Wikipedia:Help desk

Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)

• For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
• Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
• If your question is about a Wikipedia article, draft article, or other page on Wikipedia, tell us what it is!
• Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
• For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
• New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners (but please don't ask in both places).

Ask a question

Can't edit this page? ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

Assistance for new editors unable to post here

The help desk is frequently semi-protected, meaning the help desk pages cannot be edited by unregistered users (IP addresses), as well as accounts that are not confirmed or autoconfirmed (accounts that are at least 4 days old with at least 10 edits on English Wikipedia).

However, you can still get direct assistance on your talk page. ; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

There are currently 0 user(s) asking for help via the {{Help me}} template:

Cursor

When in edit mode on my Wikipedia Sandbox A/C, the curser arrow of my computer changes to what resembles a Roman one and will not move. Clicking again, turns the so-called Roman one into what resembles a Roman ten, and a final click turns the screen into hourglass. The problem does not exist when in a view mode on Sandbox or on my User and Talk page accounts in whatever mode. I operate a Dell pc acquired in 2024. Thanks! Pendright (talk) 05:04, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Pendright, I've given your message a title. By "what resembles a Roman one", "what resembles a Roman ten", and "turns the screen into hourglass", do you perhaps mean "what resembles ⟨ꟾ⟩", "what resembles ⟨⨉⟩", and "turns the cursor into an hourglass icon" respectively? Which browser are you using, and what happens when you use an alternative browser? -- Hoary (talk) 05:38, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

@Hoary: Thank you and yes. I use Google Chrome and have not tried another browser. Pendright (talk) 06:56, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Seems like a error ralated to cursor or browser issue. Maybe you can try out thise troubleshoots:

• Try Another Browser – Use Firefox, Chrome, or Edge to see if issue persists.
• Disable Browser Extensions – Turn off all extensions; re-enable one by one.
• Switch Wikipedia Editor – Use Source Editor instead of VisualEditor (or vice versa)..
• Reset Mouse Settings – Control Panel → Mouse → Pointers → set to Windows Default.
• Check Input Methods – Remove any unusual language keyboards or IMEs. finally, see if issue still appears in Safe Mode.

IHitmanI (talk) 08:14, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

@Pendright: It sounds like a script is using all browser resources so the browser cannot do other things. Does "my Wikipedia Sandbox A/C" mean User:Pendright/sandbox? (Yes) Does it work if you click safemode? No, three attempts-the first 30 seconds or so look promising, after this reverts to hourglass) sing Some features are disabled there. Does it work if you log out? (No) Does "User and Talk page accounts" just mean your user page and talk page? (Yes, One account, two pages-no other A/Cs) "accounts" normally means user accounts. (One account, my error) Some users have multiple accounts.(Answered above) Do you mean the problem is not in the Pendright account? (The problem is in Pendright's Sandbox when its' in edit mode) PrimeHunter (talk) 09:46, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Responses above - thank you -Pendright (talk) 05:55, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

@Pendright: Try to bypass your cache with Ctrl+F5 on the edit window. I wonder whether something specific in the wikitext causes it, or maybe the total size. Does it work to edit the lead section here or the Scholar section here? If the first tool at WP:HILITE is enabled at another page like Example then try to disable it there. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:34, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Use of legal records to confirm marital status

For biographies of living persons, is it allowed to use a link to a court case to update the marital status of a subject? I am asking particularly for this article, Elizabeth Koch (publisher). 🌊PacificDepths^talk|contrib 06:36, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes but there are conditions:

1. Use a source that is reliable, that is it is a second source as well as from a reputable medium.
2. Particularly in court cases, use source only if court order has been finalized not if it ongoing and have no known result.
3. Do not cite source from a unreliable source or if it is more of leak or unreliable news forum.
4. You cite it properly, with exact dates and clear indication of the source.
5. If the document includes sensitive personal details irrelevant to the encyclopedic purpose, avoid using it or redact appropriately.

altogether please keep in mind-

It is conditionally allowed to use a court case to update marital status on Wikipedia, if and only if the case is final, reliable, publicly available, and directly confirms the status change. IHitmanI (talk) 08:09, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

As far as i can see your source, I strongly suggest further notice:

UniCourt is only a raw docket aggregator. Per WP:PRIMARY and WP:RS, it isn’t considered a reliable secondary source. Please replace or supplement it with an independent source (e.g., court’s own docket, reputable news coverage, law‑review article). Thanks! IHitmanI (talk) 14:10, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

WP:BLPPRIMARY, part of the "Biographies of living persons" policy, is clear that court cases are not valid sources for details about living persons. DMacks (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Are LLM-generated drafts eligible for MFD?

