Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2022 August 25

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

August 25

How many more documents do I translate to become an experienced editor?

Hello, I'm Mr. Kwon from Korea.

I am focusing on translating Korean wiki documents into English these days.

I translated up to 201, but I still see this message. "Your translation cannot be published because publishing is only allowed to more experienced editors on this wiki." I'm still not able to publish the document, so I'm very confused about how to do it, so I'm asking for your help. How many more documents do I translate to become an experienced editor? I'm planning to translate more Korean documents into English, so I'd really appreciate it if you could help me on how to do it. Dckewon5131 (talk) 10:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

That's very strange, Dckewon5131. I've no idea. I hope that somebody else can help you. However, a different point. I glanced at two of your drafts. If you were to submit them as drafts, and if I were the reviewer, I'd decline them. That's because you use Korean (and/or Japanese?) sources but only name and describe them in English, thereby making them extraordinarily difficult to identify and search for. If your source is in Korean, please provide information on it in Korean (and hangul). Optionally, also provide information in romanized Korean, or in English translation, or both. -- Hoary (talk) 12:23, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Dckewon5131, see Wikipedia:Content translation tool § English Wikipedia restrictions – you need at least 500 edits and your account needs to be at least 30 days old. You can create a draft, however, and submit that to Wikipedia:Articles for creation. To submit a draft, place {{subst:submit}} at the top of the page using the source editor, and save the page. Rummskartoffel 12:31, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I looked at one of the very large number of "translations" you have made at random, namely User:Dckewon5131/이충세. This is written in very poor English and does not use inline citations (see WP:CITE) so it is difficult to see how each stated fact can be verified by the reader: a core policy here. I suggest you focus much more on quality, not quantity. Take one or two of the articles chosen because they are likely to be notable as defined on this Wikipedia and, as others have suggested, use the articles for creation process. That way, you'll gain experience in our standards for accepting articles. Thank-you for wishing to expand our coverage of Korean topics. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:40, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Is CGTN reliable source?

Is CGTN reliable source? I don't know what it has sensitive content or political related issues but I want to know about its reliability to Wikipedia. 196.188.245.51 (talk) 10:55, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

It's listed at WP:CGTN. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Deletion of article

Please can you help me. My entry 'Vanessa Branson' keeps being edited down with verifiable information being taken off. All information on it my page has been verified and linked to outside sources. The information about my knighthood was taken off even though it is linked to your wikipedia entry from the Kingdom of Morocco on another page. Everything is fact, no personal extraneous information, no personal marketing and yet you keep taking off my information and reducing it to a single line. I have heard that you are biased towards women on wikipedia and are more brutal with edits for women. My male business parter has the same information on his page and you allow that to remain but it was taken off mine. I would like to understand how this is happening and how you allow my male couterpart to have paragraphs of entry and you edit my information to a single line. Vanessa Branson (talk) 12:04, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Vanessa Branson - 97.113.27.216 (talk) 12:22, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Vanessa Branson, it's very possible that your business partner's page could also use some cleanup - it's hard for us to know without being given his name so we can take a look. Can you clarify who is operating this account? At times it seems to be the article subject, at other times it is apparently an assistant. Sharing an account is not allowed. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 12:25, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

His page is Howell James and my entry was exactly the same as his about ownership of El Fenn and you deleted mine. There is no reason to delete this as it is a verifiable fact. You also deleted my knighthood which is a verifiable fact and is on the Order of Ouissam Alaouite wikipedia page (I am third down on the Officer Recipients). Is that to be deleted too? Or perhaps you are too aggressive with my deletions? Everything that was on my wikipedia entry has been checked and was previously ok but now edited down to a single line. This feels like a deliberate edit to minimise any facts about me online. Vanessa Branson (talk) 12:37, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Vanessa Branson I took a look at the supposed source for the ownership of El Fenn within the article on Howell James. It gives a "page not found" error, so has suffered from link-rot. So some editor here is going to have to try to restore it from a web archive like the Wayback machine. More likely, they will conclude "this is a WP:PRIMARY source, whereas the encyclopaedia would much prefer a WP:SECONDARY one" and just move on or even delete that sentence. Wikipedia is interested in what can be reliably verified, not what is "true". That's one of the reasons we don't like the subject of an article adding material directly: what you know to be true about yourself is not necessarily information in the public domain by having been published. If you have a citation that can be used about your ownership of El Fenn or indeed about your knighthood, please add them to the Talk Page of the article in the form of an WP:EDITREQUEST and someone will likely act on that. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:23, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I have updated the reference in the Howell James article and will now add the same information to yours. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:30, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Vanessa Branson, as I look in the history of the article, I don't see where it was edited down to a single line. Can you please point us to it? The greatest single pruning that I notice this year was this, by Drmies, who generally knows what they're doing. The article names your business partner as Howell James; the article Howell James is indeed considerably longer than the one about you, but most of it seems to be about matters that are independent of you. (Excuse me if I misunderstand; it's my bed time.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:34, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Apologies, I can now see the full biography, it wasn't showing on my computer before. You have taken out the Order of Ouissam Alaouite - the Moroccan knighthood which is corroboarted by the Order of Ouissam wikipedia page and is a verifiable fact. This knighthood was awarded in 2014 and is on public record. What reason was it deleted for? Vanessa Branson (talk) 12:40, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

