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 10

Section, image; section, image; section, image....

The layout of Portraits of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart presents no hindrance to understanding, but is unusually ugly. (For the layout, the editor to blame is me.) Perhaps I'm caffeine-deprived, but I can neither think of a potential solution nor find one within Help:Pictures. (Alternating left, right, left, right ... would reduce the monotony and save space, but would bring its own problems.) Suggestions? -- Hoary (talk) 00:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

As a reader, I think Help:Pictures#Without_flowing_text to the left would be easiest to view. Heading identifies the image; image immediately below heading; then text; next heading... Schazjmd (talk) 00:35, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

But Schazjmd, if I understand this right, it would lead to yet more empty space and a (visually) longer article with more need for scrolling. If so, then no. But I appreciate the suggestion that the captions are pretty much redundant. (They were added back when virtually all the images were in a gallery near the foot of the article, an arrangement that required captions.) I shan't remove the captions till either the larger problem has been resolved or it's clear that there is no good solution to that larger problem; however, I'll keep their removal in mind. (Pinging NeoGaze and CurryTime7-24.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:55, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

I initially took as a model the article on portraits of Johann Sebastian Bach, but it obviously has fewer pictures and thus the gallery worked better. I think that what was done in the italian version of that article is a good option if you don't specially care about picture distribution consistency. Another possibility would to manually modify the size of the paintings to match each paragraph. I tested this myself and it was even worse and more inconsistent, specially in the inauthentic part of the portraits, which has less text and thus you end with almost illegible pictures. NeoGaze (talk) 12:06, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

The layout of the Italian Bach page is less monotonous than that of the English Mozart page, NeoGaze, but it would waste just as much space (unless other measures were also taken). -- Hoary (talk) 12:46, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

I have seen some articles with "mini-galleries" at places in the article. I don't know if that would improve things here. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

It's a possibility, Gråbergs Gråa Sång, but it would set up a hurdle for the reader: matching the text to the image. -- Hoary (talk) 12:46, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

You could try using the |upright= parameter to tweak the sizes of the images. Many would be fine if a bit smaller than the standard thumb. After all, if the reader wants to take a close look, they will click on the picture. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes, good idea, Mike Turnbull. I'll do that (unless of course somebody beats me to it), remove (or comment out) the captions (after checking that they don't contain information that isn't also in the text), and perhaps do some left/right bouncing. But not until thirty-plus hours from now. -- Hoary (talk) 12:46, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

I tried this myself and it didn't work very well, specially if you want to strictly adjust the size of a picture to a small portion of text. If you do this, you leave a picture so small that it can even be hard to notice it in the first place, let alone being visible to any degree. I have already removed the redundant captions, but not moved the pictures themselves. NeoGaze (talk) 18:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Not knowing the dimensions and resolution of a reader's device makes it impossible to do what is being attempted here. I recommend displaying images as thumbnails, with an "upright" value of, say, 1.2 for those in portrait orientation.

MOS:SANDWICH and MOS:IMAGELOC have helpful warnings about not using the default alignment of "right", especially regarding making text easier to visually scan.

A gallery layout may yet prove to be a good solution. Bazza 7 (talk) 20:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestions, all. I'm still certain that the plus of visual compactness provided by mini-galleries is outweighed by the annoyance of a separation of specific image and specific text. But the monotony of right image, right image, right image weighed on me, so a few minutes ago I moved a few to the left. Having done so, I wonder whether this was an improvement: I fear that the reader might semiconsciously wonder whether there's some non-obvious significance to image placement ("Why this one on the left?"). Feel free to revert me. Btw, File:Mozart,_Wolfgang_Amadeus.jpg is a repellently saccharine concoction. One Elektromagikum has described it as their "own work". If it were my own work, I'd burn it. -- Hoary (talk) 01:01, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Please help with The Right to add A Footnote to An External Reference.

Hello Wikipedia Help Desk. I have earlier added This (CC-BY) Colour Circle to Wikimedia Commons: c:File:Subtractive Colour Circle 12 Hues.png. Yesterday, I hope This will be Alright, I have added This (CC-BY) Colour Circle, from Wikimedia Commons, into The Gallery, in This Wikipedia "Color Wheel" Article. I then wanted to add A Footnote, with An External Link, that would appear in The "References" List, to My Genuine - Self-Archiving - Green (OA) Open Access - Website with WordPress, that is Not A Blog, that is The Genuine Reference Source, for This (CC-BY) Colour Circle: https://ukmjenkins.wordpress.com/colourcircle. But, when I proceeded, I got A Huge Warning, to Not Contravene Wikipedia Policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. So, I did not proceed with adding This Footnote. Please may I now ask You All, in Wikipedia Help Desk, please may I, or may I not, add This Footnote to This External Link, please ? Please examine My Website with WordPress, if You All need to, please: https://ukmjenkins.wordpress.com. I promise, I am not engaging in Self-Promotion. I promise, This (CC-BY) Colour Circle is My Own Creative Artwork, to which I have freely applied The Creative Commons (CC-BY) Attribution Licence. I promise, This (CC-BY) Colour Circle is Not Original Research, but, is A Genuine Objective Development of The Established Historical Empirical Knowledge of The Color Wheel. RSVP. Best Wishes. Yours Faithfully. Michael Jenkins.Ukmjenkins (talk) 12:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC).