I found one that has both an apparent COI and very AI-like phrasing in draftspace, but I don't know if NDRAFT wins here. Departure– (talk) 18:49, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

It would help to be specific and name the draft. However, anything that looks like a lot of WP:LLM has gone into it probably isn't suitable.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:13, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

If it's a draft, which is the problem? The namespace is meant for exactly that, for articles that are not yet ready. An AI-generated article may work as a starting point, to avoid the "blank page syndrome". Although nothing remains of the AI text, I started El Eternauta: tercera parte that way. Cambalachero (talk) 19:34, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Help fixing criticism section default parameter

Could someone skilled with templates help me out at Template:Criticism section? It currently substitutes {{subst:CURRENTMONTH}} when it should be substituting {{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}}. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 21:06, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

@Thebiguglyalien: I guess you refer to inserting the template with VisualEditor. It's controlled by templatedata in the doc subpage. I have changed it to {{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}}.[1]PrimeHunter (talk) 21:38, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Charts recreation

If an article, such as International recognition of Kosovo, uses embedded graphs using the currently-disabled Charts extension, is it appropriate to go through the effort of creating an SVG recreation in something like Gnuplot and using it as a temporary replacement while the graph is not visible?

I am well aware that graphs will be re-enabled once the better Graphs extension goes gold, so I wonder if creating replacements will either cause people to favor the much more involved and tedious process of editing the SVG graph even well after software graphs are re-enabled, and/or if the eventual release of the improved Graphs extension will cause a large surplus on Commons of unused and outdated graphs that have served their purpose as a replacement and now only serve to benefit wikis that do not or still can not use software graphs. Are these risks well-founded or simply paranoia? All things considered, should I continue to try to create interim vector replacements for graphs on articles? Or is it established that I should simply wait for all this to pass? — rae^5e <talk> 12:49, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Preserving Flickr to W.M. images

I saved a few images from my Flickr account to Wayback Machine. For instance, there is a page from a 1996 newsletter (long defunct) that was probably mailed out to under 100 people. It likely doesn't exist anywhere else. It's critical for a WP article's reference. I would like to know how substantial these saves are to Wayback. What about if I close my Flickr account in five years? Will the images still be there on Wayback. If not, what are the alternatives? There could be copyright issues with Commons. Also, I only wrote a few articles on WP. But how important is it to state the source of a link in reference. It seems to be a good idea, though not necessary. Examples: "Chronicling America" (for newspapers) and "Wikimedia C–." Thanks. JimPercy (talk) 15:52, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @JimPercy. I'm not an expert, but I think the whole point of the Wayback machine is that even if a whole site is defunct, if it has been crawled, it will be there.

However, I'm dubious that a newsletter which was mailed out to 100 people is a reliable source, so I am concerned that you say it is critical for an article's reference.

A citation should give important bibliographic information like title, author, date, publisher, page, publication (or website). A URL is in most cases a convenience for the reader, not an essential part of the citation. ColinFine (talk) 21:15, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Okay, so the images are crawled, hence, preserved regardless. That's good to know. This newsletter with the interview went out to a city of 10,000 people. I was just guessing at the 100 figure. I agree it's not the best source to back up some minor (not major) details, but still better than none. JimPercy (talk) 21:41, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Jim Sautner and his emotional support buffalo

Why do we not have an article on Jim Sautner (RIP) and his emotional support buffalo Bailey D. Buffalo? [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]Polygnotus (talk) 20:19, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Polygnotus. The answer to "Why do we not have an article on X" is usually one or both of:

• because the subject does not meet our criteria for notability; or
• because nobody has written it.

Sometimes it is because

• somebody wrote it but it was deleted, either because the subject does not meet our criteria for notability, or because it was unsalvageable, for example as promotional.

If your research shows that Sautner is notable (by Wikipedia's definition), you are welcome to try creating an article. I see that, like me, you have not created many articles, so I recommend you read your first article and then use articles for creation. ColinFine (talk) 21:22, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

The article General Intelligence Service (Syria)

Hello ! I tried to modify the subsection "2024" in the section "history".

It does print the next result : "The General Intelligence Service was established"

The Wikitext is : "The [[General Intelligence Service (Syria)|General Intelligence Service]] was established".

When I saw the Wikitext. It was a surprise because I wanted to add a link to "General Intelligence Service" and accorded to Wikitext the link is already there.

There are maybe a mistake in the Wikitext but I'm unable to find it if this is the case. Anatole-berthe (talk) 21:33, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

@Anatole-berthe: It would have been a link to the page itself. MediaWiki displays it as bold instead of making a link. See Help:Self link. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:40, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

In this case. I understand. I deleted the link because it's unseful and unuseable.

