Help talk:Wikitext/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Interlanguage links of this Help page

This page is linked to other languages one throught d:Q80212000. Should not it be better throught d:Q6521720? --Non ci sono più le mezze stagioni (talk) 22:14, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

@Non ci sono più le mezze stagioni: That is due to actions taken at Wikidata by Dvorapa, see this edit to Q6521720 and this edit to Q80212000. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:29, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

I have reverted it. d:Q6521720 has links to 86 wikis. d:Q80212000 has one! Many users of other wikis go to enwiki for help. Our page should not be hidden from 85 wikis just because the Czech Wikipedia has two help pages about wikitext and a Czech editor may think the other is a closer match (I don't know Czech). PrimeHunter (talk) 23:52, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Well, If you think you can link pages to whatever you want just because enwiki is more popular, than link Universe to Lady Gaga and do another dumb things. Or maybe just try to create a summary page like all the other languages also for enwiki (and simple wiki as well, I missed that one before). --Dvorapa (talk) 08:39, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

I examined many of the 85 other pages. They were all help pages about wikitext and good matches. Pages are linked by content and not length. It's common for enwiki to have longer pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:36, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

pages viewed prior to save of making "markup" hyperlink functional (not prior to the addition of code)

https://www3.nd.edu/~jspeaks/courses/mcgill/415/Tarski.html "..obscurity.." (in (> 1.1 -) "S is true ... where the right hand side is filled in by expressions..are both free from obscurity (and do not presuppose the notion of truth to be defined)" (bracketeed added by user, and viewed after save) https://www.nd.edu/

New Perspectives on Computer Concepts 2018: Introductory By June Jamrich Parsons p.267

(viewed after 23:05, 15 February 2020 id=940990404, added here to indicate sources - "Tarski")

Diametakomisi (talk) 23:15, 15 February 2020 (UTC) (1 change (a minor correction) after signature Diametakomisi (talk) 23:17, 15 February 2020 (UTC))

www3.nd.edu was a return from "semantically closed state" (the criteria was formed by this user (the user isn't knowing any source other than this user to attribute the criteria to (although perhaps I forgot one that I know of subconsciously)), thanks Diametakomisi (talk) 23:23, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Please add Table Formatting

How to create and format table should be included here. RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 09:59, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

It's already covered, at Help:Wikitext#Tables. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:24, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Bulleted lists

What is the Wikitext markup for creating a bulleted list? Or do you have to use <ul> with CSS? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 14:12, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

@Chatul: No, it's easier than that; see Help:Wikitext#Lists. -- John of Reading (talk) 14:22, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

It appears to be a browser issue. On a current Firefox, * works as a bulleted list, but on an old Firefox all I get is the indentation. I tried <ul>...</ul> and the old Firefox fails on that as well. Thanks. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 15:36, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

What version is "an old Firefox"? Help → About --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:50, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

38.8.0

The strange hing is that I have files with <ul>...</ul> that render properly with that version. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 22:55, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Syntax Highlighting - Same code?

Hi! In row Syntax highlighting for source code of Text formatting table, second column shows two different ways of using Syntax highlighting. But, I think there is no difference between both given examples. I mean, it's exactly the same code, line by line

181.231.51.232 (talk) 23:23, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes it is. I will remove the second example. ----Jules (Mrjulesd) 12:06, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Nice, thank you! 181.231.51.232 (talk) 18:56, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Mistype

Remove 3rd "}" here:

• This is also possible with the {{strike}}} template. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.20.166.53 (talk) 10:26, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

 Done, thank you for noticing. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:30, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Do we have Zoom conference to help new esitors?