It was removed, along with other information, in this edit by editor Undying Sikh, with the edit summary What could not be corroborated has been scrapped. In other words, it was removed because it was not cited to a source. If you find a reliable published source for your award, please make an edit request, citing the source, on Talk:Vanessa Branson. You say that you are listed on Order of Ouissam Alaouite; but since (like all but two of the names in the list) no citation is given there either, it is not of value for Wikipedia. I'm not doubting that you have received the honour, but as it stands, I could add my own name to that list, and it would appear no less reliably than nearly any other name there. (I have tagged that section accordingly: when you find a source, you might put an edit request with the source on that article's talk page too). ColinFine (talk) 14:15, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Mike Turnbull, ColinFine, Hoary, I have no choice but to block this account for a number of reasons: undeclared COI (they were told three years ago), NOT a single individual's account, and "famous user name". I left more extensive notes on their user talk page. Thanks to all three of you. Drmies (talk) 14:41, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

• Drmies, good work. Had I been wider awake (and more energetic), I'd have done the same. -- Hoary (talk) 21:17, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Attribution

A simple question I hope: I use Wikipedia as a source for much of what I do. It can steer me to other sources as an informal source for facts. I'd like to use Wikipedia as a source for what I do. I'm an aerial photographer that has assembled a set of picture files that I have assembled into a book. It's mostly about the photography but a few facts, r fiction regarding the state that i live in adds to the photo and makes the book more interesting, and hopefully saleable. How to I attribute the material I use that i have gleaned from Wiki or is that a forbidden practice. I left this question posted at the "Teahouse" as well. Lenemeryphoto (talk) 12:23, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Asked at the Teahouse (multiple times). Please only ask in one place or the other, @Lenemeryphoto, to avoid duplication of volunteer effort. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 12:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Adding AfD Discussion

Hello, I came across a new editor சுய நாசீசிஸத்தை நிறுத்துங்கள் (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who made an AfD nomination for Ezhil_(programming_language) but didn't complete the process. I'm been unsuccessful at attempts to create a Deletion discussion page for him/her because the links that one is supposed to click on during the tagging have already been bypassed by this editor. Can someone take a look at this and complete the process? Blue Riband► 12:54, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Blue Riband: that is not an afd, but a proposed deletion (prod). it is incorrect to create a deletion discussion page for a prod. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 13:06, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a closer look at it as I'm still learning the difference between the two. I'll inform the Nominator. Blue Riband► 13:08, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Blue Riband: i would also advise you to strike your incorrect post on User talk:சுய நாசீசிஸத்தை நிறுத்துங்கள். lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 13:11, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@lettherebedarklight: Done, struk out original erronous comment to சுய நாசீசிஸத்தை நிறுத்துங்கள் here: here Blue Riband► 14:55, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Material for a lesson on basics of Wikipedia?

I am a registered editor on Hungarian wikipedia, but not very expert. (I have edited and created 30+ articles, and uploaded 12+ items on Wikimedia.)

I have been asked to give a hands-on presentation IN ENGLISH on basic editing on Wikipedia, in an international forum of our organisation.