Thanks ! Anatole-berthe (talk) 21:59, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

James Bryce, 1st Viscount Bryce

Reference number 10 is not correctly done. Please fix, I am sure it is from a university journal. Thanks Srbernadette (talk) 03:39, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Well, Srbernadette, using Template:Cite journal requires specification of a journal, as the error message clearly says. Are you hoping that somebody here will somehow guess which journal it might be? I'm sure that I for one can't do so, as to me it's very obviously not a journal article. (Even the lengthy text within it in no way resembles the text of any normal journal article.) What I think you need is Template:Cite web. Incidentally, reference 10 was screwed up in this latest pair of edits, made by 49.185.27.169. -- Hoary (talk) 07:25, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

I've fixed it, replaced the template with the one for a website. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 17:44, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Vandalisim on the Crossroads, County Donegal article.

Hello, my name is Justin. I recently wrote an article on wikipedia and titled it Crossroads (hamlet), but another user had re-named it 'Crossroads, County Donegal', but I do not want that name for the title. When I contacted the user, they were very rude to me and refused to co-operate with me and then put a pp-move vandalisim on the page and now it has completely ruined the the title. I find this inappropriate and unfair. I would like the page to be permenantly renamed to Crossroads (hamlet) and block the user that vandelised the page. Justin799 (talk) 12:15, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

You edit warred through page moves. There are policies around the proper titles of articles. There could be more than one hamlet by that name, so it needs a geographic differeniator. In any event, this is a content dispute, not vandalism, that you need to work out with the other editor. 331dot (talk) 12:21, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

See WP:PLACE as well as WP:OWN. 331dot (talk) 12:23, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Sorry but that's not vandalism, that was actually correct practice. Names for articles should be specific, not generic. And no Wikipedia editor owns a page so what you wanted the name to be is kind of irrelevant. Simonm223 (talk) 12:21, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

@Justin799: The name of this article on a place in Ireland should follow the policy shown at WP:NCCS § Ireland; in this particular case, "Crossroads, County Donegal". Bazza 7 (talk) 12:30, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

There's more information at User talk:CambridgeBayWeather#Crossroads village edit.. I'd been going through the Move log looking for errors in page naming. I saw the Crossroads (hamlet) and moved it to Crossroads, County Donegal as per convention and others at Category:Towns and villages in County Donegal. I didn't leave them a message as it was just a simple mistake that I see quite often. They came to my talk page to inquire about it at and exhibiting a bit of ownership. I replied but believe that I was rude and I'm not sure why they think that. I pointed them to the guidelines and the policy I felt covered the situation and why I did what I did. Later I noticed that they had moved the page to Crossroads. (period) and somewhere had created Crossroads, (comma). After looking at all the moves, it went from draft to Crossroads (Hamlet) to Crossroads (Donegal) then Crossroads (hamlet), I felt it best to move protect it for a week to give Justin799 time to read the guideline and policy. One thing I must apologise for is when I protected the page I used WP:Twinkle and used the wrong reason from the drop down menu. It should not have been listed as "page move vandalism" and that was my error and I apologise for that. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 13:14, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

I do thank you for your apology and your understanding. I'm only here a few months so I'm still learning yet but I will look at the articlrs provided and we can find resolution very soon. Thanks for the apology.

Best regards, Justin. Justin799 (talk) 13:32, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Can someone help me understand why this was draftified?

I created this article today and it was draftified. The reason given on my talk page was it needs more sources to establish notability and it has too many problems of language or grammar.

I re-read it and noticed an out of place sentence and an errant word, which I remedied. It has 7 RS (or at least I think it does.) Is there something I'm missing? i know you're a dog (talk) 03:30, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Dora the Axe-plorer: See above. Polygnotus (talk) 04:23, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

The OP had replied to them less than two hours before this post. I think Dora will reply to their original inquiry if she's given a fair amount of time to do so, but two hours seems kind of like a short time frame.

