Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2024 April 25

__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ = April 25 =

Inappropriate comments on a closed MFD
The comment made at the bottom of this page Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:The Monument Mythos by an IP editor seems very inappropriate to me (it's pretty much cheering on for someone to die by suicide), should it maybe be deleted from the edit history? ★Trekker (talk) 05:08, 25 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Deleted, but it still needs an admin to perform a revdel. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ – robertsky (talk) 13:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you both.★Trekker (talk) 18:21, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Questions about CSS
Hi, The page Community portal/styles.css is displayed as code but when I create a new page named Wikipedia: ..../styles.css it is not displayed as code. Pereoptic Talk✉️  07:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Because only css pages in the template namespace get the right annotation for that. You can either create in template space and move to Wikipedia, OR ask someone to use Special:ChangeContentModel to modify the page to have the right annotation. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 09:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Administrators have a link to change content model at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Communityl/styles.css&action=info#mw-pageinfo-content-model. Template editors can also do it at the English Wikipedia. I guess your real interest is the Persian Wikipedia where you are currently a template editor and created a styles.css page today. Template editors don't have the required  right there when I compare Special:ListGroupRights and fa:Special:ListGroupRights. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @PrimeHunter: Yes, you guessed right! I saw an example of editcontentmodel in English Wikipedia, but I could not find it in Persian Wikipedia. Thank you very much for your complete explanation. best Pereoptic  Talk✉️  15:13, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

What is ../wiki/.. as in Wikipedia URLs?
I am trying to understand more about Wikipedia's use of URLs. I can not understand the purpose of the /wiki/ part in a URL such as en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onion. Why not just have en.wikipedia.org/Onion. Any help on this would be very much appreciated.Gourdiehill (talk) 12:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It identifies the live wiki pages at a website with other types of pages. wikipedia.org is only used for wikis but we still have many other pages like https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Onion&action=history and https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Onion&diff=prev&oldid=1216909020. One of the advantages is that our robots.txt at https://en.wikipedia.org/robots.txt can use the line   in the html. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:52, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @PrimeHunter I understand some of your answer but not fully. Also there are a number of separate but related issues. It is a bit confusing that en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Onion and en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onion both return the same web page. Wouldn't it be best if the page was accessed by en.wikipedia.org/Onion? I feel the URLs should be meaningful to users but if too much functionality gets attached to them they start to become meaningless (speaking for myself anyway). Gourdiehill (talk) 15:11, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It's practical for some applications that there are other ways to see pages and associated information. /w/index.php has a lot of parameters to see different things. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onion is the canonical ("official") URL for the wiki page. The html for https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Onion says . See canonical link element for the feature. Some wikis do have url's similar to en.wikipedia.org/Onion. It's easier to type and may look prettier to readers but as mentioned, it has advantages to have a clear distinction between wiki pages and other pages at the same website. MediaWiki controls it with mw:Manual:$wgArticlePath. It's set to '/wiki/$1' in all Wikimedia wikis with code in https://noc.wikimedia.org/conf/highlight.php?file=InitialiseSettings.php and https://noc.wikimedia.org/conf/highlight.php?file=CommonSettings.php. You are very unlikely to get this changed. If you didn't understand my webcrawler argument then let me elaborate a little. Google and many other websites have automated programs visiting millions (probably billions in total) of Wikipedia pages, typically so they can be included in search results for their users.    tags seems to circumvent this. — Tenryuu 🐲  ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:52, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Where should I discuss a redirect?
We have a whole page entitled "Redirects for Discussion". However, I can't tell if that's merely a euphemism for "Redirects for possible Deletion." I do know that many redirects listed end up neither deleted nor merely retained, but transformed in some way.

I disagree with Natg 19 on whether to convert a redirect to...something intermediate between a disambig page and a stub. If my revision had stuck and the page were no longer a redirect, I would attempt to start a discussion at the corresponding talk page. But my revision was reverted, and the page is a redirect right now.

Consequently non-technically-minded editors might struggle to find the talk page. Should I initiate discussion there anyways or take it to RfD?

Thanks, Bernanke&#39;s Crossbow (talk) 17:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Bernanke's Crossbow, why not start a discussion at Talk:Mercury-vapor lamp. I am not convinced by your version, as disambig pages should help with navigation and stubs should be notable, and I don't think the new page does either. TSventon (talk) 18:15, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Article not showing on Visual Editor linking
Hi! I have been trying to create a draft for a corresponding article in the Italian Wikipedia that is Operation Strade sicure, so I created Draft: Operation Strade sicure but I am having trouble trying to link words to the Autostrada A3 which I have tried to search for but it kept directing me to List of A3 roads with the article not showing up. I mainly use visual editor and I don't know how to link things via source editing. I've read every search result, but it kept linking to other pages. Asvro (talk) 18:19, 25 April 2024 (UTC)


 * @Asvro, there is no Autostrada A3 article on English Wikipedia. Autostrada A3 is a redirect to List of A3 roads. 57.140.16.48 (talk) 18:23, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * On behalf to @Asvro, the problem has been fixed. Thank you. 2003   LN  6  18:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

draft afc submission in my userpage
for fun and as a joke, i decided to copy the "draft afc submission" box from a draft lying around, and put it in my userpage with the heading "submit to me"

i would like to know out of curiosity, what would happen if i, or someone else, submits the "draft (that is my userpage)" for review?

