Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1093

This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:Teahouse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.

Archive 1090

Archive 1091

Archive 1092

Archive 1093

Archive 1094

Archive 1095

→

Archive 1100

I requested that this page be made, but one of the users said it didn't have enough notable references. I disagree. Just google Donna Summer Musical Brazil and the internet is flooded with media and articles on this show that has an all-star cast! It's the Brazilian production of the original Tony Award nominated Broadway show which in fact has a Wikipedia page. It's DONNA SUMMER! I mean really! 1970sHistorian (talk) 00:52, 24 January 2021 (UTC) 1970sHistorian (talk) 00:52, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Google results are usually at most 20% usable sources and >80% useless chaff. This is why we don't base an article based on the number of search engine hits. Also, we do not recognise notability-by-osmosis. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 01:02, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

If you refuse to learn how to reference Draft:Donna Summer Musical (Brazil) it will never become an article. David notMD (talk) 02:31, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

I am currently editing Apna Time Bhi Aayega, and I used the same source to find the cast members. Do I need to use the reference only one at the end, or after everyone's name? Can someone please help? AppleAKB (talk) 02:40, 24 January 2021 (UTC)AppleAKBAppleAKB (talk) 02:40, 24 January 2021 (UTC) AppleAKB (talk) 02:40, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia's page "List of historic places in Vancouver" <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_historic_places_in_Vancouver> is missing a number of copyright-free photos. So I took some photos and uploaded them to the page (over a month ago). However, none of them appear yet in Wikipedia on that page (the image box still shows a 'question mark' icon). What's the next step to get these images approved and visible for users? Luke.Ernz (talk) 18:57, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

If you took photos, and are willing to license them for use, the proper place to upload them is to Commons not Wikipedia. Your username has no edits other than the one to ask this question so if you uploaded them to Wikipedia, it must've been under a different name. You say you uploaded them to "the page", but I don't know what you mean by that. I don't see any evidence that anything was uploaded to the list page which is not the right place that they should be uploaded but if you uploaded them I don't know where they are.S Philbrick(Talk) 19:15, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Here is the right place to upload them. It may well be easier to do it again than to try to figure out where they are (having said that, sometimes our upload wizard doesn't like it if it sees an image that matches something else in the system, let's see what happens)

Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard--S Philbrick(Talk) 19:17, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Luke.Ernz. In December and January, you uploaded about 30 photos of buildings in Vancouver to Wikimedia Commons. You did not upload them to the article you mentioned, and it is not possible to upload directly to an article anyway. You need to go to Commons, go to your list of uploads, and click on one of your images. At the top of the image display, you will see a menu option with the Wikipedia W logo and "Use this file". That will generate some wikicode, and you should copy the code for "Thumbnail". Now, return to Wikipedia and the article you are working on, and go into edit mode. Paste the code in the proper place where you want to display the photo, and click "Publish changes". The photo should now display. There is no "approval process". You just do it. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:29, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@Luke.Ernz: Some articles use a different system for adding photos. List of historic places in Vancouver has code like | image =102 Powell Street.jpg. You can just edit the page and add the file name to the currently blank | image = for many of the places. Your uploads are at commons:Special:ListFiles/Luke.Ernz. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:54, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@Luke.Ernz: I've gone ahead and added some to the article. But as the others have pointed out, you could have done so yourself. Thanks for uploading these btw! If I missed a photo you can add it, it's easy :) --LordPeterII (talk) 20:05, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the help PrimeHunter, LordPeterII and Cullen³²⁸ ! I appreciate it. Luke.Ernz (talk) 02:46, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

I was attempting to find a list of all pages that require citations by clicking on “approximately 454,000 pages” under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Citation_needed. Instead of directing me to a list of un cited pages, it directed me to this page. I’m a bit confused. Clicking on “approximately 454,000 pages” has worked before. I’ve gotten to the list of uncited pages using that method. Awesomesniper86 (talk) 03:58, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Awesomesniper86, maybe you're looking for "What links here" on the sidebar instead? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:34, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, can I remove maintenance tags and empty sections from an article such as this one? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arhavi Serv181920 (talk) 17:32, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@Serv181920: Welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, it's fine to remove those (especially if they've been like that for over 10 years now). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:39, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you TenryuuServ181920 (talk) 06:42, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Request page / profile for pro athlete.

Can you please help me create a profile? I am former professional British tennis player, competed in notable events such as Wimbledon on the ATP Tour and have many articles online. 2600:8801:C10D:6100:35B3:5D93:C59:EEB0 (talk) 07:17, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Joshua Milton

Hello Joshua Milton welcome to the Teahouse. I am afraid I have to tell you that Wikipedia does not contain "profiles" like Facebook or Instaram, Wikipedia contains articles. While autobiographys are not forbidden, they are strongely discouraged. Please also be advised that a Wikipedia article might not be desireable. On top of all, sucessfullly creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks one can undertake on Wikipedia. It requires much effort and practice. That being said, there are guides available here, here or here. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:27, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, IP editor. Wikipedia is not a social media site and does not contain "profiles". This is an encyclopedia that contains neutrally written articles, and writing autobiographies is highly discouraged. I see that your highest professional ranking was #284. While that is certainly an accomplishment, I do not think it meets the notability guideline for tennis players, although I am not an expert in that sport. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Cullen.

I am only in contact as I know numerous players ranked #1000 or lower have there own page when searched and I think previously had one when I was younger.

Im fully aware of what Wikipedia is and not a social media platform, was just enquiring is there a way for you publish one or any advice like a management agency that can? Joshua Milton 2600:8801:C10D:6100:35B3:5D93:C59:EEB0 (talk) 08:13, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

If you don't meet the definition of a notable tennis player, it doesn't matter who writes the article as no amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. Please see other stuff exists; as this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years. It's also possible that these other people are notable for something else; it's hard to say unless you point out some of these other articles you cite. We can only address what we know about. 331dot (talk) 08:47, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

There was an article about you that was deleted in 2011 per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joshua Milton. 331dot (talk) 08:49, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Your career was 2007-17 and you did not achieve the WP:NTENNIS criteria. There may exist articles about other low-ranked players, but those should probably be deleted rather than serve as examples to justify your inclusion. David notMD (talk) 10:52, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

I would like to ask if crunchbase.com and topionetworks.com are valid sources when I make my first article? Gomenacy00 (talk) 11:10, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

@Gomenacy00: Crunchbase: definitely no, topionetworks.com hasn't been discussed yet but is IMO, at least if I read their about page correctly, not realy better. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:54, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I think I may have uploaded the same album cover twice that I'm trying to put in the Infobox for the article A Thousand Pictures which I just published. I've been successful in adding images before, but for some reason I can't figure out how to get this file uploaded. It is called "Athousandpictures.jpg" and I've gotten it confused by renaming it something slightly different. Thanks for any help!Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 01:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 01:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Cheryl Fullerton. You successfully uploaded the cover art, as shown in your edit history. I have added the image to A Thousand Pictures, which was easy. I just added the file name to the appropriate field in the infobox, and clicked "Publish changes". Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:14, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Cullen328! Which was the appropriate file name if I may ask? It just kept telling me there was an identical file name, so I thought I needed to delete one or the other. Thanks again for your help!Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 04:59, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Cheryl Fullerton. The file that Cullen328 added to the article is File:Athousandpictures.jpg. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:25, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Reading

The article on reading has a menu list with a picture of Arnold Vos Dias Oak Ridge 1947.

How can I find this list so I can edit it? John NH (talk) 21:55, 23 January 2021 (UTC) John NH (talk) 21:55, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@Jnhmunro: Welcome to the Teahouse. The "menu list" that you see is actually a template, {{Reading}}. To edit it you would have to go its template page (you can get there by clicking on the aforementioned link) and directly fiddle with the source code there. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:01, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@Jnhmunro: Please keep in mind that the template is transcluded into about 51 articles according to this, so any changes should be appropriate for all of them. You might want to discuss it at Template talk:Reading or maybe WT:BOOKS if you get no response. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:54, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. I did discuss it on the talk page. Thank you. John NH (talk) 12:41, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User:Afeldman463/sandbox

Hello to whom this may concern, I've recently done some research on an American WPA abstract expressionist artist who was already mentioned in three Wikipedia pages (list of WPA artists, 10th Street galleries, Carborundum printmaking) - his name is Hugh Mesibov. Because he didn't previously have a Wikipedia page, I've created one and have included references, citations, etc. from outside sources such as the New York Times and other reputable information outlets. I haven't included any images because I cannot guarantee that they are in the public domain (although it is possible some relevant images could be).

Although I've made certain slight adjustments to various Wikipedia pages in the past (references, citations, links, etc), this is my first time creating a Wikipedia page. I've read through the relevant materials sent to me by Wikipedia for new editors and I appreciate being welcomed into the club of Wikipedians.

I'm sending this out into the Wikipedia ether to ask for validation - I hope my work is suitable and it won't be deleted. Thanks for your time, Afeldman463 Afeldman463 (talk) 12:25, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Afeldman463. I've added a header to your sandbox by which you can submit it for review. If a reviewer accepts it, they'll move it into mainspace with a suitable title; if not, they'll give you feedback as to what is needed. --ColinFine (talk) 13:31, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

The article looks pretty good to me but would be greatly improved if the citations used the Template:Cite web instead of "naked" URLs. That is, just because a reference is to a link on the web, it should ideally show the author of the work, the date the work was published and the date you accessed the website to read the information (in case the link suffers from "link-rot" it can usually be rescued using the Wayback machine). Note that you can continue to work on an article even after it has been submitted for review. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:04, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

I thought to contribute to things like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Spaceflight_articles_needing_infoboxes and am therefore searching for "templates" (minimum infobox template, overview of all relevant parameters if applicable to the respective article). I found examples for "airport" and "military" in articles, but not the "original" template (are there different ones for every language ?). Would IMHO be good to link to such infos directly from the respective "articles needing infoboxes" article. Dulliman (talk) 12:11, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Dulliman, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry, but I don't understand your main question: you found examples of what? and what do you mean 'examples for "airport"'? But for your parenthesised question: yes, every edition of Wikipedia is an independent project, and templates will exist in different editions only if somebody has ported them there. --ColinFine (talk) 13:27, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi ColinFine, I meanwhile found some templates (except the one for "spaceport" I was looking for) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_infoboxes#Spaceflight. I started with asking the German community for this topic : https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal_Diskussion:Raumfahrt#Vorlage_%22Infobox_Weltraumbahnhof%22%2C_%22Private_Raumfahrtunternehmen%22. There are currently 193 "spaceport" entries on OSM which could use a standardised "infobox" on Wikipedia ? https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/aeroway=spaceport. Similar for spaceflight companies : https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/aerospace%3Aproduct. I'd like to get some input first about the infobox content before starting to edit of such a bunch of entries.  Dulliman (talk) 14:25, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

I started a discussion on the talk page for the article H.R. 1 (116th Congress). However my discussion has so far gotten just one reply, in the 8 days since I started it. As it's been that long, I doubt I'll get any more replies anytime soon, if any at all. Basically, the article was originally titled "For the People Act" but an editor moved the page without discussing doing so first with other editors. It is now titled "H.R. 1 (116th Congress)" but the article is about a bill introduced in the 116th United States Congress and reintroduced in the 117th United States Congress. The bills number in both cases is H.R. 1 though. Also both bills short titles are "For the People act", although as many article editors have pointed out, neither are actually acts but actually bills, despite act being in both bills names. Should I move the article to the title "For the People Act", some other title, or keep its current title "H.R. 1 (116th Congress)"? Greshthegreat (talk) 18:32, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Greshthegreat. The answer is given by COMMONNAME. What do the sources (which are necessarily the source for all the content in the article) call it? In any case, the other possibilities can all be added as redirects. --ColinFine (talk) 19:26, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey Greshthegreat. Though the underlying issue seems properly resolved now, regarding the lack of comment at the article's talk page, I'd just note that you opened that naming discussion at the top of that page. For that reason, it is possible it wasn't seen by some, and didn't get comments it otherwise might have. By convention, new threads are placed below older ones everywhere on Wikipedia (the "New section" button does this automatically). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:27, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

