Many edits just adding a space?

I came across the edits of this user, that almost all seem to be just adding one single space. I don't understand why they are doing that. Is there something that can be done to slow them down, and to stop cluttering the histories up with tiny edit? Maybe they are just doing it to get their edit count up? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/RetroBreads Thanks peterl (talk) 00:31, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Contact a checkuser. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 01:44, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

​They're trying to become extended confirmed, you can see that the account was inactive until exactly three months after it was created. – Thjarkur (talk) 08:54, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Submitted a sock puppet investigation. They agreed behaviour unusual, and may be trying to circumvent XC, but closed the investigation as not likely a sock puppet. I've marked a number of these one-space edits as vandalism. How else to stop this behaviour or alert an admin?

Please add Shenandoah County to your list. Box Office Brewery, 177 East King Street, Strasburg VA Thank you Mary Price — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.111.9.149 (talk) 02:49, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but this is the help desk for assistance in editing Wikipedia. It's not clear how your request relates. —[

Hi, I'm currently working on a draft article in my sandbox and have noticed that it's included in the hidden category 'User pages with reference errors'. I'm a bit stumped as to what's causing the problem as there isn't a visible cite error message and refTools error check isn't picking it up. I'm using the shortened footnote templates. I'd appreciate it if someone could take a second look (in case I'm missing something obvious) or point me in the direction of an editor who's experienced with this. Cheers, Jr8825 • Talk 03:21, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jr8825: See Help:Cite errors/Cite error references duplicate key. In your case, the duplicate key is "FOOTNOTEBrownePearson200616–17". Jackmcbarn (talk) 03:25, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick spot @Jackmcbarn:. So I know for the future, how did you find the error? Jr8825 • Talk 03:29, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jr8825: I'm not sure why you don't see it. For me, it's big and red right under the "Citations" heading. Jackmcbarn (talk) 03:31, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Hmm very strange, perhaps I need to clear my browser cache. Thanks again!

discuss at Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput- not here

The cause of death of indian actor Sushant Singh Rajput is still not confirmed by any government agencies as it's under investigation. Please change the cause of death from suicide by hanging to "under investigation". CBI is still investigating this case. No sources other than CBI is eligible to confirm the actual cause of death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anjalisat (talk • contribs) 10:12, 26 September 2020 (UTC) Anjalisat Sorry, we summarize what independent reliable sources state, and they state that this man killed himself. If that changes, the article will be changed accordingly. We do not need an official government finding- which from what I understand people who do not think he killed himself would not likely believe anyway. Please review the talk page of that article for more information. 331dot (talk) 10:26, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Note that Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput is presently semi-protected specifically because of the relentlessness of requests like this. It's incredibly unlikely that these users will do any sort of follow-up and to that end, it's better to just revert the requests off, especially if they start flooding the page. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 19:53, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Need help with copying code

Hey guys. Is there any way that images which gets updated on main page of Wiki commons gets updated simultaneously on my user page too. LearnIndology (talk) 11:32, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

LearnIndology, As far as I know, although it's quite easy to do on Commons - just add {{:Main Page/potd}} and {{:Main Page/motd}} to your user page, I don't think it's possible to do it here. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 12:58, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

@LearnIndology: Have a look at Wikipedia:Wikimedia Commons/POTD. This relies on a bot that updates a page here once a day with the image name and caption from commons. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:20, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks guys, but I need to increase the size of the image. I want to make sure it fills the whole empty space on my userpage, how can I do that? LearnIndology (talk) 13:51, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

PS It would be fine if anyone will do it by himself on my userpage. LearnIndology (talk) 13:55, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

@

The crest of arms in the above Wiki article about the UYS family is absurd and should be removed: it depicts a farmer with a little basket over his arm and 3 unions beside him -- as if UYS was derived from UNION... In the 1930's some enterprising artist invented family crests for dozens of families and sold them to gullible country folk in South Africa. No UYS family crest has been registered by the SA Bureau of Heraldry. Moreover, the UYS surname was originally NIJS from Amsterdam and Leiden. And they were humble sailors: not aristocracy with family crests. See articles by Dr JF UYS 'DIE EERSTE UYS' ('The First UYS') in FAMILIA (Journal of the Genealogical Society of South Africa) 2011 and 2013. 165.255.39.180 (talk) 11:34, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

The claimed origin of the arms depicted is fairly well described in the article's text, though you are welcome to add to it any of the details above that you can cite to independent, published reliable sources. (Whether the source you mention qualifies may depend on the rigor of the Journal's editorial practices, since the author mentioned likely has a conflict of interest in the matter.)

Canting (punning) arms have been used for many centuries, and are not usually taken to suggest a real etymological derivation of the family name, although some people may have believed in such an origin: rather, such arms are often a deliberate joke based on the name.

