Help desk
< May 9	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 11 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

May 10[edit]

Colouring in ward/constituency maps?[edit]

I've always wondered, do people use a tool to do such a thing? What I mean is like this image for example. I know it's based on a blank .svg file, but I can't seem to find out if there's a tool people use for ease of colouring the respective constituencies. OR is it just plain photoshop work? NeorxenoSwang (talk) 00:07, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know for sure, but even early versions of Paint Shop certainly allow you to select an area by its borders, and then fill it in with a pre-determined scheme. PS In your lede, "coinciding at the same time as the 2005 United Kingdom general election" is a tautology: I would suggest "coinciding with the 2005 United Kingdom general election." Regards, :>MinorProphet (talk) 02:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@NeorxenoSwang: the user created this SVG file by copying and modifying an existing SVG file. This is typically done by using a graphical SVG editor such as Inkscape. Inkscape has tools to fill areas, etc. -Arch dude (talk) 03:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

...and in fact if you open the SVG source of the file, you see that it was created with Ikscape. -Arch dude (talk) 03:43, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys, Inkscape worked a charm. NeorxenoSwang (talk) 20:02, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pinoso Wikipedia[edit]

I would like to ask the members of Wikipedia, to edit the information on Pinoso Wikipedia, since it says "El Pinos" is the way we call this village in Catalan. Wrong, since Pinoso village belongs to Alicante province and the noun of "El Pinos" is not Catalan but Valenciano. Please, note that these two languages are not the same although very similar, and share the same roots. However, the Valencia community is not Cataluña. Therefore, the blue link to 'Catalan' should be changed by "VALENCIANO".

Many thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.36.81.123 (talk • contribs) 10 May 2021 10:00 (UTC)

Done. Maproom (talk) 21:30, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you Timtempleton[edit]

Thanks Timtempleton for adding the photos. Abbeyblankensop (talk) 10:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting small change to article "Gamergate controversy"[edit]

I wanted to make a small change to an article: it is protected. So I

went to the Talk page to request it there: the TALK page is

protected. I clicked I-forget-what and ended up at

"Wikipedia:Requests for page protection". Do you really think that that can be worked by unsophisticated editors? So I am requesting it here:

In the article "Gamergate controversy", please move note [a] from the word "received" (which is not an issue) to the word "they" (which is what is being explained). Thanks. Also while you're there, it's not "GamerGate" (with a capital G) that "redirects here" 1.136.104.193 (talk) 10:38, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(I did not deliberately cause the strange grey boxes in the above comment. 1.136.104.193 (talk) 10:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC))[reply]

Hello 1.136. and welcome to Wikipedia! This seems reasonable to me and I've made that change, thanks for pointing it out and finding this place to do it on. That article is so fought over that even the talkpage is WP:SEMI protected, so you can't edit it without registering and hang around a few days first (unlike the talkpage for the less controversial ant).

The strange grey boxes comes from putting spaces in front of the text, the wiki-text environment works like that. You can achieve the effect of a space by instead typing a colon. Happy editing! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:27, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GamerGate does redirect to Gamergate controversy. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but where do you see it spelled with two capital G's? Only After the redirection. 1.136.104.193 (talk) 13:24, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect has the effect that when a reader types GamerGate into the searchbox and search, they end up at Gamergate controversy, presumably because editors at some point thought that's probably what they wanted. Like, say, Barry Soetoro. I don't see how that's problematic. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:44, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It might be because my point is so nit-picking that you're not getting it: Is it Gamergate or GamerGate? I was going to say: Across the disambiguation page, the Ant article, or the Controversy, the only place you'll see GG is in the sentence "GamerGate redirects here." But I have looked more carefully and this is not true - the hashtags are usually GG, there are about three GGs in quotations, and there are a few in the references. But in the body of the articles (unless I've missed one), it's only Gg. So why not be consistent and say "Gamergate redirects here"?

