Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2024 January 18

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.

January 18

How can I request an undo of a wrongful change to a page?

The Uyghur Genocide was removed from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides at 10:32 on 16 January 2024‎ after a Jackson Hinkle tweet called it not a genocide. https://twitter.com/jacksonhinklle/status/1747092696580112755

The official UN definition of genocide includes, "d. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group" https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml

Of which the Chinese government has been accused of doing via compulsory sterilzation and is very well documented https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghur_genocide Matthew Maiden (talk) 01:32, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@Matthew Maiden: I'm not sure what you mean by "The Uyghur Genocide was removed" – are you referring to an edit to some page? The article Uyghur genocide certainly has not been deleted. I am also not certain how any particular tweet has anything to do with Wikipedia – could you provide more information so we can help more effectively? Tollens (talk) 01:38, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Ah ­– I see that you updated your question while I was writing my response, and that Remsense has answered your question below. I'll add that the tweet you provide almost certainly had nothing to do with the edit. Tollens (talk) 01:45, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Matthew Maiden, refer to the edit summary given by the editor when they removed the material. — Remsense诉 01:43, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Translation Tool, to translate the "Infobox"

Translating from English to French this page:

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aman_Hambleton

the Tool, for the infobox, only generates this:

 https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Zenkutsu/Aman_Hambleton

(i.e., almost nothing)

1) Is there a way to get the Tool to make a new Infobox based on the original version,

or

2) How to make an Infbox myself that can be easily filled with the original data (manually)

Thanks Zenkutsu (talk) 02:36, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Zenkutsu, for 2) the translation has an empty fr:Modèle:Infobox Joueur d'échecs. You could copy the code from the link and then fill it in manually. TSventon (talk) 02:44, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Ok thanks.

Why doesn't the tool do that automatically is another story.

Anyway Will try your solution. Zenkutsu (talk) 05:48, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Help on Archiving Web Pages with See More Button

Hi,

I'm currently looking for ways how to archive some web pages with a "read more/see more" button. For example, I tried to archive the whole article, but the website has "Baca Artikel Penuh" (Read full article) button that hides the remaining part of the article until you click on it.

I tried Archive.is, GhostArchive, and WebArchive. While all three do archived the same page, but the remaining half of the article behind the "Baca Artikel Penuh" isn't visible. Any suggestions on how I can archive the text article in its entirety? Thank you. SyFuel^Ignite_Burned 03:21, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Insurance

which plan is highest selling of LIC of India? 27.61.130.144 (talk) 03:31, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi there! Per the big blue box at the top of this page, this Wikipedia Help desk is to ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia. For other types of questions such as the one you're asking, if the Wikipedia articles don't have the answer, you can try the Wikipedia:Reference desk. If you choose to ask there, I suggest you define "LIC". GoingBatty (talk) 03:36, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

David Blackburn (Royal Navy officer)

References 2 and 12 are the same - should they be "doubled up"? I cannot do this and would appreciate any help. Thanks 175.38.42.62 (talk) 10:56, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I've merged them. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:03, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi there! For instructions on how to do this, see WP:NAMEDREFS. GoingBatty (talk) 14:05, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Image use

I recently replaced one version of an image with a newer version with better resolution. I edited the relevant page (entry for "Frank Stirrup, rugby league player") to insert the new version. However, the page still shows the old version. If you click on the image it then shows the new version of the image, but on the entry it still reverts to the old version (also for the thumbnail). How can I change this?

Thanks,

Paul. Paul.pjt28 (talk) 11:41, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@Paul.pjt28: Hello! I've checked and it shows the latest image. It takes some time to update, please check again and tell whether you see the updated image or it still shows the old version for you. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:45, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

This sounds like a browser cache issue. Try clearing the browser cache, or view the page in a different browser. See WP:REFRESH.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 11:47, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, that looks correct. I tried a different browser (Chrome) from my original choice (Firefox), and it works. Paul.pjt28 (talk) 14:44, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Bypass your cache refers. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:20, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Curiosity

