June 11[edit]

Add “age guide” field in game infobox[edit]

While trying to find age guide for video games as a parent, I noted that the age info is not an available field in the Game infobox. The idea is to add the industry guide, e.g., ESRB ratings, in the infobox. Is it possible? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rynh (talk • contribs)

@Rynh: Assuming this is about {{Infobox video game}}, you can go to the template's talk page and propose the addition of a new parameter. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:44, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Exactly what I’m looking for, thank you Tenryuu for the guidance.--72.140.8.237 (talk) 13:41, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Looking at the talk history on that page, it looks like they had age ratings, but removed them many years ago. An issue seemed to be what countries to include (as different countries have different age ratings): Template talk:Infobox video game/Archive 12#Age Ratings. That short discussion is 8 years old though, so probably still worth asking there. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:46, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Right… And I would think we should list all available, rather than leave blank. Thank you Joseph2302. --Rynh (talk) 13:52, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

There's also the matter that the ESRB is not the only rating board out there. It may shock you to learn this, OP, but we have readers that aren't based in North America, and they'd (more like than not) want to be looking for the equivalents for their home country, be that PEGI, CERO, OFLC or what have you. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 21:32, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Splitting headache[edit]

I've split List of celebrities with advanced degrees into List of artists and entertainers with advanced degrees and List of athletes with advanced degrees per the discussion/hemi-semi-demi-consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of celebrities with advanced degrees. The problem is how do I retain the edit history (and the related question, what happens to the original article)? Clarityfiend (talk) 03:55, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Clarityfiend: From what I remember from splitting COVID-19 articles almost a year ago, the original page is renamed into one of the two new articles via a move, and the other article is created under a different title, with attribution being provided to the original title. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:46, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Clarityfiend: See Wikipedia:Splitting#How_to_properly_split_an_article. Your edit summary for the new article will contain a link to the article the content came from. Perhaps the original could be become a dab page that lists the two new articles as choices. RudolfRed (talk) 05:50, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

I did link to the original list in the initial edit comments for the new lists, so maybe the best thing to do is just redirect to the artists and entertainers list, as they are more likely to be considered celebrities than sports figures? Clarityfiend (talk) 06:03, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

My Article[edit]

Hi guys, The Wikipedia page I created is not published. It's been more than 2 weeks since I published. May I know when will my article gets published

You didn't publish anything. You created an article in your sandbox only - User talk:Shabarish Gudisi/sandbox. You should probably move it over to WP:Drafts and submit it for review. FYI, the wait time there is a lot longer than two weeks. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:06, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

But, Shabarish Gudisi, it will be a waste of everybody's time if you submit it for review unless you sort out the references. Please note that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. Judging from the titles and URLs it looks to me as if only one of your sources is either reliably published or independent of the subject - and that one (Times of India) does not mention Akella even once. Please read your first article, WP:BLP, and WP:CITE, and look for the sources that are required to establish notability. If you can find some, then you will probably need to throw away what you have written, forget everything you know about Akella, and start again, writing about only what you find in the independent sources. (If you can't find the sources, then you'll know not to spend any more time on a pointless exercise). --ColinFine (talk) 14:04, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Paintings (no header or question)[edit]

Paintings — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2400:adc1:125:6a00:ddfc:251e:7802:c72e (talk • contribs) 2021-06-11T07:37:16 (UTC)

Author with many pseudonyms[edit]

How to {{cite book}} for author , has www.worldcat.org/identities/lccn-no, but no wikipedia article, yet with many pseudonyms for the same book, for different editions, she also wrote a book about Benito Mussolini...

.... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 07:11, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

There's no obvious right or wrong answer: I would just cite the author credited in the copy you consulted, 0mtwb9gd5wx. --ColinFine (talk) 14:10, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Table information on a page[edit]

Hi,

The information on pages for specific churches list "Administration" details in a table on the right. See example on the following page, St Mary's Church, Hemel Hempstead

I was curious is there is a total table with all the information included into for all parishes, deanery, diocese and provences in the church of england that this information is drawn from or is it in the code on each single page?

Cheers,

Devin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deving1334 (talk • contribs) 08:27, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Deving1334 in St Mary's Church, Hemel Hempstead the parishe, deanery, diocese and province is in the code on the page. Click edit source to check. TSventon (talk) 10:09, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Problem with IABot[edit]

I've run this mny times, but when I ran it today on Storer College, I got a red box saying I was blocked from editing. Why, and what to do about it?

