided by the agency on the agency's own platform, |agency= is not appropriate. See the parameter documentation.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 04:00, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

and left blank? If you mean |author=, I'm not aware of any good reason for any null cite parameter, especially author. The cite doc suggests |author=<!-- not stated -->, but nobody I know uses that, and it's not "null" in the sense I meant. But I'm not the cite expert around here, that's Trappist. ―Mandruss ☎ 03:28, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

January 29

Blank label

I have previously used the "blank label" field in some 'info boxes' to create a novel field for information. However, I have forgotten how to do this, and I cannot find the help page to jog my memory on how this field functions. I am currently working with the blank field in an 'Template:Infobox game'. Please advise me on the coding for adding a novel field name via the 'blank label' functionality, and let me know the URL for the help page. SMargan (talk) 04:15, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

@SMargan: Specify "blank_label = your_label" and "blank_data = your_data". You have to check the template doc, as the availability of this feature is specific to each Infobox template. Fabrickator (talk) 05:57, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

@ - I am having a little bit of trouble envisioning what you mean. Do you mean like this:

| blank-label = Developer
| blank-data = Gavan Brown and Matt Tolman

I tried this, and this just seems to throw up error messages. SMargan (talk) 08:14, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

According to the documentation in the info box, the fields are called blank_label and blank_data with underscores, not hyphens. ColinFine (talk) 11:01, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

@SMargan If the template you want to use does not have the "blank_label" field, and you want to add it to the template, you should add these lines to the template inside the {{infobox}} section:

| labelXX    = {{{blank_label}}} | dataXX     = {{#if:{{{blank_label|}}}|{{{blank_data|}}}}}

The "XX" should be a number. In {{Infobox game}}, this is the 27th label, so it would be "label27" and "data27". Change this number accordingly. You may also want to add

| blank_data | blank_label

to the "check for unknown parameters" at the end.

I would highly recommend using the sandbox for the templates you want to try this out on. If anything here is confusing, adding an edit request rather than doing it yourself is a safe way of working with templates. Reconrabbit 18:08, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

@Rabbit - Thanks for the response! I am still at a loss, however, I think I will have to take away what has been said and think about it. Until I understand the problem, I will have to use an alternative approach rather than enjoying what this mechanism has to offer. There are definitely both 'blank_label' fields and 'blank_data' fields available for the "game" 'Info box' according to the "Template:Infobox game" Wikipedia article. I just cannot seem to use them in an article without throwing up an error. Therefore, I am not sure what I would have to change the template data. Indeed, I am a little bit reticent about changing such a document before having an adequate conceptual grasp as to what I am doing. SMargan (talk) 01:47, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

I thought you were trying to create brand new fields in a template. If you want to use these existing fields in an article, I can try to provide an example in my sandbox of a working model: User:Reconrabbit/sandbox Reconrabbit 02:04, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

can't format a note correctly

can someone please help fix the missing 'note 1' hyperlink in the page Abaza Family Wiki 1756 (talk) 04:23, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

@Wiki 1756 You can place the text in a efn template {{efn|Example}} will create this note. Make sure you include the {{notelist}} in the Notes section. It won't get exactly "Note 1" but it's a simple way to do it and keeps it very separate from references. Ultraodan (talk) 05:35, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

I'll leave this for you to do yourself so that you can learn it. I recommend previewing your edit before you save it. If you need any more help please ask Ultraodan (talk) 05:38, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Notes

Why did my editing streak break?

