Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests Information

From Wikipedia
Editor Assistance: Requests
  • The description of the issue with which you need help should be concise and neutral.
  • If you are asking about an article that was deleted, please provide the exact title so that we can check the deletion log.
  • Please avoid copying large quantities of article text to this page.
  • Remember to sign your posts.
  • As always, please do not include an e-mail address or other private details.
  • Discussions related to content disputes might better be addressed at the dispute resolution noticeboard.

  • If you would like quick access to some advice for the most common questions and issues, this can be found in the Editor Assistance FAQ.
  • Resolved, stale and other old discussions are archived, but if you need to return to an archived discussion, you can start a new section and note the old discussion. You may search old discussions using the search box in the Previous requests & responses section adjacent to this pages contents index.
  • Assistants: Please tag old requests using the appropriate templates, e.g. resolved, answered, unclear, unresolved, stale, moved or stuck, after approximately five to seven days of inactivity. These templates and notes on their usage may be found at Template:Ear/doc. A thread can be archived after being tagged for two days.


Determining whether a source is MEDRS

I made an edit which was rolled back on the basis of (the editor said) WP:MEDRS. I provided background on the talk page, here:

As I explained there, it is not clear why the source is not acceptable under WP:MEDRS. Is there a process for specific determinations of what qualifies as MEDRS? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariedegournay ( talkcontribs) 21:09, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Mariedegournay, hello friend. Your source appears to be a single study ("original investigation"). WP:MEDRS requires a secondary source, such as a review article, systematic review, meta-analysis, guideline, or practice guideline. The way I like to search for MEDRS compliant sources is I go to PubMed, I do my search, and then I turn the following 4 filters on: review, systematic review, meta-analysis, MEDLINE. MEDRS is one of the more complicated areas of the encyclopedia, and it took me months to get a good feel for it. I would be inclined to trust Alexbrn's judgment in this area, as he has a lot of experience editing medical articles. Hope that helps. – Novem Linguae ( talk) 21:25, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Novem Linguae Thanks for the quick and clear reply. Mariedegournay ( talk) 21:31, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Bare URLs reFill

Bare URLs reFill has stopped working for me, others?. Is there another tool? I have used in the past, based on reFill:


Thank you, Telecine Guy ( talk) 16:55, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@ Telecineguy: For me right now, the replacement for reFill is to use the automatic cite function of the VisualEditor. However, it is not as convenient as reFill since you need to copy-and-paste each URL yourself. At least better than nothing though. ~ Aseleste ( t, e | c, l) 09:01, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Changing content on a page about a public person

Hey, my girlfriend is a recording artist and she has tried several times to edit false information and misquotations on her page. Even after she edits the content, it soon reverts back to what's currently posted. The most glaring issue on her page is a sourceless quotation that she never stated anywhere. Why does her page keep revering back, and what will it take to make her edits permanent?

Thanks in advance for the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ( talkcontribs)

Hello! Many people find it difficult to edit WP-stuff about themselves per WP:Conflict of interest, basically they want to do what they want to do instead of editing according to WP:Biographies of living persons, WP:PROMO etc. See also WP:OWN on "permanent". This doesn't mean that you/she can't have some influence. You can make suggestions on the article's talkpage (always the place to start). If you mention what article (hard to have an opinion otherwise), a few changes you'd like to see and WP:RS that backs them up someone here may be willing to take a look, we can be quite energetic about WP:Biographies of living persons. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 05:44, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Regarding the unsourced quote, instead of removing it (and violating the conflict of interest rules), consider placing the "{{ cn}}" template immediately after it. That doesn't change the content but does warn readers that the "quote" may not be genuine. Butwhatdoiknow ( talk) 15:32, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Pinging noticeboard about RfC after discussion has started

Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hi all, I recently opened my first RfC after a prolonged article talk page (then my user talk page) discussion with an editor after I reverted their blanking of Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence's "Controversies" section. Several editors have replied in support of my decision but have said little else. A similar number of editors have said the section needs significant work and have challenged that the article should count as WP:FRINGE.