Im a new editor & i have so much information to add mostly from my country Philippines, but my problem is that i dont know how to correct some wrong information at are already published in the page & of course there are experience & professional editors here, my suggestion is that do not erase all the add ups, better verified it & help make some changes to make that add ups i made to be correct. Not just erase the entire idea, i believe you all started same with me as less than 5days old. So please use your spirit of Humility if you still have, because you dont know how much time & effort i gave just to contribute. Hope their are good editors that are willing to help. U can personally email me at king.belimac@gmail.com & i will be very happy to be your Pupil King Chopazar Belimac (talk) 13:58, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 December 2020

This help page currently says as an example 'Link to this article: "Help:Wikitext" will appear only as bold text.' This is a bit misleading because it's not an article, but a page, methinks. I propose that we replace article with page. (and be careful to change the rendered wikitext as well) 98.35.13.170 (talk) 02:56, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

 Done --Jules (Mrjulesd) 04:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Paragraph breaks within list items

I have been able to make a line break within a list item, but not a paragraph break with visible space between paragraphs. I tried to look up a solution to this, but haven’t come up with anything. BiliousBob (talk) 07:21, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

• First list item
  continues after line break
• Second list item, first paragraph

  Second paragraph

• Third list item

--Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:06, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Try <br />

#foo<br><br>bar<br><br>

#baz

1. foo
   
   bar
   
   
2. baz

Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 14:12, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Templates for punctuation characters

There are templates for escaping some special characters as an alternative to using <nowiki>...</nowiki> or HTML entities. A section listing them would be helpful. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 14:18, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Mobile tags

The <small> and <big> tags don't work (for me) on mobile. ― Qwerfjkl|✉   12:18, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: They are both set to 100% in mobile CSS. You can change it for yourself with code like this in Special:MyPage/minerva.css:

big {font-size:112% !important;}
small {font-size:88% !important;}

PrimeHunter (talk) 13:19, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! ― Qwerfjkl|✉   16:42, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

wikitext, wiki markup and wikicode

All over Wikipedia we can find wrong spelling and/or unjustified capitalization of wikitext, wiki markup and wikicode (e.g. Wikitext, wiki-markup, wikimarkup and Wikimarkup), even in Help:Wikitext itself.

On Help:Wikitext, we can read in lead section (introduction):

Wikitext, also known as Wiki markup or Wikicode, consists of the syntax and keywords used by the MediaWiki software to format a page.

These words in bold with first letters capitalized are really confusing because they are common nouns: wikt:wikitext, wikt:wiki markup, wikt:wikicode.

Furthermore in the Wikipedia menu of each page, we can find the tool : Page information with "Page content model": wikitext (see also Help:Content model)

I suggest the following sentence to clarify things and insist on the right spelling:

The markup language called wikitext, also known as wiki markup or wikicode, consists of the syntax and keywords used by the MediaWiki software to format a page.

Antoine Legrand (talk) 10:34, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

I wonder whether that should go further and include something like Note that the correct spelling of these names uses lowercase. Then nobody can either think they're typos, or just not notice the lowercase. Musiconeologist (talk) 11:23, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Great idea! Thanks for the suggestion. These glaring errors are all too common on Wikipedia. Editors/contributors need to be aware that these words are common nouns that follow the classic rules of lowercase usage. Antoine Legrand (talk) 12:10, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

nowiki unclear

The description of <nowiki /> is unclear. Specifically, it does not state the scope of the nowiki. --Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 15:05, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

It's a self-closing tag and has no scope. It's just used to separate two pieces of wikitext which shouldn't be interpreted as being together. There is also an example where it's used to avoid wikitext being placed at the start of a line where it would have a special effect. I haven't actually seen nowiki used for that. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:21, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

That needs to be explained in the article. --Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 18:18, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Bold markup

I'm having a small dispute about proper use of bolding using wikitext and I'm not sure the proper protocol.@PrimeHunter: Two cases are:

• {{flagicon|TUN}} '''[[Ons Jabeur]]'''
• '''{{flagicon|TUN}} [[Ons Jabeur]]'''

Both give the same visual display on my laptop... the flagicon does not get visually bolded. But it seems to me that properly only the tennis player's name should have the markup and that it should not start before the flag template. Is there something in wikipedia help that shows us what to do? Is there a better place to place this query? Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:38, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

@Fyunck(click): I see the dispute is about a tennis draw. Wikipedia:WikiProject Tennis/Article guidelines#Article types and recommended practices says:

• Draw articles

...use bolding on the won set gamescore and the winner's name

But the examples at Wikipedia:WikiProject Tennis/Article guidelines#Scores also have bold around flagicon. It seems pointless and I prefer to only have it on the name but this is the only guidance I could find and it's inconsistent. Searches [1][2] show both forms are common. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:44, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: I saw that too, but I would also want to do what Wikipedia says is correct. So they are both common forms. Obviously Tennis Project guidelines have an issue with consistency on this. I thought maybe Wikipedia said somewhere on how best to place the markup, and that perhaps in some iterations placing it before the flagicon could mess things up (as with accessibility issues). I still feel it should be only on the part that needs bolding but I wont press the issue. Maybe I'll ask in accessibility if it causes any issues with specialty readers like JAWS. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 01:53, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

