Help desk
< February 2	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 4 >

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.

February 3

Talk Page content removal

Being discussed in another forum

Important: this is, apparently, a very fundamental, complex and unresolved issue, so don't rush with an answer.

Related to a dispute of mine with another editor, DRN moderator User:Robert McClenon said here:

"but the real question appears to be that (USERNAME) removed 26 Kilobytes of material from the talk page that was inserted by an unregistered editor who was probably User:Z80Spectrum. I have read the Talk Page Guidelines and advise the other editors to read them. Maybe (USERNAME) interprets the Talk Page Guidelines differently than I do. They are not clearly written. However, it is my opinion that the removal of material posted by another editor to an article talk page is only allowed under unusual circumstances, and those circumstances were not present."

Then DRN moderator User:Robert McClenon said here

"The author who is doing the removing cites WP:FORUM, WP:NOTHOWTO, and WP:OR. I read the talk page guidelines, and they are clear that removing material from a talk page should not normally be done, but occasionally should be done, but they provide poor guidance for gray area cases."

This same essential situation then repeats over and over again in multiple discussions, with the vast majority of Wikipedia editors applying various Wikipedia policies to talk page content, where those same policies explicitly or implicitly say that they are about article content.

My approach to this is an approach of fundamental interpretation: talk page content shouldn't be easily removed, because Wikipedia fundamentally depends on talk page discussions to resolve disputes. If talk page content is allowed to be easily removed, then issues which are in the gray area cannot be discussed, because they get removed before they can be discussed, which is an undesirable and potentially dangerous situation. I agree with User:Robert McClenon that talk page content removal should be warranted only under unusual circumstances or under obvious and serious policy violations, and specifically not under contestable allegations of policy violations.

However, most Wikipedia editors apparently act as if removal of talk page content is a simple, definite and non-contestable issue. They are all allowing talk page content removal as if it was a non-issue, and they are citing numerous article-related Wikipedia policies as a rationale.

This lack of clarity in WP:TPG is creating a huge mess.

What should I do now? Z80Spectrum (talk) 03:07, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One point of clarity (not having looked into this specific case): removing content from other people's talk pages is generally discouraged (with exceptions, etc., etc.). LittlePuppers (talk) 03:52, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I generally agree with you, but I strongly disagree with this:

However, most Wikipedia editors apparently act as if removal of talk page content is a simple, definite and non-contestable issue.

If more than one editor is doing that at a particular page, it would be very unusual. I'll go have a look. Mathglot (talk) 03:57, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Z80Spectrum - What you should do now is to joint in the discussion at the Talk Page Guidelines talk page. I raised that issue a little more than a day ago. At this point the discussion there is again illustrating the lack of clarity of the guidelines. I think that the Talk Page Guidelines talk page is probably the right forum to discuss the issue. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:59, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A question that I have raised that I don't think has been answered is where should the deletion of talk page material be discussed. Controversial edits to articles are discussed at article talk pages. Where are controversial edits to talk pages discussed? Robert McClenon (talk) 03:59, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The removal of 26kb of comments was inappropriate. That said, the addition of so much information to the page may have also been inappropriate, and imho should have been, if anything, collapsed and not removed. I can see a possible argument for removal, but not on the whim of a single editor; that would have required a separate discussion and consensus. However, Robert is correct both in the lack of clarity and in the venue. Please follow this up at WT:Talk page guidelines#Removing Material from Article Talk Pages, where it is already under discussion. Mathglot (talk) 04:42, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This issue has now been forum shopped to the article talk page, DRN, ANI, Teahouse, and here. While I agree the removal of the very extended content was unusual, I think there's been a reluctance by any of the half-dozen or so editors who have been involved since the removal to restore most of the material because it's so obviously not useful to the project - restoring for the sake of restoring isn't helpful per WP:NOTBUREAU. Z80Spectrum, I feel like the effort you've expended getting this material restored to this specific location as opposed to your user space or a notepad on your desktop is effort that would be better spent doing nearly anything else. VQuakr (talk) 06:59, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Ramsey content needs to be corrected

To whom it may concern: As one of the daughters of Ms. Elizabeth Ramsey. I would like for the editor to correct the description narrative of Elizabeth Ramsey when it comes to her marriage and children. I logged in to make the changes but it's not saving it. The information are wrong and it needs to be corrected. Please help me to make it happen. Thank you Indaysusan12 (talk) 07:18, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please review how to make an edit request; you may do so on the article talk page(Talk:Elizabeth Ramsey) and detail changes you feel are needed, preferably sourced to independent reliable sources. You should not edit the article directly as you have a conflict of interest.331dot (talk) 08:46, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another question