Even though I should not need one, how can I get a mentor? To ask a few things, so I can avoid using the help desk. Obviously mine isn't a request but a curiosity. JackkBrown (talk) 13:11, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@JackkBrown: Hi there! When I'm looking for documentation to help a user at the Help desk, but I don't know the specific page, I guess by typing WP: followed by a word related to the topic. In this case, I tried WP:MENTOR, which is a shortcut to Wikipedia:Mentorship. Hope this helps you find what you're looking for. GoingBatty (talk) 16:23, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@JackkBrown That link is is useful but mainly describes an old feature. The current mentorship program which assigns mentors to all new editors is activated by the "Newcomer homepage" feature which is automatically activated for new accounts. You can test it out (and be assigned a mentor) by clicking the relevant box at the bottom of Special:Preferences. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:32, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: I cannot find ("You can test it out (and be assigned a mentor) by clicking the relevant box at the bottom of Special:Preferences."). JackkBrown (talk) 22:51, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@JackkBrown Scroll to the foot of Special:Preferences and tick box under "Newcomer editor features" where it says "Display newcomer hompage". Then you must navigate to your own Userpage at User:JackkBrown, where you will now see an extra tab in the interface, so the top menu row of tabs below your name will read "Homepage" "User Page" and "Talk". Click on the Homepage tab to see all sorts of stats and a panel about your assigned mentor. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:06, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

@JackkBrown I was told in a previous discussion, only 50 percent of users who activate "Display newcomer hompage" get a mentor. TSventon (talk) 15:09, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

@JackkBrown: Wikipedia:Growth Team features#Deployment says: "On English Wikipedia, 100% of new accounts receive the features, with 50% of those also receiving the mentorship feature." phab:T323048 says it's due to a lack of mentors and the percentage has increased gradually. I enabled the newcomer homepage to answer questions about it and got a mentor. Wugapodes, I hope you are ready to answer questions from an administrator for 16 years with 15,000 edits at this help desk and 6,000 at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). Just kidding, I will leave you alone. Probably. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Assigned or not, you're always welcome to ask me a question! The mentor feature is nice for newcomers since it helps identify a specific person to ask or avoid asking small questions "in public" at a forum, but it creates a bunch of individualized work that is hard to manage unlike centralized help forums. Hopefully the division of labor can be improved as a way to get more coverage out of the mentors we do have since it seems like that list is topping out at ~140 people, 60 short of the 100% coverage goal. — Wug·a·po·des 19:54, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Notability rules on Wikipedia

misplaced policy debate

Hello, before I get started, I know these rules will never be removed. But my question is, why? If Wikipedia is the center of information for people on the internet, why do they not let smaller and less notable articles be allowed? They are restricting information on people just because they are not notable enough. I made an article on a local politician named Chris Del Borrello, and it keeps getting taken down because he is not notable enough. What if somebody wanted to learn more info on him who was in his district? If Wikipedia was truly a center of information and user-friendly, there should not be a notability requirement. All kinds of articles should be allowed, as long as they are good articles. Antny08 (talk) 13:31, 18 January 2024 (UTC) We aren't a big old collection of information though. That's a misunderstanding of what we do. We are an encyclopedia, we don't really pander to "inclusion", rather have articles about things that are in the public eye. The notability guidelines are pretty lax really, if you think about what someone needs to have to pass WP:GNG Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:38, 18 January 2024 (UTC) Antny08, If Wikipedia is the center of information for people on the internet That's saying something we don't say. First and foremost, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a vague "center of information". They are restricting information on people just because they are not notable enough. Not quite. Notability is a fairly broad and nuanced concept, but ensuring notability also means ensuring verifiability in many cases. If articles were allowed for subjects without coverage in reliable sources, Wikipedia would essentially become just another user-generated content mill. You can't write good articles (as you say) about non-notable subjects, because they cannot be verified with any confidence, and therefore cannot be trusted. Wikipedia also (sort of) extends the concept of notability to ensuring WP:due weight in the representation of notable subjects. If the barrier of what information is worthy of inclusion is removed, every existing article on the site will also get much worse. This may be a fundamental disagreement—but curation is important. Think about a single article: you may agree that more is not always better. There is true information one can add to an article that makes it worse for readers who want to be meaningfully educated. You can naturally extend this concept to inclusion of articles on the site. — Remsense诉 13:40, 18 January 2024 (UTC) But especially for politicians, they are not counting reliable and good sources as worth anything because it is “regular campaign coverage”. I still believe that this is false and it doesn’t make sense to not include that is notable, as politicians are the things people need the more information on. Antny08 (talk) 13:43, 18 January 2024 (UTC)  Courtesy link: Christopher Del Borrello It's generally helpful to provide a link if you're writing about a specific grievance so that people talking to you have adequate context. — Remsense诉 13:46, 18 January 2024 (UTC) I will put it this way: there is nothing inherently interesting or notable about a person running for political office. Thousands of people do that every year. — Remsense诉 13:48, 18 January 2024 (UTC) But yes, if Wikipedia is an “encyclopedia”, then it doesn’t really matter if it is interesting or not. There are people, especially locally, who might want to know information about Chris Del Borrello. This is giving that information on him. Antny08 (talk) 13:55, 18 January 2024 (UTC) Campaign coverage is about his campaign, not him personally. 331dot (talk) 13:47, 18 January 2024 (UTC) But the campaign articles also talk about him, not just his campaign. Antny08 (talk) 13:54, 18 January 2024 (UTC) Antny08 There are other websites with less stringent requirements that are better suited to what you describe. In the case of Christopher Del Borrello you have done an excellent job of summarizing his activities and views, but little information about how he is considered by independent sources to be important/significant/influential. 331dot (talk) 13:46, 18 January 2024 (UTC) What websites? Antny08 (talk) 14:33, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [Edit Conflict] "Not notable" doesn't mean "nor important" or "not interesting." It means "not enough published in Reliable sources on which to base an article." In addition to the sources being reliable, the matter cited must be independent of the subject (so no press releases, interviews, etc.), and must discuss the subject at some length, not just mention them in passing or include them in a listing. Such published sources are necessary so that readers can (potentially) check them for themselves to confirm that they contain the information in the article that is being cited to them: see WP:Verifiability. If your Drafts are being declined, it is probably because you have not used sufficient and suitable sources. It may be that you have failed to find ones that exist, or that they do not (yet) exist because this subject is not (yet) prominent enough to have had much published about him independently of him: after a cursory websearch I suspect the latter is the case. Remember that Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia, not a Directory of Everybody in the World. It might help you to read Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Politicians and judges, Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, and of course Wikipedia:Notability. {THe poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.104.88 (talk) 13:54, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@Antny08: As you noted, this is a policy debate, not a question about using or editing Wikipedia. It does not belong on the help desk. Please take this to the talk page of of the policy page: Wikipedia talk:Notability. -Arch dude (talk) 15:55, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