Can you recommend some presentation templates and teaching material? I repeat, it is about basic editing (and creation of new articles), plus a brief general orientation on Wikipedia. BarbaraPG (talk) 13:07, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Help:Introduction to Wikipedia and the links in it may be a good place to start to get ideas and find material. Help:Introduction has links to a number of tutorials of varying depth. Help:Getting started is also good, although it has a lot of overlap with the other two. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 13:40, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

BarbaraPG, there was a recent discussion about video tutorials that might give you some ideas. I have only watched the 20 minute one. TSventon (talk) 14:54, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

"↵"

i keep seeing this symbol, ↵, in the visual editor. what is its meaning? lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 13:09, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Lettherebedarklight: That's the carriage return symbol. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:32, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: but what is its function? i delete those all the time because it's annoying to edit with and it has no noticeable effect on the page. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 01:13, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Lettherebedarklight: It's more evident in the source editor, but sometimes those appear when someone uses a line break. I find them most often around a group of templates, where editors usually separate each template by line. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:32, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Publishing in the wrong language by mistake

Hello,

I created a page on the Norwegian Wikipedia page by mistake.

European Alliance for Social Sciences and Humanities

How can I publish it on the English page instead?

ArtemisElephant9 (talk) 14:51, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't believe there is any way to transfer a page between Wikipedias. I think you need to create an article (or a draft, as appropriate) on en-wiki, 'Edit source' on the page on no-wiki, and simply copy the whole source to the new page. Since it has already been published you need to say where it came from: see WP:copying within Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 15:29, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello ArtemisElephant9,

I believe this page could be of help to you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Translate_us#:~:text=Find%20a%20suitable%20article%20that,edit%22%20in%20the%20new%20language. Melancholyhelper (talk) 15:29, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@ArtemisElephant9: You didn't create the Norwegian article but merely made an edit [1] which briefly changed it to English with other content, not a translation. If you don't want to translate the Norwegian article then Wikipedia:Translate us is not relevant. As a new user you cannot create articles directly in the encyclopedia but you can make and submit drafts. See Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Also see Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). The English text you saved in the Norwegian Wikipedia would be declined. You wrote "Our vision". See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure if you work for them. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:44, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

ColinFine, as an FYI, WP:CXT is probably the closest we've got. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:00, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Why we are not linking to some original source instead of some archive results.

Hello Wikipedia Team,

Can anybody tell me why we are not linking some original sources instead of using the web archive pages??

What if we got a live of similar page to the archived one, can we change it or not. Sameerkardam24 (talk) 16:27, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Sameerkardam24: See WP:LINKROT. Our citation templates provide for both the original URL and an archive URL, plus a "status" parameter that says whether or not the original is still present on the web. The original URL should always be there even if the link is now dead, and the template is designed to take the user to the original, not the archive, unless the original has been marked as dead. -Arch dude (talk) 16:50, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Arch dude!

And what if we got a similar article from a different website which is working fine. Can we add the URL of that website and remove the link of archive and the original source. 103.87.59.158 (talk) 17:11, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, IP user. We don't care where a source is, as long as it has been reliably published. In fact, for most resources, a URL is a convenience for the reader, not an essential part of the citation. So, if you find a legal copy of a reliably published article, you may link to that instead. Two caveats: I said "a legal copy": we are never allowed to link to copyright infringements; and secondly, ask yourself if there is reason to believe that the copy you've found will be around for longer than the original. ColinFine (talk) 17:41, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

He said "similar article", not "same article", so it sounds like reliable sources become an issue - R. S. Shaw (talk) 06:48, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

When is linking to a Tweet appropriate?

I understand that Twitter is not a reliable source and shouldn't be used for references, but when would the {{Cite twitter}} template be used?

My specific use case is in a sentence like, "In June 2022 the UK Ministry of Defence [https://twitter.com/DefenceHQ/status/1535496203256856576?s=20&t=FBTNLllwFtWBgl6P7mZZcw tweeted]..."

