Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ColinFine (talk | contribs) at 14:46, 26 March 2023 (→‎Political orientation). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

    Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)

    March 23

    SMK Main Convent

    SMK Main Convent, Ipoh Please fix up this - I remove the info box - or something like that...I'm sorry. Please repair115.70.23.77 (talk) 01:26, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Done. A pair of left-hand curly brackets was not paired with a pair of right-hand curly brackets (if that makes sense). Uporządnicki (talk) 01:57, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Finding chart records for music

    Hello, I'm new to making music articles, and I'm curious on how you can find which charts a song debuts in (hard rock, top 100, etc.) and in what countr(ies). Is it really just guess and check, or is there a more automated/quicker way of doing this. Thanks! Johnson524 (Talk!) 03:48, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Johnson524: I don't work with charts. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs#Chart performance and charts. You may get better answers at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:58, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This is late, but thanks for the reply! At very least it gives me a starting point. Cheers! Johnson524 (Talk!) 06:30, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Wiki page translation

    Hello,

    I am a fairly experienced translator working from Spanish to English. I would like to assist in translating Wiki pages but I am just baffled by the volume to information presented to me. I just want to see some pages of source text and translate them. I had intended to deal with a page I found on the "Category:Articles needing translation from Spanish Wikipedia" page (https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primera_generaci%C3%B3n_de_computadoras) and indeed I have done that translation outside of the Wiki Translate page in my own editor. I had then intended to retrofit my content into the Wiki editor. But I now see the translation tool is disabled to all but "extended confirmed editors" which clearly I am not.

    How can I SIMPLY get into translating Wiki content? I understand there is a need to regulate editing but I find it all rather baffling and obstructive. Can someone please point me to something simple to read so I can make myself useful to Wikipedia?

    Regards, Simon Robinson Simonitov zebedee (talk) 09:23, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello, Simonitov zebedee. I understand your desire for simplicity but certain human endeavors have aspects of complexity that must be dealt with. The simple answer is to accurately translate the Spanish text into English. But that is nowhere near enough. Is the Spanish article a great article or a crappy article? Is the topic notable as English Wikipedia defines that term? Are the cited sources reliable and do they verify the assertions in the article? Will the translated article comply with the English Wikipedia's core content policies? You must understand these questions and answer them positively, at least in your own mind, before proceeding with a translation. Please thoroughly read Wikipedia:Translation. Cullen328 (talk) 09:53, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your reply Cullen328 but I think you are missing my point. The page I found to translate was from a Wiki page itself. I assume (maybe wrongly) that it has been decided this page is worthy of translation, hence it appears on "Category:Articles needing translation from Spanish Wikipedia". With your long list of questions, you are implying too that there would be more to my input than merely translating, a worthy and specialist task in itself (in fact, the gist I get from the Wiki Translate page being closed to all but "extended confirmed editors" is that translations were highly substandard). And that's all I would want to do. Any editorial decisions should come from others more adept and skilled in those areas and the overall 'management' of Wikipedia. Is that wrong of me? Simonitov zebedee (talk) 12:32, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Simonitov zebedee, there is no vetting necessarily involved when someone adds {{Expand Spanish}} to an article (which places the article in the category you mentioned). The Spanish article may be good (by our standards), or parts of it may be good, or no part of it may be usable. In the end, you are responsible for all content you add to English Wikipedia, which means you'll need to make editorial decisions about content, sources, tone, etc., to make sure they're in line with our standards. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 13:51, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Attack article?

    Hello. Reading the wikipedia policies I was unable to find apropriate rule how to ask of removing attack article about person, which is backed only by a conflict sources. As I read in WP:ATTACK, the criteria is "An attack page is a page, in any namespace, that exists primarily to disparage or threaten its subject; or biographical material that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced or poorly sourced". And I'm reading a wikiarticle related to a person, which is known in connection with only one commercial conflict and all sources of non-trivial information on this BLP-page refering directly or indirectly only to this conflict, contain dubious and inaccurate statements about the biography of this person. By itself, he is little known and the press practically does not write about him outside this context. Does a page linking to multiple press articles around this conflict meet this criterion or not? Thanks Caramoble (talk) 09:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Caramoble It would be easier to offer advice if we knew which article you are discussing. Without knowing what it is, I can say that if a person is known only for participation in a "bad" event, that's what the coverage about them is going to be. If the sources in this article are not being accurately summarized for some reason, that should be discussed on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 09:55, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's reasonable. I wrote about this. To judge the quality of the presentation of the material in this article, it is enough to pay attention to the fact that Somkhishvili is called the founder of Lukoil in it, which is an obvious hoax. With the same success, he could be called the founder of Gazprom or Microsoft. The problem of the article is, it seems to me, that if we remove conflicting sources, then from the details of his biography supported by at least something, 2-3 phrases will remain in it. And the mentioned event is not 'bad', but it is completely ordinary. Litigation, which are hundreds of thousands, if not millions. Caramoble (talk) 10:02, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure I would call it an "attack article"- an attack article is something like "JohnPublic is a stupid person who can't tell his butt from his elbow". Regarding the article itself, if it is not accurate to describe him as a co-founder of Lukoil, that should be discussed on the article talk page first, along with checking the source to see what it actually says. 331dot (talk) 10:08, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello Caramoble. Experienced Wikipedia editors value precision and directness, and we are much less interested in discussing vague hypotheticals instead of actual encyclopedia content. You are alluding to a biography of a living person, and seem to be expecting other editors to do research to figure out what you are talking about. We have a specific noticeboard to discuss these issues which is located at WP:BLPN, the shortcut for the Biographies of Living People Noticeboard. Do not be cryptic there. State the specific article, the specific content that is of concern to you, and explain clearly and directly why the content violates policies and guidelines. Cullen328 (talk) 10:12, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. In fact, this is such an answer to the question that I would like to receive by contacting here. Wikipedia is very extensive and I just couldn't a place your noted. I will use your recommendation. Caramoble (talk) 10:16, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    talk page redirect help