In modern heraldic practice, most Heraldic authorities will design and/or grant arms to anyone within their jurisdiction who is of good standing, upon payment of the requisite fees; "aristocratic" origins or status are not a consideration and most arms bearers are not aristocrats. This certainly holds true in

hey Romulus32, can you make a new article? I want to watch and read your new article, bro! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.1.166.84 (talk) 12:03, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy ping for

It is necessary an edition in the title of the page Basilica_of_the_National_Shrine_of_Our_Lady_of_Aparecida, in 2016 the church was recognized as a Cathedral, therefore nowadays the most recognized name is Cathedral Basilica of the National Shrine of Our Lady Aparecida (see the Portuguese version of the page). This also will help to provide better access to information. 84.241.197.175(talk) 12:47, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss this on the article's talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:58, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the answer, but this request is already on article's talk page since 29 July 2020, with no modifications or answers until now. 84.241.197.175(talk) 23:21, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

If you're unable to move it yourself and the move isn't controversial, you can submit a technical move request here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:57, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

The Brownsville Texas Incident of 1906: It was LTC (Ret) William Baker's tireless research and persuasive legal brief, while stationed at the Pentagon in 1972, that convinced the Secretary of the Army to reverse President Theodore Roosevelt’s decision to discharge without honor the 167 black soldiers of the First Battalion Twenty-fifth Infantry accused of shooting up the town of Brownsville Texas in 1906. Colonel Baker certified the lone survivor, Dorsie Willis in 1973, who received $25,000 in compensation after 66 years. This reversal is documented in the New York Times obituary of Colonel Baker by Sam Roberts, October 8, 2018, and by Secretary of the Army Howard H. Calloway in 1972, who honored Baker with the Pace Award and the Legion of Merit. Colonel Baker's book on the topic, The Brownsville Texas Incident of 1906: The True and Tragic Story of a Black Battalion's Wrongful Disgrace and Ultimate Redemption, was published May 5, 2020, Red Engine Press. It won a Silver Medal from the Military Writers Society of America, September 2020. Thank you for your response. Dr. Bettye Foster Baker. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:982:8202:43F0:D04C:6F67:5130:A71F (talk) 17:30, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Is this about an existing article (maybe

Could anyone please tell me whether or not a hyperlink consisting of a word should include any punctuation marks immediately following it, like a period or comma? (Edit: Went ahead and made the edit so the period was part of the hyperlink, though if anyone says otherwise, then I'll change it.)--Thylacine24 (talk) 19:08, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

I would say "no", because then you have to pipe it. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:46, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

@Orangemike: What if it's an external link, which are usually piped anyway? (Sorry not to specify that I was talking about external links.)--Thylacine24 (talk) 20:54, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

@Thylacine24:I !vote "no". The punctuation should not be part of the blue text. For me, this is more about how you and the reader should think about the syntax. The blue text in within the clause or sentence. The punctuation should come after the clause or sentence consistently. Consider the case of a series of comma-separated clauses, one of which ends in blue text. If the comma is within the blue text, then you get one blue comma and the rest of the commas are black, violating the principle of parallel structure. -Arch dude (talk) 21:07, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

@Arch dude: Thanks for telling me. I'll take your word for it and reverse the edit I made, if no one's replied to it. Also, tangential question, could you please tell me if my tense usage in the first sentence of my earlier response ("which are usually") was grammatically correct? Sorry to bother you over it.--Thylacine24 (talk) 21:12, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

I tend to place punctuation inside external links because of that icon that appears after them, I feel it can look off to have text+icon+period. – Thjarkur (talk) 22:55, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

@Thjarkur: Thanks, but I'll go with what the other two responders here have said, unless/until someone else agrees with you.--Thylacine24 (talk) 00:40, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Thylacine24 and Thjarkur: Might be worth a search at WT:MOS to see if it's been discussed before. I agree this looks awkward: Example.com. However, this is kind of weird, too: Example. This is another solution that binds the EL icon more tightly to the link by putting a space before the period: Example.com . I tend to add a space like this in emails and other writing outside Wikipedia to make it clear that the period is not part of the URL, though I think that within mainspace here, I'd just find a way to avoid having punctuation immediately after an EL. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 17:36, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: I couldn't find anything searching the MOS talk archives. Could you please tell me if you think I should rephrase the sentence (if no one's responded yet)?--Thylacine24 (talk) 23:38, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Thylacine24: I think that putting the punctuation after the hyperlink is the lesser of evils, and most in keeping with current practice. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:47, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@

00:17, 5 September 2019‎ 66.214.179.18

On this particular edition, the entire part of my edition was removed.

Before I simply undo the deletion, is there anyway that I could communicate with the person or in this page group to find out why the deletion is necessary? I mean: if it was because my message was inappropriate, I need to know in what sense, and how to revise it. If it is simply due to a geographically political differences perceived by the deletor, s/he can put a paragraph above or below mine to dispute, rather than simply delete other people's contribution. Thank you and best regards, jdeng793 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdeng793 (talk • contribs) 20:15, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

@

Trying to find a way to make suggestions and influence policy.

How can I make suggestions and influence policies on Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trusam (talk • contribs) 00:47, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello

Menu bar that purports to appear when I edit a page. Except that it doesn't.

I have been an editor for 10 years, averaging 1½ edits per day, but I have never created a table. I'd like to give it a try. According to Help:Introduction to tables with Wiki Markup/1, "The easiest way to insert a new table is to use the editing toolbar that appears when you edit a page." The reference is apparently to the toolbar at the left. Despite 5582 edits, I don't think that I have ever seen it before calling up the Help page today. As a novice table-creator, I'd like to follow "the easiest way" but I don't see how I can. Advice, please? Peter Brown (talk) 00:48, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Peter M. Brown: If you mean you see the first row of icons but not the second one, click "> Advanced" in the first row to make the second row appear. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:38, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

I have not seen either row before today. From my familiarity with other software, I can guess what some of the symbols mean, but I don't see them anywhere on the page that appears when I click [edit] at the top of an article or section. If I could gain access to these icons, would clicking on X_I let me create subscripts without the need to type _and? That would be handy. Peter Brown (talk) 03:17, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Peter M. Brown: Please check in Preferences -> Editing that the checkbox next to "Enable the editing toolbar" is checked. If it isn't, check it and save your prefs.