I saved a screen shot, you can see it here.

deisenbe (talk) 10:31, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T274050

Deisenbe, this is something of a known issue - see phab:T274050. You are not blocked, it's a bug in IABot. firefly ( t · c ) 10:33, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Company article[edit]

Hey guys,

I've got a task to create a page for our company as many of our competitors has their own pages on Wikipedia. Would you be able to guide me through the process, please?— Preceding unsigned comment added by KaneHa (talk • contribs)

KaneHa I would suggest that you not attempt to create an article(not just a "page") about your company. Creating a new article is hard for editors unaffiliated with the subject, as you have a severe conflict of interest and are a paid editor(which you must formally disclose per the Terms of Use, click for instructions), it is even harder for you to write one. To merit an article, your company must recieve significant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to provide it(no press releases or annoucements of routine business activities), showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. It is usually very hard for company representatives to summarize only what others say about the company; Wikipedia is not interested in what a company wants to say about itself, because you can do that on your own website. That your competitors merit articles does not automatically mean that your company does too, please read other stuff exists. It depends on the sources. It could also be that your competitors do not merit articles, but that those have not been addressed by volunteer editors.

If your company truly merits a Wikipedia article, independent editors will take note of it in independent sources and choose on their own to write about it. Trying to force the issue doesn't usually work. Also note that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 12:10, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Note also, KaneHa, that not one of your competitors "have their own pages". Wikipedia may have articles about them, but the articles do not belong to them, are not for their benefit, and do not necessarily say what they want them to say. --ColinFine (talk) 14:14, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

And have not necessarily been written by them in the first place, but probably by completely unconnected and uninvolved editors who simply don't care about the OP's task to write a Wikipedia article. JIP | Talk 14:23, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

ARTICLE[edit]

Hi, I am new to Wikipedia, I am trying to create an article on a close person to me but for some reason it does the let me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ninjagokfc (talk • contribs)

@Ninjagokfc: New users can't directly create articles in mainspace. You should read Your first article, and understand that the subject you want to write an article about must be notable by Wikipedia's standards. Your closeness with the person could be considered a conflict of interest, and might need to be declared. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:38, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

I committed (perhaps) a mistake. How to solve this?[edit]

Hi. I created 2021 Ghana gay arrests but I checked and there's ReleaseThe21 which is shorter and has some problems about the same issue. What should be done? I beg pardon for not checking thoroughly enough to see that it already existed in some sort of way, though very difficult to find. Hope to be helped. Thanks. CoryGlee (talk) 15:52, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Merge the two articles. I will put merging templates on them. Sungodtemple (talk) 16:00, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Sungodtemple, Hi and thank you my friend, though, I'm afraid that my article, which does not use bare URLs and is more thorough on background will get lost into the other article. How does the merge in this case work? Regards. CoryGlee (talk) 16:09, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

CoryGlee A merge is done by someone reading both articles, and adding information that is in one but not the other to the destination article, then redirecting the extra article to the merged article and putting templates on the talk pages for attribution purposes. They should ensure consistent citation styles and such at that time. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:29, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Oh nice then thx. CoryGlee (talk) 16:39, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

getting verified.[edit]

I have my cell phone listed as my contact source However when customers want to buy something I an't get the code on my phone. I went on to verify it and when i put the number in it said this phone had too many user sources. Its the only phonei have. what am i suppose to do.the want me to give them another phone number. I only have one cell phone. I am totaly confused. There seems to be nobody to call about this matter. I have lost several sales because my number cant be verified.

This is the Wikipedia help desk. We answer questions about how to use Wikipedia. We can't help you with your cell phone; you may wish to contact your cell phone provider. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge[edit]

Is ref number 28 viable - it's not the Daily Mail. Thanks for help please remove if not OK.

Please clarify your question. The link in ref 28 goes to the Daily Mail, but it also says it is from "Mail on Sunday". Is it supposed to link somewhere else? Mail on Sunday is also not reliable, per WP:MAILONSUNDAY. RudolfRed (talk) 23:55, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Srbernadette: I undid your edit that added that source. You can fix it yourself next time by going to page history and clicking the "undo" link for the edit you want to remove. RudolfRed (talk) 00:01, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

June 12[edit]

remove contributes from profile[edit]

is there any way to remove my contributes from my user profile, so that it doesn't show i was the one who contributed?