    Hello,

    That talk page of this article Jaleigh Johnson redirects to a previous article from my sandbox and I'm unsure how to fix it! Any help would be appreciated.

    AugusteBlanqui (talk) 10:56, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Got it! BOZ (talk) 11:17, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Logo Update - Delta Cafés

    Good Morning,

    I would like to know how it would be possible to update the logo that appears on the Wikipedia tab when we google the term "Delta Cafés"?

    Image that appears (outdated logo): https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ficheiro:Delta_Caf%C3%A9s.svg

    Correct image: (logo updated and appearing on the wikipedia page) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Logo_Delta_Caf%C3%A9s.tif

    Dmd.gnab (talk) 11:12, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Dmd.gnab, Google moves in mysterious ways. Wikipedia has no control over it. -- Hoary (talk) 11:20, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Dmd.gnab: Our stock reply for such posts:
    Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that particular text was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information, but Google's Knowledge Graph has a "Feedback" link where anyone can mark a field as wrong. The same feedback facility is also provided on Bing and some other search engines.
    A user has updated the logo at Wikidata.[1] We cannot say if or when that will influence Google. They really do move in mysterious ways. We try to update articles to show the current logo. The English Delta Cafés added File:Novo logotipo Delta.png in 2017.[2] If an old logo is judged ineligible for copyright then we usually keep an image of it on a file page. Some articles may choose to mention former logos in a history section, and users can search our files for historical logos. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:20, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Mayiladuthurai district

    Could someone who knows these monuments kindly put them in clockwise from top order? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayiladuthurai_district. JackkBrown (talk) 12:21, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @JackkBrown: It's separate images. You can click them one at time. Mouse-controlled browsers usually show the url with the file name if you just hover over an image. Deor has mentioned that they were already in clockwise from top order.[3] PrimeHunter (talk) 13:57, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    How to create a page?

    We would like to add a page about a company (I work for the company), how do I do that? TraxxyLB (talk) 13:24, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    hi @TraxxyLB and welcome to Wikipedia! I strongly suggest you do not do that, it's difficult for one to write about something they're affiliated with (in addition to the difficulties of writing one as a new editor), plus there are reasons why you or your company may not want one in the first place. should you decide to write one anyway, here are some things you may want to read:
    happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 14:00, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Sentence

    Good morning. Is it better "Medvedev meets with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, 2010.", or "Medvedev meets Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, 2010."? JackkBrown (talk) 15:25, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I slightly prefer the former. "Meets with" implies that the meeting was planned. "Meets" could mean that they happened to meet in the street. Maproom (talk) 15:35, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "Meets" also could mean "meets for the first time ". David10244 (talk) 05:52, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Tags deleted, not actioned.

    Hello, at Nicolas Sarkis I raised a discussion on notability, possible AfD and inserted 4 'citation needed'. Another editor added tags for primary source, multiple issues etc. The article is a book promo imo. I would go ahead and do the AfD but an editor has deleted all the tags and all the cns without dealing with the issues. One editor has put back the orphan tag. The article is almost entirely sourced to the subject's biog on his publisher's website. I am minded to tag it as spam. Would that be right and would someone take a glance at the edit history perhaps? Thanks Thelisteninghand (talk) 16:19, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Thelisteninghand Now on the AfD there are two additional Delete votes. In the future, I would just go for it. AfD tends to be WP:BITEy, so the hesitation is understandable.
    You might want to install WP:TWINKLE (if you haven't already) as it can make the AfD, PROD, etc. processes much easier. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 20:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thelisteninghand, I haven't looked at the article. However: The article is almost entirely sourced to the subject's biog on his publisher's website. I am minded to tag it as spam. Would that be right [...]? Unless there are factors that you don't mention above, no it wouldn't. "Spam" doesn't just mean "substandard" or "inappropriate" or similar. An article about somebody shouldn't be more than trivially sourced to his blog. But if links to a person's blog (however unreliable this may be) are more or less limited to the article about that person, we can't infer that they're spam. (Which doesn't mean that they should be retained even in that article: on the contrary, most, perhaps all, should be cut.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:06, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Editing Darrell Henegan

    Darrell Henegan The Darrell Factor (talk) 16:57, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Yes. Don't. Not until you have read Wikipedia:Autobiography, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:01, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @The Darrell Factor And WP:REFB (how to create references) and Verifiability (why references are required). In short, a reader must be able to check everything you say against the reliable, published source that you have cited which backs up each statement. Unfortunately, we can't just take your word for everything. David10244 (talk) 05:59, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]


    March 24

    Infobox Search Engine

    I once used a search engine that utilized the Infobox Influences and Influenced data of two Wikipedia pages to return the influences between them. For example, if I input the names Rene Descartes and Immanuel Kant, the search engine would display the Philosophers between them, by using the Infobox Influences and Influences data.