I asked at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Accessibility and it seems to cause no issues with screen readers. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:35, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

The HTML 5.2 spec states that the b element represents a span of text to which attention is being drawn for utilitarian purposes without conveying any extra importance and with no implication of an alternate voice or mood, ... - there is no mention of images. It is not an error to enclose an image in <b>...</b> tags, but doing so is pointless since the concept of a "boldfaced image" is meaningless. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:14, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

S and U tags

@Paradoctor: there is no need to get all huffy. I came by this page today for reasons unrelated to your recent edit, and so I had no idea you had made it. (This is a violation of WP:AGF; if you think there is a reason to violate the relevant guideline, please explain below.) I checked the talk page and saw that the "s" tags were only mentioned once with no reply (see archive 1), and the "u" tags were not mentioned at all. So with that due diligence completed, I didn't see the harm in adding mention of them to the page. It's not as if I spray painted it on the side of your house, the edit was easily reversed.

But that leaves questions, such as; why is there no mention of these tags at all...? Not even to indicate that they are deprecated, (if in fact they are), or why the "ins" and "del" tags are preferred over the others? Issues that were not clearly explained in the extensive discussion you referred to in your edit summary, the same summary where you accused me (twice!) of somehow violating a talk page guideline with an edit to Wiki help page. A calm clarification would be appreciated. Thank you - wolf 23:21, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Before this goes any further, I suggest a look at WP:AAGF, especially WP:AAGF § What "Bad Faith" Is. Paradoctor (talk) 23:49, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Riiiight... so is this the part where I tell you to go look at WP:AAAGF, or can I expect you to actually address the topic at hand? I don't think that's too much to ask considering the big deal you made over it with your revert. - wolf 23:58, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Ok... almost a week with no reply. If you don't want justify your revert, you can expect it to be undone. Or better yet, try contributing to a new article comment regarding these tags, instead of just blanking and arguing. These tags are used quite regularly, so it's not as if we can just pretend they don't exist. - wolf 18:14, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Your replies so far do not give me confidence for a constructive exchange. The guideline is clear. If you revert, this will go to dispute resolution. If you wish, please feel free to take the initiative on that. Paradoctor (talk) 19:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the policy on reversion is clear, hence the reason I said "if" you don't justify your revert, you can expect it to be undone. You still haven't, and yet I am still trying to get either an explanation from you, or some suggestion toward a solution. So, how about addressing the issue, before getting a wiki-lawyer on retainer? Again, these tags are used regularly, so we can't act as if they don't exist. There should be some kind of guidance for them (seeing how this is a help page), yet you would have it so that they are not mentioned at all. Even if they were deprecated, there should at least be some mention of it, but you haven't even provided evidence for that. So it would seem that something should be added, and so I'm asking, (again)... do you have suggestion? Why not try tackling this first, or at least showing you tried, instead of going straight to battle-mode? - wolf 23:32, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:Editnotices/Page/Help talk:Wikitext Paradoctor (talk) 06:21, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

That's not really helpful. Is there some reason why you refuse to address this issue? You removed that content in the first place. Is there some reaaon why you refuse to communicate? - wolf 15:19, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

The s and u tags are not deprecated (or obsolete), but they are frequently misused. For marking up deletions and insertions, the del and ins tags should be used. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:28, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply Rr64, but I not debating their use, just questioning why all mention of these tags (content that has been here for years), was summarily removed with only a link to a single reply as justification (a reply on a different talk page, from 3 years ago). Further to that, when it's suggested that there should be some kind of "help", here on this "help page", regarding the usage of these tags, said deletor refuses to even acknowledge the suggestion. So again, either some new guidance can be collaboratively created and added, or the previous content is going back in. Thanks again - wolf 04:42, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

(arbitrary break)