Would I be considered WP:FORUMSHOPping if I were to link to the RfC at WP:FTN? I only tagged the talk page of a related article and the general science RfC category when I posted it several days ago. Thank you! — Wingedserif ( talk) 17:06, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Wingedserif If you follow the spirit of WP:APPNOTE it should be ok. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 05:31, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Obvious change is reverted without comments

I had made an obvious short change in that article. My fix was reverted with no comments at the article's talk page. So what to do next? ( talk) 16:50, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

You provided no source to support the change. The text around the edit and the images strongly suggest your change is inaccurate. You can open a discussion on the talk page if you feel the text is incorrect as written, the editor reverting is under no obligation to do so. If you do so, please provide a source as more than just one word would need to be changed to support the edit. Slywriter ( talk) 17:06, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
As I said I had already opened the discussion at the talk page with the direct link to confirming photo. It seems it is ignored. BTW, this photo of Wat Phra Kaew is taken from the page describing types of the "chofa"s and it is used to illustrate "Garuda's type". So there are only two options here: it is Garuda type chofa or the discussed text is not a description of chofa but other decorative element - "hang hong". Anyway, what to do next? ( talk) 17:38, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
You can just wait for other editors to respond on the talk page. Hopefully you get two others to weigh in. Then you see if theres a majority to make the change or not. This is part of the WP:BRD process. Hope this helps.– Novem Linguae ( talk) 18:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Messed that up in two ways, missed the talk page and then mistook IPs Diff for current. Anyway, looks like Talk Page has activity and IPs one word correction will get in the article eventually, as the text supports Garuda. Sorry IP. Slywriter ( talk) 19:52, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Adequate Reference

I taught a seminar at a university in 1996 and want to make mention of it in an article. What do I need to provide as a reference or proof?

2603:6000:C600:A607:D888:650A:CC69:924E ( talk) 20:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

You really shouldn't edit about yourself, as it is difficult to remain neutral in that instance. Better to bring it up on the talk page. That said, have a look at what we are looking for in terms of a source, primarily reliability and independence. In this case, we would be looking for sources which are reliable and not affiliated with you or the university and having any interest in promoting those to say that you teaching the seminar was somehow significant. If that type of source material doesn't exist, it doesn't belong in any articles. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:36, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Misunderstood article deletion

Dear Sir, I wrote yesterday an article about a Lebanese public figure, noting that there are already posts about public figure biographies on Wikipedia, but I don’t understand why The article was deleted, I even included the personal website of that person, may someone assist me? I don’t see that i violated any of Wikipedia policies. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AAK89 ( talkcontribs)

AAK89, you'll need to tell us what article you are talking about. You have not written any articles which were deleted under the AAK89 account (as an admin, I can see if you've made any edits which were since deleted, and you have not). Seraphimblade Talk to me 22:28, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
This is about an article on arwiki; I'm attempting to help the user on my talk page. ‑‑ ElHef ( Meep?) 13:40, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

fixing missing source details

I noticed that a full citation for one of the sources on this page is missing:
LGBT culture in New York City (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

It is the "Duberman" source (citations 9, 10, 12, etc.): it is cited many times but there is no full source detail in the references. It seems that Duberman is a popular author of several relevant books (which I myself have not read). As a new editor, I'm wondering what would be the best approach for verifying the missing source and updating the references on this page?
Naiditouq ( talk) 04:13, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Naiditouq You are quite correct, that is not how it should be. Sometimes citationstyles on WP become mixed in an unhelpful way. To compare, at Florine Stettheimer you can see that citationstyle done correctly.
I've asked for input at Talk:LGBT culture in New York City and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies, we'll see what happens. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 17:31, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Pinging Castncoot. They appear to have added the Duberman reference in 2016, and are still an active editor. [1] Maybe they can help add a full reference. – Novem Linguae ( talk) 18:35, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Now that's good thinking. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 18:56, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

American Descendants of Slavery

We are having repetitive issues where editors are changing the wikipedia for American Descendants of Slavery to omit information and present the group inaccurately. Editor Ritchie333 had to correct this prior just two months ago.