@Tanpug: If you are leaving Wikipedia, you can request to WP:VANISH which will obscure your edits. You only have one other edit from this account, though. RudolfRed (talk) 00:10, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Tanpug: Aside from the above method, there isn't; Wikipedia requires that all edits be attributable to someone (i.e., you). If, for example, you've inadvertently divulged personal information, you can contact Oversight in those cases. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:20, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Having trouble getting my article started[edit]

Hello, I'm trying to link most of the projects linked to my name attached so i can have my article published but i cant seem to find where to submit?

@Thardy1094: This is the only edit I see from your account (per Special:Contributions/Thardy1094). If you are working on a draft please link to it. RudolfRed (talk) 02:42, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed i dont know how any of this works but here is the link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Thardy1094/sandbox — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thardy1094 (talk • contribs) 06:20, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Thardy1094: (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.) I have added a submit button to your draft, see also Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft. IMDB is not considered a reliable source 06:33, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Thardy1094: I notice that your draft has been moved to Draft:Terrence Hardy Jr., and it has been submitted for review. There is a waiting period for reviews, and in the meantime you might like to fix some problems with the article so it has the best chance. There is a reference to IMDb right at the beginning before the text starts - that is pointless. Each reference should be placed just after the specific claim(s) it supports. Otherwise it is not clear why it is there.

Speaking of references, the article needs more in-depth coverage in reliable sources to show that the subject is really notable. IMDb does not count for that because people can write their own entries. The only other reference currently is a very fleeting mention in a cast list. To show that Hardy is notable, collect the very best references: the books that have been written about him, the in-depth articles devoted to him in major newspapers and magazines, etc. - then construct the article to summarize what those references say about him. Anything not sourced from such a reference should be removed.

Finally, please be clear that it is not "your article". If you have a connection to the subject (which one might suspect) then you should read Wikipedia:Autobiography to understand why this is strongly discouraged, and what actions you MUST take to manage the inherent Conflict of Interest.--Gronk Oz (talk) 07:47, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

About 'Edit Warring'[edit]

Hi. My English is not good, so if you can't understand, please ask me again below.

It's a warring about Bill Dickey. From his nickname, he's like a NYY fan. This person undid all my contributions. I wanted to have some talk with this guy, but he ignored me. I left a message on his user page, but I couldn't get a reply.

He gave me only one reason. "See other examples." That means 'See other examples of other NYY players I wrote.'. Does this make sense? He ignored me and secretly removed my contribution again four months later because he thought I was no longer active here. It's very unpleasant.

I don't want to see this man undo my contribution without any grounds. What should I do? 221.143.186.6 (talk) 10:13, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello 221, and welcome to Wikipedia. Per [1], it seems you and Yankees10 are (slowly) WP:EDITWARRING about something, which of you is right I have no idea. You reached out at User_talk:Yankees10#Please_don't_remove_my_contribution_for_no_reason. in February which was the right thing to do. Afaict you didn't get a response, I don't know why.

Since there has been no discussion at Talk:Bill Dickey since February, I suggest you start a new thread about this (what you want in the article and why) there. You can also ask for more input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball (something like There is a discussion about X at Y, your help is welcome.). If this doesn't lead to a solution, see WP:DR. Hope this helps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:49, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

• What is this garbage? You are literally removing info without any reasonable reason. Vandalism get reverted sorry-- Yankees10 17:41, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Yankees10: it's clear from the edit history that 221.143.186.6 is editing in good faith. This seems to be a difference of opinion about whether a coach's wins should be included in the infobox, or something like that. I don't know or actually much care who is right, but please do not call good faith edits "vandalism". That is entirely inappropriate, and not a good way to engage collaboratively. 221 did explain their reasoning in at least two places, on your talk page last February, as well as on the article talk page. You did not reply to the message on your talk page or participate in the discussion on the article talk page, so you should explain your position on the article talk page now, rather than dismissing their edits as "vandalism" and making false claims that they have provided no reason for their edits. CodeTalker (talk) 23:00, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Yankees10: I didn't expect "What is this garbage" to be the first word I could get from you. Anyway, thank you for your first response. I'm not garbage and I just want to know the logical reason why my edits should be removed. If my edits are ignored again for no reason next time again, I have no choice but to request on page WP:DR. 221.143.186.6 (talk) 01:39, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

And... I was an editor who contributed more than 18,000 times, about three years in another language, and I left the site 4 years ago because I hated that language community. What I'm trying to say is that I'm more of a person who knows Wikipedia's policies a little, not a Newbie who's edited only 20 times. I know what "Vandalism in Wikipedia" is, but I've never done it.