While copyediting the article Army Cadet College I noticed that much of the content is word-for-word identical with the content of this copyrighted web page: [2]. How can one determine whether the Wikipedia article was copied from the copyrighted page or vice versa? The web page is copyright 2019 and the Wikipedia article was created in 2009, but I am uncertain whether this is adequate proof that the Wikipedia article preceded the web page. Dieter.Meinertzhagen (talk) 18:47, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@Dieter.Meinertzhagen, you can try using the Wayback Machine to find the first version of web page and line that up with - it's not perfect by any means but the first archived version is from Feb 2020 (see https://web.archive.org/web/20200222182729/http://kataradefenceacademy.com/acc) and that is after the matching revision of the Wikipedia page. While it's hard to determine, I don't think it is a copyvio, but the whole article needs to be rewritten either way. ✨ Ed talk! ✨ 18:55, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey Dieter.Meinertzhagen. Further on to the above, using the first (2009) revision as a baseline (which is substantially the same as the current content), I took a look for copying. The fact that an article is of a substantial age (12 years here) can often make finding a source of copying more difficult. But the fact that the very first version of the page had quite a few typos, while not conclusive, is one indication of original typing, as opposed to being copied and pasted from an existing website. Furthermore, when Google corrects the typos, and you click on "search instead for... [quoted content with the typos], zero results are returned—instead of what happens with the corrected text – the massive number of Wikipedia mirrors and copyright violating websites that (always) pop up for content from any mainspace article of any age. All indications are, then, that there's no copyright issue. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:33, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

thank you wikipedia for making me pass al my exams thank you wikipedia for helping me all these years even tho im a new registered person : thank you! <3 Thxuhelpmeinmyexamwiki12 (talk) 15:12, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Thxuhelpmeinmyexamwiki12, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm glad that you found Wikipedia to be a useful educational resource, it's always nice to hear. If you're considering joining the editing community may I suggest exploring the Introduction to editing and the Wikipedia adventure. Kind regards, Zindor (talk) 15:57, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Saltwater (Chicane song)

Does anyone have more information on Chicane Saltwater from 1999. Music video Cast, photos and all round info. Thanks. GrogMoko5 (talk) 16:05, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Grog Moko

Hello I am in the process of to open an account for my profile wikipedia I have an important question for you, so if I want to add a new project to my profile page, I know how to do it, then you check it and publish it, Problem: If you try to prove the new projects which I have added, you will have a lot of difficulty, because they are not in English language, but I can prove it to you (with Google) both in the original language and in English. Question to you: I wonder if there is a section-Link or a place on the wikipedia profile page to prove these projects? Thank you Majak 96.20.210.103 (talk) 19:07, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not host "profiles". It has articles written about notable subjects, by contributors who are independent of those subjects. I don't know what you mean by proving projects. Maproom (talk) 19:41, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

English Wikipedia allows for non-English references. Wikipedia dissuades attempts at autobiography (see WP:AUTO). David notMD (talk) 19:51, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

96.20.210.103—I think a good first step is registering an account. See Wikipedia:Why create an account? Assertions have to be supported by sources. By "prove" do you mean to show that reliable sources support the assertions that would be made in an article? Also see What is an article? Bus stop (talk) 19:54, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. It sounds as if you think that Wikipedia is something different from what it is: please see What Wikipedia is not. Note that 1) Wikipedia does not host profiles. Not one. 2) Wikipedia is not for telling the world about anything, and especially not for telling the world about yourself and your projects: it is for summarising what independent commentators have already published about things. 3) It's not clear what you mean by "proving", but if you mean "proving that your projects exist", that is not relevant to Wikipedia. Billions of things exist in the world which Wikipedia does not, and will not, have articles about. Conversely, some of our six million articles are about things that don't exist, such as Unicorns and Piltdown man. --ColinFine (talk) 22:52, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Non-English-language sources are acceptable, as long as they are reliable. If it was me, I’d use the article's talk page to provide details about what the sources say. Be careful not to go past fair use and into copyright infringement when providing translations. If the sources are online and the language is well supported by Google or Bing Translate, then Anglophones like me may still get the gist by feeding them through machine translation. Pelagic ( messages ) – (12:56 Sat 23, AEDT) 01:56, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Similar discussion by same user in section 'prove the information' below. Zindor (talk) 16:15, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

How to get your sandbox page approved and published? need help with editing Juliana000 (talk) 23:49, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

You have made a common beginner's mistake of creating a draft on your User page, but in your case duplicating it at your Sandbox. First, delete all the content from your User page. Second, to submit your Sandbox draft to Articles for Creation for a review, put double curly brackets {{ }} at the very top and put subst:submit inside the brackets. David notMD (talk) 02:28, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Please see additional content at your user talk page regarding the deletion of your userpage (since, per above, the content is already duplicated at your sandbox), and an apparent copyright issue with the draft content.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:30, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

The question is explained in the title,I got a message saying I was blocked for using Wikipedia for promoting or advertising purposes when I didn't even do it. Ishaan bommakanti 650 (talk) 17:25, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ishaan bommakanti 650, you have not been blocked, as you are currently editing the Teahouse. Maybe you recieved the notice as you were logged out on an IP that has been blocked for that reason. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 17:27, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ishaan bommakanti 650: Please read the messages on your talk page about your recent edits. RudolfRed (talk) 17:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hang on, RudolfRed. Ishaan bommakanti 650's recent edits to San Diego Zoo all look to me like good faith - the editor is just not yet familiar with our policies on verifiability. Ishaan, we require that information in a Wikipedia article come from a reliable published source, not from our own knowledge, and your edits were reverted because you didn't give any published sources for the changes you made. A bot thought your changes were vandalism because you changed a few words, and didn't include an edit summary explaining why you were making the change. --ColinFine (talk) 17:53, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

How do you add a picture in wikipedia? Ishaan bommakanti 650 (talk) 17:20, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Ishaan bommakanti 650, and welcome to the Teahouse. Adding pictures is not the easiest thing to do. If you can find a suitable picture already in Commons, then it's easy; but otherwise you have to upload the picture first, and unless it's a picture you took yourself, you are likely to have difficulties with copyright. See Help:Pictures. --ColinFine (talk) 18:01, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ishaan bommakanti 650, if the file is already uploaded to either Wikipedia or Wikimedia commons then it's as simple as an internal link, for instance [[File:Ambersweet oranges.jpg|thumb|right]] shows File:Ambersweet oranges.jpg as a thumbnail floated to the right. You can look at more info at Help:Pictures. If the file is not already uploaded, you'll want the Upload Wizard. --Paul ❬talk❭ 18:12, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Why is it not opening?It just stays in the teahouse page. and when I do it on another page it gets redirected back to the teahouse page. Ishaan bommakanti 650 (talk) 17:35, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Ishaan bommakanti 650. It's very hard to help with problems of that sort without more detail. When you say your "message box", do you mean your talk page? How are you trying to open it - what link are you picking, and what happens? And what are you expecting to happen? --ColinFine (talk) 17:58, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes,I mean my talk page.I am opening the notifications link,and nothing happens — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ishaan bommakanti 650 (talk • contribs) 18:03, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ishaan bommakanti 650: I think that what has happened is that Cluebot and another user left messages on your Talk Page today, which automatically leaves a message for you (which appears in the icons at the top of any Wikipedia page and is called "your notices"). You have probably clicked on that icon to see what the messages were but, if you were already looking at your talk Page, then of course the link in the alert simply left you on that page. Nothing to worry about. Note that the "ping" I have created by this response will give you another such notice for you, this time pointing to the Teahouse. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:13, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Why would Cultivation theory appear in the search results when "Biology" is selected from within the "Filter this category by topic:" section at Category:All articles needing copy edit? I am unable to find anything in that article to suggest an "article topic" of biology. (Note: The article contains a link to Portal:Psychology.) azwaldo (talk) 18:38, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi azwaldo. You can link a category by placing a colon in front. [[:Category:All articles needing copy edit]] produces Category:All articles needing copy edit. mw:Help:CirrusSearch#Articletopic says: "Topic models are derived via machine learning from ORES. Any given article receives a score on dozens of different topics, and therefore may appear under different keywords." Machine learning has limitations. Maybe it thought "Cultivation" implied biology. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:27, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Much appreciation here for your response, PrimeHunter.

So, it seems that with 'Psychology" not even available as an article topic (in CirrusSearch topic list), the search engine resorted to "Biology" as its best approximation. azwaldo (talk) 23:34, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

@Azwaldo: It's also in Society. I don't know whether there is a way to look it up so I tried all of them. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:06, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Seems odd that the article does not appear when "Media" is selected, since "media" occurs in that article more than sixty times. ("Society" appears 23 times.) azwaldo (talk) 19:07, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

what

what to do any actions on such type of users i had complainted about two same users last year that time they joined recently , no action was taken , now both from same team started messing and delibrately using baised and hatered filled writing approach specially towards a single community ,there talk page is full of such type of complaints by another users and they are bullying in nature , also there edits are causing disputes on ground level as google search simply ranks wikipedia pages on top and wikipages are vandalised by them with leftist history writers and only one side things , they simply revert referenced content because they are a team working full time on platform we are unable to solve issue ,looking for answers , should i go to local cyber authorities as it is also distrupting communal harmony , the both wikipedia users are below mentioned see their talk pages for more info:- heba aisha lukeEmily also they belong to a rival community of rajputs that may be inspiration for there edits . --Loneltrussia (talk) 14:56, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Pinging Heba Aisha and lukeEmily since discussing people behind their backs isn't really the vibe we're going for here. I notice that you've already added vague but ominous comments about 'monitoring' them on their respective talk pages - I don't know how you expected that to come across as anything but creepy. Now, you could raise your concerns on the administrators noticeboard if you really, really want to but if they've already decided to take no action then you'll need a fresh reason why they should change their minds, I would also stress that your actions will be subject to scrutiny as well. --Paul ❬talk❭ 15:42, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

...oh also, I don't know what you mean by "local cyber authorities" but please do note that legal threats are prohibited and will lead to a ban. --Paul ❬talk❭ 15:56, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't know what does he mean by leftist writers? But, the sources used by me are of high quality and from reputed publishers and writers. The set of articles he is pointing towards are vandalised by facebook group based users, the detail about which is on my talk page along with discussion with administrators and knowledgeable editors in this area.Heba Aisha (talk) 16:38, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

FYI

 – OP has now been blocked by Bishonen --Paul ❬talk❭ 19:18, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi,

I have got an image that I am annotating with {{annotation}}. The problem I’m having is that I need to either a) have the reference point in the middle of the annotation, or b) find out the width and height of the annotation. Is there any way of achieving this? DBoffey (talk) 15:59, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, DBoffey. I'm not familiar with the template but have you tried using Template:Annotated image? I note that it allows the dimension attributes to be defined, so could solve that problem. Regards, Zindor (talk) 16:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Zindor, however, without some way of finding out the dimensions, this does not solve the problem. The Annotation is passed in a template parameter, so I cannot pre-compute the dimensions. Regards, DBoffey (talk) 17:31, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

DBoffey, it should tell you on Commons below the image what the dimensions are. For instance this image is 359×397. It would have to be re-sized smaller for use in an article though. Zindor (talk) 17:40, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, DBoffey, I think I've been reading your question wrong! The font size would be defined in em units, if you convert that to px would that give you some reference for the size of the annotation? Zindor (talk) 17:47, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Again, Zindor, this does not help me. I need the template to find out the size of the annotation. Working it out by hand and feeding that information to the template defeats the point of it. Besides, if a different client should decide to use a typeface with different metrics, all the calculations would be wrong. DBoffey (talk) 18:10, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

There's a parameter for defining a typeface, choose a websafe one. I suggest asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates if you'd like a template amended, the Teahouse isn't typically geared for that. Zindor (talk) 19:10, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

I’ve posted my question on the Wikipedia help desk. Maybe, they’ll be able to tell me how to achieve my goal. Thanks again for trying to help. DBoffey (talk) 19:30, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, The page Ruby Chocolate has an Arabic equivalent شوكولاتة الروبي but they aren't connected and I can't seem to figure out how to link it. It isn't the first time I've faced this problem.