@Peter M. Brown: forgot to sign. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:01, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: OK, I can retrieve the "edit toolbar" following your instructions. I can see that it would be useful occasionally. For tables, I dunno — the do-it-yourself instructions seem clearer than those called up by the icon.

Thanks. You can "close" this inquiry, or whatever you do when the person requesting help is satisfied. Have a good day.

Peter Brown (talk) 16:55, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Peter M. Brown: Note there are some other useful things there, like the magnifying glass that brings up a search/replace dialog that knows how to do regex. Also, the pencil to the left of >Advanced turns on useful syntax coloring in the edit window. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 17:40, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

I shall have to study the Regex article; it's rather long.

I assume that you meant to refer to "⌵ Advanced", not ">Advanced".

I do have a question relating to Special:Preferences § mw-prefsection-personal: it says that the answer to "How do you prefer to be described?" will be public. How, as a member of the public, can I obtain this information on an editor? In a talk page discussion involving two or more other editors, I regularly refer to one as "he" while addressing another, but I realize that "she" (or even "they") may be more appropriate. I gather that there is is a way of finding out without changing the subject by asking explicitly?

Anne Marie Trevelyan Sinophobia Accusation

In this section I want to change to this and inclube emojis as they were part of the texting incident how do I add them as I have tried and it didn't allow me to do so

In May 2020 Labour MP and first British female MP of Chinese decent Sarah Owen crisited Trevelyan for a WhatApp message of a split fortune cookie that says: “You not have coronavirus.” captioned: “Just received my Covid-19 rapid test kit from China. Soooooo relieved!” with a follow up message of "Just for Bob 😉." refering to Conservative MP Bob Seely who repsoned by sending "❤️😊". Owen said “If Anne-Marie Trevelyan doesn’t understand why this sort of humour was left in the 1970s, I would be happy to explain it to her. In recent weeks we’ve seen East Asians spat at, beaten up, verbally attacked and had their businesses targeted. Seely responed to Owen by saying " “It was a well-meaning joke at my expense and I didn’t think anything of it.” refering to Seelys campaign against the Chinces tech company Huawei. Trevelyan has not repsoned to Owen — Preceding unsigned comment added by VictoriousDwarf (talk • contribs)

Place to discuss this would be the article talk page. However, emojis don't render well for some users e.g. those on screen readers, so probably the text is better for accessibility. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:13, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@

I uploaded a photo but Wikipedia would not allow me to use it for some odd reason, though I am the owner of the photograph.

Anyways, please contact me as soon as possible. I do not want nor think my draft should be deleted either. I am making a historical documentation of the artist X-Calibur via this platform. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urbanunityproductions (talk • contribs) 06:38, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Note: user has been indef blocked.

 You are invited to join the discussion at Module talk:Excerpt § Denglisch bug. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 09:49, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

adding a note

I've searched the help sections, but am struggling. I want to add a note to some text I have written. This is subsidiary backup, but not a published reference, so it seems like a note would be a good way to include the data. But although I can see notes on pages, I can't find how to create one. Can anyone help please?

Simon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stagememories (talk • contribs) 10:59, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

This will tell you how to do what I think you want to do. -- Hoary (talk) 12:23, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Stagememories: information in a article that is not cited to reliable sources can be challenged or just deleted at any time by any editor, whether it is in the main text or in a note. -Arch dude (talk) 15:15, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

I added the reference as a citation not a note, as the process to add a note was just too complex for me. I don't understand why Wikipedia has to make it so much harder than just adding a citation or link? For the record, I had stated that a designer (W. Heath Robinson) had created a range of illustrations for use on pottery "c.1928". To back this up, I gave a number found on the actual pots, which implies that the design was registered in 1928, and therefore that the range was designed in the same year. I considered that the general reader wouldn't need that level of detail, and that the citation didn't really fit into the same category as a published book or article, as pottery pieces can't be referenced in the same way. This is why a note would have been ideal. But I gave up, and referenced it as a citation anyway. Sure, if someone wants to challenge it that's up to them, but Wikipedia doesn't seem to understand that not all citations are straightforward. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stagememories (talk • contribs) 16:32, 27 September 2020 (UTC) --Stagememories (talk) 16:32, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Stagememories: we tend to accept photographs as being legitimate. If you still have access to these pieces, you can take photos of those marks. If the pieces are on display in a location that is accessible to the general public, It constitutes a "reliable source" even without such a photograph. It really is a citation, not a note. We do not require that citations use our templates. Templates are a convieninece, and when they get in your way, you should just fall back on our general principle of verifiability (i.e., give enough info for someone else to verify your information) which seems to me to be what you are doing here. Please note that my original hostile-sounding response was a generic response to your fairly generic statement that you were referencing a "non-published reference", which is basically a no-no: see WP:OR. I'll take a look at the article and see if I can help: a note attached to the ref may be the way handle this. -Arch dude (talk) 17:53, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I do have a photo of the backstamp on the piece, which could be uploaded, but think it would be a bit too much detail for the page. After all, while the jug I have pictured on the page is pretty, and relevant to the subject of the page, an image of a backstamp would be a littl dull for the general reader, I feel. Of course, if there was a way up uploading the image as a reference, not on the page... I quite understand that you were only sounding a little hostile for very good reasons. Not a problem. --Stagememories (talk) 18:02, 27 September 2020 (UTC)Simon

Someone I don't know tried logging into my MediaWiki account

I got an email this morning, saying that someone had requested a reset of my MediaWiki password. I never requested this password reset; in fact, I'm not sure that I even know what MediaWiki is. Can someone explain the difference between MediaWiki and WikiMedia? Of the two, I'm only familiar with WikiMedia. Apparently, I do have an account on MediaWiki, but according to the contributions page, I've never used it before. I am very active on Wikipedia though.