Hello,

When I go to my homepage, it says my last editing streak broke on x day. However, when I look at my contributions, I definitely did an edit on X + 1 day. So why did my editing streak break? Daphne Morrow (talk) 04:25, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Probably because Wikipedia uses the UTC time zone and an entire day has passed without you editing regarding the UTC time zone. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 04:32, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

:( damn, that's a bummer. Do you happen to know where I can suggest that they change the streak code to reflect the user's local timezone? Daphne Morrow (talk) 04:36, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Daphne Morrow, the more important question is why you even care about something as exceptionally silly as an "editing streak". Wikipedia is not a video game. I have been editing for over 15 years and have edited a large majority of days over those years. But if I am busy with other things due to travel or health issues or family visits and do not have time to edit in a specific 48 hour period, I don't give it the slightest thought. Why do you care about this? Cullen328 (talk) 04:40, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Because it brings a little joy to my day to see the number go up. It's exceptionally silly and that's what I love about it. Daphne Morrow (talk) 04:47, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

This, I think, is a perfectly valid and positive reason, and you shouldn't have to defend it. The more you enjoy the experience of being here, the more likely you are to continue making a contribution, so Wikipedia benefits too. Musiconeologist (talk) 11:59, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Also, I don't bah-humbug the harmless ways you enjoy wikipedia. I don't think you should bah-humbug the harmless ways other people enjoy wikipedia. Daphne Morrow (talk) 04:50, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Daphne Morrow, you have been editing Wikipedia for less than two months and I have already mentioned how long I have been editing. I list on my userpage many of the hundreds of articles that I have written or expanded. That's how I enjoy Wikipedia, mostly by creating good content. This is a project to build and improve an encyclopedia, not to rack up phony brownie points. You have made many edits to Hashimoto's thyroiditis and I will assume that you improved that article significantly. Thank you for that! That is the sort of accomplishment that deserves accolades, not anything having to do with artificial meaningless "editing streaks". Cullen328 (talk) 05:24, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

I take my commitment to building an encyclopedia seriously, but not joylessly. I like that someone took the time to add a little streak feature, and I intend to use it.

If you feel like your way of building an encyclopedia is superior, good for you. However, my way of doing it doesn't actually put the project at risk. I wish you wouldn't try to suggest I should try to be the kind of person you are, because while I'm sure that's extremely valuable in its own way, I am a different person altogether. Daphne Morrow (talk) 05:36, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

@Daphne Morrow You may enjoy reading an article about the longest editing streak. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:29, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

The last I remember looking at it, the concept of a streak was within any given 24-hour window, not within each 24-hour period defined by a specific time. Each of those could have value for editor interest or other purposes, but are different concepts that might be more or less appealing to different individuals. I remember some years ago having a difficult time in Real Life and using the streak concept as a "at least once a day, remember to do this to get out of your rut for a rew minutes". Either keeping up on a long-term interest, doing a bit of research something unusual I saw around town, or clicking 'random article' 5 times and make at least one substantive improvement to one of them. DMacks (talk) 13:41, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Daphne Morrow, curious, what are you talking about? I've been editing here 19 years, but I've never heard of an automated editing-streak counter, and I don't see anything on your user talk page. Nyttend (talk) 19:34, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Probably https://streaks.toolforge.org. Personally I intentionally try to break my streak and spend a few days not editing Wikipedia every month or so. I'm not always successful in that. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:43, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

It’s on my homepage in a box called “your impact”, along with data about how many visits pages I’ve edited have received. I didn’t add it, it’s been there since I joined. Daphne Morrow (talk) 23:11, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

It's on Special:Homepage, right-hand side. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:22, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Aha! If I follow the link, I get a message saying something like To enable the newcomer homepage, go to Settings and . . . . So it's only available with that turned on. Musiconeologist (talk) 02:03, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Everybody can see the longest streak at Special:Impact/Daphne Morrow which shows the impact part of Special:Homepage for the user. Special:Impact isn't linked in the interface but I add a link for a user in their userspace with User:PrimeHunter/Impact.js. @Daphne Morrow: Note that it only shows the longest streak in the last 1000 edits. You currently have 623 edits but may exceed 1000 within months. Streaks are based on UTC which is the default time zone of the English Wikipedia. It's not about editing within any 24-hour window as somebody suggested. Streaks are a feature of the MediaWiki software which powers Wikipedia so suggestions belong at Phabricator: as described at Wikipedia:Bug reports and feature requests. I have some experience there and didn't find your suggestion so I will make it soon, probably within a day, and post a link here. However, I'm sceptic that the developers will spend time on it. The time zone setting at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering is secret for privacy reasons so others should only be able to see the UTC-based streak at Special:Impact/Daphne Morrow. It's mainly a feature for users to see their own streaks so maybe they will consider it anyway. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:50, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, that makes sense. Daphne Morrow (talk) 22:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