On the about just today three hours ago an editor omitted information about one founders Antonio Moore contributing on a progressive site and left information about the other to misrepresent information. They also restructured the page as not about but a biased slander. We have attempted using the talk page and it is ignored. Please have the page reverted to what it was prior to the revisions that make biased omissions to misrepresent the group. The page should be reverted and locked. They also added slanted information about singular statements that shouldn't be on a group page. They changed the whole page and now it isn't a description of the group.

The page is now more of a blog with the goal of making ADOS appear right wing. It has left the line about Southern Poverty and omitted the clearly sourced mention of Moore writing at Here is the source. Its their actual site. You can omit both but not one and not the other.

Also, there are inaccuracies of added information on the page now. The source doesn't say what the editor asserted. It said "They say" this is basically the editor effectively piecing together material to make their own argument that is not in the source. This is the quote Washington Post quote "They say calling Harris “African American,”..." and the writer is ambiguous to the source of that "they" it is inaccurate.

The editor added this but there is no support. "In one video, Moore criticized Kamala Harris and asserted that she was not "African American" (Harris's father is Jamaican American); the claim was amplified by right-wing figures, including Donald Trump Jr..[" There is no source to support this discussion. And now what the editor did is took one wash post article and made sections off this one article. The prevalence section added is from this same article. As is the misquoted citation.

In addition, now the page both tries to frame the group as small and right-wing which is not for a description page about page. It took citation 5 that the recent editor added and embedded it as the page in all senses. The prior version of the page is a basic description that leaves all assessments to the reception section properly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnways21145 ( talkcontribs) 20:51, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Below is the prior page text please revert:

Extended content

American Descendants of Slavery (ADOS) is a term referring to (and a lineage-focused political movement advocating for) descendants of the enslaved Africans in the United States from its colonial period onward. Both concepts grew out of the hashtag #ADOS created by Yvette Carnell and Antonio Moore.[1]

ADOS have made reparations for the system of slavery in the United States a key tenet of their platform.[2] They want colleges, employers and the federal government to prioritize African Americans who descended from American slaves, and they argue that affirmative action policies originally designed to help the descendants of slavery in America have largely been used to benefit other groups.[2] The American descendants of slavery, they say, should have their own racial category on census forms and college applications, and not be lumped in with others with similar skin color but different historical experiences.[2] One of its founders, Carnell, was a board member of "Progressives for Immigration Reform",[3] described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as an anti-immigration group.[4] The other founder Antonio Moore wrote on liberal think tank Institute for Policy Studies site on economics and race for several years.[5]

Overview Members of American Descendants of Slavery (ADOS) are descendants of enslaved Africans, their captors (European slavers), and the original inhabitants of the North American continent during the time of chattel slavery and the Atlantic slave trade. They are descendants of at least one ancestor who was forced into slavery within the established colonies in North America during the time of chattel slavery. The term "descendants of slavery" was originally coined by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. during the Civil Rights era in the United States of America. The addition of 'American' within the term is used to establish specificity (as there are other countries that also used the forced labor of enslaved people to develop their nation). "American Descendants of Slavery" refers specifically to the descendants of the enslaved people held in captivity in North America during the initial establishment of the United States (from the colonial era onward).

ADOS cannot trace their ancestral roots to any specific country or tribe on the continent of Africa.[6] Their African ancestors were sold into human trafficking (slavery) by African traders on the continent who made a profit from selling their enemies and other unfortunate people to European traffickers (slavers).[7]

Political movement The movement intends to correct the view of outsiders by using statistical and historical data and evidence to speak to the reality of modern life for ADOS (formally referred to[by whom?] as African Americans), whose lives have been impacted heavily by social and economic struggles created by chattel slavery, segregation and Jim Crow, the practice of Red Lining, convict leasing, mass incarceration, and discrimination still found in various forms within the structure of the American political and economic system today. The group continues the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. with the continued fight for social and economic justice as it demands reparative justice and the opportunities they have historically been denied within America.