The email that I received specified the IP address of whoever requested the password reset, and WP:TRACEIP says that whois.arin.net can be used to determine the owner of an IP account, but I'm not very tech savvy and am not really sure how to use WHOIS. When I go to that website and enter the IP address of whoever requested my password reset, I'm shown five boxes. The first box is titled "Network", the second box is titled "Organization", and the next three boxes are all titled "Point of Contact". All of the boxes except for the one titled "Network" list a location. Not all of these locations are the same. The location listed under "Organization" is also listed under the last "Point of Contact" box, while a separate location is listed under the first and second "Point of Contact" boxes. These two different locations are in different states. Both of the locations for the IP address that I looked up are in the USA, as am I.

Can someone help me better understand what's going on? Why are there two different locations listed across four different boxes for that IP address on WHOIS? And should I be concerned that someone tried to access my MediaWiki account? No one that I know would have had a reason to log into any of my Wiki accounts. --Jpcase (talk) 14:22, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

MediaWiki is the software that runs Wikipedia. You've probably opened a help page there regarding wiki-syntax or something, and all the Wikimedia-run sites share the same log-in session. You can safely disregard these emails, they usually appear after you've had a run-in with some long-term abuser who is trying to annoy you, but there is no danger of them gaining access to your account. – Thjarkur (talk) 14:51, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

If you are worried, you can request two-factor authentication to further protect your account. Ed talk! 14:56, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ed6767: Two-factor authentication is only vaguely familiar to me as a concept, but it seems like lots of other websites are encouraging everyone to use it, so do you know why Wikipedia only grants it on a case-by-case basis? -Jpcase (talk) 00:08, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jpcase: your WHOIS data is simply the response of a WHOIS server. See WHOIS to help decipher the response. -Arch dude (talk) 15:12, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm not very good with computers, and there's a lot of technical information in the WHOIS article that would take a long time for me to grasp.

Is someone able to either explain very quickly the difference between the two different locations listed by WHOIS for the IP account or point me to the specific section of the WHOIS article that explains this? I can't think of any nefarious reason for why someone would have tried to hack me, but I'm still curious whether or not the password-change request came from an area where I actually know people or if it simply originated with some random stranger. Thanks! --Jpcase (talk) 16:19, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jpcase:Please provide the IP address. Otherwise, this is just too abstract. You have no moral obligation to that IP user to keep it private. -Arch dude (talk) 16:23, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

There's no need to share the IP address with us (since it might be yourself!). But you can go to https://whatismyipaddress.com/ip-lookup, it will give you the city. I think you've been looking at the information of the ISP company who owns the IP, rather than geolocation. – Thjarkur (talk) 16:44, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Pjarkur: Ah, thanks! I just double-checked the results on WHOIS and realized that I made a mistake - at first, I thought that there were two different locations listed across the four boxes, but now I'm realizing that there are actually four different locations listed. The first box doesn't list any location, but each of the subsequent four boxes lists its own unique city.

The reason I got confused is because the four cities are evenly divided between two different states. The city listed on whatismyipaddress.com is a completely different fifth city but appears to be very close to the city that WHOIS lists under the "Organization" box. Two of the cities listed on WHOIS are close-ish to me, but the city listed on whatismyipaddress.com is in a completely different part of the country from me. So if the whatismyipaddress.com IP address is the location of the person who tried accessing my account, then there's essentially zero chance that it's anyone I've ever met. Would there still be any benefit to providing the IP address here, or should I just ignore all of this going forward? --Jpcase (talk) 17:18, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Just ignore, there's very little one can do about this. – Thjarkur (talk) 17:37, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Pjarkur: @Arch dude: I just noticed a notification from two hours ago showing that someone thanked me for creating this conversation. Which wouldn't be particularly strange, except that when I click on the profile name for the person who thanked me, I'm shown that the profile doesn't actually exist. So as far as I can tell, it seems like someone created a Wikipedia account specifically to "thank" me for my edit and then immediately deleted their account. Is there anything I can do about this? I have to wonder whether the person who clicked the "thank" button for my edit is the same person who tried accessing my account this morning. --Jpcase (talk) 19:30, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

​(The account in question in Willy Nice, the account still exists but hasn't made any edits). Yes it's just someone trolling you, nothing to do but ignore. – Thjarkur (talk) 21:21, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Þjarkur: Yes, that's the account name. How did you know? I didn't realize it was possible to see another person's notifications on Wikipedia. I realize that I should probably just ignore this, but I'm very confused about who this person is. I don't know anyone who would have any reason to troll me. --Jpcase (talk) 22:34, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

How can I add about myself and about my whole family. For Example like : Birla Family (Already exist in Wiki). I wanna add similar contents for my Family i.e Sharma Family — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohitsharma143 (talk • contribs) 15:37, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

How do you search a video by uploading it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KESHA69 (talk • contribs) 19:36, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry,

How do I create my own website? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KESHA69 (talk • contribs) 19:38, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

KESHA69 This is not a general help desk. 331dot (talk) 19:47, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Do you mean a Wikipedia user page? I see you haven't created one of those yet. If you want to do so, start here:

Creating a page

I wish to know how to create a page

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fireflywash (talk • contribs) 05:46, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi team, I have a small query. My client written an article on Wikipedia. But still not approved since 2 months. But I see, same article about Director/Producer is published on Wikitia.

