You can make your username appear in lowercase in logs, page histories and probably some other places I haven't looked yet, but only to you; it doesn't affect how other users see it.
You just have to copy this:
a[title="User:Lp0 on fire"] { text-transform: lowercase;}
JoinWikipedia:26 for '26 and create or substantially improve twenty-six Wikipedia articles during the year 2026, at least one for each letter of the English alphabet.
Tip of the month:
Ourredlists are a great resource, but not every redlinked subject is notable. Be sure to research before starting a new article.
Hello! I'm fairly new to editing and wasn't able to find an answer to this online. I'm editing an article in which a paragraph references a hypothetical group of people, and says "...could change his or her behavior." As gender here is unknown/irrelevant, should this be changed to "their behavior"? I'm not sure of the typical wording wikipedia uses here. Thank you! --Ossifrangere (talk)01:49, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
NPP unreviewed article statistics as of February 02, 2026
Welcome to Phase 2 of theJanuary–February 2026 NPP drive. DuringPhase 1, we reviewed 16,658 articles and 4,416 redirects, and there is currently a backlog of 16,475 articles and 23,782 redirects in the queue. Fantastic job! Completing 22,502 patrols in the first phase made a significant dent in the backlog. Let's keep our foot on the gas for Phase 2, and I hope we can achieve even more reviews than Phase 1. Best of luck!
hi! I am trying to edit a few things on Ayesha Curry's page, such as updating her photo, which is outdated, but it rejected my edits. can you help? --Llee52 (talk)20:26, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Llee52: hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Your edits weren't rejected by the system; they were undone by another editor,S0091. They left a message onyour talk page which I'd recommend you read; the upshot is that you probably need to provide some reasoning as to what's wrong with that source. Also, images from Getty Images aren't usually creative commons, so again it would be helpful to provide evidence of that; otherwise the file may be deleted.
No problem! Adding sources to articles is really important, so I'm glad it's something you've chosen to do. If you have any more questions, please feel free to ask :)lp0 on fire()13:02, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
My advice is that edit summaries should serve two purposes: they should explain what you did and why you did it. When I'm dealing with confused newbies I sometimes try to make my edsum verbose and explanatory, but usually I'll go for the shortest thing that conveys both the above points. For example, "rm unsourced" means I removed content because it was unsourced, and "misc grammar" means I did miscellaneous grammar fixes which are self-explanatory. Often the edsum can just be a link to a page that explains something; for example if my edsum is "MOS:SOB" that means I messed around with the wikilinks to avoid creating a sea of blue. I hope that helps but if I've left anything unclear please do ask for clarification.
That would depend on the context probably.MOS:TENSE seems to be silent on the matter, but I'm sure there are examples where each is appropriate. For example in a plot summary, I might write "while he is running, he trips". Hopefully that's a reasonable illustrative example, but this is a case where I would advise you to use common sense: if the present continuous sounds odd, change it, and if it sounds fine, it probably is.
I'd recommend caution when adding or removing a serial comma. PerMOS:SERIAL, you can do so if the current formulation hinders meaning, but otherwise it's best not to change the article's style conventions.
Hi there, nice to meet you! I am making a small edit to a page (updating something to a more recent figure), and I am therefore amending an existing citation. The existing citation is no longer live, and therefore a previous editor has included an archived version. For the new citation, should I find the archived URL to futureproof?Annoyingly, I am in the UK and my internet provider has blocked the wayback machine for being "over 18 content", and it will take me a while to fix that! --Floot11 (talk)12:01, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Floot11: internet censorship is crazy these days. Finding archive urls is always helpful, but there is a bot which adds them, so if you can't find an archive url I wouldn't worry too much about it. It might be worth leaving the out-of-date citation in place if you're really worried about link rot, but I would say add the information, and if you manage to find an archive url later then you can add that. If you use a full citation rather than a bare url, that's usually enough to ensure people can find the source if it still exists. You're welcome to use any citation style, butWP:CS1 has lots of helpful guidance on the most common style. Thanks for helping to keep the encyclopedia up to date and verifiable, and welcome to Wikipedia!lp0 on fire()12:26, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that's very helpful! I have followed the same citation style as the other references in the article, so hopefully that's all ok!Floot11 (talk)18:12, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Due to the result of a recentmotion, a rough consensus of administrators at thearbitration enforcement noticeboard may impose an expanded topic ban on Israel, Israelis, Jews, Judaism, Palestine, Palestinians, Islam, and/or Arabs, if an editor'sArab-Israeli conflict topic ban is determined to be insufficient to prevent disruption. At least one diff per area expanded into should be cited.
@SatnaamIN: looks like taking it to AfD was reasonable. The only thing I'd say is that you don't have to reply to everyone who says keep. That's known asbludgeoning the process and is generally seen as harmful. Once you've made your point once, people are allowed to disagree with you, and the closer will make an assessment of consensus, but repeating your points isn't productive.lp0 on fire()07:37, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Noted. Fine is your advice. I felt for NPP school, but none adopted me. But from my day-today- learning, I feel I'm eligible to identify sourcing per Wikipedia consensus. Can you please guide me as none adopted me for NPP schooling? I am requesting you with Good faith.SatnaamIN (talk)07:44, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again. Could you give some feedback on the copyedits that I made for the article "Elderspeak"? How could I improve my editing and what should I keep doing? (Is there is a place to ask for feedback like this? I don't want to flood your talk page with questions.) --A Wondrous Raven (talk)05:19, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@A Wondrous Raven: Those edits look pretty good! In that case someone had filled in the |reason= parameter of{{copyedit}}, which makes it fairly easy to know what to fix. The difficult ones are when someone uses a template like{{tone}} or{{copyedit}} but really they meant{{rewrite}}. I think, the longer you spend hre and the more guidelines/essays you read about encyclopedic style, the better your copyediting will get. There arelots of things you could read, and some of them are buried quite deep in the Wikipedia rabbit hole, butMOS:WTW is the place to start if you haven't read that yet.
Please do keep asking me questions; you aren't flooding my talk page at all! If you'd like answers from some other people, you can ask at theteahouse. Thanks for helping to improve the encyclopedia!lp0 on fire()10:34, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I'd like to add to this that the other way you could learn more about copy editing is by reading the feeback given to past featured article candidates (that will also include broader issues like structure or sourcing, but is likely to be very informative).lp0 on fire()10:55, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I will definitely look at some of the past featured article candidates to learn more about (copy)editing.I will keep asking questions here and I'll asksome questions at the teahouse :)
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Arbitration
Miscellaneous