It doesn't matter if you call me garbage, but I know that the most important thing in Wikipedia is conversation, and I hope it's done in Wikipedia's right procedures rather than a wasteful editorial war. 221.143.186.6 (talk) 02:57, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Women in the Bible[edit]

Can someone who is good at archiving please fix so the archives are visible and searchable on the talkpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:26, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm trying to fix this, Gråbergs Gråa Sång. It looks like someone put in the wrong parameters, so the archives were numbered 4, 5, etc. This may take a bit to fix. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:05, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

This should now be  Done. Ping me if there are any further issues. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:21, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Extraordinary Writ That looks excellent, thank you! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:31, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Captcha[edit]

FYI – Heading added by Tenryuu.

My captcha is not clear

Is this a Captcha to access Wikipedia? This is otherwise the wrong place to ask this question. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:18, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. I'm afraid that anything to do with how the software works - such as the captcha - is unlikely to get much help here, as this desk is frequented by people who know about editing Wikipedia, not about the software. You could try posting at WP:VPT, which is a more appropriate place. It may make a difference what you are trying to do that elicits the Captcha: see Special:CAPTCHA. --ColinFine (talk) 17:20, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Christian Eriksen Wikipedia page - some obscene photos in it[edit]

Christian Eriksen Wikipedia page - some obscene photos in it

Unfortunately vandals have tried to circumvent the protection implemented on his page by adding obscene images at the source images hosted at Commons. Admins there have already been notified and a number of his images have already been protected. Kosack (talk) 18:26, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

About publishing an article[edit]

HI,

I published an article about my client https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mina_Luna_Vincent cam you please confirm and make it public. It has been 7 days already but nothing yet

Regards, Edris — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ediweb1 (talk • contribs)

@Ediweb1: You have not submitted the draft for review. I have added a button that allows you to do so, but please remember this is the English Wikipedia, and not the Spanish one. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:27, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Also Ediweb1, does your client have any notability? Disclose that you have a WP:COI on your user page. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 01:40, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Ediweb1. I'm afraid that you appear to have the (very common) misapprehension that Wikipedia is a place to tell the world about something: it is not. That is called promotion and is forbidden. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If Wikipedia ever has an article about your client, the article will not belong to you or your client, you will not control its content, and it will not necessarily say what you (or your client) would like it to say: see an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. As TigerScientist says, you must make a formal declaration of your status as a paid editor (this is part of the terms of use). Then you should carefully read about notability, and your first article, and look for independent sources about your client. If you can't find them, you should give up, as in that case, it is impossible to write an acceptable article about your client at present. If you can find the source, you then need to forget everything you know about your client and write an article - in English - based only on what those independent sources say. There is no deadline for getting the article reviewed, as most editors here are volunteers, and work on what they choose. If you wish to publish in Spanish, you need the Spanish Wikipedia, which may have different standard from the English one. --ColinFine (talk) 11:26, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

June 13[edit]

VAIL COLORADO GONDOLA ACCIDENT[edit]

This ropeway accident killed four people and injured eight. It occurred on March 4, 1979. The details were never put into the record. I have a copy of the complete story as published by the Chicago Tribune Press Service. The newsprint is hard to decipher, but I have a clear, printed transcript. I would be happy to mail it (USPS) to Wikipedia or the appropriate individual; someone who is interested and knows how the archives on Ropeway Accidents is managed. Just send the address to my email address or phone me at (redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.211.163.213 (talk)