Will it be shown to wikipedia also? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaganmehra93 (talk • contribs) 08:36, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

As you were told on your user talk page, if you are editing on behalf of a client you need to make the mandatory declaration as laid out at

 Courtesy link: Suchetgarh Jn. railway station

There is no such station in Pakistan. It was a station in JK India. Now abandoned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramakant Wadkar (talk • contribs) 09:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Anyone can help me with guiding me, how to edit deadlink? thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruhulksagor (talk • contribs) 09:31, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

For guidance on how to dead with a dead link, read

I note that there is an option for Special:Contributions to Only show edits that are latest revisions. This only shows the edits that are marked (current).

Is there any way to reverse this, that is, for pages I have contributed to, only show edits later than my most recent revision?

I would like an easy way to spot if somebody has edited an article or responded to a talk page I have contributed to (without having to watch all those pages).

Thanks CapnZapp (talk) 11:05, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm looking for a block of code that fetches the last revision date and time of a WP page and displays them in Nepal Standard Time (NPT) in the format d mmm T NPT. I want to bypass the need to manually update the "Last updated:" part in Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Nepal medical cases by province and district. Best, Inimesh (talk) 11:34, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

​Would it be sufficient to just mark the day when the template was last edited? If so you can use {{REVISIONYEAR}}/{{REVISIONMONTH}}/{{REVISIONDAY2}} → "2020/09/30" – Thjarkur (talk) 13:32, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Following up on that:

{{time|npt|df-cust=j M g:i A|hide-refresh=yes|_TEST_TIME_={{REVISIONTIMESTAMP}}}} → 30 Sep 7:33 AM [[Nepal Time|NPT]] → 30 Sep 7:33 AM NPT

|df-cust= accepts the formatting codes used by {{#time:}}.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:47, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks, Þjarkur and Trappist the monk! Inimesh (talk) 15:13, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

I think that this experiment is a fail. Whenever someone edits COVID-19 pandemic in Nepal § Notes (as a whole-page edit or as a section edit), {{COVID-19 pandemic data/Nepal medical cases by province and district}} will be re-rendered. Re-rendering apparently uses the article's new revision timestamp. I confirmed this by making this edit. The date displayed in the template agrees with the time of my edit:

{{time|npt|df-cust=j M g:i A|hide-refresh=yes|_TEST_TIME_=2020-09-28T15:46:00}} → 28 Sep 9:31 PM NPT

You might want to take this question to WP:VPT.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:52, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@

Hi

I'm working on the article for the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory (a far-right, antisemitic conspiracy theory which claims Western Marxism as the basis of continuing academic and intellectual efforts to subvert Western culture) and I'm compiling a list of organisations which promote or spread the conspiracy. Both InfoWars and Daily Mail have used the term and promoted the conspiracy however I can't use their articles as references because they are blocked. What is the policy for referencing this kind of thing? I've actually found a number of sources which Wikipedia considers reliable which also spread the conspiracy e.g The Times and the The Spectator but I'm unsure if I should link to these directly.

Thanks very much

John Cummings (talk) 11:49, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

John Cummings, you must find reliable sources that name these newspapers as sources that spread the conspiracy theory. So don't cite the things themselves, cite a reliable source that says it about them. Popcornfud (talk) 11:53, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Citing those sites' own articles to support claims that they advocate the conspiracy theory would be primary-source based original research. What you really need are independent sources saying that those sites spread it (e.g. a NYT piece or Routledge book saying "InfoWars spreads this conspiracy theory"). Ian.thomson (talk) 11:55, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @Ian.thomson: and @Popcornfud:, could you point to the policy page for this? I'm confused because it doesn't seem like original research because they use the term outright e.g Toby Young wrote an article called "Are the cultural Marxists in Retreat, or Lying Low?". Is it true that I should find sources that reference them spreading this conspiracy even for sources that Wikipedia accepts as sources, or only for those that don't? John Cummings (talk) 12:01, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

WP:PRIMARY, but that is somewhat contextual. There's also the argument (not exactly policy but commonly accepted consensus in many other cases) that we would need an independent source to establish that the (say) InfoWars article wasn't an anomaly or that it was noteworthy. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:06, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

John Cummings, if a source says something like (to make up an example) "Cultural marxists are the biggest threat to the world right now", that doesn't show that the source is wrong, or that cultural marxism is a conspiracy theory. You need other sources to say that. Does that make sense? Popcornfud (talk) 15:17, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Popcornfud thanks, the fact that its a conspiracy theory is clearly established in the article already, all I want to do is provide references to show that InfoWars, the Daily Mail, The Times, Spectator etc are spreading it. John Cummings (talk) 08:11, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

John Cummings, yeah, to do that you will need secondary sources saying that the Daily Mail etc are spreading the conspiracy theory. Otherwise it's WP:SYNTH. Popcornfud (talk) 09:34, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Popcornfud I think I'm not explaining myself very well, let me try to ask it another way... What are the rules for quoting text from a source that is not considered a reliable source? John Cummings (talk) 09:43, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

John Cummings, why would you want to do that? It's not a reliable source.

I think I understand what you're trying to do, anyway. It's like this, right?

Source A, reliable: "Cultural marxism is a conspiracy theory."

Source B, unreliable: "Cultural marxists are killing the world!"

You want to cite source A to show that cultural marxism is a conspiracy theory. Then, this established, you want to quote source B, and say: "Look! Source B is spreading the conspiracy theory."