--FH24 (talk) 06:50, 24 January 2021 (UTC)FH24 FH24 (talk) 06:50, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

@FH24: Since there are already some other languages linked, the procedure is as folllows:

1. Find the item "Wikidata item" in the sidebar. Its normally under "Tools". Click on it.
2. You should now arrive at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q42417413, the sister project through which articles are linked.
3. Check that you are logged in. If you aren't, click on the login link, log in with your usual enwiki credentials, and come back to Q42417413 one the login is completed
4. on Q42417413, scroll down until you find a section called "Wikipedia". click on "edit". The section will now slightly change appeareance.
5. Identify the empty input field containing the grey text "wiki" at the end of the section". Put "ar" into it (the language code of the Wikipedia we want to link to).
6. A new input field appears next to the one you yust filled in, containing the grey words "page". Put the unescaped arabic page title there ("شوكولاتة الروبي")
7. hit save.
8. The pages are now linked. The server will show the link to the arab page when he gets to update the enwiki page for the next time. If you wish, you can force him by doing a purge. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:20, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: Thank you! I discovered that the problem is an interwiki conflict. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FH24 (talk • contribs) 20:34, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Reaching out to ask if my page will be removed without warning. I have limited time to edit my page and am plugging along, trying to "learn" as I go. I have gotten 3 helpful messages from editors, but can't figure out how to reply. Time is my enemy. I am happy to plug along, but also want to acknowledge that I am as slow as molasses. Learning how to "reference" right now. I sometimes have to wait until the weekend between edits. So sorry! Vanessa SmallSteps101 (talk) 22:29, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, SmallSteps101. This is about Draft:Henry Lorentzen. Your draft is in no danger of being deleted as long as you edit at least once every six months. The artist appears notable. Referencing for beginners should be useful. Also read about the neutral point of view. Currently, the article is full of praise, and reads more like a hagiography than a neutral encyclopedia article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:40, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Looking more closely, SmallSteps101, I am not yet convinced that Henry Lorentzen actually meets Wikipedia's notability guideline for creative professionals such as artists. I am always willing to take a look at new evidence. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:21, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, I did read the page on notability and I am open to your critique. At this point, (as I gather information) am I going to have this page removed? SmallSteps101 (talk) 13:08, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Your draft was submitted and Declined. It remains as a draft. There is no deadline. Up to you to address the criticisms in the Declined notice before you resubmit. On your User page, you should describe your connection - if any - to Lorentzen. David notMD (talk) 20:43, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I changed a picture on this template, {{Reading}}, for the article at  Courtesy link: Reading. How can I fix the picture so it appears correctly on my iPhone? Thanks, John NH (talk) 23:00, 23 January 2021 (UTC) John NH (talk) 23:00, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey folks! I just joined the community today and edited the Wiki page of former Utah Governor J. Bracken Lee. (Added the information that some of his grandparents were English, not uncommon for early 20th century Utah) Just one hour after editing another user undid my edits, commenting that the genealogical information was useless and the source (itself a Wiki project) questionable. As you might guess I don't have any experience editing Wikipedia but I cannot understand this point of view. I am aware that Wikipedia can't deliver a family tree for every person featured but as far as I know ancestral background information is treated as relevant enough at least when it comes to the biographies of Presidents, Congressmen and Governors (For example try understand JFK without knowing that all his grandparents were Irish). So I do think that is relevant information. Also I find the source reliable enough - it relies on the US Census and the FamilySearch website. (Moreover family trees are not known for changing in the course of time or being subject to widespread dispute, other sources on the Internet show matching data.) If you couldn't use sources like those most genealogical information would be lost for Wikipedia. So I think that my edits should remain. What should I do?

Sincerely, VernalUT VernalUT (talk) 22:02, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

VernalUT Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You should discuss your concerns with the other editor involved, either on the article talk page or with the editor directly on their user talk page. Other wiki-type websites that are user-editable are not accepted as reliable sources(note that Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source) due to their being user-editable. You should use where that website gets its information as your source. FamilySearch also contains a great deal of user-generated content. 331dot (talk) 22:09, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

More specifically, Wikipedia does not consider user-generated content to be reliable. The US Census should be directly cited, as it appears to be reliable (though it runs the risk of being considered a primary source, which is a whole other can of worms). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:13, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

 2600:1700:A280:A30:5EC:D160:8738:3513 (talk) 19:45, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

It depends on which photo. Most are licensed for reuse (usually attribution required) but some are done by "fair use" which means that they are not available for reuse. Click on the photo you are interested in to see what license it has. RudolfRed (talk) 20:02, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

 Could you please tell me what attribution required means? I got the photo's off your web site, Dose that mean I could use them to help tell my story?

Pete — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:A280:A30:A9F5:655C:2266:93A8 (talk) 23:03, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I think there is a problem with the criticism sections on many pages on music albums, records, etc. Most of them start with - 'Generic Album Title was met with generally (favorable/unfavorable based on whatever Metacritic calculated) reviews. At Metacritic, which assigns a normalized rating out of 100 to reviews from professional publications, the album received an average score of ****). This is a pretty vapid stat to start that section with and the calculation of the score seems to give undue weight to some reviews anyways. Should a review in the NYT carry the same as a review from the artist's hometown newspaper? Not per Wikipedia policy so it's odd this aggregating service gets to end run undue weight. Also, Wikipedia policy states "Commentary should... be sought from reliable sources for critics' consensus of the film." "Such commentary should come before reporting aggregate scores because such sources are likely to be more authoritative and to provide descriptive prose. The aggregate scores can complement this commentary. Single-number "averages" of opinion can be insufficient on their own." Yet Metacritic gets to list its supervote at the top of nearly every article. Where could I go to raise my concern? SanctimoniousDuplicitousBiters (talk) 13:53, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

@SanctimoniousDuplicitousBiters: You could find the appropriate WikiProject at Category:WikiProject Music genres and bring up your concern on their talk page. For example, if you enjoy rock music, you could try posting on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rock music. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:49, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

@SanctimoniousDuplicitousBiters: You could also review Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Album_article_style_advice#Critical_reception and bring up your concern on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums/Album article style advice. GoingBatty (talk) 23:50, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Hot fire test The rocketmans2 (talk) 19:41, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

@The rocketmans2: I added a template to the top of your draft, which includes some suggestions for you. I also added Template:WikiProject Rocketry to the talk page, but that WikiProject is inactive. Maybe you can find another WikiProject that would be helpful. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:58, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I belong to Tansen. When I searched the world heritage sites of Nepal. I got "The Medieval Town of Tansen" when I clicked on that link I found the wrong description about Tansen Town. That was a description of some Hinduism music not about the Tansen Town. And I tried to edit it, that wasn't accepted. 93.144.36.158 (talk) 23:14, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi I.P, I believe you're looking for Tansen, Nepal. If you look at the top of pages sometimes you'll see a note explaining that there are topics with the same name and there will be a link. In this case there was a link to a disambiguation page which lists all other pages with the same name. To find out more about disambiguation, follow this link. Regards, Zindor (talk) 23:21, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

I have re-targeted the link that was present at List of World Heritage Sites in Nepal, thank you for bringing it to our attention. Sometimes link don't display their true target; these are piped links. Zindor (talk) 23:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

I fixed 16 other articles that incorrectly linked to [[Tansen]] instead of [[Tansen, Nepal|Tansen]]. GoingBatty (talk) 00:13, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Nice one, GoingBatty. I had a peek at the incoming links earlier but only one more stuck out at me. I might look into reinstalling AWB. Zindor (talk) 00:33, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@Zindor: I did a search for "Nepal insource:/\[\[Tansen\]\]/" in Wikipedia to confirm there were several to fix, and then performed the same search in AWB. GoingBatty (talk) 00:39, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining the method, that'll come in useful. Zindor (talk) 00:44, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

My toolbar does not show a "More" button. What did I do? Jimtaos (talk) 02:17, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@Jimtaos: Were you logged in? It won't show up when you're not. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 02:48, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

You may need to be autoconfirmed. That should happen automatically after 10 edits and your account is four days old. RudolfRed (talk) 02:54, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

The general question I have is this: What is to be done about Zombie web sites that are cited in Wikipedia articles but have been taken over with malicious intent? The criteria I'm developing are these:

1) The citation is for a real article that existed on that site and the specific citation and may or may not exist on Archive.org

2) The site used for the citation appears in dozens of articles in Wikipedia.

3) There is a live domain that is also currently archived in Archive.org with generic SEO general interest eye-candy. None of the content of the older site exists on the live site, and it is clear that there is a history gap between the old site and the new one. http://web.archive.org/web/20181129130655/http://www.blurt-online.com/

4) There clear evidence that at some point in the recent past, that site changed ownership and as a result, the site's content changed to generic info typical of a parked domain.

5) The result of clicking on the link to the live site leads to a malware download dialog. The current live domain sends a malware page for Wikipedia citations but does not send them for navigating from the home page of the site itself.

6) An additional complication is this. The content of the original site has been moved. This is a separate editing problem in the Wikipedia domain but part of the original issue nonetheless. The new domain site is slightly different and searching for the terms used in a Wikipedia article reveals the correct reference for the original citation.

Specifics of the anecdotal experience: I checked a citation on the article about Herb Cohen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herb_Cohen#cite_note-blurt-1 the Wikipedia live link to the citation is this http://www.blurt-online.com/news/page/68/

I clicked on the link in the citation to the article and a classic malware page loaded which told me I needed to update my Adobe Flash Player. It was not an Adobe page.

A little more research with Google and Archive.org revealed the following. The original site was hosted at https://blurt-online.com/ and after 2013 the online Zine named Blurt was sold and the domain changed to https://blurtonline.com/ The google results for site:https://blurtonline.com/ show about 11,000 results. The google results for site:https://blurt-online.com/ show about 52 results.

It looks like all of the old material is on https://blurtonline.com including the article I was interested in. However, the old https://blurt-online.com/ tried to deliver malware when I clicked on the citation to the live article.

So this experience raises these questions:

• "Did bad actors take over the old Burst Online site and use it to entice Wikipedia users to download malware?"
• "Did these bad actors see a high count of 404 errors on their site and decide to target the users coming from Wikipedia?"
• "Does this type of pattern affect other Wikipedia pages?"
• "Does Wikipedia have (or need) a bot of it's own that flags links that may be dangerous, or simply broken?"

BrianDSy (talk) 12:09, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

@BrianDSy Such sites are considered dead links, those links need to be replaced with an archived version of the page. You can tag the link as such with {{dead link}} or you can update the dead link yourself to point to the new resource. Aasim (talk) 21:51, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

@BrianDSy: See WP:URLREQ, where you can request that the usurped site be blacklisted. If there are a lot of refs to it, there is a bot that can be used to fix them. If there are just a few refs, and they use citation templates, add the |url-status=unfit (which will cause it to not link to the bad site) and, if it exists, the |archive-url= and |archive-date= to the archived original page. See WP:LINKROT for a complete treatment of the subject. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:04, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Please explain me how I should do to write a page on myself. I think I accomplished enough in my life and can demonstrate it with sufficient references. You can check it just by typing my name on the web. I just wanted to write my biography and add all the necessary references. Leopoldo Stefanutti (talk) 16:51, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

@Leopoldo Stefanutti: I would suggest starting a draft (after taking a look at Your first article) so that reviewers can take a look at it first. That being said, it's strongly discouraged to write an article about yourself as people find it very hard to write about themselves neutrally. Ideally, if you are notable by Wikipedia's standards, an interested editor will write about you without much prompting. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:03, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Appears you may have made a common beginner's mistake in creating a draft at your User page. If you insist on trying an article about yourself, follow the YFA advice, above. David notMD (talk) 18:06, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

@Leopoldo Stefanutti: Please also note that an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:20, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

For some reason, WP keeps signing me out. why's that? 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 05:27, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@LightningComplexFire: the maximum length of your login session depends on several factors, incluuding, but not limited to, wether the checkbox "Keep me logged in (for up to 365 days)" is checked. If it is, your login session can last for up to 365 days with no action. If the checkbox isn't checked, your session is limited to a maximum time of 24 hours, and automatically ends when you close your browser. Victor Schmidt (talk) 05:55, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

USS Sterlet (SS-392) I added important historical information to the listing on USS Sterlet (SS-392), but had a problem with the citation number. Here is the paragraph with the problem.

>Her keel was laid down on 14 July 1943 at the Portsmouth Navy Yard. She was launched on 27 October 1943 in the first triple launching in the history of submarine construction.[7] Sterlet and Pomfret were christened in the building basin and Piranha was christened and launched from the building ways.<

The number [7] after the second sentence should be [1] since this is the first citation. The citation appears as [7] in References. The citation itself is correct.

I would like to learn what the problem is and how to correct it. Thank you.