Well change it or not, I won't nag; I won't raise it again. 1.136.104.193 (talk) 16:23, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Except: Do you mean the capitalisation changes where the redirect goes to? That would be strange! 1.136.104.193 (talk) 16:35, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And I should have said "where a Search goes to" 1.136.104.193 (talk) 16:38, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalisation can change where redirects/searches go, see for example BusinessWorld/Businessworld. And saying "Gamergate redirects here" at Gamergate controversy would be, well, lying. Also, that is a software thing, you only see it via GamerGate, not Gamergate controversy. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like you don't know what a redirect is. See URL redirection. GamerGate redirects to Gamergate controversy. Gamergate does not. It's not just a search feature but also URL redirection on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GamerGate. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:40, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or more visibly https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=GamerGate&redirect=no Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:52, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, 1.136., this practice of adding more and more colons is known as WP:INDENTing. The general idea is to add one colon more than the comment you are responding to. There are gadgets that supposedly make this easier, but I think you have to register to use them. We learn the strange ways of WP as we go along. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:08, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the GamerGate naming controversy™, brought to you courtesy of en:wp Help Desk, but with added intensity. Tetris is just fine for me btw. MinorProphet (talk) 17:40, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Editing an article[edit]

I am a blogger and I have a website on I post most of helpful and useful content. I have a query that, If I add a link in an article to my blog post which might prove to be helpful for the readers, will it be okay for Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FunWithFriday (talk • contribs) 11:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not. You need to read about reliable sources WP:RS <<<<< there! -Roxy . wooF 11:47, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say never, as you'd not be reliable as above, but also have a WP:COI in this instance. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:25, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted article.[edit]

An article I wrote was deleted on 11th December 2019 by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RHaworth User:RHaworth and/or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:%C3%9Ejarkur [[1]] I have no idea why this person would make the decision to delete my article -

Draft:Dominic Hassall (dentist)

It was written by me about a world-renowned dental educator and professor so that people who are interested in his work can learn more about him and find his papers and research. I fail to see why the user who deleted the article has deemed the page to be 'unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view'

It seems quite an unusual and destructive activity to autonomously patrol Wikipedia looking for articles to delete. Perhaps Wikipedia should be looking at the credentials of these people.

I would like the article to be restored as a draft so that I can review it and make any changes that may have triggered such an excessive response from this person.

Flowonline (talk) 11:44, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Flowonline, clicking on Draft:Dominic Hassall (dentist) shows it was deleted by User:RHaworth as WP:G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion. RHaworth, are you willing to restore it? TSventon (talk) 12:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As User:Flowonline is being paid to promote Dominic Hassall I think restoration is not in the best interests of the encyclopaedia. DuncanHill (talk) 12:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the deleting admin won't be able to restore it, because they're (unfortunately) not an admin anymore. And G11- unambiguous advertising- seldom gets restored anyway. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:17, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing in this draft that is worth restoring, it just references papers written by the subject, and is indeed advertising/promoting the subject. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:24, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Flowonline. The purpose "so that people who are interested in his work can learn more about him" is precisely what Wikipedia means by promotion. The purpose of Wikipedia is to summarise what independent reliable sources have said about a subject. If he is indeed "world-renowned" then you should be able to find enough sources that are reliable, wholly independent of Hassall, and containing significant coverage of him to base an article on. Then you can start again with a new draft, confining yourself strictly to what those independent sources say about him (and making sure you include any sources which are critical of him, if there are such). Apart from uncontroversial factual information like places and dates, nothing that he or his associates have said, done, or published belongs in the article unless it has been covered by an independnet source. --ColinFine (talk) 14:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Airport Name Changed - Need Help Updating[edit]

Hello,

I'm hoping someone can please help me update the name of an airport. I'm having a lot of trouble changing the main heading at the wikipedia page linked below. Can you please help me correct this? Thank you so much. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McKinnon_St._Simons_Island_Airport

I work for the Airport Commission responsible for managing this airport. The airport is located on St. Simons Island, Georgia and is now called St. Simons Island Airport at McKinnon Field. It was previously named Malcolm McKinnon Airport and McKinnon St. Simons Island Airport. Because the process was completed through the FAA, the airport is now officially call St. Simons Island Airport at McKinnon Field.