    I am trying to find out if know of such a search engine, or if not, is there are way I can do this myself.

    Thank you HuntleyMike (talk) 00:41, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Political party colour

    The colour for the Green Party of England and Wales in the infobox has incorrectly changed from a shade of green to white and I'm not sure why or how to change it back to what it previously was. It seems to be an issue with "colour box|{{party color|Green Party of England and Wales (2023)" in the infobox on the editing page. This has subsequently incorrectly altered the meta data for the party from green to white across a whole host of other related pages, such as where the party is listed in opinion polls and the party colour next to its listed candidates. This issue seems to have occurred in around the last 48 hours. Before then two different shades of green were correctly appearing in the infobox and connected and related pages were showing the correct colour of green for the party. Helper201 (talk) 02:17, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    This change, which I have undone, caused this. @C.david.ham: Please ensure that the outcome you're intending does not break pages which include {{Party color}} for Green Party of England and Wales (2023). Bazza (talk) 10:19, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Source revision and outdated citations (flag a citation)

    I was reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism and noticed that citation #4 didn't provide the quote it was cited for. Furthermore, googling the quote doesn't pull any results. It's a rather nice quote and I'd hate to edit it out of existence, but it isn't properly sourced.

    Is there a function to flag a citation for review by a more experienced editor or some other preferred method of handling such a case? Udstrat (talk) 05:09, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    There's the {{failed verification}} template for when a source is given but you cannot verify the text using the source, and {{quote without source}} for unsourced quotes. In this particular case, the quote was changed in this edit by a user now blocked for vandalism; I have reverted to the previous version which does appear in the source given. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 10:38, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Company name change

    Hello,

    Our company's name was recently changed. Our organization has a page on Wikipedia. I attempted to edit and update our company name, but the changes were undone. Could you please assist me in updating the company name and some content? Deepak-LCS (talk) 06:13, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi Deepak-LCS. The first thing I suggest you do is read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Pay particular attention to the latter because a failure to properly declare you connection to your company may be considered a violation of the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use. The next thing that you and your company need to understand is that your company doesn't have a page on Wikipedia, but rather an article written about it on Wikipedia. This might seem like a silly distinction to make, but it's an important one when it comes to Wikipedia because your company has no real editorial control over what's written about it on Wikipedia as explained here. Any content written about your company will be expected to be in compliance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and not with your company wants. Now, if your company has officially changed its name, then that's important encyclopedic information for Wikipedia readers and should be reflected in the article. So, what you will need to do is go to Talk:Arction Ltd and make an edit request asking that the article be updated to reflect the change in name. You will need to provide some way of verifying the name change in your edit request: usually this is done by adding a external link to a WP:RELIABLESOURCE or even your company's official website that supports the name change. Try and keep you edit request as simple as possible to make it easier for others to assess; for example, something like "I work for Company A and it recently changed its name to "Company B". This can be verified by checking this link. Please change the name of the company accordingly." should be fine. If you write too much or request too many changes be made at once, your edit request is going to be more difficult to answer and may actually be skipped over by those who answer such requests. If there are other things about the article that you would like updated, I suggest you wait until your "name change" request has been taken care of and then make separate edit requests for them. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:42, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Deepak-LCS: Hi there! You also might enjoy using the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard. GoingBatty (talk) 13:33, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Links to a section?

    Hi there, is there any tool that allows me to view what articles that specifically link to a section within another article? I'm just looking to compact the Table of Contents at General Motors LS-based small-block engine, and there are several anchors that I would have to correct if I were to do so. TIA. X750. Spin a yarn? Articles I've screwed over? 06:58, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi X750. Try checking Help:What links here. I think that might be what you're looking for. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:46, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hey Marchjuly, I'd already given that page a read. Unfortunately, In the case of links to sections or other anchors, the precise target is not shown. does not give me much faith. That's why I thought I'd pop over here, maybe some bright spark had a fancy gizmo or thingmajig that could dig up section links. Guess not, and I'll probably leave the anchors as is. As it stands, however, will that massive ToC be a factor if the article were to be nominated for featured article status? Cheers. X750. Spin a yarn? Articles I've screwed over? 08:03, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @X750 Just as an aside: on the new Vector 22 interface, at least on my PC, the ToC appears on the left of the article and by default is restricted to the first-level section headers unless I click on the > marker to expand levels. Hence it's not that "massive" at first and unlike in Vector 2010 doesn't interrupt the flow from the lede to the main text. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:28, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I completely forgot about that, as I still use the legacy vector. Cheers for that, Michael D. Turnbull. X750. Spin a yarn? Articles I've screwed over? 18:36, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    how to add a article on your page

    how to add a article on your page about anyone, please explain 27.6.173.211 (talk) 08:28, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm not sure what you mean by "your page"(this entire website?)- writing a new article is very difficult, and it is usually recommended to first gain experience and knowledge by editing existing articles in areas that interest you. If you create an account, you can use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia. IP users and new accounts cannot directly create articles, and need to create and submit a draft via Articles for Creation once you have gathered independent reliable sources to summarize in the draft. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 08:35, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You can't create an article about just anyone, because not everyone is notable. David10244 (talk) 06:02, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Sockpuppetry question