You already asked at Talk:Color wheel, Ukmjenkins. Better, I think, to have just one discussion, and to have it there rather than here. -- Hoary (talk) 12:51, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

@Ukmjenkins Thank you for your contributions, but unfortunately I don't think anyone can help you in adding your link. While external links do not have as strict of a criteria for inclusion as citations, they still need to be reliable enough for the purpose of providing further context and information on a subject. You can not claim that it is not an WP:OR when your site literally said "All My Colour Circles, here, for You,are my own Understandings." Wikipedia is not a place for personal expression. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 13:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

As an aside, @Ukmjenkins, your file would be much smaller and more useful in general if done as an .svg. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:25, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

(1) Thank You Tutwakhamoe. I have accepted Your Criticism of My Text in My Colour Circle Article, I have now worked to amend The Text, so that It is Correctly Objective. I promise My Intention is Not Self Expression.

(2) Thank You Michael D. Turnbull for Your Information on SVG. I have just read The Wikipedia Article on SVG. I am sorry, at That Time, I did not know about how Good SVG is. My Understanding, at That Time, was to provide High Resolution Lossless PNGs. I may now go back to The Beginning, in order to work to create The Equivalent Set of SVG Colour Circles.

(3) Ukmjenkins (talk) 17:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC).

January 11

Extended-confirmed rights

Hello, I just recently had over 500 edits and my account is older than 30 days. I have a few questions:

1) Aside from being able to edit extended confirmed articles and viewing the Wikipedia library, are there any other new rights I get from this? If so, what are they?

2) Is there anything I should be doing differently now that I have this permission?

3) Do the amount of edits I have still matter beyond this point? If so, why?

4) After achieving this, are there any other realistic "goals" related to more rights which Wikipedians go for? If so, what are they? 4b) Are these goals dependent on how much time and effort we put in to this? If that's the case, could you explain what the different goals are depending on the amount of time people spend on here?

5) Is there anything else I should know or be improving on?

Thank you all for your time! Wikieditor662 (talk) 00:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

@Wikieditor662: Just continue to be a productive editor. Don't worry about any additional user rights. When you get to a point where you might need more, you will probably know (such as rollback for anti-vandalism work, or applying to be an administrator if you find you need those tools, etc). If you want to help out at Category:Wikipedia_extended-confirmed-protected_edit_requests I'm sure that would be appreciated RudolfRed (talk) 01:13, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

1. As said above, you can answer extended confirmed edit requests if you wish.
2. Should? No. You're free to do as you wish on this volunteer project.
3. You might have to be more specific, but in general, no. Your edit count can be a sign of experience to others, but has no major practical effect.
4. See Wikipedia:User access levels. Keep in mind though that there are no goals that Wikipedians have to aim for. You should obtain a right when you actually plan to use it, not just as a sign of status. Some minor user rights are pending changes reviewers and rollbacker. Major user rights include oversighter, checkuser, and, of course, administrator. Those major rights require a gigantic amount of experience and trust from the community as well as required time spent to keep those roles; most users never obtain them.
5. Make sure you always have fun here!

Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 02:17, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Unclear why link doesn't work in add a citation tool

To whom it may concern,

I have tried to use the add a citation tool on the Do They Know It's Christmas? page with the following link: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2025/01/10/do-they-know-its-payday/ but it doesn't work. I am unclear why the link isn't being picked up or identified as such.

Any ideas how to fix or resolve this issue? Greenpark79 (talk) 00:47, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

@Greenpark79: Which citation tool is this? And what happens when you try? For a list of tools see: Help:Citation tools. Is this in VisualEditor? Be aware, the editing "experience" you get isn't going to be the same as everyone else's: people use different settings.

Something important to take note of here: the link goes to a blog, a "self-published source" (reading this linked page if one hasn't highly advised). This source should be used only for sourcing statements attributed to the author(s) of the blog post: "Person X stated that..." – not as a source for "general" statements like "the Battle of Foo took place in 1749".