Folkrelic Folkrelic (talk) 05:53, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@Folkrelic: The citation number goes by the order it appears in the source code. Since there are six sources in the infobox, which goes before the first paragraph in the source code, yours is numbered #7. This is nothing to worry about, since the numbers do not actually matter; its only use is to point readers to the correct reference at the bottom of the page. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 06:05, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

How do I change my username BigbadFelzo (talk) 06:41, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, BigbadFelzo. The easiest thing is to abandon use of your current account and never use it again. You can then start a new account and resume editing. If your situation is more complex, then please read Wikipedia:Changing username. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:54, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

How to edit, and make them searchable on Google? David Bobby George quotes (talk) 07:13, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, David Bobby George quotes. Self-promotion is forbidden on Wikipedia, and visibility in Google searches is not our objective. Our goal is to build a comprehensive neutral encyclopedia. Google strives to link to high quality content, not spam. If our content is excellent, Google will index it. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:21, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

See subject. Thanks! SLG4ever (talk) 18:28, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi @SLG4ever, welcome to Wikipedia. While I'm sure there is a policy for this somewhere, which another editor may find, the general standard is to use LGBT, as looking at Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies and the many articles on similar subjects. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 18:38, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

SLG4ever the general rule "follow the sources" is usually a good principle. Use the same terminology as the sources your article is based on. If the sources are inconsistent use your own judgement. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:47, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Jai Jai Swami Samartha ==== Heading text ==== MITU12 (talk) 07:54, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@MITU12: Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 08:20, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

I willingly need help to understand how this works

Hello. I am a newcomer from Myanmar, Asia and I am studying Food engineering . I mostly read articles from wiki as I believe it's reliable enough for me. Thou reading articles in English is fine for me , I intend to translate some academic articles to my language (if it is legit) in order to help my local people and students to learn about their subject more quickly and conveniently.

I understand that reading in original language written by the author can gives more information but I also have difficulties in reading sometimes, as I have to read the whole article to understand about it absolutely and hard to read overview. This make me slow in my academic learning (self-learning). I think that other local people who are learning the same subject and as weak as me in English have the same trouble too so this is why I want to translate. This will be probably a small help for them too.

In conclusion , I would like to ask my senior editors about how to translate an (academic) article in Wikipedia and want to know it is legit to translate academic articles (I am too concern about policy).

Thank you for reading my request and I wish all be fine to withstand this pandemic.

From SDG Hidgeright (talk) 07:48, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@SDG Hidgeright: Hello fellow translator! I also do some translating, albeit the opposite direction from Mandarin to English. If you're planning on translating into Burmese (or another language), then you should be following the guidelines and policies on the Burmese Wikipedia, since that's where the final article will be. However, I believe that the general gist of it is about the same: to stay in a neutral point of view, make everything verifiable, and don't use original research. For translators, there's a tool called Content Translation that you can use to translate line by line. I personally don't use the tool, but I prefer to built the article ground up using the source article as a guide only since I can't access some of the print references used in some articles. Translating is a underappreciated endeavor sometimes, so I commend your efforts and wish you the best of luck! ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 08:29, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

The new, translated article must credit the source article. The recommended way to do this is to do both of the following:

• (a) Provide in the first edit summary of the target article a statement of your translation, together with an interlanguage link to the source (translated-from) article. Example: Content in this edit is translated from the existing French Wikipedia article at [[:fr:Exact name of French article]]; see its history for attribution.
• (b) Place the template {{Translated page}} on the target article's talk page.

Hope this helps. David notMD (talk) 09:09, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

The article Doraemon begins with the 3rd citation, could you please edit and solve the problem? --Atlantis77177 (talk) 09:03, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

References 1 and 2 are in the Infobox. This is considered normal practice. David notMD (talk) 09:11, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Why doesn't anyone nominate Wikipedia for WP:GA. It seems ready, or I felt so. Comments.--Atlantis77177 (talk) 10:01, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@Atlantis77177: Hi, Teahouse is not exactly the right place for this question - if you think the article should be nominated you are absolutely free to do so - the steps are described over here WP:GAI. Hope my answer was of help to you. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:10, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Update tags, citation needed, and some not so reliable sources. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 10:11, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

This question is about my rejected article(Nikhita Khan Rhino Centre),I added reliabke sources,but it is not coming.Why? Ishaan bommakanti 650 (talk) 18:20, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Nikhita Khan Rhino Centre

Hi Ishaan bommakanti 650, if you have added any reliable sources I certainly can't see them. The only reference currently is a page on San Dieago Zoo's website that doesn't mention Nikhita Khan Rhino Centre at all. --Paul ❬talk❭ 18:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

That draft was created by User:Ishaan bommakanti 6548. Why are you using two different accounts, Ishaan bommakanti 650? While this is not forbidden, there are only certain purposes for which it is allowed, and you should explain on both user pages why you are doing so. See WP:Multiple accounts. --ColinFine (talk) 18:40, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Declined four times. At no time have you provided references that are about the Centre. David notMD (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Sorry,I could not find any references about it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ishaan bommakanti 650 (talk • contribs) 08:42, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ishaan bommakanti 650: I am not sure why you are not finding sources. I do not have time to edit the article myself, but if you really want to safe your draft, you could consider using some of these sources: [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. Not an independent source, but might be used for some basic facts: [9].

I am not sure whether these mentions are sufficient for a standalone article, but in any case, you could have a better chance if these were integrated into the article. Also, it seems you misspelled the title: It should be Nikita, not Nikhita. Maybe that is why you couldn't find sources? --LordPeterII (talk) 10:14, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

My edits are never accepted so I'd like to flag a necessary update to 116th United States Congress to reflect that Kamala Harris has replaced Mike Pence and Chuck Schumer is Majority Leader. Serenwyl (talk) 10:29, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Serenwyl:, Teahouse is not the right place for discussing any article disputes - you need to address this on the Discussion Page of the mentioned article. Hope my answer was of help for you. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:53, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@Serenwyl: I think you are referring to the fact that the article you refer to is protected from editing by some users. If you wish to propose a change, please make a formal edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page, Talk:116th United States Congress. 331dot (talk) 10:56, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@Serenwyl: I would add that the current session of Congress is the 117th United States Congress. 331dot (talk) 10:57, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Dear participants, please help to post an article "Draft:Gleb Sintsov" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Gleb_Sintsov) in WIKI. SeregaBeglov2020 (talk) 11:12, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

SeregaBeglov2020, if you would like the draft to be published, add the template {{subst:submit|SeregaBeglov2020}} to the page. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 11:42, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Giraffer, thank you for your assistance.SeregaBeglov2020 (talk) 12:10, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello.

Can someone please rewrite this minimalist Wiki entry:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Melody_Moko

I saw this artist win an award on our Australian Country Music Awards (on Australia Day!) and wanted to create a "stub" for other people to fill in details later.

I just want to add a completely new Topic that has never existed before; everyone and anyone else can fill in the details later.

I just want a "stub", and do not want to spend more time on it.

Please rewrite it and publish it.

Also, in future, what's the quickest and fastest way to create a new entry...is there a Template I can fill in? Anyone know???

Cheers,

Alex Portnoy  182.239.253.234 (talk) 12:19, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Alex, welcome to the Teahouse. You draft seem to be refused because of a need of a reliable source, for example this one: https://www.newcastleherald.com.au/story/6952050/melody-moko-in-tune-with-life-and-her-creativity-on-new-album/ - there is no problem for submitting stubs but it will need to be based on at least one reliable source. Hope my answer was of help for you. CommanderWaterford (talk) 12:32, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

For establishing notability three reliable secondary sources containing sigcov would be the ballpark standard in this case. The award might provide some leeway. Zindor (talk) 12:59, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

I have got permission to draft an edit for a protected page but I do not know how to move forward with it. Please help. YoYoRockNRoll (talk) 06:09, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@YoYoRockNRoll: I think you mean an edit request. The page has instructions on how to do so. Be sure to state your change clearly and unambiguously, like "change X to Y", and provide reliable sources. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 06:29, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, YoYoRockNRoll, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm a little concerned by your words "I have got permission" - I'm not sure what you mean by it. If you mean, from or on behalf of the subject of the article, then you need to understand that such permission is not relevant to Wikipedia. Nobody, and particularly not the subject, has ownership of an article. If information is in a reliable published source, and a consensus of Wikipedia editors agrees that it is encyclopaedic, then the information should be in the article even if the subject does not want it there. Conversely, if information is not available in a reliable published source, or if the consensus of WIkipedia editors is that it is not encyclopaedic, then it should not be in an article even if the subject wants it there. --ColinFine (talk) 13:19, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

How do I open a Wikipedia page for someone? Constantine Kourtidis (talk) 13:36, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

You write an article for someone, so long as they meet Wikipedia's WP:NOTABILITY standards. Bear in mind that the subject of your article should meet these requirements before you start writing, as Biographies of Living Persons are subject to strict standards. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 13:38, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I was wondering: Some things might be very clear to anyone from a certain country, who speaks a certain language, but they might not be clear at all the people who are not in that group.

Sometimes, reputable English language sources will write about such things, but get them very wrong. Because they are reputable, and there are few other English language sources, other reputable English language sources might reiterate the same erroneous information. Sometimes this goes on for decades, with nobody correcting these errors.

What I want to know is: What is Wikipedia's stance when it comes to cases like this? I know about WP:NPV, but I've also seen a lot of arguments boiling down to "because all the important English-speaking people say so it has to be true, even if every single source in the original language says otherwise", and most of the time these are the arguments that end up having the final say. To me that hardly seems neutral/impartial.

And it's not too bad if you can come up with sources in the original language, but what about cases where you cannot even find an academic source in the original language, because it's something like the definition of a word, or even common sense, that nobody cares to write about because of how obvious it is?

I haven't personally gotten involved with stuff like this (yet, maybe), it's just that I've seen a lot of it around and would like to know in advance what the official stance is and how to deal with it if I do encounter it. 109.236.4.20 (talk) 14:34, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Do you have an example? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:10, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

I haven't actually encountered any problems with this (yet, maybe) but: "Standard Tokyo Japanese" and "Tokyo Japanese" being used as synonyms for "standard Japanese" is pretty common in English, but "standard Japanese" and "Tokyo Japanese" are in fact two completely different things, not to mention how "Tokyo Japanese" is a badly-defined term that could mean one or more of half a dozen different dialects.

A Google search of "standard Tokyo Japanese" term turns up lots of seemingly reputable sources, some academic, and there are even a few Japanese ones that seem to have reverse-imported usage of the term as a translation for the Japanese word for "standard Japanese". While "Tokyo Japanese" does have a load of different definitions that nobody can agree on, though, the one thing that the academics do seem to have agreed on is that it is not standard Japanese.

My point is: If someone on en.wikipedia decided to replace all references to standard Japanese with "Tokyo Japanese", it seems that the myriad of English sources would make it really easy for them to do so, even though it's obviously wrong to anyone who has knowledge of the subject.

Is the "lots of English sources say so, thus it is so, even if the source language sources contradict it" stance commonly seen an official Wikipedia guideline/stance? If not, how should cases like this be dealt with?

There's a better example I saw ages ago, where changes by a Japanese person (that anyone who understands Japanese could see were correct) were reverted based on English sources, but unfortunately I can't recall what the article was, only that it had something to do with a historical term. 109.236.4.20 (talk) 14:32, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello again! I was looking around on my watchlist and wondering what the 'live updates' button did. Could someone help out? Thanks! Fawnstream (talk) 14:31, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Fawnstream. It kinda does what it says on the tin (see hover-over for the message). Your watchlist shows pages that you are following (which you control by ticking the box in the source editor as you make an edit). So, you may well now be watching this Teahouse page. Later, the "live update" feature will automatically alert you that your watched pages have changed and give a new blue links saying something like "view new changes since time/date". Clicking on that link will refresh the list. If there are no changes to be seen, the blue link won't appear. Hence if you only have slowly changing pages in the list, there may be nothing to see. However, the Teahouse, for example, tends to update very often. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:44, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Ah, thank you, @Mike Turnbull. Fawnstream (talk) 14:52, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauss%27s_lemma

Right now this article has a section that reads Gauss's lemma (number theory) – Condition under which a integer is a quadratic residue. But this is grammatically incorrect, as it should be "an integer". But when I went to edit the page to fix it, that section appears to be part of something else and it's not available for edit. How to fix this? Thank you. --2601:644:8500:A520:40E5:9B36:CA3D:F2EC (talk) 15:58, 25 January 2021 (UTC) 2601:644:8500:A520:40E5:9B36:CA3D:F2EC (talk) 15:58, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

The dab page Gauss's lemma is using the template:Annotated link template, which pulls the text from the template:Short description template in the target article (Gauss's lemma (number theory) in this case). I have fixed the grammatical error there. CodeTalker (talk) 16:20, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

How long till the bottom becomes dark ?? Visit4873488390935a (talk) 17:05, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@Visit4873488390935a: Do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:20, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

On my talk page I am warned about edits that were falsely labeled as vandalism please help Thing User (talk) 16:56, 25 January 2021 (UTC) Thing User (talk) 16:56, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Leave a message on the Talk page of the editor who reverted your contribution. David notMD (talk) 17:18, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Your edits like this one [10] do indeed look like vandalism and were correctly reverted. Theroadislong (talk) 17:23, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Theroadislong, read the whole page for context. This was just an edit that definitely looks like vandalism from the diffs, but isn't in the bigger picture. Pahunkat (talk) 17:28, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

No the edit was not vandalism it was in the nonsense/vandalism category on an article that was not meant to be an informational article Thing User (talk) 17:29, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Thing User. Disclosing what you are doing in your edits, by using edit summaries to explain your edits before you save, is good for many reasons. Many, many users do so for every edit, no manner how minor its nature, and how seemingly self-explanatory the purpose is if someone looks at the diff. Here, while your edits were not vandalism, they were of a type that was on the very high side of having a surface appearance of vandalism, in the absence of others studying the surrounding context. (I would also note that I think this edit was fairly likely to be reverted for other reasons, even if the context was known, e.g., because whereas the other edits under the "vandalism/nonsense" header are guessing as to a type of bad edit predicted as the seven-millionth topic, your edit lacked that clarity with any explanatory language.)