    Hi, while doing RCP I came across a sockpuppetry scenario where the editor was creating numerous accounts in succession to make a wave of disruptive edits to a set of articles each time. The pattern goes like this: they create account 1 to make wave 1 of edits, dump it, create account 2 to make wave 2 of edits, then abandon it and create account 3 to make a third wave of disruptive edits, and so on. It's worth noting they only use one account at a time here, not multiple. Is this kind of behaviour allowed, or is it something that will definitely result in a block of the user if I make a report of it? AP 499D25 (talk) 09:19, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @AP 499D25: Hi there! See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations. GoingBatty (talk) 13:26, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Ambiguous article title?

    Doesn't the article John Loftus (author) have an ambiguous article and shouldn't it be renamed given that John W. Loftus is mainly known as an author, too? Which would be the best solution? --Florian Blaschke (talk) 11:42, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Probably a case of first come, first served. I've added a hatnote pointing to the disambiguation page on John W. Loftus‎‎. Is it really a problem? Anyone looking up "John Loftus" will hit the disambig page and can choose there. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:01, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There's no such policy I've ever heard of, and it would have unacceptable results. Per WP:TITLEDAB, article titles should be unambiguous, unless there is a clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 13:56, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    What policy are you referring to? Martin of Sheffield (talk) 21:44, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Issues with finding online source material

    Hi there, I am drafting an article on a pianist who was active in the 1990s and early 2000s. Thus there is very little third party information on him on the internet. What is the best way for me to cite the information I have on the artist without it being taken down, given I cannot site it with sources from the web. Cheers, Sam Tucansevb (talk) 14:39, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Tucansevb: WP:PUBLISHED isn't restricted to online sources. Bazza (talk) 14:43, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Cite Books, magazines, newspaper articles etc. Sources do not have to be online, although it's useful if they are. Have a look at WP:CITEHOW for a few source ideas. - X201 (talk) 14:44, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    How to deal with editor removing AfC rejections?

    User:Ieromaxos is repeatedly removing AfC rejections and declines without changing the article content much on what seems to be an autobiography or at least a COI (Draft:Georgios Mikellides). I'm not sure where to take this.

    Asparagusus (interaction) 15:13, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    do you want to recommend any meaningful changes in order to be accepted? Ieromaxos (talk) 15:26, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The article has been rejected multiple times, so I'm pretty sure it's not going to be accepted. All of the people who have rejected/declined your article have left suggestions; maybe you should look at those.
    Asparagusus (interaction) 15:37, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Given that it has been rejected twice (as well as declined nine times) Ieromaxos, you should stop wasting your time and everybody else's time on this doomed endeavour, or you are likely to find your account blocked for disruptive editing. ColinFine (talk) 18:11, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Photo Deletion