If that is what you want to do... then you can't do that. You are applying source A to source B and creating a new claim, which is: "Source B is spreading the conspiracy theory." This is WP:SYNTHESIS.

Instead of using source B, you need a different source saying that source B is spreading the conspiracy theory. Popcornfud (talk) 09:50, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@Popcornfud: ok, I understand what you're saying, thanks for taking the time to explain it. Where I do not follow the logic you've used is that I'm creating a 'new claim' by quoting someone's writing who very clearly promotes the conspiracy e.g an article called "Are the cultural Marxists in Retreat, or Lying Low?", they're literally saying the name of the conspiracy in the title of article. John Cummings (talk) 10:52, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

John Cummings, it comes down to a question of original research.

You can't just look at Source B and say "Look! They're spreading a conspiracy theory." That's your own personal analysis. That doesn't cut it. You need a secondary source to say that about the first source. If Source A doesn't say anything about Source B, then you need to find a source that does. Popcornfud (talk) 11:03, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the explanation @Popcornfud:, I think where I was confused is on Wikipedia:Deprecated sources it says 'Deprecated sources can normally be cited as a primary source when the source itself is the subject of discussion, such as to describe its own viewpoint.'. John Cummings (talk) 14:17, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

John Cummings, yeah, it's not straightforward. You could potentially cite the Daily Mail if you wanted to show an example of the Daily Mail's position on cultural marxism, but you couldn't use that to show that the Daily Mail was propagating a conspiracy theory. In all honesty, your safest bet is to find other, reliable sources that describe these sources. Popcornfud (talk) 14:39, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, could I request for admin? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BossDragon64934 (talk • contribs) 15:53, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

BossDragon64934, hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Unfortunately, you will probably not be nominated for adminship as you have made only 19 edits. However, to answer your question: see WP:Requests for adminship/Nominate Heart ^(talk) 15:57, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)BossDragon64934 You have made 19 edits ever to English Wikipedia, so you are not experienced enough. Most admins will have at least a couple of years of solid editing and at least 5,000 good edits. Note that you don't need admin permissions to do most things such as create and edit content on Wikipedia. WP:RFA is the process for it, but I advise that if you do try, you don't have a chance right now of being successful. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:59, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)BossDragon64934, I have to agree with HeartGlow30797, you are not yet ready to become an admin. That said, there are a lot of ways to contribute to Wikipedia without being an admin, and contributing in those areas will help you learn the ropes and the rules and policies that admins are expected to implement, and in a year or two you may be able to demonstrate that you are ready. I recommend looking at the task center and maintenance areas for things you would enjoy doing.  Get your feet wet doing copyediting, fixing typos and grammatical errors. Then move on to referencing.  Category:Articles lacking sources is a good place to start; look for things in your local library or on the internet that verify the information in articles that are lacking sources and add citations to the articles. At some point you will naturally migrate into deletion discussions; especially if you come across an article that is a hoax or totally unverifiable. By participating in activities like adding sources and deletion discussions, you will gain an understanding of notability and sourcing and how they play together. At that point you'll be ready to try writing an article. Perhaps you'll find a red link in an article you're copyediting and be curious about the topic, or maybe a source you're using for one thing will have information about something we don't have an article about, or maybe you'll want to take a look at requested articles and see if there's something you either know something about or are curious about and want to write. Research and write the article. Nominate it for the did you know section on the front page. Work to develop it to Good or featured status. Then do it again. Do a few articles. Keep an eye out for vandalism and fight it. Maybe get into new page patrol (especially once you've written a couple articles yourself). Do NPP for a while, and then you'll be ready. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:11, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Can you fix the error i made about Ron Roenicke being Fired please. 68.102.42.216 (talk) 16:47, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Fixed There were a number of problems with both cites in that section, not the least of which was that neither link pointed to the article intended. There were a number of typos in parameter names for the cite templates as well. I think I found and cited the correct sources. —[

Hi, So my attempts at using the translator from wiki failed miserably in the citations area. My atempts at searching to find a guide or further info simply found me really random stuff. The named reference inline citations dissapear in the translated text (as the linked terminology works, I find this odd). It also shows up with tons of errors, not a single citations was correct. Is the best practise to sinmply go through and re-enter citations by hand into the new language? I am thinking there I am not the only one with this problem and that there must be a fix.... I hope a non-manual one. Thanks for the help BF (talk) 17:03, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Thebaconfairy: Can you provide some details, like which translator, which source and target articles, etc.? Different Wikipedias have different ways of doing citations, not all of which are necessarily supported on all others. I can imagine (though don't know) that some translators don't know how to deal with cites well or at all. The talk or other support page of the translator itself is probably a better place to start, though. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 17:26, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

My Spanish to English & English to French both failed. Either there has to be a go-to method or there isn't, I would be very surprised if this was a special circumstance. --BF (talk) 17:50, 28 September 2020 (UTC) BF (talk) 17:50, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Thebaconfairy: Again, please provide both of: 1. a link to the translator you are using; 2. a link to a Spanish source article that failed to translate to English. Have you tried asking at the translator's talk page (if a wikipedia tool) or other support page, where you are more likely to find people familiar with the translation tool? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:42, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

The page is Draft:María Ortega Gálvez, which was translated from es:María Ortega. The problems are apparently with the Spanish-language cite parameters, which can be seen in this version. I don't know anything about the translation tool used. kennethaw88 • talk 22:22, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

It looks like the red error messages provide accurate suggestions for English names of the Spanish parms. You just have to search/replace \|\s*título\s*= with |title= using the magnifying glass icon on the advanced editing toolbar at the top of the edit window and check "Treat search string as a regular expression". Do that for each of the parameters as needed. As to whether the translation tool can do it for you, I have no way of knowing without knowing what tool it is, but I have no special knowledge of them that can't be gained from looking at their docs or asking at their support pages. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:03, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Note, too, that the date values in cites are rather fussy. The first letter of the month name must be capitalized. (MOS:DATE) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:07, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! I've asked for further info on the translations talk page—I hadn't realized that would be a good place to ask. Your workarounds were helpful, but I am hoping there might be something in the program itself.BF (talk) 09:16, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

You still haven't told us what program you were using, so we can't help you there.