@Paradoctor: So now, after everything, and without a word here beforehand or input from anyone else, you decide to add content that now mentions the s tags, though only as part of a note on the the strikethrough template. And just prior, you again reverted the content debated above, and noted both the DRN close and wp:redact in another disingenuous edit summary - the DRN close made no mention of the revert, and redact, (as it turns out) had the s and u tags arbitrarily removed by you as well, (to bad that wasn't disclosed earlier). Your making bold edits to guidelines and help pages, and when they're challenged, you won't contribute to any kind of collaborative solution, you tried to head off any wider discussion by suddenly starting a DRN that you then refused to cooperate in and basically stymied, and now you're back to making more of these bold edits, without any input from anyone else. Go to ANI if you want, but I'm going with BRD. - wolf 16:26, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Help:Wikitext § Strike through is not part of Help:Wikitext § Show deleted or inserted text, and deals with a different topic. The text I introduced does not imply that <s>...</s> is a permissible alternative to <del>...</del>, on the contrary: Do not use it, however, to indicate document edits. Paradoctor (talk) 16:39, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

You mean the very brief sub-section, that is directly below the other very brief sub-section and ends with a note to see the very brief sub-section directly above it? You want to assert that those sub-sections are entirely unrelated? Also, I see you're using the word "imply" again (not sure why), but doesn't: "Do not use it, however, to indicate document edits." imply that the tags could be used for other than document edits?

You know, I'm not sure if this is deliberate or not, (I'm trying to agf here), but you seem to missing the point entirely. This would all be so much easier if you you were more willing to actually discuss a collabotaive solution. (Also, please don't move my comments out of the topic thread. Thanks.)

- wolf 17:16, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

There is a case at the DRN regarding this page.

This message is to inform interested editors of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute related to this page. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. Any editors are welcome to add themselves as a party, and you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Help:Wikitext". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:15, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

DRN aftermath

The closure notice states It has been established that the use of the <s> and <u> tags is incorrect for marking changes to talk page dialog. Since the current version is not compliant with WP:REDACT, I will reinstate the version I edited.

@Thewolfchild: If you reintroduce language that states or implies that the <s>...</s> and <u>...</u> tags are permissible alternatives to <del>...</del> and <ins>...</ins>, I will take it to WP:ANI. Paradoctor (talk) 13:50, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Don't threaten me, I'm tired of your smug and overbearing attitude. You had several opportunties (and still do) to work towards a solution here but instead have refused to contribute in any way. Now you think the DRN somehow supports your edit here? The DRN closure does not support your complete removal of any and all mention of the s and u tags. In fact, the DRN didn't address many of the questions regarding the tags. Once again, you could've choosen to work towards a solution here and perhaps offer a suggestion or two... it's called collaboration, feel free to give it a try. - wolf 14:12, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Code tag within efn prefix

When I attempt to use <code title=>...</code> within an {{efn}} template, I get the error message Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).. If there is a restriction on the use of |title= then the text of #Text formatting should note it. It should probably also suggest the use of <syntaxhighlight>...</syntaxhighlight>.

Is there and equivalent attribute on a tag or template similar to <syntaxhighlight>...</syntaxhighlight> and {{code}}?

BTW, what is the template for rendering an attribute? I keep forgetting it :‑(  -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 12:26, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

@Chatul: Since that code fragment contains an equals sign, you'll need to follow the advice in the {{efn}} documentation: Note that if the note's content contains an "=" character, a reference error will be displayed; precede the content with |1= (or one of its aliases, |text=, |reference=, or |content=) to fix the error. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:11, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

@Chatul: Try {{para|parameter name}}: |parameter name=. Paradoctor (talk) 14:12, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

There's still one problem.. The raw text

<code title="Diagnose">DIAG</code>,{{efn|VM repurposes <code title{{=}}"Diagnose">DIAG</code> as an <code title{{=}}"Hypervisor Call">[[Hypervisor|HVC]]</code> instruction.}}

correctly renders as "DIAG," but hovering over the text HVC gives the page Hypervisor from the wikilink rather than the text Hypervisor Call from the |title=Hypervisor Call attribute of the <code title=Hypervisor Call>...</code>. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chatul (talk • contribs) 22:01, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

@Chatul: That is because the tooltips of nested tags override the tooltip of the nesting tag. Since you don't control the relevant CSS, the only workaround I see is to use {{plain link}}, like this: "DIAG," Paradoctor (talk)

Notes

Musical notation rendering broken?