    I have a photo for my wiki site that I have permission from the guy who the wiki site is about. His name is Adam Sandoval. The photo is Adam Sandoval standing in front of motorcycle.jpg How do I get the speedy deletion taken off the photo so it can stay on the wiki page? Jamesnewton.indycollab (talk) 15:36, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Jamesnewton.indycollab: All photos are copyrighted by default, by copyright law. The copyright lies with the photographer, not the subject of the photo. We do not need and cannot use "permission" from the subject. We need a valid open copyright license (CC-BY-SA) from the photographer. That license lets anyne, not just Wikipedia, make copies of the photo. We MUST remove the photo because we must be very sensitive to copyright law. -Arch dude (talk) 15:51, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay but I am Adam Sandoval's agent and Adam took this picture himself with his iPhone and has told us to use the picture for this page so why is it being deleted still? Do i have to update the photo and list that Adam is the owner of the photo Jamesnewton.indycollab (talk) 16:23, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jamesnewton.indycollab, you must properly disclose as a paid editor per WP:PAID, and should not attempt to move the article into mainspace again. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:33, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jamesnewton.indycollab:Since Adam is the photographer, he owns the copyright. He may upload it and release it under CC-BY-SA. MAKE SURE he knows what that means: i.e., anyone can thereafter use it for any purpose, requiring only attribution. -Arch dude (talk) 17:01, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jamesnewton.indycollab, you also uploaded this picture. Did you take the photo? Why is there some kind of logo in the bottom left? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:39, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jamesnewton.indycollab You ask "Do i have to update the photo and list that Adam is the owner of the photo?" You cannot do that; the photographer must do that. I can't see the picture; did Andy take a picture (selfie) of himself standing in front of a motorcycle? This assumes that you get beyond the issue of Andy's notability. Good luck. David10244 (talk) 06:11, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Also Draft:Adam Sandoval has got a lot of external links in the prose. They need removing. - X201 (talk) 16:13, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    why do I have to remove external links if it allows the reader to know what the event he raised money for? or are you talking about deleting the repeated external links? Jamesnewton.indycollab (talk) 16:19, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    See WP:EL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:25, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jamesnewton.indycollab: Hi there! Draft:Adam Sandoval has more a more serious issue: a complete lack of independent published reliable sources to support the statements in the draft and demonstrate that the draft would meet Wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion, called "notability". GoingBatty (talk) 16:15, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you talking about the references links that are not included? Jamesnewton.indycollab (talk) 16:21, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    He's talking about the WP-rule for "Should we have an article about [whatever]?", WP:N. Read it. See also WP:PROMO, and WP:TUTORIAL on how to add references correctly, if you are hoping to make a WP-article that can "stick", this is essential. And if WP:COI applies to you, follow it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:31, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jamesnewton.indycollab on the external links: they can (and should) be used in citations (though for the most part, citations should come from independent reliable sources), but they do not belong as external links in the prose of the article.
    It looks to me like you are taking on the very tricky task of writing an article, from scratch, about a subject you are close to, as your first involvement in Wikipedia. That's a tough thing to do, and a very tough thing to do right. Expect to have a lot of people telling you are doing something incorrectly, and don't expect all of them to be gentle about it.
    Right now, I'd say your priority number one is to read WP:COI and WP:PAID, and do the appropriate disclosures, because otherwise someone will probably just block your account and delete the draft article. - Jmabel | Talk 22:04, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Jamesnewton.indycollab. I'm just going to add that even if you're able to straighten out the licensing problems you've been having so far with your uploads so that they're not all deleted from Commons, there's still no automatic guarantee that those files will ever be used on Wikipedia. Wikimedia Commons is primarily concerned with the copyright licensing of the content (i.e. files) it hosts; it's not too concerned with how those files are being used as long as they fall within the scope of Commons. Wikipedia (i.e. English Wikipedia), on the other hand, is not only really concerned with the licensing of files uploaded to it or added to its pages, but it's also really concerned with the encyclopedic relevance of such files when added to Wikipedia articles. It's a moot point now perhaps since File:Adam Sandoval standing in front of motorcycle.jpg has already been deleted from Commons, but that photo has (at least in my opinion) very little, if any, encyclopedic value to Wikipedia readers; so, it would be a bad choice encylopedically for an infobox photo regardless of its licensing. A photo of a Sandoval standing in front of his bike, striking a pose with his thumbs in his jeans' pockets could possibly work as long as his face wasn't completely obscured by his helmet. Nice photo for a personal website or social media perhaps, but not really for Wikipedia. Just from a casual Google image search, it appears that Sandoval doesn't have much of an aversion to having his picture taken sans helmet and sans sunglasses; so, perhaps it would better to try and use another picture instead. Anyway, as it has been pointed out above, there are more important things for you to sort out at the moment than file licensing, and I suggest you focus on them first and worry about uploading more files later. For reference, files that are deleted aren't gone forever; rather, they're only hidden from public review and can be restored at a later date if the reasons that led to their deletion are eventually sorted out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:10, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello,
    Thank you for being kind and a friendly tone. This is my first time creating here and some of the responses I’ve received have been brutal. So, I appreciate you reaching out.
    I will work on making the changes this weekend. 152.117.79.118 (talk) 23:17, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Citation help

    On Altai Republic, there's a reference named "2021Census", but that reference doesn't seem to be defined on the page. Why isn't this causing a reference error? —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 16:16, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    The <ref name="2021Census"> is defined in {{Ru-census2021}} which is transcluded into Altai Republic by {{Ru-census}}. The actual reference is transcluded into {{Ru-census}} from {{Ru-census2021}} from {{ru-pop-ref}}.
    Of course, the documentation says nothing about this...
    Trappist the monk (talk) 16:59, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Picture name

    When there is no title of the painting, but only an indication (e.g. 'self-portrait'), this title should be written without italics; or should it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_West. JackkBrown (talk) 22:26, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Titles of works should be italicised. But there's no reason to italicise a description of a work. Maproom (talk) 00:00, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Linking to information about an Israeli organisation not described in English Wikipedia

    In Thirty-seventh government of Israel § Monitoring bracelets for domestic violence offenders, I've mentioned an organisation called Amutat Bat Melech, which doesn't appear to be described in English Wikipedia. So I've added an interlanguage link to Hebrew Wikipedia. Then it occurred to me that, for an English-speaking reader, a link to the English-language version of the organisation's Web site would be more useful. Are there guidelines for this kind of thing? Thanks Misha Wolf (talk) 23:56, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Yes, there are. External links may be used only in limited circumstances: I don't believe those apply in this case. The {{ill}} link you have used is normal practice. ColinFine (talk) 00:16, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Misha Wolf: Don't make an inline external link but their English front page https://www.batmelech.org/?lang=en could be an inline citation after "assists Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox women who suffer from domestic violence,". The existing citation also says that but is mainly a citation for the following quote. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:34, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, @ColinFine and @PrimeHunter. Misha Wolf (talk) 00:50, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    PS: In case you want to take a look at what I've done, I've changed the section name and the new link is Thirty-seventh government of Israel § Electronic tagging of domestic violence offenders. Misha Wolf (talk) 00:53, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]


    March 25

    Ref. number 8 should list the publication as "The Star" - please fix this if possible - thanks 58.179.137.31 (talk) 01:51, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

     Done! GoingBatty (talk) 04:33, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Reporting flags

    Hello, I wish to report a serious problem with many Wikipedia articles and seek guidance on how to rectify it.