All this is to say, while you are not required to leave edit summaries, doing so is a much better practice in general; doing so for this edit would have been exquisitely prudent. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:55, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Good morning- I currently have an article that was resubmitted for review back in December, edited further in January, and is now still awaiting review. Theroadislong indicated that there was still some "unsourced content," but I'm not sure to what that is referring in this article. They also said they'd leave it to another reviewer to decide. Any guidance or feedback would be much appreciated - thank you! Jcollinsycc (talk) 13:39, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, unsourced content includes for instance the first paragraph of the education section of your draft Draft:Roy S. Herbst. Paid editing will be held to a higher level of scrutiny. Theroadislong (talk) 13:43, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! I've added a reference for the start of the Education section. Thank you for your guidance! Jcollinsycc (talk) 18:05, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

so ive had a few bumbs in making my first article and ive tried to make a not so much guide as just a note and some facts about other works my article is on no mans sky mineral farming and it kinda complicates itself because ive been denied several times so um can somebody please tell me what to do to polish it i mean i didnt intend for it to be a guide but that kinda happened so anyody who can help me polish it that would be great look up draft no mans sky mineral farming i need contributions and such as then i am ending on a good note i am trying my best thank you for your time Wulfenitegaming (talk) 18:16, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Wulfenitegaming, Draft:No Man's Sky mineral farming does not appear suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia because it's too much of a guide/in-universe. I'd suggest focusing on improving existing articles instead of trying to create a new page. No Man's Sky is already pretty well-developed, so it doesn't need a ton of help, but there are other pages that do at WP:TASKS. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:20, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Wulfenitegaming, you may be looking for something like Gamepedia for this. No Man's Sky has one dedicated to it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:27, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm very unfamiliar with how to add images to an article, but it looks like I'd need to upload it on WikiCommons and I'd need rights to the image. I was wondering if someone here could walk me through the process or direct me to the right WP guidelines on how to do it. I'm specifically wondering if it would be possible to add the cover arts of various podcasts to their respective articles. As an example, how would I go about adding the cover art for Come to Papa (podcast) to WikiCommons and then to the article itself. Would I run into legal issues? Are there ways around it like using poor quality pictures (I think I've seen something about this somewhere but I don't remember)? TipsyElephant (talk) 17:48, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

• TipsyElephant, cover art is almost always copyrighted, so you'd be adding it under fair use. Go to Special:Upload, and choose the local option. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:16, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@Sdkb: I didn't see any local option, but I found an option for "Album or Single cover" and decided that was probably a safe bet. Let me know if I did it wrong and how I would go about correcting it. Here are the two I uploaded: File:Come-to-papa-revised-cover.jpg and File:Come-to-papa-original-cover.png. TipsyElephant (talk) 19:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

TipsyElephant, sorry, my bad, I meant to send you to WP:File Upload Wizard, not Special:Upload. (We really ought to consolidate those pages...) Yep, it looks like you did it correctly! {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:18, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

 Dick Omondi (talk) 19:31, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Dick Omondi, you probably shouldn't. Wikipedia doesn't have profiles, it has articles, because Wikipedia isn't for advertising, marketing or public relations; it's an encyclopedia. Articles aren't owned or controlled by any one person, and they're written neutrally. If the person you know is notable by Wikipedia's standards, someone without a conflict of interest may eventually come along and write about them. Until then, it's probably better to write about them somewhere else on the internet. Vahurzpu (talk) 19:54, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hoping someone is able to assist. We used a 'Wiki writer' to publish a page on an Executive I work for however after a few weeks the page was removed. The company who wrote it said there wasn't enough reputable sources in the page. I wanted to know if there is someone I can confirm this with as the Executive has hundreds of online sources and others in the same business, at the same level, have existing pages. The person who published it was from 'the Wiki Expert' and the article was for Phil Lynch, CEO Media Manchester United. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. SamRo2021 (talk) 13:41, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi SamRo2021 Firstly you will need to be far more specific - what exactly was the article's title or the username of the person who created it? Phil Lynch is an Australian football player, Philip Lynch is an Irish businessman, and Phillip Lynch is an Australian politician.

Secondly it is generally a bad idea to pay someone to write an article. While paid editing is not prohibited it is widely regarded as less than honest work so such articles are very closely scrutinized by volunteer editors. No paid editor can ever guarantee that articles they write will "stick", few do. Some paid editors are in fact scammers. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:56, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi SamRo2021. Please advise the exact name of the title where the article or proposed article's content was posted at. Also, did the company advise any examples of pages they had created in the past, so that you could see examples of their work in writing articles before hiring them? Please tell us the names of each one--if you could copy and paste from their advertisement emails or responses with that list of example works, that would be extremely helpful to us. Thank you.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the information, we didn't realise at the time that it was frowned upon to have someone write it for us, although can confirm it has been a poor experience. Below is the draft we saw of the article, I don't know the Wiki username of the person who wrote it however his name was Craig from 'The Wiki Expert'

— Preceding unsigned comment added by SamRo2021 (talk • contribs) 14:35, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, SamRo2021. The draft still exists, at Draft:Philip Lynch (businessman). It was created by Gretainis in their sandbox, and moved to draft space by by Curbon7 on November 19th, just before they declined it on review. If Gretainis is "Craig from The Wiki Expert" then he is in breach of Wikipedia's policies - and given that the text that you have posted matches that in the draft, it would seem to be the same person.

Curbon7 can give you more details, but it appears that the sources given are not enough to establish that Lynch meets Wikipedia's criteria of notability. --ColinFine (talk) 15:51, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

ColinFine is correct, the sources did not establish notability. Curbon7 (talk) 20:11, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

thank you for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SamRo2021 (talk • contribs) 16:22, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

User Gretanis was previously warned not to do COI/PAID editing without making a declaration, a warning "which was deleted from their Talk Page in this DIFF".. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:31, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

From a person who does not follow professional football (or any other professional sport), the references for Lynch strike me as 'thin,' meaning a mention in passing, in lists of other people, and in what are basically regurgitations of press releases. Being a successful businessperson does not automatically make that person encyclopeia-worthy. If there are in fact "hundreds of online sources" those are not reflected in the chosen references. The fact that other articles exist counts for nothing - among English Wikipedia's millions of articles there are tens of thousands that should be deleted. David notMD (talk) 16:36, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

(e/c Please note my post below regards a different origin story, regarding an earlier posting of this content, by a "different user" [the hydra has more than one head]).

Thanks SamRo2021. With your posting of the content I was able to locate the title of the deleted article. But can I ask again: did the company ever provide a list of titles they had created as examples, in order to sell their services? If so, please provide that list here (or to my talk page; e.g., click edit at the top paste at the bottom of the page, and save). Such a list would be of great value to help us stop this company from cheating others with poor work, like they did here.

Here's some of what what happened. After the article was posted, it was scrutinized at a project discussion forum called Articles for Deletion, to decide whether an encyclopedia article on the topic was warranted based on the concept of "notability". In short, Wikipedia employs this concept to avoid indiscriminate inclusion of topics in the encyclopedia by attempting to ensure that the subjects of articles are "worthy of notice" – by only including articles on topics that the world has taken note of by substantively treating them in reliable sources unconnected with the topic. The general notability standard ("GNG") thus presumes that topics are notable if they have "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

The now closed discussion may be viewed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip Lynch (executive). As you can see, the result was its deletion for appearing not to meet the GNG. In my view, this company had the contents of your wallet, and neither your, nor the encyclopedia's, best interests in mind when they agreed to do this.

I say this because a proper job would have entailed researching whether the right type and depth of sources existed to write an article that could "stick", and then only taking your money if that was true. If those sources exist (in your post you indicate they might), the article should have been written properly using them; if they don't exist, they shouldn't have taken on the job. I don't know the answer to whether those sources exist, but I can tell you what they posted was essentially a slapdash blurb, with mostly the wrong types of sources cited, and so manifestly they did not provide proper value for your payment. The company representative who worked on the article did all this in violation of our mandatory policies for paid editing disclosure, after being advised of them, which shows you a lot about their prerogatives and ethics.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:36, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm posting this separately because it's a tangent. I wrote most of the above before ColinFine posted, having found and focused on the deleted article, and having not found the draft. After the above post, I looked at the draft (which I will likely delete per the deletion discussion), and compared it with the deleted content and some fairly fishy business seems to be going on that I am at a bit of a loss to explain – really odd. The draft appears to faked written anew. When you follow the way it was written, it has the appearance of some content being added here and some content being added there as if it's organically growing. Yet when you view the end result, it has parts that are word-for-word the same content from the deleted article in places (and the deleted article, and every edit of it, pre-dates the draft.

You might think something like, "oh, well at some point the person found the deleted content and added it in". But no, I can find a word-for-word sentence being added, and then its citations being added, over multiple edits, when the result is a duplicate of the deleted content, unique enough that could not result from a parallel evolution. Why would someone do that?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:36, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

The user which has created the draft also created (now deleted) article Will Scully-Power. This was also put through AfD. Their website lists a supposed customer, but I can't verify if that's true or fake. Pahunkat (talk) 16:51, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

This hash-up will potentially lead to Wikipedia Admin reviewing the validity of all the Wikilinks in the draft, including Manchester United, Yahoo!, Sony Pictures, Brown University and List of people with surname Lynch. (Just kidding.). David notMD (talk) 17:10, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

As MetaWiz4331, I have been contributing to Wikipedia by creating new pages, such as Alejandro Edda, Vincenzo Nicoli, Flaminia Cinque, Brandon Scott, Wilmer Calderon, Mark Holden, Denise Dowse, Charlotte Zucker and Monica Lopera. Then one day, I accidentally logged out and I have discovered that I have a session hijacking to deal with. As MetaWiz4331, can I be logged back in Wikipedia as long as there is not a session hijacking? 174.215.199.134 (talk) 19:52, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy:MetaWiz4331

I assume you want to tell me that you forgot your passowrd, or the password doesn't seem to be what You recall. Luckily for you, MetaWiz4331 has specified an email adress. This means that you can simply visit Special:PasswordReset, enter "MetaWiz4331" in the username field, and give that big red button a click. You should then get an email from Wikipedia with a new temporary password that you can use to login. See also Help:Login. If you meant to describe a different situation, please try to be more specific, as symptoms or Session hijacking can have a wide variety of actualy causes and actual problems. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:16, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

A while back, I tried (operative word here, I didn't succeed) to add a Talk page archive to my Talk page. However, it a) didn't look right, and b), didn't actually seem to, er, archive anything in a way I could access? See this diff here. I truly don't know what I did wrong here.

I removed it...and now none of the section headers on my Talk page are editable, save for editing the entire page at a time. IIRC, on mobile, I don't think I can edit it at all, but I can't remember, as I dropped my phone like a dumbass this weekend and it's thusly in surgery, having its little phone guts removed. Any help? (I promise I'll never try doing really complex things again!) Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 19:32, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Ineffablebookkeeper, Could it be Disambiguation link notification for December 9? The last bit there doesn't look right to me. Adam9007 (talk) 19:48, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ineffablebookkeeper: I have installed a hotifix so that your talkpage is archived again. Whai I have done:

• I have removed that fragment from the disambiguation link notification
• I have added your old archive box at the top that worked until december
• I have disabled the bot generation of the archive index, since it doesn't seem to work (It looked like the start of Special:AllPages, if you ask me)
• I have created a manual Archive box using {{Archive box}}.
• I have moved User talk:Ineffablebookkeeper/Archives/ 1 to User talk:Ineffablebookkeeper/Archive 1 since that is what your archive system seems to be.