Awshort (talk) 04:30, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Indeed. And they have the This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.-template on their talkpage. Polygnotus (talk) 04:34, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Which is why I posted here to see if anyone knows what needs fixing. i know you're a dog (talk) 04:38, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I made a few edits already. See the history page here. Polygnotus (talk) 04:39, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, I see them. Is there anything you see that might prevent it from getting approved if I submit it for review? i know you're a dog (talk) 04:46, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

There is quite a WP:BACKLOG, we got ~2,736 pending AfC submissions. Polygnotus (talk) 05:22, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

I would guess that the main concern is notability and that the grammar thing was an additional checkbox in an automated tool. Address the notability, namely that this article is based on one event and is very fresh (breaking news). Commander Keane (talk) 04:48, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. It had 7 RS at the time it was moved to draft space; I’m unable to ascertain how I could have established notability further aside from adding more sources that weren’t adding new information. Any ideas? i know you're a dog (talk) 05:00, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

As for the "breaking news" explanation, I think that is weak because the relevant policy language says In principle, all Wikipedia articles should contain up-to-date information. Editors are also encouraged to develop stand-alone articles on significant current events. WP:BREAKING does not say that articles about breaking news should not be created. As for "one event", that relates to WP:BLP1E relating to biographies of people notable for one event. But this draft article is not a biography but rather about an event, and the policy says In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event article.. So, the question is whether or not the event of an American citizen being falsely arrested and imprisoned for ten days on an immigration violation that did not happen is a "significant event". I think it is significant. Cullen328 (talk) 05:14, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Cullen328 For the record we don't know if the arrest is "false" or "illegal" yet or not. It is pretty easy to get people to say stuff that isn't true, especially vulnerable people, and it is not unlikely that I can get most Americans to say things that aren't true if they believe it will benefit them (or if I talk to them in a harsh accusatory tone). Arrests are rarely "illegal" because any government twists the laws in ways that suit them.

Also we don't really know how important this specific event will be in the grand scheme of things, if we look back after a decade or so. Given the incompetence of certain parts of the US government it is not impossible that Hermosillo will be one out of many, in which case it is probably better to have one article about many cases instead of articles about each individual case (e.g. Detention of Juan Carlos Lopez-Gomez). Polygnotus (talk) 05:16, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Polygnotus, when a United States citizen born and raised in the state of New Mexico is arrested on charges of illegal immigration, then that is ipso facto a false arrest. I did not use the word "illegal". Whether or not it might be a better idea to merge the content in the future should be considered at the future date. Cullen328 (talk) 05:49, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Cullen328 See False arrest. If a police officer pressures a vulnerable person into confessing something they didn't do, and then arrests them for it, that isn't necessarily a "false" arrest because a false confession given under pressure by a vulnerable person can be probable cause. And vulnerability isn't always visible or obvious. I am not a lawyer and neither are you. This is not legal advice. Polygnotus (talk) 05:53, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, @Polygnotus, but the potential future where many US citizens are falsely arrested for being undocumented immigrants, when in fact they are citizens, is not a reason to draftify this article. It is a terrifying thought, though. Also WP:CRYSTALBALL. i know you're a dog (talk) 06:26, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Iknowyoureadog I didn't say it was a reason to draftify the draft. potential future Unfortunately this is not the first time something like this happened, and it won't be the last. Polygnotus (talk) 06:30, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Got it, sorry if I misunderstood. And yes, I agree - see Detention of Detention of Juan Carlos Lopez-Gomez. i know you're a dog (talk) 06:31, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Iknowyoureadog See Deportation of Americans from the United States and, for example:

https://www.aclusocal.org/en/press-releases/guadalupe-plascencia-us-citizen-unlawfully-detained-ice-wins-settlement

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/01/540903038/u-s-citizen-held-by-immigration-for-3-years-denied-compensation-by-appeals-court

https://www.aclu.org/cases/morales-v-chadbourne

https://www.keranews.org/2016-12-22/you-say-youre-an-american-but-what-if-you-had-to-prove-it-or-be-deported

https://www.texastribune.org/2019/07/23/texas-ice-us-citizen-detained/

https://www.aclufl.org/en/cases/peter-sean-brown-v-richard-ramsay

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/3/31/1649164/-ICE-is-getting-sued-after-detaining-a-U-S-citizen-for-nearly-three-weeks

https://www.aclusocal.org/en/press-releases/us-citizen-unlawfully-detained-immigration-agents-wins-settlement Polygnotus (talk) 06:34, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Oh god. Thank you for linking these. Now excuse me while I scream into the void. i know you're a dog (talk) 06:38, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Iknowyoureadog If you want more then there are more. Way more. Polygnotus (talk) 06:39, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, please. Either here or on my talk page. i know you're a dog (talk) 06:40, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

https://www.aclumich.org/en/cases/us-citizen-turned-over-ice-deportation

https://www.aclunc.org/news/civil-rights-groups-sue-ice-unlawful-arrest-and-detention-us-citizen

https://www.courthousenews.com/massachusetts-man-at-heart-of-twisted-citizenship-case/