    Some time ago I had removed some fictional flags from articles on Bengal Subah and Battle of Plassey. The flags were from the game EU4 and were about a much older Bengal Sultanate in the game. Unfortunately, the flags have been re-introduced.


    Even more concerning, it just does not stop at that, I have recently come to see many fictional flags primarily from the same game being used for many many articles of the polities and battles of pre colonial Indian kingdoms.


    This is deeply concerning as it jeopardises the credibility in front of those informed and misinforms the uninformed. Just as all written material on Wikipedia needs citations, I suggest that it be made essential that flags too require references.

    Kodombo (talk) 02:43, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Kodombo: Your removals of File:Flag of the Principality of Bengal (15th-18th century).svg were both reverted by User:Cookersweet [4][5] who has been blocked along with other accounts controlled by the same person. The file is hosted at commons:File:Flag of the Principality of Bengal (15th-18th century).svg and not the English Wikipedia. You can change the description to say it's a fictional flag from w:Europa Universalis IV. The initial w: is used in links from Commons to the English Wikipedia. If the other flags are also hosted at Commons then you can bring up the issue at commons:Commons talk:WikiProject Flags. I don't think it's practical for the English Wikipedia to require a reference when a flag is used. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:18, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Citing a reference that contains an incorrect detail

    Hello, I sometimes find myself wanting to cite a reliable source but realize that some detail in the article is incorrect. For instance, this article by El País (in Spanish) mentions that Iran Air started flying from Caracas to Tehran in March 2007 but that Conviasa took over the flight just 2 months later. However, this source (in German) provides evidence that Iran Air was still flying the route in June 2007, and this article states that Conviasa did not start operating the flight until October 2007. I was hoping to use the El País article because it is written by a reliable news organization and contains lots of notable information, but it appears to get this one detail wrong. Would it be acceptable to cite such a source? Sunnya343 (talk) 03:24, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Sunnya343 You might be right, but why do you trust one source over the other? David10244 (talk) 06:16, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @David10244: I was thinking that the German article is a first-hand account of the author's experience on the flight, although now that I think of it, perhaps the author took the flight prior to June 2007. The article from Iran Daily was published 2 days after Conviasa's inaugural flight took place (if we take the article to be accurate). On the other hand, the El País article was written a couple of years later. Sunnya343 (talk) 15:07, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Sunnya343 You could mention that there is conflicting information and cite all three sources. Random person no 362478479 (talk) 22:03, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Request to Change Page Title for Trademark Infringement

    I am writing to request a change in the title of a Wikipedia page that infringes on my trademark. The current page title, "Virtuos", is identical to my registered trademark, "Virtuos"


    The use of my trademark in the Wikipedia page title is causing confusion among consumers, and I am concerned that it may be detrimental to my business. As such, I am requesting that the page title be changed to [Virtuos Games], which does not infringe on my trademark.


    I will attach evidence of my trademark registration and documentation showing my use of the trademark in commerce if it is required


    I would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter and look forward to a positive resolution.


    Article URL = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtuos


    Thank You Rishabhgambhir988 (talk) 04:10, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Rishabhgambhir988, huh? I don't see how a Wikipedia article's name has anything to do with your alleged copyright or how it is hurting your business in any way. Perhaps someone else here has more expertise this area. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 04:17, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Whenever someone searches for my company's name, they often come across a gaming company with a similar name on Wikipedia. This is causing confusion for my audience about our respective niches. To prevent any further confusion, I would like to request a change in the article name of the gaming company on Wikipedia from "Virtuos" to "Virtuos Games." I believe this change will make it clearer to my audience that our companies operate in different niches. Rishabhgambhir988 (talk) 04:47, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rishabhgambhir988: It appears that the game company calls itself "Virtuos", as do the reliable sources in the article. Therefore, per WP:COMMONNAME, it's reasonable for the Wikipedia article about the company to be named Virtuos. If Wikipedia had another article with a similar name, then there may need to be some disambiguation needed. If there's a potential trademark issue, you might want to address that with the game company, not here. GoingBatty (talk) 04:30, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The gaming company in question is consistently using the name "Virtuos Games" on all other platforms except for their Wikipedia page. Even their domain name is Virtuosgames.com. Therefore, it would be beneficial to change the title on their Wikipedia page to match their consistent naming convention. Rishabhgambhir988 (talk) 04:48, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You don't seem to understand. That is not their "Wikipedia page". They do not have anything to do with the article about them. That is an article about them in this encyclopedia. And the practice in this encyclopedia is to use the ordinarily-used name for the subject of the article. Most articles about this company call it "Virtuos", so that's what we do too. We don't care how the subject is known formally, as in SEC filings and the like. And we certainly are even more indifferent to what you think. If you have a gaming company of your own called "Virtuos", that's between you and the other guys, and we insist you leave us out of it. --Orange Mike | Talk 05:00, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Orangemike To nitpick a bit, I don't think the OP necessarily has a gaming company named "Virtuos", just a registered trademark... which might be some kind of company, gaming or otherwise. But you are otherwise completely correct, of course. David10244 (talk) 06:22, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    What is your own meaning of Virtuos? If it's mentioned elsewhere in Wikipedia then maybe there could be a note at top of Virtuos. We don't rename articles just because something without its own article has the same name, and we don't add notes if something isn't mentioned in Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:29, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rishabhgambhir988: You are correct that their domain name is virtuosgames.com. However, their logo is "Virtuos" and the text on their website refers to themselves as "Virtuos", not "Virtuos Games". GoingBatty (talk) 01:35, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The English-language sources in the article Virtuos almost all call it Virtuos (the source by Gach is an exception). Wikipedia should therefore use that name. There is another company with the name "Virtuos". Its web site says "We are born in digital native cloud redefining how Customer Experience (CX), Employee Experience (EX), and Everything Experience (XX) orchestrate across a symphony of brand, digital, and commerce." I think that means they design web sites. If that is the OP's company, maybe they could reduce the confusion by providing a clearer statement of what they do. Maproom (talk) 09:59, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Help with personal attacks/edit warring IP