Thank you again,

E. Leigh Newton Glynn County Airport Commission (Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ELeighNewton fly (talk • contribs) 13:43, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ELeighNewton fly: Please disclose your paid relationship with the airport on your user page; you may use {{paid}} to do so. After doing that, you're going to want to leave an edit request on the article's talk page.

We might need someone to redact the personal info above? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Creating an account[edit]

There should be music on Wikipedia and more pictures of someone or things we're searching — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.114.206.102 (talk) 15:26, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some articles (like Symphony No. 2 (Beethoven)) do have music. And most articles have pictures. I'm not sure what music and pictures has to do with creating an account. Could you clarify your question?~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think most people would agree with you that Wikipedia would be better with more pictures and music samples. Unfortunately, it is often difficult to find such materials whose copyright allows them to be used. That is very often why there is no picture on an article. --ColinFine (talk) 17:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried Listen to Wikipedia? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest edit request_No response[edit]

Hello,

I posted a conflict of interest edit request for the page 'Primary hyperoxaluria' on April 14, 2021. However, I have not received any response thus far. Could you please let me know how long it would take to review this request?

Iciplascarfern (talk) 15:47, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Iciplascarfern: Really depends. Editors would take a look at it and review it if they're interested, and there's no deadline on Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:00, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Iciplascarfern, as the request edit template notes, there are 153 requests awaiting review, which is a large backlog. The oldest request currently in the backlog is from December of 2020 - so it would be logical to assume it could potentially take up to 5 months. Moreover, Primary hyperoxaluria is a medical article, which has a higher standard of sourcing than most of our articles, and reviewing edit requests on medical articles is more difficult than on other articles. Lastly, your edit request has 16 items you want changed. Some are simple, basic grammatical changes, but others are more complex. As Tenryuu said above, editors are volunteers and tend to work on what interests them. A complex edit request on a medical article is liable to have difficulty attracting the interest of the majority of people working the edit request queue. All that said, I will drop a note on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine, as people interested in working on medical articles are more likely to see it there than in the general edit request queue. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:38, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ONUnicorn, the request was mentioned at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine#Primary hyperoxaluria on 3 May. TSventon (talk) 16:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oops; well, I've mentioned it again. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for the response and for explaining what the process entails. Truly appreciate it. Iciplascarfern (talk) 17:35, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

no thank you, forgive me for my 'ignorance' but whats the exact nature of your COI in terms of this article, thank you --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:53, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ozzie10aaaa. I work for a pharmaceutical company that is developing a therapy for the treatment of primary hyperoxaluria. Iciplascarfern (talk) 13:28, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Iciplascarfern, please can you read Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure and confirm whether you are paid to edit Wikipedia? To notify Ozzie10aaaa you can copy the link from their signature, Ozzie10aaaa. TSventon (talk) 13:50, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am a salaried full-time employee of the company and not hired specifically for editing the Wikipedia article. Would the disclosure still apply to me? TSventon Ozzie10aaaa Iciplascarfern (talk) 14:07, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

yes--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

shared disclosure on talk page of Primary hyperoxaluria Ozzie10aaaa TSventon Iciplascarfern (talk) 14:35, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting admin control[edit]

Recently the article Ethiopian nationalism has encountered libelous editing referencing in the side of Amhara privilege but indeed Ethiopian nationalism centered in benefit of Ethiopia as the name suggested. The article texts in some part has been abused by counterpart and I suggested the article should be controlled by patrolling admin and need recruited experts who trustly edit. The Supermind (talk) 16:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the article is currently semi protected. The correct venue for requesting a change in the protection level is request for page protection. It looks like there has been some discussion on the talk page, about the article being changed to push a POV regarding the Amhara, however none of the discussions are recent. I'm hesitant to increase the protection level without further talk page discussion, but you may get more traction on WP:RFPP. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia home page[edit]