I have removed your contact information for your own protection, as it is not wise to publish it in this public forum. In addition, unless the most sensitive personal information is involved, Wikipedia related matters are handled on Wikipedia, for openness and transparency. Regarding your request, you seem to misunderstand how Wikipedia works- there is no central location to mail stories to for others to write about; volunteer Wikipedia editors write about subjects that interest them and also meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability, summarizing what independent reliable sources state. In this case, we would need more than one source about this accident to write an article about it- and the best way to guarantee that an article is written is to do it yourself, though it is challenging. 331dot (talk) 06:53, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Ropeway accident in Vail which killed four people and injured eight fits this incident in 1976. Maproom (talk) 07:26, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and generally accidents aren't worthy of articles, unless it was a terrorist incident, someone famous was killed or possibly gross negligence was the cause (the last being the case with the recent Stresa–Mottarone cable car crash). There was a Sports Illustrated article nearly nine months after the March 1976 accident, but that's about it, and in my judgment, that's not enough to qualify as WP:SUSTAINED coverage. At best, I could see it being included in a List of gondola accidents, if that were created. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:32, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

"Unless [...] someone famous was killed": Clarityfiend, is this true? I do realize that Wikipedia is besotted with celebrity, but celebs anyway tend to get their own thanatographies. -- Hoary (talk) 08:57, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Death of James Dean, The Day the Music Died, 1999 South Dakota Learjet crash, 2020 Calabasas helicopter crash? Clarityfiend (talk) 09:25, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Per WP:AIRCRASH (only an essay, but still mostly followed), "For accidents involving light aircraft ... or any military aircraft the standard for inclusion is:

• The accident involved the death of a person of sufficient individual notability to have their own biography page in Wikipedia ..." Clarityfiend (talk) 09:30, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
• "The accident resulted in a significant change to the aircraft design or aviation operations". That's another valid reason for an article, but doesn't apply here. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:46, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation page replaced[edit]

Looking through new users' pages, I came across The Day Before. I made a few copy edits. But then I noticed something strange in the history - until recently this was a disambiguation page. It seems the recent editor replaced that with this article, losing the old disambiguation function in the process. Being new, they may not appreciate what a disambiguation page is. Any suggestions how to proceed? In particular, I am aware of the need to retain edit history for both the DAB page and the article.--Gronk Oz (talk) 07:39, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

I am torn between just restoring the dab page, as the game has, not surprisingly, no sources for any of the gameplay or specs, or moving the game to The Day Before (video game) and adding it to the restored dab page. Leaning toward the former. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:42, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

In that case it might be best to take it to the article talk page?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:45, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

I doubt the article Talk page would get enough editors involved for a meaningful discussion. @Clarityfiend: if I were to create that new article for the game, is there any way to keep the edit history? Or would it just start from today with me apparently creating it de novo?--Gronk Oz (talk) 17:06, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

I'd prefer to keep the edit history with the dab page. As for the game, only the intro is worth salvaging as far as I can see. You could just attribute that in the edit comment. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:09, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

I've reverted the page to a disambiguation page. Sneaking an article onto Wikipedia by hijacking a page intended for another purpose is dishonest. If the "upcoming" (a word usually used here to mean "not notable yet, but") zombie game can be shown to be notable, then I expect someone will create an article about it by honest methods, and link to it from the disambiguation page. Maproom (talk) 22:34, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Maproom: Wise advice, as always. Thanks.--Gronk Oz (talk) 01:27, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Shaquille.oatmeal3333 - removing maintenance templates & Edit Warring.[edit]

Good Day,
I would like to bring to your attention continuous unconstructive Edits and Edit Warring by Shaquille.oatmeal3333 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
The page in question is I.C. Colony (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs).

Recently User deleted the maintenance templates of the page - [1]. which was reverted with message being left wrt ( Template:Uw-tdel2 ) on User talk:Shaquille.oatmeal3333.
USER deleted the Maintenance templates again (despite the 1st Warning) -[2] , with ZERO Explanation/summary. This too was reverted - with Template:Uw-tdel3 added to User talk:Shaquille.oatmeal3333, but to no avail.
Shaquille.oatmeal3333 has once again deleted the maintenance templates. Thereby showing an inclination to engage in WP:EW. User had also reverted an edit which sought to TONE down the Promotional Overtone of the Article - [here]

From User talk:Shaquille.oatmeal3333, it is evident that Shaquille.oatmeal3333 has done the same thing in the past and was warned against it by another Editor in May 2021.
Shaquille.oatmeal3333 is obviously closely attached to the Article in question and is engaging in WP:PROMO and not adhering to WP:NPOV and in the process is generating a WP:COI.
The Article itself has no References other than a mention as a dog park & a train line passing through it. I am reporting this because I don't Want to run foul of WP:3RR
--Thank you, --STC1 (talk) 11:26, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Edit warring reports go to WP:ANEW, long term behavioral problems to WP:ANI. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:48, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

• Note Blocked (indef) Eagleash (talk) 12:04, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: [WP:ANI]]. Got it. Thank You.