    Hello, please see edit history of IP user 207.148.176.2. Assistance is needed for obvious personal attacks in edit summary. "You ever wonder why no one takes this site seriously anymore? Its assholes like you that have ruined Wikipedia" Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 04:12, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @EDG 543: Hi there! Try reviewing the info at WP:ANI. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:23, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @EDG 543 I can see this is related to an edit war at Streisand effect. It might be easier to request that the article be temporarily protected in some way. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:01, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Ending an RFC

    When ending an RFC, is there anything I need to do beyond removing the {{rfc}} template? Am I required to somehow formally close the discussion? ADifferentMan (talk) 05:15, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi ADifferentMan. WP:RFCEND has guidance on when and how RfCs can end. Removing the tag and moving on, when consensus is clear, is included as one of the options. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:23, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Password

    I just changed my password at the behest of Google, which said it had been comprised. The new password I entered is now coming back as incorrect. I copied it AND saved it in my iPhone password saver. The problem is my email address - which I was trying to change - no longer exists. It was a Verizon email and they stopped providing email. Even so, I no longer have an account with them. I’ve been a user of Wikipedia for over 7 years. Please help! Lynx Spirrit (talk) 05:23, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    This is the help page for issues related to Wikipedia. Since you are logged in to your Wikipedia account, this is not a Wikipedia issue. As the notice at the top of the page says, you can try the reference desk Meters (talk) 05:34, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lynx Spirrit: Is this about your Wikipedia account "Lynx Spirrit"? It only has seven edits: Special:Contributions/Lynx Spirrit. If you are not strongly attached to the username then you can just create another account. If you don't know the password for Lynx Spirrit and cannot access the email address then you will lose the account as soon as you log out. If you want to try to keep the username then create another account from another browser WITHOUT logging out in the browser where you are logged in as Lynx Spirrit. Then write, while logged in as Lynx Spirrit, the name of the other account and say it's you and you want it renamed to Lynx Spirrit. Then you can try a request at Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations with edits from both accounts as proof. Remain logged in as Lynx Spirrit for as long as possible. If they consider your usurpation request then they may ask for more while you are logged in. We don't normally allow usurpation of an account which has edits but if you can demonstrate it's your own account then it may help. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:53, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lynx Spirrit Has Google told you that your Wikipedia password has been compromised? How would Google know that? Or does Google really know everything these days? David10244 (talk) 06:24, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @David10244: Several possibilities on how that could happen. We do not know what passowrd manager the OP uses, however, some password managers track the last time you updated the password and warn you if a database breach occured since you last updated it. Alternatively, some sites automatically calculate the SHA1 hash of your password and check that against something like https://haveibeenpwned.com/Passwords. Also, I am not concinved I can rule out a case of password reuse here, strong warning to everyone: Reusing your password everywhere is a significant safety risk, as a hacker only needs to compromise one site to get all others, doubly so if one uses the email adress as the other value in login credentials. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:07, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Matthew beard

    Why isn’t Matthew beard (1870-1985) (aged 114 years and 222 days) at number 5 on the list of the world’s oldest living men? Gogokingkong (talk) 05:32, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    He's not alive, so he's not going to be listed on any list of living people. If we have reliable sources for his lifespan then he can be listed in List of the verified oldest people and Oldest people. What sources are available? Meters (talk) 05:46, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    And I see that the case of Matthew Beard has previously been discussed on now-archived threads of the article talk page. I suggest that you read those threads and see if there is anything new to discuss. Meters (talk) 05:50, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It appears that Matthew Beard's supposed lifespan is in question. A recent web page on this case https://longeviquest.com/2023/03/mathew-beard-status-reclassification/ shows that his supposed lifespan was accepted at one time, but has since been rejected. Meters (talk) 06:00, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Search

    Why is something you search something but it come with something else lol lol lol just whyyyyyyyy@° 86.29.62.101 (talk) 14:28, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Do you actually expect anyone to be able to guess what you want and give an answer? See Help:Searching for general help. If you have a meaningful question then ask it. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:46, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    How do I send articles to Wikipedia for publication?