How do I set an article as my home page (Showing when I enter Wikipedia)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:89f0:1740:21e1:3e17:9398:4f15 (talk)

Wikipedia has no way to set a particular article as a "home page". But it is possible to access a particular article directly simply by directing your browser to the article's URL. So, when you "enter Wikipedia" (which you didn't specify how you do it), simply replace Wikipedia's main URL with the URL of the article you want. JIP | Talk 16:44, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can also use your browser's bookmark function to bookmark a specific article. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You set your home page in your browser settings.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:00, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do IP editors get ping?[edit]

Whenever IP editors make a contribution to some page, I see a 'talk' link beside their IP address in the page history (though that is a red link; on clicking which, I'm asked to create the page, since no other person has edited that page earlier).

If possible, I intend to leave messages for some IP user(s). Hence, I wanted to know whether IP editors get ping if we write something in their talk page? And whether they will get a ping if I use the {{u|lorem ipsum}} or the {{ping|lorem ipsum}} template, putting their IP address in the place of username? Thanks. Cheers! CX Zoom (talk) 17:15, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CX Zoom, Yes, they do get the ping with both the template and the talk page message. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 17:25, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lightbluerain and CX Zoom: This is incorrect. WP:ECHO is only enabled for logged-in users, so {{ping}}s do not go to IPs. Talk page messages should trigger a giant "You have new messages" banner for IPs on the desktop site, but not on the mobile site. So if you see a IP where every recent edit is tagged "mobile edit", there's no way to communicate with them, apart from a block. And even that might not work if they're using the apps. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 17:37, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are further challenges: IP addresses are almost always reassigned and they are often used by others. This means some other user, or no one at all, will often get the message. There are exceptions, but I'd say if you're leaving a message for an IP who hasn't edited in the last few days, you may well be wasting your time. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 17:47, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lightbluerain, Suffusion of Yellow, and Zzuuzz: Thank you all for your help. Have a good day. CX Zoom (talk) 21:15, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Suffusion of Yellow and Zzuuzz: If Wikipedia knows this is a bug, why is it not fixing it? I think this is important. And, Suffusion of Yellow, I, once, recieved a warning on the IP I was using for an edit someone made years ago with that IP. So, I thought IPs also get alerts like a logged-in user. But, checking the link you shared I learned that it is not so. Thanks. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 07:08, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Email confirmation code[edit]

I'm attempting to validate the email associated with my username (Sangatfoundationcap) in order to use email features. My attempts to do so have not been successful. I've gone to my preferences and clicked on the button to confirm my email address, which then takes me to a message that a confirmation code has been sent to my email on record. However, no such confirmation code has come through. I've checked my spam filter. I've tried clicking the confirm email address button again, which just gives me the following: "A confirmation code has already been emailed to you; if you recently created your account, you may wish to wait a few minutes for it to arrive before trying to request a new code."

It's been nearly a week of attempts and still no confirmation code. Help! Thank you.

Sangatfoundationcap (talk) 20:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sangatfoundationcap: See Help:Email confirmation. You may have to try another email service if you want Wikipedia mail. It's optional. Nearly all communication between editors is via talk pages. Be sure to not forget your password if you don't have email enabled. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:44, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sangatfoundationcap: each validation code is valid for a full week. There is no need to hurry and request a new one when the old oen takes more than a few minutes to arrive. Sometimes Its also simply a software problem that too many users request a reset, causing a delay. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:33, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bridgewater Interiors, LLC.[edit]

Hi, I took a lot of time to post an article and now it looks as though it has been removed from the system. Why is this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashleymw78 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ashleymw78: It was speedily deleted under the G11 criterion ("unambiguous advertisement or promotion"). Please check your talk page. Kleinpecan (talk) 21:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kleinpecan Thank you for letting me know this and I did state when asked about the photos if I had been granted permission and I said yes, I had. When I look at the page, it is very similar to how their parent company pages are structured. I don't understand what was being violated specifically. please tell me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashleymw78 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You having the permission to use the image(s) is meaningless. Wikipedia, as the one hosting it/them, would need the permission, and will not seek it. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 21:59, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Only administrators can access deleted pages and I'm not an admin, so sadly I can't tell you what was wrong with the article. (Please don't forget to sign your posts by adding 4 tildes (~~~~) at the end of your post. Alternatively, you can click on the signature icon (