Edit to add: there is also a reference to a reliable news source backing up the sentence. The article does not reference the Tweet but they're both in the same timeframe (Tweet was the day before the article was written) and the Tweet is from an official government Twitter account. I'm simply trying to include the actual Tweet, not use it as a reference per se. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cartographile (talk • contribs) 17:00, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Is this an acceptable usage? Thanks. Cartographile (talk) 16:54, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

It can be acceptable to cite a tweet to confirm what the tweet said; but it is a primary source. If you have a secondary source for it, what does it add to cite the tweet itself? See WP:TWITTER. ColinFine (talk) 17:44, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Cartographile, note that the example you used, in which an external link to Twitter appears in the article body, would, of course, not be an acceptable citation format, per WP:CITE.--Quisqualis (talk) 18:01, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Quisqualis OK, thanks. It's more apparent that this would in effect be a citation, no matter the implementation. Cartographile (talk) 19:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

ColinFine Thanks. To me it added the exact text to read which provides more detail and context to the statement. The article didn't specify where the comment came from. It just said something like "The UK MoD said...". I found the Tweet and I made the connection, so it becoming a primary source at that point makes sense. I don't want to get into the reliability of the Tweet even though it's an official Twitter account. All in all this wouldn't be a super useful edit, so I'll just leave it as is. I've got too many browser tabs open anyway. Cartographile (talk) 19:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Newspapers in Virginia

This article is incomplete. The Rappahannock Times is published weekly in Tappahannock, Virginia. It has been published under various names since 1850, being known as the Rappahannock Times since 1923. Debra Kimbrough 69.161.106.136 (talk) 16:59, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Debra! First point: is this a different newspaper from the Rappahannock News, which is listed, (though it's in red because no-one has yet written a Wikipedia article about it)?

Second point: usually, list articles on Wikipedia are not intended to list every single possible entry, only those that already have a Wikipedia article about them, which requires that they are "Notable" in the sense that Wikipedia uses this jargon. In this article, it looks as though quite a few (possibly too many) entries have no articles, but have been "red-linked" as a suggestion that articles about them would be merited: this is an acceptable practice, if not over-used.

Third point: Wikipedia articles are created and material added to them not by some mysterious omniscient entity or by a staff of professional editors, but entirely by volunteers (about 100,000 different ones in every month), as a hobby (or obsession). ("Professional" editors of Wikipedia exist, but conservatively 95% are scam artists who can't write an acceptable article and certainly can't guarantee anything they do for a fee on someone's behalf won't be deleted as inappropriate or inadequate.)

Right now, you are the best placed person to add The Rappahannock Times to this list, because only you have so far come here with any interest in or knowledge of it. If you don't feel confident in doing so (and it's a table, whose code can be daunting) you can instead put a request on the article's Talk page together with links or references to where we can find published information about the paper (online or in printed books or journals that could be found a Library somewhere in the World – we cannot rely on an individual's knowledge or memory), so we can prove it really exists (or existed), and add "{{Edit request}}" to your post, which will summon an experienced editor to check it out and add if warranted. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.90.29 (talk) 19:35, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Like most List articles in Wikipedia, that is not actually a list of newspapers, but a list of Wikipedia articles or potential articles about newspapers. If the Rappahannock Times meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then we could have an article about it, and it could be added to the list. ColinFine (talk) 17:47, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Information on Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Wikipedia's information about Mr. Kennedy is absolutely incorrect and needs to be updated. What a bunch of bullshit! 2601:190:C400:803B:F515:47E:42E3:7F65 (talk) 17:14, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

IP editor, please note that Wikipedia's biographies of living people are strictly based on reliable, published sources, not on what the subjects or their associates have to say about them. If there is something wrong with the article's sources or their interpretation within the article, please make a note of it on Talk:Robert F. Kennedy, Jr..--Quisqualis (talk) 17:33, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Quisqualis. If anything is inaccurate, please post a message on the Talk page of the relevant page and provide news articles that prove the inaccuracy. Unfortunately, since Wikipedia is freely edited by anyone, sometimes misinformation gets through. However, on a high profile page like that, it is unlikely that something inaccurate went unnoticed. Typically the more popular the subject, the less likely that there is inaccuracy, because more people and editors are likely to catch it and correct it. Zeddedm (talk) 03:58, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia algorithm is incorrectly flagging my article.

Hello,

I have tried to submit my first Wikipedia article, but it is being rejected and I feel pretty confident that an algorithm has misinterpreted what I have written. My article is called Third-level Domain Redirection. It is something that I invented myself, but I did publicly declare that fact before starting the article. The article mentions the domain ontheInter.net and also links to archive.org. Neither of those are on your 2 blacklists, unless there's another one that I didn't see. The article does not contain any redirected URLs, but merely mentions them, since that's what it's about.