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article24475174.html

https://deportation-research.buffett.northwestern.edu/us-citizens/ (scroll down a bit for some examples)

https://www.nydailynews.com/2013/12/01/deported-us-citizen-finally-gets-passport-back/

https://www.aclu.org/documents/aclu-memo-interested-persons-regarding-concerns-hr-4437-border-protection-antiterrorism-and lists for example Sharon McKnight

I am too lazy to find more but a bit of Googling and you'll find many more. There must be hundreds or perhaps thousands over the years. Polygnotus (talk) 06:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Iknowyoureadog I apologize if I made you depressed. Polygnotus (talk) 06:51, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Oh, you didn't. My mother did :) i know you're a dog (talk) 07:00, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Gosh. This is quite overwhelming. To work I go! i know you're a dog (talk) 07:01, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I would describe it as "fucked up". Polygnotus (talk) 07:06, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Cullen328 I agree that it's quite significant, and if I may, quite disturbing. That's why I am somewhat perturbed that it was draftified for a reason that I cannot ascertain. i know you're a dog (talk) 06:22, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Iknowyoureadog, I have moved the article back to main space. Cullen328 (talk) 06:31, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

I just saw that, thank you so much @Cullen328. You also made some great improvements; thank you for that. i know you're a dog (talk) 06:32, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Only part of edit visible

This is really confusing. Can someone look at this diff and tell me why it's so different to what the page is actually displaying? Just in case it's only doing it for me, I'll explain that what I see is no new section, just the part of my edit which follows the {ping} as if it were part of the previous section. AndyJones (talk) 13:33, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

It looks like your ping of Scope_creep is missing one of the left braces. (That is, you have "...discussed with {ping|scope_creep}} above by..." in your comment.) I'd guess that the parser got confused because there was a 'close' for the template call without a corresponding 'open'. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:46, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, that could well be it. It's fixed now. Thank you to @Trappist the monk: and @TenOfAllTrades:. AndyJones (talk) 14:51, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Linking to redirects and WP:NOPIPE

Hi folks!! Is it normal to link to redirect. This is on the Joseph Lister article. For example a link was made President of the Royal Society that links to the redirect, where it was formerly President of the Royal Society. It was removed as part of a WP:NOPIPE copyedit. But is it valid to connect to a redirect now from a article link. I know at one time you couldn't link to a redirect, but has it changed. Is that a valid link. Thanks. scope_creep^Talk 15:59, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

It is normal to link to redirects. WP:NOPIPE says It is generally not good practice to pipe links simply to avoid redirects. StarryGrandma (talk) 17:18, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Do separate pages documenting new features in software releases violate WP:NOTCHANGELOG?

Hi all,

Ran across a bunch of pages [7] here which seem to extensively document new features in Windows. Vista seems especially prevalent, with 4 whole pages dedicated just to documenting various additions. Given WP:NOTCHANGELOG, should these pages be deleted?

Thanks for your help.

Rcfische2 (talk) 22:02, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

No, these pages should not be deleted, and WP:NOCHANGELOG says that a summary of development is fine which is what these are. Maybe look at an actual changelog, the level of detail is roughly a thousand times higher. Polygnotus (talk) 22:08, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Appreciate the response. Can definitely see that now, still, many of the pages read like Microsoft puffery. (And 4 pages + the main article for Vista seems unjustifiable and likely to lead to content duplication). Rcfische2 (talk) 22:24, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Rcfische2 Can you give specific examples of this WP:PUFFERY? I am not opposed to adding a banner to each Microsoft related article that explains how to install Linux, but some people might disagree with that. Polygnotus (talk) 22:27, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

As a representative example - Management features new to Windows Vista has lines like:

- "In addition, snap-ins present their UI in a different thread than that in which the operation runs, thus keeping the snap-in responsive, even while doing a computationally intensive task." which is not supported by a citation and seems to just document internal optimizations.

- "Windows Vista includes over 2400 options for Group Policy" followed by a detailed (and uncited) explanation of changes in the GPO architecture.

- More generally, the article cites 37 sources, 28 are Microsoft authored and 9 are independent. Of the 9 independent sources, 1 directly cites a Microsoft representative, 1 is from a Microsoft MVP, and 3 others are from books for Windows users/admins.

While I struggled a bit to find clearly promotional language, taken together, the length of the articles, their massive reliance on primary sources, and their detailed coverage of features which, from my (admittedly non-expert) perspective, seem very minor, all give the impression of undue coverage.

I do think a very aggressive trim of at least the Vista articles, with a final goal of merging their content together into Features new to Windows Vista is in order.

Per the second point, that'd definitely spark an edit war over which distro to recommend.

Rcfische2 (talk) 23:03, 26 April 2025 (UTC)