If you don't like the layout of the archive box in comparision to the bot generated one, check out its params, since I yust installed a quick version that "works". If you do change params, I recommend using the preview butotn. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:10, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

I'll have a look. Thank you so much! --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 20:39, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

inhumane and degrading treatment a victim of enforced disappearance (quebec) premeditated murder tax fraud (fed/prov) no due process no statute of limitations need shadow councel no help anywhere 104.250.81.97 (talk) 13:22, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? If not this is probably not the venue that you're looking for. I'm afraid I don't have any particular suggestions for where it'd be best to go instead. --Paul ❬talk❭ 13:52, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps the loony bin.--Mr. 123453334 (talk) 21:19, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Mr. 123453334, that's not a particular nice way to speak about our misguided Teahouse guest. Zindor (talk) 21:47, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I do not speak any Italian, but I would like to do this anyway - how would I translate the page Fabrizio Romano to the Italian Wikipedia? Of course, the translating part can be done, but is there a special indication of a translation that I have to put to comply with copyright rules? Paul Vaurie (talk) 17:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC) Paul Vaurie (talk) 17:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Paul Vaurie. You can find the details about copyright and attribution at Wikipedia:Translate us. But how can you accomplish this if you don't speak Italian? Machine translation is not accurate enough to be acceptable. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:52, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

I can always ask for the help of an Italian editor. Paul Vaurie (talk) 17:54, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328: In fact, where can I find an editor who speaks both Italian and English and is experienced in both Wikipedias? Paul Vaurie (talk) 19:07, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Paul Vaurie, Wikipedia:WikiProject Italy doesn't seem very active but perhaps you can find some individual editors there who are still active. Another possibility is to look at the edit history of Italian language and its talk page. Substantive contributors probably speak Italian. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, everyone. Whenever I go on any page (just any page, doesn't have to be a talk page or only an article page), I always get a notice saying that a user script has failed to load, and it says to go to JavaScript for more help. When I press the link for user script, it sends me to User:Evad37/rater.js. I usually edit on mobile web, so I'm not sure if that has anything to do with it,though when I go on Desktop mode, I don't get the notification. Anyone else have this problem, or know how to fix it? Thanks! Cyclone Toby 20:45, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

For anyone wondering I put up a picture showing what the problem looked like for me. Stay safe, Cyclone Toby 20:53, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@Cyclone Toby: Other users (including me) are running into this problem as well. A question is also posted at the Village Pump at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#"An_attempt_to_load_a_user_script_has_failed". ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 00:12, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello I have been working hard to create a strong article as my first creation on wikipedia. as a complete beginner it has been hard and complicated! I have not yet submitted the article for review (I believe) and was wondering if someone would be able to proof read it for me as I would like to get it approved and online. the page is called Justin Kingsley and I have made it using 'visual editor' thank you Misletoe20 (talk) 19:15, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Justin Kingsley. David notMD (talk) 19:23, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Misletoe20. Please see the series of edits I have made, including some notes to you in the edit summaries I used, at the draft's history, e.g., regarding using named references, so that you don't repeat the same citation as a separate entry. Please note some of the fixes I started to the citation templates; continuing that to its conclusion would be good. In short, many, many citations are presented with a strange use of the citation template parameters, e.g., |last=October 12|first=Kristin Laird|last2= 2010

Not sure how that happened, but at least for this one, the fix appears straightforward—move the names to the correct locations, reconnect the different parts of the date into one entry next to date=, get rid of last2, which is for the last name of a second author (with none present and no matching first2=), viz, |last=Laird|first=Kristin|date=October 12, 2010. Many others are not so straightforward, as I noted in the edit summary. I am guessing this may be a result of the visual editor's various quirks and bugs, and may require source editing to fix. I suggest the Wikipedia:Tutorial for a primer, and, given the issues here, also Help:Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup.

Note that I have mostly corrected and commented on styling and formatting issues. These are not unimportant, but not nearly as much as the content, and the nature and depth of the sourcing that verifies that content and demonstrates the topic's notability, which I have not reviewed. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:03, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Regarding the last proviso in my post above, another user has reviewed the content, and notes it is full of improper marketing speak, providing some specific examples – of peacock language, buzz words – and other evaluative content included in Wikipedia's voice. Articles must be written from a neutral point of view, and don't hawk the virtues of their subject. (I'd also note that the inclusion of such ad-speak also violates a cardinal rule of writing: show, don't tell.)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:09, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Misletoe20, in addition to the phrases identified by a reviewer of the draft, other examples of unacceptable promotional language include "visions", "deepest desires", "global recognition", "passionate advocate", "made his mark with ground breaking campaigns", and "a mandate to invent a new way of communicating with youth". The entire draft reeks of promotionalism and must be completely rewritten from the neutral point of view, which is a core content policy. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:41, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

How do I edit?Nonetherite2 (talk) 00:38, 26 January 2021 (UTC) Nonetherite2 (talk) 00:38, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@Nonetherite2: You may want to try out the interactive tutorial, The Wikipedia Adventure for the basics of using and editing Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:41, 26 January 2021 (UTC) Hello Nonetherite2. You can edit by going to the Edit Source section at the top of the page in the right-hand corner under your username. User:Cirpatha

Recently, a trusted contributor named LouisAragon added information to the Baloch people page, with the following revision, text- 3 to 5 million Baloch-speakers (Brill, 2011) Citing - Spooner, Brian (2011). "10. Balochi: Towards a Biography of the Language". In Schiffman, Harold F. (ed.). Language Policy and Language Conflict in Afghanistan and Its Neighbors. Brill. p. 319. ISBN 978-9004201453.

Pointer- It [Balochi] is spoken by three to five million people in Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan, Oman and the Persian Gulf states, Turkmenistan, East Africa, and diaspora communities in other parts of the world.

But this text is not in the book-

Language Policy and Language Conflict in Afghanistan and Its Neighbors. 2011

https://books.google.tm/books?id=52aicl9l7rwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Language+Policy+and+Language+Conflict+in+Afghanistan+and+Its+Neighbors&hl=ru&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwie2P2G7rTuAhXosYsKHdkPAesQ6AEwAHoECAEQAg#v=snippet&q=It%20Balochi%20is%20spoken%20by%20three%20to%20five%20million%20people%20in%20Pakistan%2C%20Iran%2C%20Afghanistan%2C%20Oman%20and%20the%20Persian%20Gulf%20states%2C%20Turkmenistan%2C%20East%20Africa%2C&f=false

This text is in this book- Encyclopaedia Iranica, -Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1988

https://books.google.tm/books?id=xgYZAQAAIAAJ&q=Baluch&dq=It+Balochi+is+spoken+by+three+to+five+million+people+in+Pakistan,+Iran,+Afghanistan,+Oman+and+the+Persian+Gulf+states,+Turkmenistan,+East+Africa,&hl=ru&source=gbs_word_cloud_r&cad=3

Feel the difference from 1988 to 2011 this LouisAragon Member is Iranian, very closely following the pages concerning Baloch and provoking.  Ali banu sistani (talk) 19:16, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Ali banu sistani, it's great that you want to make sure that the page is accurate, but these types of comments should go on the article's talk page. Thanks, Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 22:12, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Ali banu sistani, it looks like you can't find the quote because page 319 is not included in the Google Books preview. You can see the same figure in the abstract of a paper by the same author here Personman (talk) 01:11, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Susan Wagle

Hello, I am a new editor and I made changes to what I thought were opinions on the "Susan Wagle / Kansas Senate President" page. Initially, I just deleted the paragraph and that was rejected so I added 2 credible sources and edited it to take the opinion out and make it more factual. That too was "undone". I went to the talk section and asked the user who rejected why he/she did it. The person has not responded but I noticed many warnings on the person's page. Since I am very, very new to this and still learning, can you help me figure out if this is normal and also what the process is to dispute? Thank you I love Kansas (talk) 02:30, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@I love Kansas: Content disputes happen all the time and should be handled on the corresponding article's talk page, in this case at Talk:Susan Wagle. Be aware that we have a policy known as the 3 revert rule to prevent edit warring, and violations of it lead to a block. As for your edits, some of your wording in the first sentence is an improvement, but the change is a net negative. The video is a misuse of a primary source and also puts undue weight. The election results is considered synthesis, meaning you drew a connection that sources don't talk about. If you would like to discuss this further, do so on the talk page. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 03:18, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@Snooganssnoogans: Please remember to use edit summaries. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 03:20, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Would Brickipedia be notable enough for an article the same way Wookieepedia is, or should it redirect to Fandom? JediMasterMacaroni ^(talk) — Preceding undated comment added 03:53, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@JediMasterMacaroni: It would depend on whether you could find independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage of Brickipedia to demonstrate notability. I did a quick Google search and didn't see any, but maybe you'll find more than I did. GoingBatty (talk) 04:04, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I recently worked on creating this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Michelle_Browder and submit it, but it was moved back to draftspace. The reviewer cited that I used non-neutral language and had information that wasn't cited. I went through and worked to remove all of the uncited information or to cite the information that exists, however, I am worried that I might not be catching all of the non-neutral language, as I wasn't aware I was using it! I'd love to improve my skillset at this, just started editing/making Wiki pages this year, and so if there's any advice anyone has on non-neutral language (and sees any other issues) in this current draft, I would welcome it greatly.. just trying to understand what works best for Wiki. Thank you so much for your time Endlessnapalm (talk) 16:42, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Endlessnapalm the first thing I noticed is the section "The More Up Campus". It struck me as a misplaced bit of advertising or even an intrusive "history lecture". Apart from a passing mention it contains nothing about Browder. Imho the draft would be better without that section. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:14, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

How can I get a Wikipedia Page made for YoReSpot? 174.130.23.1 (talk) 00:55, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

If YoReSpot is notable by Wikipedia standards, an article will be made about it. Wikipedia will not advertise or promote it, however. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:16, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

You will need to be Autoconfirmed to make pages. Dutch Shoe (talk) 02:20, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

You can always try WP:Requested articles, or create a draft. if you choose the latter way, you should probbably come back when you agthered your main sources. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:55, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Is there a NSFW mark for wikipedia? Thank you! :) FellowWikipedian2378 (talk) 07:54, 26 January 2021 (UTC) FellowWikipedian2378 (talk) 07:54, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

FellowWikipedian2378, welcome to the Teahouse. There is not, as Wikipedia takes the stance of not censoring content. From the link:

Attempting to ensure that articles and images will be acceptable to all readers, or will adhere to general social or religious norms, is incompatible with the purposes of an encyclopedia.

—Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:57, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I'm a paid editor at Wikipedia. I have disclosed the relevant information at my userpage as well as the talkpage of the page I submitted as a draft. I wanted to ask that if I can create a page directly as a paid editor directly following all regulations, a paid editor has to follow or should I submit as drafts only ? Precariousman123 (talk) 06:50, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@Precariousman123: Just like how COI editors are strongly discouraged from editing articles directly but may propose changes on the talk page, you should not create a page directly. Please go through the Articles for Creation process so that we could get another editor to make sure the article stays neutral. We also encourage newer editors to go through AfC as well. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:11, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello Precariousman123. I see that you are not disclosing your clients on your userpage. I recommend that you do so immediately. According to WP:PAID, paid editors "are very strongly discouraged from directly editing affected articles, but should post content proposals on the talk pages of existing articles, and should put new articles through the articles for creation process, so they can be reviewed prior to being published." So, you are not forbidden from moving a draft to main space, but highly discouraged from doing so. You should expect volunteer editors to devote greatly heightened scrutiny to your contributions, because a very large percentage of the work product of paid editors is non-neutral promotion of non-notable topics that wastes volunteer time and ends up being deleted. Don't be that type of editor. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:15, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby:, yes I was referring to the Articles for Creation process when I said I submitted the article as a draft. It got rejected and I'm currently working on editing it to improve it so I can resubmit it for review. Thank you got cearing that up (Precariousman123 (talk) 08:07, 26 January 2021 (UTC))

@Cullen328: I understand, thank you. As for mentioning clients, the page has not been currently published. It is still in draft mode and I have not submitted it for review. I have mentioned on its talk page that I was paid by the company. Do I have to declare it on my userpage as well, even if it is currently a draft? (Precariousman123 (talk) 08:07, 26 January 2021 (UTC))

Precariousman123, yes, using the template {{paid|employer=YOUREMPLOYER}}. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 08:25, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Giraffer, alright thank you, I will add that. (Precariousman123 (talk) 09:00, 26 January 2021 (UTC))

In Commons, the following images have wrong category (SVG Localized Wikipedia globe logos, v2), since the images are png and not svg. Is there someone that could gently remove the wrong category? Thanks in advance!!!