@Daphne Morrow: I have made the suggestion at phab:T385283. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:31, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Everybody knows WP:The List is the pinnacle of human existence. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:37, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

@User:Clarityfiend I went and had a look at that, once I realised your comment was a comment. (For some reason I'm seeing it in a tiny font, so I thought it was an accidentally pasted signature or similar.)

I didn't bother looking at the names on the list (in fact I'd prefer not to know, I think), but the statistic about only 30% of registered users ever making an edit was a bit startling. I'd have expected people to sign up after making an edit or two, then make one or two more before being scared off by a warning-masquerading-as-a-welcome template—which could only be prompted by them actually making an edit to be warned about in the first place.

(I realise those templates aren't necessarily intended to come across that way, but I think they often do.) Musiconeologist (talk) 17:48, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

External links to National Archives are formatted differently

I added an external link to a Wikipedia article using the link tool in the visual editor, but for some reason it was formatted differently than an ordinary external link. I copied and pasted the full link into the editor box, but when I published my changes, the link was automatically reformatted to: [[nara:74887660|Moving Images Related to George Washington Carver]] which looks like: Moving Images Related to George Washington Carver. I expected: [https://catalog.archives.gov/id/74887660 Moving Images Related to George Washington Carver] which looks like: Moving Images Related to George Washington Carver (note the blue arrow). I bring this up because the two links behave differently from one another. The normal link opens the linked page in a new tab, while the reformatted link opens the page in the same tab, and that bothers me. I could write the link in source editor and have it open in a new tab like a normal external link, but I don't know why it was automatically formatted to not do that, so I'm not sure if I should change it or not. I did some searching and couldn't find any reason why this link would be reformatted so I came here in hope of some answers. Nikoledood (talk) 09:47, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

It reformatted again! The normal external link that I expected is: [https://catalog.archives.gov/id/74887660 Moving Images Related to George Washington Carver] which actually looks like: Moving Images Related to George Washington Carver. Nikoledood (talk) 10:02, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Nikoledood. The Interwiki link system knows about a number of resources which are not Mediawiki projects, and can link to them using a wikilink rather than an external link - the list is at Special:Interwiki.

nara: is the shortcut for https://catalog.archives.gov/id/$1, and it appears the link tool has recognised that and created a wikilink.

If it is important to you that it appear as an external link, I think you're going to need to edit it in the source editor (but there may be a way in the VE - I don't use it). ColinFine (talk) 11:09, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

@Nikoledood: It sounds like you have enabled "Open external links in a new tab or window" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. It's not default and can only be enabled by registered users so the difference will affect few readers. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:40, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Unable to bold subject of article

Not commenting on the content of this article - in short, this may be a borderline WP:NPROF pass - but why is the markup not working right when I try to bold the subject's name in this article? Draft:Jamal Lasri. Adding apostrophes ('') in any quantity in the first paragraph bolds and italicizes all the text coming after it. Reconrabbit 14:45, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Found the problem - further in the lede, source shows "and study of the intermolecular transamidation reactions of ''N''-carbamoylmethyl-''N'''-tosylguanidines" - there's three apostrophes after the second N when there should be only two. This disrupts the bold markup for anywhere before then. Departure– (talk) 14:55, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! It was hard sorting through all those apostrophes, and it didn't stop happening in an obvious place. Reconrabbit 15:07, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