Hi, My article on The Word Balloon podcast was not approved because it said I did not have enough reliable sources. Most of the information about the background of the podcast came from an interview/discussion I had with the creator/host of the podcast. How can I site this so that my article gets approved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maddy DalPonte (talk • contribs) 20:27, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Interviews are not useful for proving notability as Wikipedia defines it, full stop. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 20:34, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Maddy DalPonte: - the article Draft:Word Balloon Podcast appears to be sourced primarily with a blog, itself not a reliable source. Without broader coverage, it will be hard to show that the podcast is notable. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.) TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:37, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Timtempleton When you say it's primarily sourced to a blog, do you mean Bleeding Cool? Wikiproject Video games and Wikiproject Comics both consider it reliable. Now, I would agree that it needs broader coverage than just one publication in order to be notable, but I don't think Bleeding Cool is unreliable, just not enough by itself. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 21:07, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

ONUnicorn good to know - I didn't check to see that it also has an article - I was going on first impressions of the layout, and the fact that it was pretty much the only site used as a source. So I stand corrected on reliability, although few blogs meet that threshold. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:22, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Such an interview is of no help in establishing notability. The reliable sources need to be independent of the subject. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:36, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Maddy DalPonte In addition to what everyone above said about establishing notability (and arguably more important than notability) an unpublished interview is not something that is verifiable by other people. If you talked to someone and wrote a Wikipedia article based on your conversation with them, there is no way for anyone else to verify that that conversation took place as described. Even if the interview is published, the fact that you conducted the interview constitutes original research, which is not allowed. Now, if someone else did an interview and published it in a reliable publication, it would then be able to be cited for facts, but it still wouldn't contribute to notability, because notability requires sources that are produced independently of the article subject. So, if you find a published interview, you can cite it for facts but in order for the article to remain on Wikipedia there also has to be multiple sources besides the interview which satisfy the requirements imposed by the notability guidelines. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:55, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

September 29

On this date 1899, John Albert Burr invented one of the first rotary-blade lawn mowers.

 On this date 1899, John Albert Burr invented one of the first rotary-blade lawn mowers.

This Black inventors Patent number is #624,749.

Reference: Created Equal The Lives and Ideas of Black American Innovators By James Michael Brodie Copyright 1993, by Bill Adler Books, Inc. William Morrow and Co. Inc., New York ISBN 0-688-11536-5 https://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?PageNum=0&docid=00624749 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:1213:C142:BC57:6227:EBA2:D7DE (talk) 02:18, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Hey there! Welcome to Wikipedia! Do you have a question on how to use/edit Wikipedia? Heart ^(talk) 02:25, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Based on a quick Google and Google Books search, I believe that John Albert Burr is probably notable and eligible for a Wikipedia biography. He already has one sentence of coverage in the history section of Lawn mower. Please consider registering an optional Wikipedia account and read Your first article. If you decide to try to write this article, I will assist you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:38, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

And I'll be glad to help. --

Dear Wikipedia, How/where do I change my user name?

User:Darionapoliguitar

Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darionapoliguitar (talk • contribs) 08:40, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

You may change your username by making a request at

dear Wikipedia HelpDesk,

my mail to You is overdue . personally , i am an adamant digital neanderthal . i work in Film &TV and i am lucky & grateful to have wonderful people in my life who are looking after my digital presence which we keep to a minimum . please believe you me ,they have tried now for a very looong time to reach out , contact you and get the following issue sorted out.it's about my web-profile on Wikipedia , particularly my photo !

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

it's inaccurate , outdated and belongs to the past . plus it is per se a very unfortunate picture , since it was taken randomly , at some night event . it has little to do with who i am today and how i look today . it doesn't really represent me.although this might be also my personal sensitivity , my lovely people failed in their quest via you to have this image changed/amended/updated and i am making now an effort to contact you now directly since it is about Me and my personal right.

i have a photo where i own the rights to and can easily get a confirmation from friend & photographer Benedict Frank.

ideally , i would like this photo to be used for All wikipedia sites/ languages because on the German version , there's again a photo which i can live with , especially as an adamant UNICEF Ambassador but would also prefer to use this Benedict Frank photo .