The images are:

• File:Wikipedia-logo-v2-ses.png
• File:Wikipedia-logo-v2-ti.png
• File:Wikipedia-logo-v2-vi.png

--2001:B07:6442:8903:7DA4:E940:35D8:1126 (talk) 08:35, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I have moved them from commons:Category:SVG Localized Wikipedia globe logos, v2 to commons:Category:Localized Wikipedia globe logos, v2. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

What's it be like to expand articles? Well, for instance, I happen to be expanding the articles by adding more citations and categories to and improving filmographies of actors and actresses right on this list:

• Garry Chalk
• Fiona Reid
• Troy Baker
• Neil Crone
• Keone Young
• Kevin Michael Richardson
• Alex Désert
• Freda Foh Shen
• Michael Ensign
• Carole Shelley
• Ben Reed
• Colin McFarlane
• Kathleen Freeman
• Jonathan Harris
• Ray Charles
• Flaminia Cinque
• Sam Richardson
• Mary Kay Bergman
• Andrew Kishino
• John Schwab
• James Wolk
• Ronnie Schell
• Dustin Demri-Burns
• Elias Koteas
• Sanjeev Bhaskar
• Vincenzo Nicoli
• Corey Johnson
• Tom Stourton
• Susan Lynch
• Denise Dowse
• Jere Burns
• Frank Gehry
• Adam Rodriguez
• Wilmer Calderon
• Lavell Crawford
• Sophie Colquhoun
• Demetri Goritsas
• Mark Holden
• David Lipper
• Sean McCann
• Rocky Carroll
• Obba Babatundé
• Joseph May
• Brandon Scott
• Daisuke Tsuji
• Eddie Shin
• Alejandro Edda
• Zuleyka Silver
• Glenn Wrage
• Matt Hobby
• Monica Lopera
• Bobby Roode
• Paul Haddad
• George Buza
• Christian Cage
• Charlotte Zucker

If anyone can expand as many articles, they can put more information on the pages. 174.215.199.134 (talk) 03:46, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

This list makes more sense after I saw from a previous Teahouse posting that over years you created many of these as User:MetaWiz4331 before accidently logging out, and are still trying to recover your password. David notMD (talk) 12:02, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

hello people of teahouse i want to propose an award for wikipedia called the five corners. basically it is an award for an article that is featured in all section of mainpage: featured article, In the news, Did you know ..., On this day, Today's featured picture. basically there are two types of article that could fit in this: 1. featured article about people with featured image in it and the person is in the todays featured article and todays featured picture. then the person dies, entered in the news, and about 3-4 years after the person death it gets to on this day. 2. a very recent incident that gets into the In the news, then after the article gets better it could get into the todays featured article and todays featured picture and did you know, then about 3-4 years after the incident happened it could get into the On this day.

ok thank you for reading this I hope you have a nice day — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.165.82.168 (talk) 10:46, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

We have a similar award, called the Four Award. It is given to people who start and article, have it listed at Did You Know, become a Good Article, and become a Featured Article and get on the mainpage as Today's Featured Article. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 12:14, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm assuming the In the News portion was avoided, due to it only applying to certain articles that are newsworthy. Panini^🥪

Hello, I am a new Wikipedian, I wasn't able to find info on this question in policy searches: is it acceptable for me to contact a person that is the subject of an active BLP page to ask them to upload a compliant photo to commons? For example, on this page I edited https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Markopolos there is no photo and searching online and commons shows no photos with proper permissions, I don't have any relationship with the subject, is it acceptable per wiki policy to email them to ask them to upload a photo? Then I can add it to the page if they do? Is this acceptable? CosmicNotes (talk) 11:05, 25 January 2021 (UTC) CosmicNotes (talk) 11:05, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, CosmicNotes. Wikipedia has no control over who e-mails whom off-wiki. Assuming you have the person's e-mail address, you can try to get them to upload a selfie as you suggest. Note that they have to hold the copyright to the photo, which usually means that they themselves took the image, which is why I used the term "selfie". And they have to be prepared to license the image as CC-BY-SA-4.0 which means others will be able to use it for any purpose. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:24, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Michael D. Turnbull for the insight. I will try this as I was able to find the subject's email. Would CC-BY-NC 4.0 also work for their image upload (non-commercial)? and if I reach out and they upload, do I need to declare this contact when putting up the photos? Seems it would not be COI since I would have no relationship with the person, simply adding their photo after requesting it? Please advise, I would like to follow the rules properly. Thanks. CosmicNotes (talk) 01:11, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@CosmicNotes: I'm afraid that the NC license doesn't work for Commons. This confuses some people as Wikipedia itself doesn't count as a commercial use. However, once loaded to Commons anyone can download and use the image for any purpose, even a commercial purpose (see "this page on Commons". for the details). It is perhaps because of this that many people who are subjects of a BLP here don't want to upload an image. Given that unscrupulous scammers and others will just hijack a copyrighted image from the web in any case, I think it is better to have one available in Commons, but I'm not a celebrity.... There is an additional problem in that even if you are sent a photograph by the person in question, you cannot upload it to Commons yourself because you don't personally own the copyright. Either the individual has to do that by creating their own account on Commons or the two of you have to follow something called the OTRS process whereby you upload but the subject (and copyright holder) e-mails permissions-commons@wikimedia.org to confirm they have given you the permission to upload their file. See "OTRS page on Commons". for details. All this may sound a little daunting but I've used the process myself and it works well given the owner of the copyright is willing to do the e-mail. COI doesn't arise. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:36, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Michael D. Turnbull!

Hello! So, I've been aware of these things called portals for a while. I'm not sure about the actual definition, but I've seen a few and looked around a few, and I want to know what the criteria for a portal is. So, for example, the page on Michigan has loads of categories and linked pages at the bottom - e.g large cities, crime, protected areas. Would there be a separate portal for Michigan or would it just be classified as a category under States in America? And what is the purpose of a portal anyway? Thanks! Fawnstream (talk) 09:44, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@Fawnstream, yep, see Portal:Michigan for Michigan's portal. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 10:10, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

User:Berrely Ah, thank you so much! This is the second time you've come to my rescue, haha. Fawnstream (talk) 10:12, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Fawnstream, to amplify your understanding: portals are a kind of knowledge gathering. It's like, say, a portal of Michigan, where there would be a combination of general knowledge about the state, as you can see in Portal:Michigan. GeraldWL 12:59, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Gerald Waldo Luis Thank you! Fawnstream (talk) 13:38, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

How do I cite a PDF such that all the pages can be seen by the viewer? Ggae1885 (talk) 14:18, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

What you cite is the bibliographic information about the publication which will enable a reader to locate the reference (eg in a library): title, date, author's name, name of work etc, page number, ISBN if it's in a book. If it happens to be available legally online, you can include a URL as a convenience to the reader, but that is not the main part of the citation. "Citing a PDF" doesn't make much sense: if it's been published, cite it as above. If it hasn't, you may not cite it. See CITE. --ColinFine (talk) 14:38, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I would like to create a new page for a recently deceased author; Adrienne Lewis who published under the name Alexandra Raife. She had a dozen novels published, all based in the Highlands of Perthshire. Can someone advise me whether she counts as "notable"? Beinno20 (talk) 15:05, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Beinno20, and welcome to the Teahouse. Notability depends almost entirely on whether several people, unconnected with the subject and not prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish at some length about the subject in reliable sources. If you want to establish whether she is notable, it is up to you to present the evidence for notability, rather than expecting somebody else to go and do that work. (Somebody might be interested enough to do so, but ...) --ColinFine (talk) 15:35, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

While listing her novels may be a legitimate part of an article, what is required for references are published articles about her. David notMD (talk) 15:44, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I can only find this single interview https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12060355.in-a-novel-world-of-her-own/ but will keep looking. Thanks for the feedback — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beinno20 (talk • contribs) 15:48, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Sadly, interviews are not considered 'reliable sources' of information to confirm notability, as the persons being interviewed may not be telling the truth about themselves. David notMD (talk) 15:55, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

How to control the size of the images as displayed in Wikipedia? Ggae1885 (talk) 14:21, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Ggae1885,

Welcome to the teahouse. I'm going to assume you are asking as an editor who wishes to control the size of the image for everyone, as opposed to a reader who might be looking at an article edited by others want to change the display size of the image for yourself. This page Help:Menu/Images_and_media has general help about adding images including how to control the size. S Philbrick(Talk) 16:12, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Is there a place to prove the information you have written on the wikipedia page ? 96.20.210.103 (talk) 15:43, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

In what way do you want to ‘prove’ your contribution? Do you mean, to prove that you are the author, or that your contribution is correct? DBoffey (talk) 16:02, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi there IP, all claims on Wikipedia need references, for what a reference is and how to use the, see Help:Referencing for beginners. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:02, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

This can be extremely frustrating: you personally know something, perhaps because you witnessed it, and you even have a photograph. Sorry, but Wikipedia has no way to incorporate your knowledge. That's because we are crowdsourced by anonymous editors and we have no infrastructure in place to validate individuals or their veracity. Instead we insist on references to "reliable sources" (WP:RS) that do have this infrastructure. This is fundamental to the way Wikipedia operates and has operated for the last 20 years to produce the largest and (IMO) the best encyclopedia on the planet. -Arch dude (talk) 17:03, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, I am creating a page for a well-known photographer. I have content straight from him, some of his writing narrating his early life. How can I site this?

I plan to incorporate other citations in the page as well when it comes to his career, but the facts about his early life may not documented other places.

Thank you. Roj97 (talk) 16:42, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello Roj97. Basically, don't do that on WP. If it's not published, don't use it. If your subject has something like an official webpage with some bio-info, you can use that a little per WP:ABOUTSELF, but you can't cite "he told me so". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:02, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Roj97, welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have any secondary sources that are independent from the subject? Wikipedia isn't interested in what he has to say about himself (which content straight from him would fall under). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:02, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Also, if Wikipedia:Conflict of interest applies to you, follow the guidance there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:04, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Roj97, if the information you have is straight from him, it's original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. If you have to rely on that information to write the biography, that is a strong signal that the subject is not notable and that the page may be nominated for deletion. The main way subjects of articles can help out with them is by providing a photo of themselves to which they own the license. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 17:04, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I want to add an episode summary to an article about a Netflix series. After consulting the Wiki Help page on editing tables, I tried to select the part of the table where I was going to add info, but the entire table was selected and an unfamiliar box popped up w some kind of table template. How do I add a row in one part of a seven-row table to insert the episode summary? Chippy Beagle (talk) 17:16, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@Chippy Beagle: looks like you are using the visual editor. The genral guide is here. To add a row to a table:

1. make sure you are in edit mode
2. click on a cell next to where the new row is supposed to be
3. an arrow appaers on the left of the row. Click it.
4. A menu appears. Click "Insert below" or "Insert above" depending on where the row shall appear.