User:Reconrabbit, although your edit fixed the formatting in the lede, it made the actual chemical name incorrect. The second N needs to be italics (as you recognized) but also have an apostrophe after it. See the title of the cited doi:10.1021/ol035377z ref for confirmation. DMacks (talk) 18:55, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

I see. The first reference to that sentence wouldn't load. It would be nice if citation bot could grab the titles for all of these references. Reconrabbit 19:08, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Switch the ref to a {{cite ...}} template with the doi placed in the |doi= field rather than a full URL, and cite-bot can handle it. When it's not in a template, cite-bot doesn't know how to format the details or what details are already given. But a template is structured enough that the bot can parse what is present and pass everything, with the formatting deferred to the template. DMacks (talk) 23:36, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

@Reconrabbit, Departure–, and DMacks: Pleas see this edit: Special:Diff/1272663526 – I put the nowiki-ed apostrophe inside the italicized region, so that it does not collide with the upper-right end of the italic 'N' letter. Feel free to undo if you think it's not an improvement. --CiaPan (talk) 19:24, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Yup, that's now correct content. The {{'}} template can be used here (I swapped it in). I think it should technically be a prime rather than an apostrophe, in which case {{prime}}. That's a good wikitext item that makes it clear what symbol actually is being used. But many writers I know (and most wiki pages) use the apostrophe in this context because it's easier to type the character directly (no 'prime' on the standard keyboard). DMacks (talk) 23:26, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Can't figure out how to remove an inappropriate category

The article Butter is listed the category 'Dietary fat templates' and since this is an article and not a template, it shouldn't be there. However, within Butter's page source, I don't see why it is ending up in this category. Ike9898 (talk) 15:35, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

{{Comparison of cooking fats}} emits that category. You can raise the issue with interested editors at Template talk:Comparison of cooking fats.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:46, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Fixed. The category link inside that template should have been inside a <noinclude> group, and I have moved it there. ColinFine (talk) 15:49, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

... and, unfixed, because another editor has reverted my correction. Taking that up with them now. It was a mistake, and they undid their revert straight away, but I had been notified, so I didn't notice that until I went to look. ColinFine (talk) 15:21, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Lost one-click archiving

I used to be able to one-click archive threads via a link that would appear to the right side of sections. I haven't seen that option for some time now. I suspect I may have screwed up my preferences or added a script that's not playing well with it or such, but I'm not sure what I need to do to fix it. If any technically-minded Wikipedians would be able to help me out, I'd appreciate it! DonIago (talk) 17:43, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

I also had this problem recently. The script you linked to is outdated and no longer maintained since the user was banned; I started using this script that works well: User:Elli/OneClickArchiver. If the page doesn't already have a link to the archive you may need to add {{Talk header}} or similar. Reconrabbit 17:57, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for linking to that version of OCA, but I do (or should) already have that one installed. DonIago (talk) 18:25, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't know then. I can see a very small "|Archive" button next to this section (on Vector legacy). Reconrabbit 18:32, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

January 30

Vector legacy suddenly stopped working. . .

All of a sudden this evening, my interface looks like the new version of Vector, which I can't stand. In preferences the skin is still set to Vector legacy, and when I click preview it looks like it should, but as soon as I click any link it goes back to the new version. What happened? Is there a way to fix it? I am using Chrome on a Chromebook, if that is relevant. Thanks. blameless 02:23, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

. . . and now it is just as suddenly fixed. I withdraw my question--I guess someone was just fooling with the interface. blameless 02:25, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Withdrawing An Edit Request

I tried contributing to an article but after so many tries the request was still not accepted so i gave as all the sources were denied and it wasn't not possible for me continue this alone. So i tried withdrawing my edit request but even after fair explanation and reasons my edit requests are being reactivated even though I don't want them to remain active or be merged into the article. Is there way for me delete/remove/withdraw my edit request as I don't want to continue working on it. 4rju9 (talk) 08:54, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

If no one has responded to you at all, you may simply edit the talk page to remove your request. 331dot (talk) 09:01, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

And if it has been responded to: reply to your original request saying that and add |answered=yes to the edit request template at the top of the section. Ultraodan (talk) 10:05, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

@331dot

@Ultraodan

Yes it is responded saying that my sources are invalid which should not be the case as they were all from old and known books, and i tried to get more details regarding the rejection of the source but no one replied it's been so many days but no response from any of the editor regarding the issue.