My two redirect pages

Hi Team,

With new information about a live-action Teasing Master Takagi-san film, I am having trouble with my two redirect pages: Teasing Master Takagi-san (2022 film) and Teasing Master Takagi-san (film).

I initially created Teasing Master Takagi-san (2022 film) redirect page (for the anime film) after initial news of the series having a live-action film. But I move that redirect page to Teasing Master Takagi-san (film) after new info that the live-action is for television.

Now that live-action film is also confirmed alongside the live-action television, with the film's release date set to May 2024, I am planning to create Teasing Master Takagi-san (2024 film). However, I am stuck on what to do with Teasing Master Takagi-san (film).

What can I do to fix this? Can I create a redirect page for 2024 film and keep the other two as it is OR delete the two redirect pages and start over?

Any tips will be appreciated. Thank you so much! Centcom08 (talk) 15:35, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@Centcom08: Hi there! I suggest creating the 2024 film article first, and then changing Teasing Master Takagi-san (film) to a disambiguation page with links to each film. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:19, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: That is a good suggestion! I'll create an article for the 2024 film once new info and interviews start to come in. Thank you so much! Centcom08 (talk) 16:25, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Best practice in refactoring level-2 headers on talk pages

Occasionally, new editors may copy-paste sections of article content onto talk pages that include various headers, including level-2 headers (example, the two "Composition" level-2 headers should be part of the edit-request thread), which interfere with the Discussion Tools and the table of contents. Is there a preferred way in refactoring these headers in line with WP:OTHERSCOMMENTS (nowiki tags, collapsing, deleting, etc.), or should these threads be left alone? Liu1126 (talk) 15:53, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Liu1126 in the example you gave the easiest solution was to change the level-2 headers to level-3 headers and the editor who answered the request did so. TSventon (talk) 19:25, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

‎Dangerous site in reference n. 3 on the pizza pugliese page

I clicked on the link in reference n. 3 and was warned by the site itself that it's dangerous (translation from Italian: "Dangerous site. Malicious users of the site you are attempting to visit may induce you to install software or reveal information such as passwords, telephone number or credit card number. Chrome strongly advises you to turn back."); can I delete the reference? JackkBrown (talk) 16:10, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@JackkBrown: Hello! It's better to add the archived version (on Wayback Machine), than delete. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 16:28, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @JackkBrown: Instead of deleting a reference, you can try finding an archived version that isn't dangerous. For example, copy the URL and paste it into the Wayback Machine and you'll get this archive-url, which you can add into the reference with |archive-url= and |archive-date= parameters. You can also add |url-status=unfit to the reference to hide the link to the dangerous URL. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:28, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