For alphabetical context, we should use in or of? I am intent to make change to some articles about letters to keep consistent, but I'm not sure what's going on without consensus. What's your opinion about changing the requested in
[The uppercase letter], or [the lowercase letter], is the [numeral] letter in/of the Latin alphabet, used in the modern English alphabet.? 2001:EE0:4BC7:E310:B50C:773B:1A40:16BA (talk) 11:32, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here, I would use of, since there's nothing to an alphabet (for our purposes) other than that it is a collection of letters. In is more often used when the larger thing has some sense of greater scope or ownership over the member, like a road in a country. Remsense诉 11:39, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let's count it. In:18, of:8. Clearly to see there is a majority of articles prefer in. Any thought? 2001:EE0:4BC7:E310:B50C:773B:1A40:16BA (talk) 11:52, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer of in this case, but it seems like both ways are accepted, so MOS:STYLEVAR may apply. Perception312 (talk) 16:08, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose in simply reads less naturally to me, and with such issues there isn't really a notion of 'explicit consensus'. But this is an abstract thing. I'm just one person with one opinion, though I've got some reasoning for it. Remsense诉 19:02, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! The Help desk can point users to sections of the Wikipedia:Manual of Style when appropriate, but it isn't the place to form a consensus for a series of articles. Sometimes WikiProjects choose to do this. Talk:A contains {{WikiProject Writing systems}}, so you might want to ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Writing systems. GoingBatty (talk) 22:32, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to check what external links are being referenced in an article

Hi. We are able to check what articles link to a certain page from WP:WLH. Is there a way to check what pages are being link to from an article? More specifically can we check what external URLs are being referenced in an article?

Fernand Lopez recently has a user adding all these external links to it where they don't belong. I want to see if theres a way to check if I missed any external links that need to be replaced with a proper citation. - Imcdc Contact 12:30, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Imcdc: An external link search is possible with mw:API:Extlinks like [1] but it includes links made by citation templates so it's not very useful for you. For your purpose you can make a browser search for [http in the source text. It's Ctrl+f in Windows browsers. By the way, I have User:PrimeHunter/Where links this.js to show outgoing wikilinks but I haven't made a version for external links. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:49, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok got it. I'm surprised there isn't anything made for external URLs yet. It would be useful for cleanups - Imcdc Contact 12:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Imcdc: I have now made User:PrimeHunter/External links.js but it includes template-generated links like citation templates so it's not for cleanup. {{Cleanup bare URLs}} can be placed on articles needing cleanup. It includes tool links. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:09, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source editing

What's gong on? No more source editing? - Joaquin89uy (talk) 14:56, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Joaquin89uy I still have an "edit source" tab on all articles and pages like the Help Desk and they still work (on a PC with Windows 11 and edge browser). Can you give more details on your set-up: device, browser etc. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:05, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael D. Turnbull Ok, at least now I know it's not everyone, nor is it a new feature of the page or something.

I'm using a new computer I got, which uses ubuntu, and as for its browser i'm using google chrome. Joaquin89uy (talk) 15:18, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Try the key combination alt-shift-e, which is the keyboard combination for invoking the source editor. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:24, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Try going to Preferences > Editing and selecting one of the following editing modes: "Show me both editor tabs" or "Always give me the source editor". Perception312 (talk) 15:45, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael D. Turnbull @Perception312 The "Alt-shift-e" thing didn't really help, 'cause it would just take me straight into visual editing mode and nothing else. The preferences page option did help me, but not exactly as Perception put it, 'cause the options he mentioned don't appear to exist.

What I did instead is disable the "show visual editor" box there, just to see what would happen, as it was the only thing that kinda related to my problem, and now the "edit" option on any article I enter takes me straight to "source edit" mode. That isnt a problem since I don't ever use the "visual" editor anyways.

I thought I'd describe what helped me in detail just in case it happens to some other person down the line. Sorry it took so long for me to reply. Thank u both, a lot. - Joaquin89uy (talk) 19:44, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Joaquin89uy: Hi there! Taking four hours to reply is fine - no apologies needed. When you go to Preferences > Editing and look at the "Editing mode:" drop down, what options do you see? GoingBatty (talk) 22:24, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GoingBatty: For starters, and to be precise, I dont have any subsection named "Editing mode". I have one called "Editor". Do you have one literally called "editing mode"? Or were you going by memory?