Then i tried to take my edit request back thinking that isn't no use contributing to rhe article. And i removed my edit request but each time i remove my edit request a new editor comes and revert it back. Each time i give explanation and reasons behind why i want to withdraw it. They don't reply and revert it back and my questions regarding the denial of sources is still not answered.

What can i do in this situation. I just want to withdraw my edit request or archive it, but they keep it active

Can you guide me on this? 4rju9 (talk) 16:18, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

You should update the 'answered' parameter as Ultraodan mentioned. That will establish it as being resolved. Once other editors have responded to your request, you should no longer attempt to delete it entirely. Hope this helps! DonIago (talk) 17:18, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, so there's no way for me to remove it now or withdraw it, Right? Is it possible to move it to archive? 4rju9 (talk) 17:35, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Just asking, in Wikipedia:Edit requests there are no perticular rules about withdrawing or deleting the edit request by its original creator and the changes that are rejected from being merged into the article will have no effect on the original article or to the talk page as they don't depend on them nor they depend on that particular edit request. So can't the creator remove it from the list of active edit requests with a proper reason/explanation. 4rju9 (talk) 17:44, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

@4rju9, there are no active edit requests at Talk:Gangwar (surname), they've all been tagged as answered. Schazjmd (talk) 17:54, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

@Schazjmd

Yes the changes are rejected, i want to remove it, is it not possible? Can i not remove my edit request as removing it entirely will have no effect on the article or it's talk pagem 4rju9 (talk) 18:14, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

@4rju9, an administrator already explained this on your talk page. Schazjmd (talk) 18:27, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

As have I, on my own talk page. They seem completely stumped by the most simple explanation I've given them, and I've asked them to stop posting on my talk page as it's clearly not being taken on board. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 07:03, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

well i understand and thanks to all the editors for helping in this. i got the point that why it is prohibited to simply remove an edit request that is already answered although this rule does not make any sense in my case but if wikipedia policy does not allow it i will respect its policy.

@Jéské Couriano Don't bother new editors who come to contribute you're just making it worse for the new comers to come and contribute to the wikpedia articles editors like you do everything except contributing to an article that can be improved or support someone who is trying his best to contribute. simply means you won't contribute nor let anyone else contribute.

stay away from all the editors because you're not helping them in any way nor they get to learn anything from you cuz you only criticize.

in your talk and other talk pages what all you and other editors did was pointless argument. that is why i had to come to Help Desk. 4rju9 (talk) 11:40, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

"LTA 1311"

After posting a warning on a user's talk page, the edit filter showed my name and the aforementioned edit. There was no ID, just "LTA 1311" at the end. What does that mean? (3OpenEyes' communication receptacle) | (PS: Have a good day) (acer was here) 18:02, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Can you please post a link to either the user or the article? LTA typically refers to a long term abuse account. However I am confused by a few of your warning notices including: here and here. What pages were edited by these users and especially the second one, why did you give a final warning to them? TiggerJay (talk) 18:20, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Huh. It seems I did. I'll go ahead and revert the second one back to level 1.

I can't seem to find a user warning template for tripping the edit filter, which had disallowed the edit but not warned the user, so I used the generic templates.