As a followup, I was checking this reference to see whether it was legitimately a dangerous site or just an unencrypted connection, and got a browser warning I had never seen before, so I retrieved the archive and marked the original URL as unfit. Folly Mox (talk) 19:04, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Update link on page

I'd like to update the "Mercury Studios" link on the American Symphony page to direct to the proper company website...right now the link is directed to "Mercury Records" which is not the correct page. Emcpherson0 (talk) 17:46, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@Emcpherson0 We have several articles at American Symphony (disambiguation), including American Symphony Orchestra but I don't see an external link to Mercury Studios for any of them. Please can you specify exactly which article you think needs updating? Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:25, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Apologies, this is for the Netflix Documentary about Jon Batiste and his wife Suleika... American Symphony (film) Emcpherson0 (talk) 18:27, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@Emcpherson0: So it's about the infobox in American Symphony (film) which links "Mercury Studios" to Mercury Records. We don't link infobox fields to external websites. Links go to Wikipedia articles but Mercury Studios doesn't have its own article. We often link to a related article instead. Mercury Records has a brief mention of Mercury Studios and they have the same owner Universal Music Group. Eagle Rock Entertainment says "In 2020, Universal Music established Mercury Studios which absorbed Eagle Rock Entertainment." Would Universal Music Group, Mercury Records, Eagle Rock Entertainment or a fourth Wikipedia article be the best target for "Mercury Studios"? I don't know. Is Mercury Studios basically a new name of Eagle Rock Entertainment? If so then that should probably be the target. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:37, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for this! I will share with the team and see how they'd like to proceed. Appreciate the help!! Emcpherson0 (talk) 20:00, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Emcpherson0 I gather by your reference to "the team" that you work for Mercury Studios- the Terms of Use require you to formally declare this, please see your user talk page for more information and instructions. 331dot (talk) 20:04, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Page Deleted - How to restore or recreate?

The page about me - "john jones (record producer)"- was deleted in 2017-18 after I edited it. The page was deleted for me not being notable according to this notice - "page does not exist" from January 2018 - John Jones (record producer)

How can the page be restored? Because it is about me, do I need to hire someone to make a new page?

Thank you, John Jones (JJ) Johnibjones (talk) 17:57, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

If it is written by yourself and is about yourself, various red flags start to appear, including WP:COI and WP:ABOUTME. Wikipedia is not designed to do these things, and you should look at having a profile on Facebook or LinkedIn rather than trying to do it here.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:48, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for responding. My page started in 2001 and was not written by me. I was one of the first, if not the first record producers on wikipedia. I am a Grammy awarded music producer, songwriter and recording artist.

I need advice as how to get the page back. Not having my page on wikipedia is destroying my business since the music services and press use wikipedia to search for music and record producers using it. The person who deleted my account was in error and gave me no opportunity to remove my edits! Johnibjones (talk) 19:03, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Winning a Grammy award might be a good indicator that you're notable by Wikipedia's special definition of the term, @Johnibjones, but it would need to be an award you specifically won, not something awarded to - for instance - a studio album you were one of many producers on (Falling into You?).

The main thing here is to find reliable, independent secondary sources with significant coverage of you. You, specifically. And they must be independent - not interviews; not biographies published by you or an employer. Reading WP:42 might be of help (and also perhaps An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing). 57.140.16.1 (talk) 19:16, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

The fact that most of the page's data went up in 2002 had a lot to do with the references not being included. At the time the page was deleted I was trying to add references. Johnibjones (talk) 19:37, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@Johnibjones We would highly discourage getting involved in paid editing firms: most are scams, and most Wikipedia editors heavily disapprove of them as it goes against the entire ethos of Wikipedia.

If you are genuinely notable then a volunteer, at some point, will write an article about you. Qcne (talk) 18:57, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Johnibjones (talk) 19:06, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@Johnibjones See the wayback archive copy as of April 8, 2017. Fabrickator (talk) 19:05, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you!Johnibjones (talk) 19:10, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

That had just one reference. I can understand why it was deleted lmao — Python Drink (talk) 22:28, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

The deleted article did not meet Wikipedia's current standards for establishing notability. But Wikipedia still has a category "Albums produced by John Jones (record producer)". I agree with what Qcne wrote above, and suspect that some volunteer who knows the field might be willing to create a new article. Maproom (talk) 19:30, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the link. I see that it only has 3 albums listed. Am I allowed to add the other 50?