As ADOS explains on its policy page, the group key objective is for reparations for the descendants of slaves who were held in captivity in the United States as well as a larger Black agenda that demands a "New Deal for Black America."[8] This agenda includes but not limited to lineage-specific set-asides for American descendants of chattel slavery, restoration of the protections of the Voting Rights Act, a minimum of 15 percent of Small Business Association (SBA) loans be distributed ADOS businesses, a multi-billion dollar infrastructure plan targeted to ADOS communities along with financial compensation for benign neglect of those communities by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and federal government, comprehensive prison reform and rehabilitation, a refocused oversight and enforcement for ADOS economic inclusion from American banks, and ADOS college debt forgiveness and health care coverage.[8]

Supporters of ADOS push the issue on social media with the hashtag #ADOS. As a movement #ADOS draws value from the use of social media, and "sets out to shift the dialogue around the identity of what it is to be African American in an effort to move the discussion from melanin"[9] to the lineage of an American population whose ancestors built the wealth of the United States.

Founders The American Descendants of Slavery movement was founded by Yvette Carnell and Antonio Moore.[1]

Carnell runs a weekly political show called "BreakingBrown"[10] and has been an aide for two Democratic politicians, Senator Barbara Boxer and Congressman Robert Marion Berry.[11]

Moore has been a writer for the progressive think tank the Institute for Policy Studies and for the Huffington Post. He was also the producer of the investigative documentary 'Freeway Crack in The System' which was nominated for an Emmy for Outstanding Investigative Journalism: Long Form.[12][13][14]

Reception Hubert Adjei-Kontoh of The Outline opined that "#ADOS has managed to synthesize the black left-wing critique of America's origins with a right-wing belief in the inherent superiority of those who were born in America."[15] Kevin Cokley from the University of Texas at Austin is critical of the organisation's desire to separate the descendants of slaves from African immigrants and encouraged the two groups to be united under an African American identity.[16] Malcolm Nance characterised supporters as trolls, calling them "a mix of [African American] proTrump racists [and] nuts.”[3] Talib Kweli is critical of the group because he believes they are aligned with the Republican party against immigration[3] and Shireen Mitchell stated the group was making it easier for black voters to justify voting for Donald Trump.[2] Farah Stockman questioned in November 2019 whether the movement was large enough to warrant discussion on a national level but decided to print an article about the group in The New York Times.[17]

Alvin Bernard Tillery, Jr., an associate professor at Northwestern University, states that the issues ADOS raised on who should receive reparations will have to be reflected upon by the black community.[3] William A. Darity Jr. believes the ADOS' premise is based on a distinctive ethnic identity that exists among the descendants of American slaves.[3] He defended ADOS against nativism claims[18] and believes they are supporting people who have not benefitted in the current American system.[2] Cornel West stated at an ADOS conference in Louisville, Kentucky that the ADOS movement was resuming the work started by Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X.[17]

Johnways21145 ( talk) 19:58, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Johnways21145, hello friend. Not to be rude, but your post is a little long. You may have better luck in the future if you limit your posts to 1-2 paragraphs. Anyway, I took a look at the article you linked. It is semi protected, and the edit history is full of edits by very experienced editors, so I suspect the article is in good shape. I would recommend that you raise any changes you'd like to request on the article's talk page, that way you can discuss directly with the experienced editors I mentioned. All content that is added to articles must follow our policies and guidelines, and experienced editors will help you make sure that your changes follow the policies and guidelines. Hope that helps. – Novem Linguae ( talk) 21:02, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

question about sneed and chuck

In a The Simpsons episode ( E-I-E-I-(Annoyed_Grunt)), there is a store that is called "Sneed's Feed and Seed (Formerly Chuck's)". Does this mean the store was called Chuck's Feed and Seed? I don't get it. ( talk) 05:35, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

You'll probably have more success if you go to a Simpson's Wiki. I'm sure there are many out there, maybe at Fandom. Liz Read! Talk! 05:46, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Citing email correspondence?