This is the address of my edit page: [[2]]

I don't know what else I can do. AshevilleNC (talk) 18:25, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

It's not the algorithm failing, you're trying to add http://www.ontheinter.net:80/. PICKLEDICAE🥒 18:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

The algorithm is working as intended, ontheinter.net is on the global blacklist as \bontheinter\.net\b (added in 2007) Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 18:46, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply.

bontheinter.net is a different domain.AshevilleNC (talk) 20:00, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Backtracking a bit here, you state that the article is on "something that I invented myself". To save us further time, can you confirm that you have read Help:Your first article, and that you can cite independent reliable sources concerning the subject, in order to demonstrate it meets Wikipedia notability criteria? Because, to be quite frank, a quick Google search suggests that 'Third-level Domain Redirection' is a commonly-used phrase, and as such highly unlikely to be describing anything newly invented. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:11, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

You see the title of my post? I believe that an algorithm has malfunctioned. Bontheinter.net and ontheinter.net are two totally different domains. I've been told now that the algorithm is working as intended. If that's true, then I believe it was poorly written, and that is indefensible.

What you call "backtracking" I call changing the subject completely. I searched Third-level Domain Redirection In quotation marks, and Google came up with "about 6 results." This was my search: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Third-level+Domain+Redirection%22&oq=%22Third-level+Domain+Redirection%22&aqs=edge..69i57j0i546l2j69i64.1375j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I also don't understand what you mean when you say that it's unlikely to be describing anything newly invented. No one said that this was newly invented. I invented this in 1998, 24 years ago.

What I would like to know is why an algorithm would be created to flag a domain name that happens to appear inside of another domain name, as a subset of the letters? AshevilleNC (talk) 20:28, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

It's flagging correctly, \bontheinter\.net\b is a regular expression. |Madeline. 20:32, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

To further clarify, the \bs in that regular expression do not refer to the literal characters back-slash and b, but are instead special instructions for the blacklist. The expression does not match "bontheinter.net" (and it isn't meant to, either), but it does match "ontheinter.net" (which it is supposed to). Rummskartoffel 20:54, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Okay, \b is not actually a part of the domain name. Thank you for explaining that to me. Up until 2009, the site allowed users to create their own domain name by adding a third-level. It was never intended for anyone to spam, but some did. Once I became aware of spamming, I immediately canceled the account. Unfortunately, Internet resources are misused by bad people. There has been no spamming from this domain since 2009, and I promise you, it was not me. I am an innovator and developer, and I have never been part of any spamming operation. I no longer provide third-level domains or redirection, and no one has used this domain name except me since 2009, and that's how it's going to stay. Can I have this domain name removed from the blacklist in the hopes that I can post my article?AshevilleNC (talk) 22:05, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Ask at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist, but note you are going to need a pretty compelling reason to convince the admins that removing it is a good idea, doubly so since you're evidently the site owner. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 22:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Doesn't hurt to ask . . . . AshevilleNC (talk) 23:16, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Russian Wikipedia

Hello everyone, I'm new to Wikipedia so sorry if this message doesn't belong here. But I need some help with Wikipedia in Russian language because I got shocked how much disinformation and propaganda is there. Shortly I'm from Moldova, and I started to check pages about Moldova in russian language and they everywhere mention that our language is "Moldovan" which doesnt exist and was a Soviet Union instrument of propaganda, our official language is only Romanian, and when I tried to speak about that on their forum showing evidences, and what i got back was racist insults for being from Moldova and to tell me that I'm actually speaking Moldavian, and even russian admins were doing that, then they just blocked me from posting anything. After that I checked several pages about Moldova and absolutely everywhere, there is false information about our History, Language, Culture... , and every time someone tries to say something russian moderators just block them. I dont know what to do I really thought Wikipedia is a place for knowledge and true info, and if you can help me do something about that I'll be very thankfull! 188.237.249.130 (talk) 18:32, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Each Wikipedia is a separate project. You will need to discuss this at the Russian Wikipedia, we can't help you here. RudolfRed (talk) 18:39, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

This is the idea, I tried to discuss that in Russian Wikipedia and they just blocked me for absolutely nothing, that's why I wanted to know if we can do something about that, I always thought Wikipedia is not the place for discrimination and propaganda. 188.237.249.130 (talk) 18:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Ideally it's not, but as every language Wikipedia runs entirely separately from every other language Wikipedia (they are not just 'translations' of each other), no-one here on English Wikipedia can do anything about this situation, any more than London Transport could do anything about a problem on the Moscow Metro. We wish we could help you, but we can't. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.90.29 (talk) 19:50, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pessimist2006

For example this person is a Russian neo-nazi who is editing Wikipedia from 2008 and nobody is doing anything to him, he told me some racist slurs in my address he banned me because he is also admin on Russian Wiki.