I went ahead and punched up a basic {{cite web}} ref "manually" for you. For demonstration also here it is syntax-highlighted with each parameter on its own line for easy readability. (Whitespace between different template syntax elements is "ignored" by templates, so go for readability to humans editing the content, the computer doesn't care)

Highlighted syntax
<ref name="LSE">{{cite web |last = Richey |first = Lisa Ann |date = 2025-01-10 |title = Do they know it’s payday? |url = https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2025/01/10/do-they-know-its-payday/ |website = Africa at LSE |publisher = [[London School of Economics and Political Science]] |access-date = 2025-01-13 |lang = en }}</ref>

Reference demonstration --Slowking Man (talk) 03:17, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

References

i changed my password but can't log in

i changed my password, it took me to the login page, and i entered my new password but it said incorrect password. why does it do this? Qxva (talk) 02:44, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Qxva Are you sure you entered the same password on both instances? I'm pretty sure that's the issue, but if not, it might be a software bug and you may want to raise the issue somewhere in MediaWiki (I'm not sure the exact page). Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 02:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

i'm certain i entered the same password on both instances. Qxva (talk) 03:12, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

@Qxva: You are logged in now. Are you sure you completed the password change? The first step is to log in again with the old password to verify who you are so your account cannot be hijacked by somebody with access to a computer where you are logged in. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:19, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

what if i forgot my original password? Qxva (talk) 18:47, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

@Qxva: Then you cannot change password. And you haven't set an email address so you cannot get a temporary password by mail. Setting an email address also requires knowledge of the current password. If you really forgot the password and want a chance to keep access to the account after your login expires then use {{Committed identity}} while you are still logged in. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:08, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

How can I submit sources to provide edits are correct?

WikiOriginal-9 Keeps undoing my edits due to (No source, removal of relevant content). How can I submit sources to provide edits are correct?

Thank you, Pagefinder123 (talk) 02:36, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

(moved from talk) '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 02:57, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Pagefinder123. See WP:CITE, WP:V, and WP:RS. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 03:24, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Marking an achieved request as complete

There is an extended confirmed request edit Talk:Lionel Messi/Archive 28#Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 October 2024 - Lionel Messi Wikipedia Page which I want to mark as  Partly done: (and explain why), but I can't reply and the page says not to edit its' contents, which means I can't mark the request as answered. What do I do? Wikieditor662 (talk) 05:41, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

@Wikieditor662: I suggest you follow the advice at WP:PREMATUREARCHIVE - copy the section to the main talk page, delete it from the archive, and reply at the main talk page. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:01, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

So I suppose there's exceptions to the "do not modify" archive message? Wikieditor662 (talk) 16:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

@Wikieditor662: Yes, this is an exception. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Getting an article reassessed on the Wikipedia's content assessment scale

Hello, I have expanded this article way beyond a start-class rating. How could I get it reassessed or get it a new rating? Bollardant (talk) 09:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Bollardant. That article contains a lot of "facts", some important and some pretty insignificant. I think that it needs to be edited to better place the facts into a coherent narrative. In my opinion, the reasons why the airport had to close are not properly explained, and why the airport in question was not retained as a backup during the annual hajj when demand is at its greatest. Put yourself in the shoes of a reader who knows nothing about that closed airport but is curious about it. Cullen328 (talk) 09:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, I will consider that and find more information about its closure. The airport is quite obscure, and finding information for it would be trial and error. Bollardant (talk) 11:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

@Bollardant: I've upgraded it to C class. Just a few unreferenced items preventing B class. Mjroots (talk) 11:05, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Many Thanks for helping out. I will get to fixing them then. Bollardant (talk) 11:19, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Deletion nomination help needed

I followed the procedure to nominate the Lanemeyer article for deletion but it seems to have failed. I used {{subst:afd2}} but while it created Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lanemeyer it did not add my posting to the deletion discussion page. It appears that the {{subst:afd2}} didn't work. Your guidance accepted with gratitude. Spideog (talk) 09:55, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Spideog. Creating an AfD discussion requires invoking a template. All templates (that I am aware of) require a pair of rightfacing curly brackets to begin invoking the template and a pair of leftfacing curly brackets to finish the operation. Your edit lacks the leftfacing curly brackets to finish the operation, and therefore, the template is unable to do its assigned job. Cullen328 (talk) 10:01, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the partial resolution, @Cullen328:. I added the missing terminal brackets (how thoughtless to have forgotten, then failed to notice during my failure review).

The {{subst:afd2}} template has now replaced raw code at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lanemeyer but my nomination for deletion is still not appearing on the discussion page, perhaps because the first attempt was an incomplete/aborted procedure. (I did purge the cache to double-check its absence.) Is there anything else I can do to insert my nomination into the discussion page so people will actually see it? Spideog (talk) 10:18, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Never mind, after a later check, I find that a bot called cyberbot I found the error and fixed it by completing the incomplete procedure. It left a message: "This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 January 11." Thanks again. Spideog (talk) 10:38, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

How to put editnotices?