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatole_Taubman

please kindly help me and let me know how to proceed and how i can get this Benedict Frank photo to you.

thank You dearly ever so much !

heartily truly and with radiant health , Anatole — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toli Taubman (talk • contribs) 13:58, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi

I've updated your photo on the English article to the same as the German one while someone else helps you with adding a new photo

Thanks

Hi Wikipedia, Considering how social media is being manipulated/used for nefarious purpose, I'm thinking YOU could design a platform where people can socialize without the whole thing devolving into an Orwellian nightmare. You could ask for contributions from users, and avoid advertising, which seems to be used for mind control, etc... I don't know what parameters you'd want to put onto it, but you are smarter than me and could design it so that the community is available for people to use it in a spirit of sharing and discussion. It's just an idea. I think people are ready for an alternative to Facebook/Twitter. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmyKathleenRyan (talk • contribs) 15:56, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

While I'm sure people are ready for an alternative to Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, Instagram, Telegraph, and whatever else is out there of that ilk, such a project would be beyond the scope of the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation's mission to provide free educational content to the world. ~

I am trying to correct a page on WIKIPEDIA, most exactly DANIELA NICOLETA SOFRONIE and my edit is not accepted even if it is the correct version of the info presented there! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.86.71.26 (talk) 17:43, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Looks like you changed the spelling of the last name with no explanation. Start a discussion on the article's talk page if you have reasons for this that are supported by reliable sources.

I notice that the gadget/gadget definition appears on almost every project, however one thing puzzles me. Why is this namespace used on every project but no pages have this namespace? See ru:Special:Random/gadget, fr:Special:Random/gadget, and es:Special:Random/gadget. Note that Gadget:Invention, Travel, & Adventure on the English Wikipedia is NOT an actual gadget, it is a redirect as this title should not be used for an article. Gioguch (talk) 17:54, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@Gioguch: This namespace was originally configured to contain the gadgets for the project, so they can be edited by anyone, as Pages in The MediaWiki:-Namespace cannot be edited by anyone that isn't an interface admin. It isn't heavely used, howewer, In theory you could create a gadget there. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:36, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I am trying to publish the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&oldid=970501180

Someone was helping me with this page and moved it and now I can not find it to publish it. Thank you for your time. ALLBN (talk) 19:03, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

I am the founding editor of a scholarly journal covered under the Wikipedia Academic Journals Project. I want to make some purely factual corrections to the article and to add a bit of factual detail (including correcting an inconsistency between the current editor's name in the sidebar of the article and in its stubby text). I founded the journal in 1979 and passed on the editorship in 1995, but I remain on its editorial board. I believe my edits would have value, are purely factual (e.g., adding the names of the first two editors of the journal and the dates of their succession), and would not in any way undermine trust in the integrity of Wikipedia. I hope I can publish edits to the article with disclosure as a connected contributor, but I do not understand how or where I am supposed to make the disclosure. Please advise. THANKS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grdfoge (talk • contribs) 20:34, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

You would request the changes on the talk page of the article, citing published, reliable sources for the changes, for them to be done by an editor without your COI. In the same post (please remember to sign) you would state the nature of your COI. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:15, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@

Have you noticed russian bots editing middle eastern content? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:16A2:613A:6859:C9EF:5952:A393:5A4C (talk) 21:56, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

No, have you?

Color coded table

Category	Chinese	Count
Temple	寺廟	25
Government	衙署	12
Fort	關塞	12
Residence	宅第	11
City wall	城郭	8
Industrial	產業	5
Tomb	墓葬	5
Lighthouse	燈塔	4
Train station	車站	3
School	書院	3
Plaque	碑碣	2
Paifang	牌坊	1
Church	教堂	1
Bridge	橋樑	1
Ancestral shrine	祠堂	1
Other	其他	12

I've recently created List of national monuments of Taiwan, and I'm thinking of color coding the categories, shown collapsed on the right, that I think will bring more contrast. Would this be helpful, or is this unnecessary? Is there some accessibility guideline that I'm not aware of? Any feedback on these colors, or the list article in general, is welcome. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 22:41, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Ganbaruby, have you consulted MOS:COLOUR? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:55, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Yup, though most of that seems to be about the contrast between color and text, instead of between different colors. None of the cells are links, colors aren’t essential, and they all should be WCAG AAA. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 23:13, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@

There is a page on Wikipedia containing info about the National socialist movement. It states their political orientation is “far-right”.

Socialism for starters is not on the right side of the spectrum, it’s a leftist ideology. The right or Republican Party was formed in opposition to the Democratic Party and slavery. The Republican Party was also founded in the north- Ripon, Wisconsin to be exact, what side did they fight in the civil war? The right or Republicans support capitalism not socialism.

This claim, that the National Socialist Movement is far-right or right in any way is wrong and mis-information. Totalitarian government is large government- another leftist ideology, the exact definition of it.

The claim in that article is completely wrong and goes against everything Wikipedia stands for and represents. The article needs to be corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.144.145.75 (talk) 00:05, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

The right has always been about conservatism, and the left liberalism, since the days of the French Republic (indeed, the terms "left-wing" and "right-wing" come from where the liberals and conservatives sat while in legislative sessions - liberals to the left side of the chamber, and conservatives to the right). "Big government" can apply equally to either wing, especially outside of North America. (Also, fascism - such as espoused by a rather infamous National Socialist party - is conservatism taken to its illogical extreme.) —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 00:21, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Depending on which page you are posting about, you might find that this has been discussed already at the article talk page, which is where you should make suggestions to improve the article. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 00:26, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

(ec) In any case, this is the general help desk. If you have suggestions for improving an article, the place to find people that actually work on that article, and who are interested in and knowledgeable about the subject, is the article's individual talk page. There are several articles listed at

I want to know how to Add something to the People Murdered in Washington State, my Sister was Murdered in Kelso,Wa. I want to add her to the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AllenMom14 (talk • contribs) 01:44, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

AllenMom14, she must be WP:NOTABLE in order to be added. Second of all, you are referencing a category, which requires a page to be created and added to it. Happy editing! Heart ^(talk) 01:48, 30 September 2020 (UTC)