Now I'm curious, lol. - Joaquin89uy (talk) 03:24, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Joaquin89uy: Here's a screenshot of what I see. I'm using the Vector (2022) skin, in case that makes a difference. GoingBatty (talk) 03:43, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Joaquin89uy: What is the exact URL of the Preferences page you're visiting? I just noticed that the Commons Preference page has different options than the English Wikipedia Preferences page. GoingBatty (talk) 03:48, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GoingBatty: That last section doesn't exist in my preferences page.

The url is

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing - Joaquin89uy (talk) 04:20, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GoingBatty: Ok, now I got it.

The problem was the first option was unchecked in mine.

The one about "Prompting when editing a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary)". That one enables the "editing mode" subsection to appear or not to appear. Don't know why, though. - Joaquin89uy (talk) 04:30, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's "Enable the visual editor" which (after saving preferences) controls whether "Editing mode" is shown. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:12, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter You seem to be right.... Still, what I remember having at the beginning of this all, was, the "enable visual editor" box checked, the first one unchecked, and no "editing mode" subsection available to me. Still, I might be wrong about that. Unfortunately I didnt take a screenshot of it then. - Joaquin89uy (talk) 11:56, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image Error

Hello Help Desk. There had been an image error reported on the article Zuru (company). The image appear to be shrinked. Please help out. Thanks ⚒️★MinecraftPlayer★³²¹⚒️ Let's Chat! 16:31, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MinecraftPlayer321: Hi there! Where do you see this error, and for which image? The more information you provide, the better we can help out. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 22:21, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox image currently looks fine to me but File:Zuru logo.jpg was recently overwritten by a version with other dimensions. Sometimes there is a delay in updating something after that. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On my screen, the logo is kinda squished ⚒️★MinecraftPlayer★³²¹⚒️ Let's Chat! 22:59, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps my screen is too small. ⚒️★MinecraftPlayer★³²¹⚒️ Let's Chat! 22:59, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can try to bypass your cache. Use Ctrl+F5 in Windows browsers, not F5 or the reload button alone. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:12, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That helps a lot! ⚒️★MinecraftPlayer★³²¹⚒️ Let's Chat! 05:07, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another cite error.

Hello Help Desk I have no idea how to fix this cite error in this article. Thanks! ⚒️★MinecraftPlayer★³²¹⚒️ Let's Chat! 17:10, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done, added missing group name from reference. Cmr08 (talk) 18:02, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! ⚒️★MinecraftPlayer★³²¹⚒️ Let's Chat! 18:42, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MinecraftPlayer321, also note that we generally discourage citing press releases, such as PR Newswire, and it would be ideal to replace those references with better sources, if available. LittlePuppers (talk) 19:13, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LittlePuppers Thanks for your advice. I could not find any other sources, so I will add the Template: Better source needed. Thanks! ⚒️★MinecraftPlayer★³²¹⚒️ Let's Chat! 19:17, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Articles with hatnote templates targeting a nonexistent page

Hello! Category:Articles with hatnote templates targeting a nonexistent page has categories titled Category:Parents of prime ministers of Great Britain and Category:Syndromes with obesity that have no apparent problems. In the listed categories, it doesn't say that either one is in Category:Articles with hatnote templates targeting a nonexistent page. 8UB3RG1N3 (talk) 21:53, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@8UB3RG1N3: Fixed by null edits to Category:Parents of prime ministers of Great Britain and Category:Syndromes with obesity. They did have the reported problem (except not being articles) when they were last edited and would have displayed the parent category at the time. If a page is not edited but changes categories for other reasons then the categories may change on the page display without the category pages being updated. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:43, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! 8UB3RG1N3 (talk) 22:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the double reply, but I noticed the same problem on Category:Thai girl groups. Could you teach me to null edit or null edit the page for me? 8UB3RG1N3 (talk) 23:00, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@8UB3RG1N3: I wrote "Fixed by null edits". Blue text is usually a link. Just click it. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:33, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. 8UB3RG1N3 (talk) 00:24, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is newspapers.com free subscriptions still available to editors?

This may be the wrong place to ask, for I've never used Help Desk before. For several years I was able to use newspapers.com without charge by applying through the Wikipedia Library. My subscription has apparently run out, and when I attempted to apply for another one year subscription through the Wiki Library I was unable to do so. Perhaps I'm just forgetting how to find an online application, but I'm wondering if newspapers.com stopped participating in granting free subscriptions to Wikipedia editors who make a certain number of edits a month. I'm feeling foolish for asking, but I'm stomped on how to figure out the application process. Karenthewriter (talk) 22:04, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Karenthewriter: Hi there! See See Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library and Wikipedia talk:The Wikipedia Library#Newspapers.com. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:15, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Karenthewriter (talk) 22:24, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]