How can I put edit notices in my user page or talk page? B Gnu779 (talk) 11:02, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

@Gnu779 see WP:EDITNOTICE. The template would go on User:Gnu779/Editnotice or User talk:Gnu779/Editnotice. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 11:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

unable to contribute

I have done 10 edits and have been a user for more than 4 days. Why am I unable to post my contribution? RuReSe25 (talk) 11:17, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

@RuReSe25 you were able to post this question, which means you're already autoconfirmed. Is there a specific page you're unable to edit? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 11:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Archiving an audio interview

Hi all -- question about archival practices (Internet Archive, etc.). In the Melvin Edwards article, under the further reading section, I included an interview Edwards did with a radio station in Baltimore. I was trying to archive the interview as it's hosted on WYPR's website via a pretty suspect audio player and I want to make sure it's available easily for posterity. But IA is not cooperating with the media player and won't archive the actual audio. Any suggestions on an alternative method for archiving this so it's publicly linkable and playable in the future? Thanks all! (this might be a question for the computer/IT section of the reference desk, not sure)

• Interview link

--19h00s (talk) 17:41, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

@19h00s: Have you tried other archive sites, like https://archive.ph/ or https://ghostarchive.org/ ? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:41, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

I tried archive.ph with no luck earlier, just tried ghostarchive and had the same issue. None of them are catching the actual audio, at most they catch the interface and will let you click play, but it spins endlessly trying to load. It's ironic because the interface literally lets you download the file for the audio, but that doesn't make a linkable version for Wikipedia obvi. Thanks for the additional suggestion though, will add ghostarchive to my list! --19h00s (talk) 20:02, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

@19h00s, this is the direct mp3 link to the interview: https://podcast.audiostaq.com/artmatters/melvinedwards_14180.mp3

I looked that up in wayback and it seems like it's already been archived by them a few times, most recently in 2021 here: https://web.archive.org/web/20210114235659/https://podcast.audiostaq.com/artmatters/melvinedwards_14180.mp3a

So you can use that link. --Habst (talk) 22:56, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Oh, perfect -- thank you for the help! Have a great weekend :) 19h00s (talk) 23:00, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

January 12

Logged in on another device

Hello. I am ImperialAficionado, and i logged in on another device (my original device got crashed). I am leaving this messege because I want to let you know before me making edits on this device. I hope this won't be an issue :⁠-⁠) Imperial^[AFCND] 03:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

@ImperialAficionado: It's never an issue to use the same account on different devices. You can always use whichever device you want. It's the first time in 20 years here I have heard somebody be worried about it. If you think you heard something then it was probably about using multiple accounts (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry) and not multiple devices. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Article title capitalization

I am having a hard time understanding how capitalization of articles works. In the article 2026 Alabama Attorney General election the words “attorney general” are capitalized but in 2026 Alabama gubernatorial election, the term “gubernatorial” is not. In what situations do terms like this get capitalized versus when they don’t? Thank you Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 04:23, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

As per WP:NCCPT, only the first letter of the first word or any proper names should be capitalized. So in this case, "Attorney General" is a proper name, whereas "gubernatorial" is an adjective and thus no capitalization. If you are unsure about capitalization in the future, you can also check how capitalization was done in the cited sources of that particular article. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 05:25, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your help Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 07:48, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

English is not my native language and it has always annoyed me how different and complicated "gubernatorial" is compared to governor. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:10, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Halvfems times as complicated. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:34, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Touché! For non-Scandinavians, the Danish word for 90 is halvfems, short for halvfemsindstyve which means half five times twenty, or (5 – 1/2) × 20. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

More at Danish_grammar#Vigesimal_system. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:52, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

January 13

Overusage of Citation

I'm currently writing an article regarding a military battle (Battle of Geumyangjang-Ri) with limited sources which can be cited. I've only been able to find one academic paper (can attach if requested) with somewhat comprehensive details of the battle. Other sources have limited/unimportant information or cannot be cited. Whats the point at which it becomes an issue to rely on one source? ExiaMesa (talk) 02:14, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

If you only have one reliable source, it's already a problem, as you haven't begun to approach notability. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:31, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

That was my secondary concern. Though based on my research its a moderately notable battle (not in terms of the Wikipedia guidelines), I think the lack of reliable english sources is contributable to the lack of US involvement. (The engagement occurred between an Turkish Brigade and PLA forces.) Is 2-3 sources sufficient or should I try a search into various romanizations and possibly turkish language sources. ExiaMesa (talk) 03:12, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

It is a battle about which war ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 02:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Korean War ExiaMesa (talk) 03:04, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

This Korean War ?

About the battle. Did you tried to find sources in Korean ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 03:24, 13 January 2025 (UTC)