But seriously, my biggest problem is my name. Before 2018, Google and other search engines found me by my wiki page and domain name. Now they can't find me and only find people with different spellings! Johnibjones (talk) 19:41, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Johnbjones I don't mean to sound cruel- but Wikipedia is not concerned with search results or "knowledge panels". The presence of a Wikipedia article is usually only one possible input. 331dot (talk) 20:07, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@Johnibjones: I searched Google for "John Jones record producer" and found lots of information about you. Category:Albums produced by John Jones (record producer) now has 5 7 albums listed. The category is added to the article about the album, so if Wikipedia doesn't have an article about the album (e.g. Alan Frew's Hold On), the category won't show the album. GoingBatty (talk) 20:40, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

List of websites that are copy-paste version of Wikipedia

Hi everyone,

As title says, I would like to ask if someone has a list of websites that are literally copy-paste version of Wikipedia. The reason why I am asking is because currently there is 1lib1ref going on at Serbian version of Wikipedia and we have blocked some domains to be used as reference. One of them was wikiwand.com which is literally copy-paste version of Wikipedia. Does someone have those sites so I can put them in the block list so they cannot be used as a source for anything ?

Thanks for any help.

Cheers,

Боки ☎ ✎ 20:54, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@Боки: See Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:04, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Please see Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks and more specifically Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks/All for a very long list - Arjayay (talk) 21:09, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter and @Arjayay

Thank you very much for this ! Is there a file that blocks them so that I can just copy-paste it on Serbian version or do I have to manually enter each and every single one of them ? Боки ☎ ✎ 21:14, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

German speaker required

Is there a German speaker who can help out with an incomprehensible (machine) translation as discussed at at Talk:Effects of pornography on young people#Clarification Needed? If so, please help us out. Thanks - Arjayay (talk) 20:56, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi there! @Arjayay You could try asking someone in Category:Translators de-en or Category:Proofreaders de-en. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 21:08, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

How to change my font size

So I edit exclusively on mobile for the record. Thus began a year ago. My Wikipedia font size would spontaneously change (not while I'm viewing it though). Like I'd use Wikipedia today and it was just ok as my browser is set to. All of a sudden, it's tiny as fuck or gigantic the next day. I thought this was my browser so I did all I could from updating to clearing caches and reinstalling to even testing Wikipedia on a different browser. It's clear the problem is from Wikipedia itself, since other sites aren't affected. Please, how do I fix this? The current font size is insanely large and ugly and really discouraging me from reading and editing Wikipedia. — Python Drink (talk) 22:23, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@Python Drink: Hi there! What device and browser are you using? Playing around with the Safari browser on my iPhone, I see I can change the zoom for one page without it affecting another site. GoingBatty (talk) 23:05, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

And what font size do you have at Special:MobileOptions? PrimeHunter (talk) 23:13, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter and GoingBatty: my browser is Google Chrome 120.0.6099.230. Device is Android 10; TECNO KC8. As for the mobile Wikipedia server-side font size, it's regular; I have never changed it. And I have looked through every setting on mobile Chrome; there's no way to set font size for a specific site except perhaps in an experimental flag. (Now you mentioned it, it sounds cool) — Python Drink (talk) 20:07, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

@Python Drink: I don't have an Android device. Does https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/96810 help? PrimeHunter (talk) 20:24, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, it does help! Although, I already discovered that when I looked through my settings again. Can't believe I didn't notice that. Which makes me now think that Wikipedia wasn't actually the problem: perhaps for whatever reason, Chrome was spontaneously changing the font size specifically for Wikipedia. Anyway, my problem's now solved. Thanks a lot, you too, for your help. — Python Drink (talk) 20:56, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

specific spelling of antisemitism

which spelling of antisemitism is used on the wiki regarding antisemitism? antisemitism or anti-Semitism? Thanks, Megabits000 (talk) 23:29, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

The article "Antisemitism" uses "antisemitism"; and for this reason I'd use that. -- Hoary (talk) 23:56, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@Megabits000: Don't forget anti-semitism. It's a WP:ENGVAR issue.

• Cambridge lists all three;
• dictionary.com lists antisemitic with anti-Semitic as an alternative spelling;
• Collins lists anti-Semitic with antisemitic as an alternative;
• Merriam-Webster lists only anti-Semitic;
• Oxford lists only anti-Semitic.

Bazza (talk) 11:19, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

The article explains why it uses the spelling "antisemitism" in a footnote. Some authoritative source has recommended the spelling "antisemitism" as "anti-Semitism" may convey the idea that "Semitism" is some doctrine being opposed. Makes some sense to me. — Python Drink (talk) 20:10, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

yep, i was just confirming because i have found a few articles that should be corrected Megabits000 (talk) 06:49, 24 January 2024 (UTC)