I'm wondering if it's possible to cite email correspondence between a wikipedia editor and a reputable source, for example, asking a museum archivist about the existence of pieces in their collection when an online catalog is incomplete. I am considering doing this while editing the page Fredric Hobbs--his obituary claims that his art pieces are held in the Museum of Modern Art's permanent collection, but their online catalog is incomplete. I'm not sure if this falls under WP:NOR or not, as if the conversation took place on an email list it seems that it would be fine? If such research doesn't count as "original research," how I would cite correspondence in a useful/verifiable way? - - mathmitch7 ( talk/ contribs) 13:48, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

The issue isn't ""original research", it's the requirement that cited sources must have been published so that readers can verify the statements they support. Maproom ( talk) 14:46, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
@ Mathmitch7: Unpublished emails are against Wikipedia:Verifiability. We once had a rarely used Template:Cite email but it was against policy from the beginning and was deleted in 2007 (on my nomination). PrimeHunter ( talk) 15:00, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Got it. So if the exchange was publicly verifiable in some way, it'd be good, but emails aren't that. Great, thanks for the clarification! - - mathmitch7 ( talk/ contribs) 16:24, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Now if you could get them to mention this as part of their holdings, in a generally-available publication or newsletter, that would constitute a reliable published source. -- Orange Mike | Talk 20:14, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Archivist writing Wikipedia pages

I am interested in writing Wikipedia pages that do not exist for authors (noteworthiness tbd) with highly credible published works but I also volunteer for a group that creates audiobooks for works that are in the public domain.

Is this a conflict of interest for me to do both if I am not a writer by profession or hobby but consider myself more of an archivist looking to fill a void?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tchula65 ( talkcontribs)

Tchula65. Hello friend. This doesn't sound like a conflict of interest to me. A conflict of interest, in my opinion, is a strong financial or personal connection to a specific person or company. The only conflict of interest here might be writing about your volunteer group that creates audiobooks. Hope that helps. – Novem Linguae ( talk) 20:02, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
'most everybody here has tried our hand at creating articles about topics we think are notable enough to merit an article. Unless the author is paying you, there's no COI. -- Orange Mike | Talk 20:10, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Assistance with advertising in article

I am requesting assistance cleaning up apparent advertising in violation of the WP:PROMOTION policy in the Toll Brothers (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) article. On March 29, 2021, user TBuser2021 made several edits to the page that appear to be advertising (examples include discussing the company in very positive terms, user referencing "we," and also removed a post about a controversy they had. I went ahead and added the advert template for now. I am looking for an experienced editor to help revert these changes and then post the "Template:Uw-advert1" on TBuser2021's page when finished, along with any other necessary changes. Thanks for any help. Wikipedialuva ( talk) 21:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

It appears to be resolved. Thanks to Maproom for cleaning up the article. I went ahead and posted the "Uw-advert1" template on TBuser2021's talk page. Wikipedialuva ( talk) 23:07, 10 April 2021 (UTC)


@Sundayclose has treated me poorly and made me reconsider past contributions, editorial and financial, to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davemcor69 ( talkcontribs)

@ Davemcor69: You refer to your addition to Lolita being reverted. Sundayclose told you to get consensus. That typically means to start a new section at Talk:Lolita to seek support from other editors. Lolita#Popular music is not meant to have all mentions but a selection. Other mentions have been removed in the past, for example from a 2016 version. I looked up the lyrics to the Suzanne Vega song. It sounds more related to Lolita (term) than to the book. PrimeHunter ( talk) 23:49, 10 April 2021 (UTC)