    How does one send articles to Wikipedia for publication? 102.89.33.207 (talk) 15:49, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    • Step 1: make absolutely sure that the subject is notable. See WP:N. Notability is our only absolute requirement. If the subject is not notable by our definition, then we will delete the article, wasting your time and ours.
    • Step 2: read a few articles on subjects similar to yours to see what a Wikipedia article should look like.
    • Step 3: proceed to WP:YFA.
    -Arch dude (talk) 16:41, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Page: Tottenham; paragraph: "Namesakes"

    Why was the boldface present? Is there a specific reason? Page: Tottenham; paragraph: "Namesakes". JackkBrown (talk) 16:04, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @JackkBrown: Tottenham cake redirects there. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Text formatting#Article title terms says: "The most common use of boldface is to highlight the first occurrence of the article's title word or phrase in the lead section. This is also done at the first occurrence of a term (commonly a synonym in the lead) that redirects to the article or one of its subsections, whether the term appears in the lead or not". PrimeHunter (talk) 16:25, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Can Wikipedia contact psychiatrist about psychosis.

    psychiatrist help in treating psychosis. How is this accomplished. 146.113.133.61 (talk) 17:04, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Maybe our articles at Psychiatrist and Psychosis would help. Please don't create new Sections on this page to ask additional questions: just add them here if necessary. I have no idea what aspect of login you want to understand. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:47, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia cannot provide you with medical advice or assistance. If you wish to contact a psychiatrist, use Google to search for psychiatrists in your area or ask your primary care physician to contact one for you. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:11, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If this is a current emergency, Google for "emergency psychiatric hotline" and call for help. If in doubt, do not wait. -Arch dude (talk) 00:39, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Login

    Login is what i am interested in. 146.113.133.61 (talk) 17:07, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    There should be a "create account" link in the upper right corner(it may be in a drop down menu). You may also request an account at WP:ACC. 331dot (talk) 19:16, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You use the mobile version which has a hamburger menu icon ☰ at the top left. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:10, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Regarding Infobox for former villages

    Hello. I was wondering if anybody knows if there's a infobox I could use for articles about former villages Zaur and Galgaï-Yurt. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 21:05, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello, WikiEditor1234567123. You can use Template: Infobox settlement. Cullen328 (talk) 21:31, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 22:07, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    March 26

    Citation copying won't work

    Hello, I am an editor for 2023 FIBA 3x3 Asia Cup, I've been trying to fix a duplicate reference on [1] and [2], but no matter what I try it just won't work, please help me! ~With regards, I followed The Username Policy (Message Me) (What I have done on Wikipedia) 01:38, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @I followed The Username Policy:  Fixed in this edit. GoingBatty (talk) 02:01, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @I followed The Username Policy: I also removed url-status from refs with no archive-url. – Raven  .talk 02:05, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Article naming issue

    I'm working on articles about Polish statistical systems (TERYT, TERC, BREC, ULIC) and I have an issue with naming them. Let's take TERC as an example:

    • The most commonly used name is the acronym, however there are multiple uses for TERC already, and therefore TERC cannot be used.
    • The article could be titled by its full Polish name, which would be System identyfikatorów i nazw jednostek podziału administracyjnego, which is rarely used and against WP:USEENGLISH.
    • Another solution would be to name the article by the translated Polish name, which would be System of identifiers and names of units of territorial division, however this name is almost never used in relation to TERC.
    • The article could be named by something like TERC (Polish statistical system), but this is against WP:NCA.

    Other wikis that have an article about TERC use just TERC as it is the most common name, however none of them have an article on Telomerase RNA component, which is another use for TERC.

    The systems' acronyms are sometimes derived from Polish, such as SIMC (System identyfikatorów i nazw miejscowości). SIMC already has an article, titled by its Polish name.

    What would you suggest doing? PRmaster1 (talk) 12:13, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    If it's known by it's acronym, then use that. You then need to find a suitable disambiguation, (statistics system) is reasonably close I'd say. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 12:19, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Political orientation

    I have noticed that there seems to be a marked left-wing orientation within Wikipedia (in the United States, it corresponds to the Democratic Party). I would like an explanation as to whether this is really the case, or whether it is just my impression; furthermore, I would like to know, with proof, whether Wikipedia, according to its own laws, can have political orientations, or must, by necessity, always be neutral. I repeat: it would seem, in my opinion, that there is a not inconsiderable left-wing political orientation here on Wikipedia. JackkBrown (talk) 13:24, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Putting "left wing" and "US Democratic Party" in the same sentence leaves me giggling. --ColinFine (talk) 14:46, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    JackkBrown This sort of discussion is probably better suited for the Village Pump. Users are not expected to leave their political affiliations at the door, so to speak, but are expected to civilly collaborate to achieve consensus. Having a neutral point of view is different from being without bias, which is impossible. We all have biases, as do independent reliable sources. Sources are presented to readers so they can evaluate and judge them for themselves as to bias and other factors in determining what they think. If an article seems to have too much of a slant, please discuss it on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 13:32, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll add that Wikipedia does not equivocate if reliable sources do not, for example with how the January 6 United States Capitol attack is described, or Joe Biden being found to be the winner of the election. 331dot (talk) 13:35, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Should an article about people objecting to (say) Rhubarb, be titled "Rhubarb protests" or "Anti-rhubarb protests"?

    Someone has changed the name of article 2023 Israeli anti-judicial reform protests to 2023 Israeli judicial reform protests. Which name better fits Wikipedia's article naming conventions? Thanks Misha Wolf (talk) 14:10, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]