i apologize if this is not the right place for me to ask things. i've had a look at the "am i in the right place" page; another place i could be in is the village pump for technical stuff but what i'm asking probably isn't a bug, so i'm here. — ppr22 📄 18:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)


 * It would be added to Category:Pending AfC submissions, but I wouldn't recommend wasting AfC volunteer time. I have added demo=y to take it out of Category:Draft AfC submissions, which possibly means it would be ignored. TSventon (talk) 19:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * right, the purpose is for it to just look ridiculous, like
 * a draft afc submission box... in a user page??? it's silly, right? :P
 * although if it were to be approved (which will never be, i know that, but my curiosity overtakes me), would my user page become an actual article or what would happen? — ppr22 📄 10:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * If an editor writes an article on their user page and submits it through AfC, it will generally be moved to draft space before it is reviewed. Then if it is accepted it is moved to article space. So if User:Paper2222 was an article (which it isn't) and was submitted it could be moved to Draft:Paper2222 as a draft and then Paper2222 as an article. TSventon (talk) 11:13, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * so, my userpage would become an article
 * that's spooky haha. thanks for the answer! — ppr22 📄 11:24, 26 April 2024 (UTC)


 * , it's clear that you have put a lot of effort into your user page and your signature. As this is, after all, an encyclopedia, how about putting effort into improving articles? -- Hoary (talk) 21:44, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * if this is just you yelling at me to put my effort in other, better places (i can't tell; autism)... i'm sorry. i would rather do (often useless) things that make me happy.
 * most of the work i've done are fixing obvious typos and other edits that are 90% of the time minor edits. the most i've probably ever done is add a citation to a [needs citation] message on a topic i know very well.
 * also, you can't exactly tell me how i waste my online time.
 * if this is an actual suggestion, then i would love to. i love the community and hustleness this place gives, and the amount of wikipedia trivia i've found out are endless. i hate thinking about how the majority of edits i've done is my user page. i would love to do more work in improving (and possibly even making) articles. i've just a few problems:
 * 1. i'm too unconfident in making brave edits or new articles, since i'm afraid of getting ridiculed for it.
 * i know how to write articles (i think), and i know how to add citations pretty well, but my unconfidence just gets to me ;w;
 * 2. i don't spend alot time on wikipedia
 * while i do visit this site often, i feel like i don't visit it enough to participate in any wikipedian-oriented events or discussions.
 * plus, (unbelievably,) i have a life. i go outside and i have millions of other hobbies i need to keep track of, which is a good segway to
 * 3. i have way too many hobbies
 * adding wikipedia onto list of the other hobbies i have, on top of my terrible time management, is a recipe for failure. — ppr22 📄 10:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Fixing obvious typos and adding citations on a topic you know very well are both useful things to do. TSventon (talk) 11:17, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

"Provolone" and "provola"
I realised a not insignificant problem: in this encyclopaedia there is the wikilink "provolone" on many words "provola", but these are two different cheeses, although similar: https://it.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provolone; https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provola. JacktheBrown (talk) 21:04, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * , you can write an English article about Provola. Cullen328 (talk) 21:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * You mean "provolone". All right, I copy and paste this. JacktheBrown (talk) 21:16, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * , no I didn't mean "provolone". We already have Provolone. Cullen328 (talk) 21:20, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * sorry, I thought you wanted me to open a discussion on the "provolone" page. JacktheBrown (talk) 21:25, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * , I didn't say that. Cullen328 (talk) 21:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I know; I misunderstood, unfortunately. JacktheBrown (talk) 21:32, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * [Edit Conflict] So delink them. Likely this English language Wikipedia does need (or at least would benefit from) more Italians, but that would require more English-competent Italians to voluntarily become active editors here – how can that be achieved?
 * Of course, exactly the same surely applies to all other non-Anglophone cultures. And I'm sure that Anglosphere topics covered in the Italian and other non-English Wikipedias also have some similar problems. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 188.220.144.58 (talk) 21:21, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Dear IP, it's not easy to do it on all pages, alone I can't do it. JacktheBrown (talk) 21:23, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * JacktheBrown, you have several times pointed out that coverage in en:Wikipedia of Italian matters is poor. This poverty is regrettable but not at all surprising. If you want to remind people of it and perhaps also appeal for help, why not do so at WT:WikiProject Italy or WT:WikiProject Food and drink? -- Hoary (talk) 21:54, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * no, the Italian topics are treated sufficiently well here, but they could certainly be improved (for example the "Italy" article, the "Kingdom of Italy" article and the "Sicily" article are better in en.wiki). JacktheBrown (talk) 21:58, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * JacktheBrown, so what's your purpose in bringing up here (Help Desk) successive examples of what could certainly be improved? -- Hoary (talk) 22:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)


 * JacktheBrown, you say "it's not easy to do it on all pages, alone I can't do it".
 * Using the search box option "Search for pages containing provola" reveals that there are (only) 16 articles that contain the word 'provola', and one of them concerns butterflies. Checking, and correcting where necessary, 15 articles does not seem to me to be a monumental task for one who is concerned about the matter, and almost certainly you are the only one in this discussion who has the necessary knowledge to do it.
 * There are rarely sweeping overall solutions to deficiencies in Wikipedia's huge store of data: the only way to correct them is the same way that Wikipedia was created in the first place, with each individual contributing or doing what they can. Eventually it all adds up, even if it takes years. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 188.220.144.58 (talk) 21:21, 26 April 2024 (UTC)