But yeah, thanks for help and very sad that we cant anything with that... 188.237.249.130 (talk) 19:57, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

if you're going to accuse other editors of such things, you better provide evidence. PICKLEDICAE🥒 19:58, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

You realize that everyone can see your attempts to vandalize his userpage, right? Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 19:59, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

That editor is Mark Bernstein, who is not a fascist. See Detention of Mark Bernstein. Cullen328 (talk) 20:05, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

• If you keep making posts like this, you will have a short career on the English Wikipedia as well. You would do well to focus on reliable, scholarly sources for the edits you want to make, not on your personal feelings of national belonging.

Please also note that Moldova/Romania is covered by discretionary sanctions, which is Wikipedia-speak for "admins will shoot without warning, due to lots of previous abuse". Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:22, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Getting "Error contacting the Parsoid/RESTBase server (HTTP 404)" message

I'm trying to "Publish Changes" on a draft article and every attempt to do results in this error message: "Error contacting the Parsoid/RESTBase server (HTTP 404)"

I've tried reloading the page and manually backing out the edits, then publishing, and still receive the error.

The draft article URL is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Submission_Grinder?action=edit

I've reloaded the page without the "action=edit" part, but my changes are automatically recovered, and trying to publish the changes again gives me the error. ThatMarcC (talk) 19:20, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I apparently worked around the problem by converting the draft to the Source Editing format and then back to Visual. ThatMarcC (talk) 19:40, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Correcting Historical Images

There is an Image of an Ancient Text that I have found 3 errors in, and validated these 3 errors with other experts in this very specific area of Philosophy and Practice. My question is - is there a protocol for correcting such a historical image?

Is it best to:

1. reach out to the uploader and explain the errors and suggest a new upload of a correct image? 2. create a new section titles "errors in translation" for this specific image and explain how and why the image continues to be misinterpreted and wrongfully translated? 3. just make the changes as I see right and see what happens?

I understand this is a "community" and I would like to be included in the community properly as I have a number of updates to make on a number of Ancient Chinese Philosophies, Theories and Practices.

Kindly advise if there are general considerations for how community members work and respect each other through the process of correcting knowledge.

Thank you,

Ben BenLee107 (talk) 22:44, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

BenLee107 could you link the image? Is it on Wikipedia or Commons? TSventon (talk) 23:09, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Older or newer archive URLs?

Hey everyone. I strive to add Wayback Machine links to webpage sources when editing, but I'm curious as to whether linking to the oldest or newest capture is preferred. Is there some kind of consensus on this, or does it not really matter? I usually link to older captures close to the publication date so I'm wondering if that's considered a bad thing. LBWP (talk) 22:56, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I have not seen any policy around this. In my own opinion, if all versions are exactly the same, then it doesn't matter. Also in my own opinion, if the content is different, then you should probably use the version that is most relevant as a citation. If the design is different, but content the same, then you should probably use the latest version. Zeddedm (talk) 03:52, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

@LBWP When using the Wayback machine, I often find that more recent captures give 404 "page not found" or similar errors. This occur when the top-level domain is still live but the particular old page is no longer hosted. Hence it is important to always check that the archive URL does actually contain the material cited in the article. Often, it is easiest to look for captures just after the date for the original citation, assuming that has been added. Its not a matter of policy but of what works for the reader! Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:28, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

@LBWP: Use the archive from the earliest date that is after the date listed as the access date in the citation. If you use a later date, you will need to verify that the later version still supports the information in the Wikipedia article, and if the later archived version has different publication information (e.g., updated author, publication date, title, etc.) you will need to change these in the citation template, also, and change the access date, because you are replacing the originally-cited work with a later work, and you are taking responsibility for checking it. -Arch dude (talk) 12:14, 26 August 2022 (UTC)