) on the edit toolbar.) Kleinpecan (talk) 22:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've reviewed the content- it was unambiguously promotional and not suitable for use in an encyclopedia. That's because it was a direct copy/paste of this [2] material from the company website, which is a copyright violation. So re the comment below, it will not be restored. The former content is available right there on the company website. Wikipedia doesn't host advertising or material scraped from other websites. Acroterion (talk) 22:29, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

how do I get the page back to edit it? @Kleinpecan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashleymw78 (talk • contribs)

Even if it wasn't a copyright violation, it would be totally unsuitable as a Wikipedia article. We are an encyclopedia, not a marketing page for your company. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I had permission to use the copy if I wanted. How should I go about filing this again? What is the proper way to write this? @PrimeHunter

Again, you having the permission is meaningless, as you are not hosting the content. Wikipedia would need it, and as a rule will not attempt to seek it. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 23:14, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ashleymw78: before you spend any more time on your article, please convince yourself that the company will meet our notability requirements (see WP:NCORP). If the company meets the requirements, we can help you get past all the problems (copyright, promotional language, conflict-of-interest) and eventually get to an acceptable article. If the company does not meet the notability requirement, then your article will be deleted, even if it is perfect in every other way. Really. I'm serious. Please see WP:AMOUNT. -Arch dude (talk) 23:35, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Arch dude, well I believe that it does and if you read the article you will see. It is the third largest African American company in the United States and has won numerous accolades for its growth, impact, and focus on diversity. Additionally, in 1998, its initial five-year GM contract was the largest contract ever awarded to a racial minority-owned business by an automaker.

Please read WP:CORP - that is the threshold for notability, which will need to be substantiated by multiple references in major independent media, showing that the company is suitable for inclusion in a global encyclopedia. In the meantime, you need to unambiguously declare a conflict of interest and to abide by the best practices outlined at WP:COI. Acroterion (talk) 23:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Once an article about a notable person is published, who has the ability to edit it over time?[edit]

Once a Wikipedia article about a specific person gets published, who has the ability to edit it over time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.23.22.231 (talk)

Pretty much anybody - this is The Encyclopedia Anybody Can Edit. At least, that's the general aspiration. Acroterion (talk) 22:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Everybody. Users can be blocked for disruption and articles can be protected to prevent disruption but generally, you don't even need an account to edit articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Acroterion and User:PrimeHunter are absolutely right. Furthermore, it is not allowed to forbid anyone from editing an article, except in situations where a user is blocked for disruptive behaviour. In particular, an article about a person does not "belong" to that person, and may be edited freely by anyone. In fact, the subject of an article is actively discouraged (but not forbidden) from editing the article, because of an inherent (if not necessarily intentional) bias. JIP | Talk 23:22, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is one class of editors who are very strongly discouraged from editing the articles directly: editors with a conflict of interest. See WP:COI. These editors should use the {{edit request}} system instead. This includes the subject, family mambers, and agents or associates of the subject. -Arch dude (talk) 23:27, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do those edits go through an approval process? I.e., are edits/additions subject to review and verification by Wikipedia editors, just like an article initially is for creation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.15.243.141 (talk) 22:38, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not typically, but edits may be marked as pending if the page is 'protected' as described above. Any other editor who sees any edit may challenge it they feel it necessary. What has sparked your interest in this aspect please? (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 23:26, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would guess that Special:Diff/39295651, where the IP rightly removed a problematic claim about Emma Watson, is the reason for asking. Pelagic ( messages ) – (06:32 Fri 14, AEST) 20:32, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]