@Eagleash: OK. Understood. Thank You. -- STC1 (talk) 12:12, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@SierraTangoCharlie1: The account was blocked by Materialscientist who had become involved at the page. As the disruption was persistent, current and ongoing I had taken it to WP:AIV and the block was immediate, but my request probably 'overlapped'. FWIW I am fairly certain I have seen a similalrly named disruptive account at some point in the last 2 or 3 years. Eagleash (talk) 15:32, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Eagleash:- I didn't even know that WP:AIV existed. I only knew about WP:ANI & WP:AN. Everyday I learn something new. Anyways about the USER in question, I've been noticing their constant reluctance to allow edits to this particular page, and had reported it in a previous month, admins then had cancelled his reverts, but new month and same story repeats again. Anyways, Thank you very much for your help, the USER (Shaquille.oatmeal3333) had also vandalised my userpage, which was reverted by editors. --STC1 (talk) 15:43, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Using the infobox for settlements: auto population density.[edit]

While editing this page: Monroe County, New York I tried to enable | population_density_sq_mi = auto but it seemed to have no effect. How do I know what failed? There was no indication of missing information.

Also, besides being a rather computer-literate software engineer, I am a novice with the Wikipedia ecosystem, including this Help desk. Sorry for any breeches of etiquette or style.

Thanks, Aheckmann (talk) 15:10, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Aheckmann, I think you have mastered talk page etiquette. I checked the template for the infobox used in the article and unfortunately Template:Infobox U.S. county#Population density states "Population density ... Must be entered manually, as the template does not currently support automatic calculations based on population divided by area." TSventon (talk) 15:43, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought my edited page was a "settlement" infobox, but I must have read that from another, open browser tab. Since "u.s. county" is a wrapper for "settlement", how difficult do you think it is to add an auto-calculated field like that? Aheckmann (talk) 16:32, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Aheckmann, sorry, I have no idea. I see you have asked at the template talk page, which is a good idea. If you don't get an answer here or at the talk page you could try Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). TSventon (talk) 17:13, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Mystery category on Template:GWR Locomotives[edit]

Navbar {{GWR Locomotives}} is in Category:Rail transport navigational boxes of the United Kingdom. I cannot see the category either in the source for the template, nor on its doc page {{GWR Locomotives/doc}}. How is this category applied?--Verbarson (talk) 18:44, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

It's on the doc page, in a <includeonly>{{Sandbox other|| block (which makes only the base template get categorized and not the doc page itself or the template's sandbox. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:46, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. When I saw the doc page was not categorised, I didn't look any further into the source. I wll read up on {{Sandbox other}}.--Verbarson (talk) 18:56, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Text/Image flow control: Glens Falls Hospital[edit]

Aside from {{clear}}, which would not help here (Glens Falls Hospital), is there a way to have the =History= section begin to the right of the image on the left, or, as a second choice, right after that (emgergency care center) image. Pi314m (talk) 18:52, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

I moved the image so it doesn't interfere with the section header, which i think is an improvement. But I'm not sure if that is what you meant. MB 19:22, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for trying. What I'm looking for, if it's possible, is to have =History= begin much higher up, without the large empty space. Pi314m (talk) 20:22, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Pi314m: You could add {{TOC right}}. In my preview at least, that fixes the problem. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:11, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Pi314m: It's not a readability problem as it is, and I'd just say leave it. Yes the gap is kind of annoying, but it's present on essentially every article. Mcguy15 (talk, contribs) 22:07, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Ask yourself if that image on the left is really necessary. I mean really necessary. For me, I don't think that an image of a hospital emergency entrance that could be any emergency entrance to any hospital doesn't do anything for the article. Were it up to me, I'd bin it. And also, MOS:SANDWICH...

—Trappist the monk (talk) 22:59, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

0764211707[edit]

Eekddqq

Welcome to Wikipedia. You may ask questions about how to edit here. For experimenting or learning to edit, please use the WP:SANDBOX RudolfRed (talk) 20:38, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

June 14[edit]