My apologies for the lack of clarity. (3OpenEyes' communication receptacle) | (PS: Have a good day) (acer was here) 18:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

@3OpenEyes: Users shouldn't be warned at all for edits which were stopped by an edit filter. The filter shows a warning when the edit is stopped. Your edit matched the conditions in a filter for a long-term abuser (LTA) who makes bad warnings and uses multiple accounts. The filter is non-public to prevent the abuser from seeing the conditions and work around them. You risk being blocked by somebody inspecting logs for the LTA filter so immediately stop giving warnings to users without saved edits. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:43, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Alright. I will make sure to remember that. Thank you, and I'm sorry for my mistakes. (3OpenEyes' communication receptacle) | (PS: Have a good day) (acer was here) 18:44, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Problem

Hello, I'm editing the "Toca Boca" website and I'm trying to put a plain row header with the title games. I add "Games" and the header, and the "Games" section stays there, but the header, instead of staying below, it is in the WHOLE bottom of the page! What can I do? Camilolucena (talk) 22:10, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Camilolucena you are using {{Wikitable}} and that needs "|}" at the bottom, so I added that. I then reverted myself as it needs more work, for example the name column does not look right. TSventon (talk) 22:38, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

@Camilolucena: {{Wikitable}} is an irrelevant link but you do have to close the table with |}. It opens with {| and nearly all features with an open have a symmetric-looking close. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:44, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: I don't want to give out incorrect information in future, do you know the correct template link? TSventon (talk) 11:47, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

@TSventon It's not actually a template. You can point new editors to H:TABLE and MOS:TABLE. Ultraodan (talk) 12:16, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @TSventon: Tables and templates are different features. There was no template involved in [1] so I see no reason to give a template link. This was about table syntax. Using the wikitable class merely adds some styling with no effect on the syntax so that also seems irrelevant. You could add "See more at Help:Basic table markup" after giving the |} fix but the fix was probably all they needed. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:32, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

January 31

Is this a copyright violation?

About 80% of the text of the article 4-Hydroxy-1-methyl-4-(4-methylphenyl)-3-piperidyl 4-methylphenyl ketone is taken from a copyrighted journal article. The source is cited and the text is in quotes, but this still seems to constitute a copyright violation as described at Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources. I'm not sure what to do about it though. Can someone knowledgeable have a look? Marbletan (talk) 16:46, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

The quoted text was added by User:DYLLMARTIN99 in 2018, and that was the only edit done by this account. It doesn't really count as vandalism, and holding a discussion on that account's talk page might not be productive. I think the only course of action that can be taken for now is removing most of the quotes and replacing them with paraphrase. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 19:11, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

IP block shows a different address

When I’m trying to edit a page, I see a colocation web host block for 113.23.0.0/17. Since I’m actually on a residential connection (hotel Wi-Fi in Vietnam), I wanted to request an unblock, so I went to check my IP and got 58.186.*.*, which is not in the blocked range. How do I proceed here? Notpushkin (talk) 16:51, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

@Notpushkin: Are you using a VPN or other anonymising service, even if unwittingly? Those would cause your IP to show up differently to Wikipedia's servers (as your traffic gets routed thru their servers and thus inherits their IP), and would be likely to be blocked on discovery. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:55, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Nope. I did have Cloudflare WARP enabled before, but I was getting a different error, so I disabled it. (I think 113.23.0.0/17 is not a Cloudflare network, in any case) Notpushkin (talk) 17:44, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

In some countries, I've seen them route traffic differently, so while when you go to a check-my-ip sort of website, you might get one result, while going to a different website its routed through a different proxy/VPN/relay. Also sometimes there are other technical reasons which are confidential for how the system detects IP addresses to prevent abuse that are not usually show on simple IP address checking websites, but are available within other technical data. Although with that being said, clearly you were able to post here, so were you trying to edit without being logged in? TiggerJay (talk) 17:41, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

I’ve checked my IP on the Wikipedia:Get_my_IP_address page, which gets the IP from the Wikipedia API directly (see Get-my-ip.js). So the IP should be the same as when I open an edit page. Maybe it’s some local ISP shenanigans? I’ve just rechecked and I can’t see the block anymore, so it’s either that or a stale cache somewhere. Notpushkin (talk) 17:52, 31 January 2025 (UTC)