Hello! In the section for musical notation, the renders as side is showing an error for me which says "Could not load file knexhwo2.json from server." Is it broken for anyone else or is it just me? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:37, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: It works for me. I don't know why it tries to load a json file for you. I see https://upload.wikimedia.org/score/k/n/knexhwo22jc7li2m3yv66wtcmufhlln/knexhwo2.png. Does it work in safemode or if you log out? PrimeHunter (talk) 03:01, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

It appears to have been the device I was using for some reason. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 03:12, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia.org Contents

Wikipedia.org Contents is not so accurate as it seems or appears to be. First of all, your views is as diverse as its' editors or contributors. If your editors or contributors are of one race or majority of one race and age group, then your editors or contributors views are bias and one-sided. For example: In Google Search, the search included: (See Below)

African Americans (also referred to as Afro-Americans or Black Americans) are an ethnic group consisting of Americans with partial or total ancestry from ... ‎Lists · ‎History · ‎Culture · ‎South African Americans

The term 'African Americans are African people who has recently come to these United States and took the American oath of citizenship. Unlike them, me, my parents, and their parents are considered 'Afro-Americans' and not 'African-Americans'. There's a humongous difference and it should be noted. Additionally, if your editors or contributors had taken a Black History class and/or taken classes with individuals from Africa, you would know immediately the differences in dress, speech, presence, and acquaintance. United States citizens born in this country who happen to be born with a shade of brown skin are not African-Americans. They are Afro-Americans with past ancestry whose ancestors were taken from Africa and brought to the United States of America through slavery. Before sharing your views of the world, seek affirmation first. There are many Afro-American social, political, and economic professionals that will provide your editors or contributors with all the facts that's needed.

I find it very disappointing that an organization that can write so much about so much, do not provide and has not provided a simple way for local and global readers to comment on your written documentation. I found myself in a corporate run-around when looking for a easy, simple comment text box. This needs to be corrected because it's not fair to the readers. And too boot, now you want people to log-in to your web site when all that is totally not necessary. 98.118.251.167 (talk) 16:56, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

This looks very like some recent posts at VPM, e.g. Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 75#I just want to point out that a large number of articles are severely biased. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:35, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Pre tags

1. Why do these exist? In what situation would one actually want to strip out all formatting in this manner? 

2. Why is a space at the start of a paragraph (a very easy typo) a shortcut for them? Furius (talk) 19:11, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

No instructions for commonly used page characters ( and )

A lot of pages in Wikipedia use parenthesis, as in "Raiders of the Lost Ark (soundtrack)" but there is no hint of how to make this link work. I found a workaround, using ( and ). The page and section that I edited is

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taricha#Toxicity

where I fixed the link to "Washington (state)". -- motorfingers : Talk -- motorfingers : Talk 06:45, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

There is no hint because they work exactly the same as internal links to any other page. The character entity references are neither necessary nor helpful. Paradoctor (talk) 07:37, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Special characters

This section shows HTML character entities but it does not show templates, e.g., {{=}} (=), {{!}} (|), {{all}} ($\forall$), {{and}}($\wedge$), {{euro}} (€), {{exist}} ($\exists$), {{not}} ($\neg$), {{pi}} (π), {{times}} ( × ). -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 16:33, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Strikethrough section

@Danbloch: Did that escape your attention? marks up a span of text with the <s>...</s> tag The template is merely a convenience. Paradoctor (talk) 02:45, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Well, yes, but that doesn't really change anything. The Strikethrough section was about the {{strikethrough}} template, with the mention of <s> being just an easy to overlook implementation detail. And the problem with having a section about {{strikethrough}} is that templates aren't part of wikitext so {{strikethrough}} doesn't deserve a section in this article.

Having said that, I no longer care that much. If no one else chimes in, feel free to put it back. Though I reserve the right to do a more comprehensive rewrite some other time. Dan Bloch (talk) 03:29, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Noted. Paradoctor (talk) 04:56, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@Danbloch: If no one else chimes in, feel free to put it back. No one chimed. Paradoctor (talk) 04:57, 30 December 2023 (UTC)