The proccess for adding new columns is similar: The only difference is that you select the arrow that apepars on the top of the collumn in step 3. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:35, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I see that adding uncategorised articles to categories is a useful thing to do. But how do you see what categories there are? Thanks Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 22:41, 25 January 2021 (UTC) Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 22:41, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Maryanne Cunningham. Here is what I do. I type "Category: (plausible search term)" into the search box, and see what comes up. Another tactic is to take a look at a well-developed article about a similar topic, and see if any of its categories are applicable. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:46, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen328 Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 19:11, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

There is also an editing tool called HotCat that you can use. I do not use it myself, but many editors do. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

I do use HotCat (WP:HOTCAT), but still often use Cullen's second approach to find relevant cats - look for similar subjects and see what cats they're in. Once you get a feel for certain subject areas it gets easier. GirthSummit _(blether) 01:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Girth Summit Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 19:11, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I am working on Draft:Edpuzzle, and I used {{cite web}} correctly, yet it doesn't seem to work. What's wrong? 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 19:05, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

 Seems to be fixed by Zindor! I forgot the ref tags, so nevermind 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 19:21, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Can I remove comments from a talk page if I had my question answered on another talk page? It seems unnecessary to have the question answered and then have someone else chime in with the same answer. Thanks! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 06:32, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

If anyone's answered, then you should not remove it. Otherwise, it's ok to remove it if it's only been a short while. It's perfectly fine to just leave another comment saying "my question is answered" if you don't want a reply. Note that you're allowed to remove anything from your user talk page at any time, which is interpreted as you read the message already. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:07, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: There are a few items that are prohibited from removal from one's own talk page (so "most things" not "anything":-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:36, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello Is it acceptable for me or any user to revert indefinitely blocked user’s edits even if the blocked user provided reliable sources for his edit and everything was fine with it? 2- I’m talking about edits prior to the block

 Whatsupkarren (talk) 14:54, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Whatsupkarren, If they are blocked how are they making edits? If you found an old edit prior to the block, no it's not appropriate to revert it. If the edit occurred post block how did it occur? S Philbrick(Talk) 16:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@Whatsupkarren: Check out WP:G5 (new pages) and WP:BE (edits). If the editor is using an alternate account to make edits while blocked, you may revert them but its not mandatory. As noted, it does not apply to edits made before the block or after the block expired. RudolfRed (talk) 20:00, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Roger Ward was also a member of the Fuzztones and he is not listed. The garage band with singer Rudi Protrudi 159.251.158.1 (talk) 19:35, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Can you point to a reliable source that can be cited in the article to verify this detail? (I only found blogs and similar user-generated, unreliable sources.)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:00, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I was attempting to create a table on the article Impossible Engineering, and something seems to be wrong with the tables. They appear in different sections that I wrote them in. Can someone take a look at them, and either fix them, or tell me how to fix them? Thanks! DestinationFearFan (talk) 19:31, 26 January 2021 (UTC) DestinationFearFan (talk) 19:31, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

On the page, series 1 is blank (even though there is a table typed there), and series 2 has the table for series 1, series 3 has the table for series 2, etc. DestinationFearFan (talk) 19:50, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Uh, well ... if somebody does that, what goes in Series 7? Uporządnicki (talk) 19:55, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi DestinationFearFan. Tables are closed with |}. I have closed all the tables. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:00, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

By the way, I'm guessing "Stratoluanch" should be "Stratolaunch." And the word "plane" links to a disambiguation page. Uporządnicki (talk) 20:03, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

PrimeHunter Thank you! DestinationFearFan (talk) 20:47, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Uporządnicki Season 7 is at the bottom below references I think. And thank you pointing out the spelling issue and disambiguation page. DestinationFearFan (talk) 20:47, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Spent about 5 minutes puzzling over the coding looking for a glitch--then realized someone had already fixed it. Uporządnicki (talk) 20:57, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

What is Woody's backstory from the film "Toy Story"? Grangergirl1437 (talk) 20:47, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Have you tried the Entertainment section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:07, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Displaying in my Wikipedia page the inside pages of a PDF document that i own Ggae1885 (talk) 17:37, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ggae1885: Hi. Assuming you mean, by "my Wikipedia page", an article that you are working on and you are asking how to include a non-published source, the answer is probably "don't". If you can provide some more details, like which article, the exact nature of the source, and the reason, it would help answer the question more fully. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:52, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Furthermore, Ggae1885, unless you own the copyright to the document it may very well be an infringement for you to upload anywhere on the Internet. Many sites do not care about this, but Wikipedia does, and does not permit links to sites which violate copyright.

This together with your previous question makes me wonder if you are trying to put original research (that is, information based on unpublished sources) into an article. We could help you more if you clarified what you are trying to achieve. --ColinFine (talk) 20:42, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

If this is about Draft:Rita Asfour, be aware that by adding an image (a self-portrait of Rita Asfour) to Wikipedia Commons (while claiming it as your own work), you are allowing anyone in the world to use the image however they want to. David notMD (talk) 21:11, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I own a small book in a PDF file. I want to display pages of that book in my article. Can this be done? Ggae1885 (talk) 19:12, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Ggae1885, when you say you own a small book, do you hold the copyright for it? If not, the copyright holder has to be the one who releases it, usually as part of the donating content process. Just keep in mind that the content, if released from copyright, can be used for any purpose by anyone, not just Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:17, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Ggae1885. In almost all cases, the answer is no, because of copyright restrictions. The only exception would be if you have solid evidence that copyright has expired, which applies to books first published before 1925. If the book is freely licensed with acceptable terms, or explicitly published in the public domain, that would be acceptable too, but that is quite rare. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:20, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello everyone, I have noticed that there is an editor constantly monitoring the BLP of Douglas Murray, adding negative remarks only, reverting edits by other users that disagree with him and most importantly exclusively using sources from the author's detractors. How can the situation be reported? Thank you for your help. Ocrx16 (talk) 19:29, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Ocrx16. To help us out , which Douglas Murray article are you are referring to? Zindor (talk) 19:34, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Without knowing the situation, I would first see what they put in the "edit summary", so you can see why they are reverting. You also may want to write a message on there talk page, to either tell them to stop, if you find that their edits are incorrect, or ask them why they are reverting edits. DestinationFearFan (talk) 19:33, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Zindor, this is the BLP I'm referring to Douglas Murray (author) Ocrx16 (talk) 20:27, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ocrx16 I know nothing about this subject but a **quick look** would seem to support an alternative (likewise, seemingly, painting-with-a-broad-brush) summary that the user you refer to has been attempting to push back a tide of apologists who seek to remove (¿white wash?) negative content cited to high caliber, reliable academic sources. I am playing devil's advocate with that; without knowing the nuances, that also may be wrong – or maybe the truth lies somewhere in between these two extremes. I expect that the trenchant issue—what this should resolve on—is whether the negative sourced content belongs under WP:WEIGHT – whether the cited content "fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources".

That can be a thorny issue to resolve, because before even getting into various aspects, it requires someone to delve into sources at a granular level and present those findings as a baseline. I'd also note that sometimes when that question is in play, the best answer may not be to remove the negative, sourced material, but to provide context and/or to balance it with countervailing material. And sometimes the mainstream view is predominantly negative, in which case the subject predominantly negative treatment in our article is proper weight.

Anyway, the rub here is that this is not a forum for resolving these issues. The talk page is. I see discussion related to these matters has already been opened there. In addition to simply posting there, please see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution for other options to draw additional people to discussion, seek third opinions, start a Request for Comment (RfC), etc. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:02, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Note: OP was blocked as confirmed sockpuppet account while I wrote above post.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:22, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

The Douglas Murray (author) page has been the subject of repeated, tendentious block removals of everything perceived as being unflattering to the subject - to see just a few examples:[11][12][13][14] The page as it currently stands represents the mainstream academic opinion of Murray - that he puts a socially acceptable face on fringe far-right ideologies - and is based on more than a dozen academic sources. The page as it stands is an absolutely fair and encyclopedic take on Murray, but new content and discussion on the talk page is always welcome. In particular, the page could use something about Murray's ideological self-definition Noteduck (talk) 21:26, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey, can someone Add a Better quality Logo Onto the Kids' WB Article? Because I'm unable to. LooneyTraceYT (talk) 20:53, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Kids' WB

@LooneyTraceYT: Logos are considered non-free images and should be uploaded in a low resolution fashion because they're only for identification purposes (see WP:LOGOS). There are non-copyrighted logos, but this doesn't seem to be the case. Unless you have a very good reason to change it, I would just leave it alone. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 00:12, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I was added as an editor on the dashboard.wikiedu.org site. Is it possible to be removed from that role and be a regular editor, or do I need to create a new account? Myndwalk (talk) 22:33, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Myndwalk, welcome to the Teahouse. As far as I can tell, the only user group (or role) you're in is WP:AUTOCONFIRMED. If you're no longer a student editor, you can delete the {{student editor}} template on your user page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:36, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Myndwalk: Thanks for deciding to stick around after your course! There's no such thing as a "student editor status" and I think there's no reason you can't keep using your account; you can remove the template on your userpage to show that you're not a student in that course anymore. You may also choose to create a new account if you want to start fresh. Again, welcome back! ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 00:38, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I asked many questions on "TALK" and got great answers that require responses. How do I contact the editors who took time to help me? Ggae1885 (talk) 23:55, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ggae1885: If I wanted to send you a notification, I'd put {{ping|Ggae1885}}, like I've done at the beginning of this message. Replace your username with the username of whoever you're trying to reply to. You have to leave a signature with four tildes like ~~~~ for it to work. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 00:10, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Is this the right way to get in touch wit you? Ggae1885 (talk) 01:05, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ggae1885: No. Typing the "@" symbol doesn't do anything. Try again by copy and pasting what's in this box: {{ping|Ganbaruby}} ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 01:16, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey there. I am pretty new to this place and would love advice on what do I do. ContentProtector1505 (talk) 04:40, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

ContentProtector1505, welcome to the Teahouse. If you're freshly new to Wikipedia, you may want to try the interactive tutorial first. After that you may want to check out the community portal to find articles that require help in one form or another, or User:SuggestBot/Requests to get a curated list of suggested articles to maintain directly to your user talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:33, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

How hard is it create a google knowledge panel RaviInternational (talk) 05:14, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@RaviInternational: Google Knowledge Panels are created by Google, not Wikipedia. They may use text from Wikipedia, but Wikipedia has no control over what they ultimately say. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 05:46, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Pages with a lack of neutrality? 2603:7000:9603:43DB:F0A1:F42C:F3EF:1EF0 (talk) 05:01, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

You could tag it with Template:POV or a similar template (there's lots of them). You should also raise a question at the talk page of that article and ask for opinions from other editors. Or, better yet, you could try to be bold and fix it yourself! ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 05:48, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed that some user talk pages have warnings on them and I was wondering how I can do this after I undo vandalism edits. Thanks, Moishtithole (talk) 06:51, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@Moishtithole: See WP:Twinkle, which is the easiest tool for it. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 07:12, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Moishtithole. Please see WP:WARN (the shortcut to Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace) for a gathering of many of the warning template series we have. See Wikipedia:Vandalism#Warnings for information about such warnings. There's a bunch of tools listed on that page (including Twinkle) for help with automating the process to some extent. There's a link in the interface menu to the left of this screen, under "contribute" for "Recent changes", which takes you to Special:RecentChanges; using that page, you can see edits being made as soon as they happen across the encyclopedia, which is useful in helping out with reverting vandalism soon after it happens. We also have an associated "patrol" project: Wikipedia:Recent changes patrol. Please see {{Reportvandal}} for some digested guidance about the use of warnings to ultimately report a user for a block at WP:AIV if simple vandalism persists, and additional guidance for more complex cases. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 07:25, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I'm just starting out as a Wikipedia editor. I have found a few articles that had a box at the top saying the lead section was too short, and edited them so that it included more important information from the article. Should I remove the alert after doing my best to address the problem, and if so, how does one do that? Or will editing the article automatically let someone else know who will go through and check my work before removing it? Thanks for your help! Unaccompanied Bach (talk) 01:24, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Unaccompanied Bach Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. With only a few exceptions I think(like conflict of interest), if you feel you have addressed the issue or issues maintenance tags describe, you are free to remove the tag. If someone disagrees with you, they will restore it and discuss it with you. 331dot (talk) 01:27, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Unaccompanied Bach. The template message you are seeing have a link in them that says "(Learn how and when to remove this template message)". The link is to Help:Maintenance template removal, a page I created for just the purpose of guiding users on this issue.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 07:35, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia page for public person.

Would their be any one or two interested persons in Sporting me to create a Wikipedia page for a public person?

I can check back here or write me at (Redacted)

regards, TheOneWhoIs (talk) 07:38, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

It would depend on what sources exist to be able to write an article, considering our biographical policies. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 07:50, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I believe the self-published source policy regarding biography of living person articles - WP:BLPSPS - needs clarification urgently. The context is that I'm involved in a relentless tug of war about the inclusion on the Douglas Murray (author) page of an academic group research project titled the Bridge Initative[15] which is meant to address Islamophobia in the public space and is maintained by Georgetown University on a BLP article. It does not seem to be contested that the Bridge Team[16], to whom the articles are credited, is highly distinguished, including professors John Esposito Farid Hafez and Susan L. Douglass, the human rights lawyer and commentator Arsalan Iftikhar and a host of others, nor that it has been cited by other RS's[17][18][19][20][21][22][23] Nobody has been able to distinguish Bridge in evidentiary terms from advocacy groups like the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center. However, several people have pointed to sections in editorial policy like this one:

Per WP:USESPS: "Self-published works are those in which the author and publisher are the same."

Self-published material is characterized by the lack of reviewers who are independent of the author (those without a conflict of interest) validating the reliability of contents.

Per WP: V:"Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer".

Bridge articles are written by a team and attributed to them, just as articles written by advocacy groups like the Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Innocence Project and so on tend to be. Articles on controversial BLP subjects feature articles from these groups as a matter of course: see the pages for Milo Yiannopoulos,[24][25][26][27], Richard B. Spencer[28] and Lauren Southern[29] for example. However, a literal reading of currently policy could exclude them as "self-published sources", and potentially exclude anything that doesn't have a person with the job title of "editor". It needs to be clarified whether the above are "self-published" sources or whether they are acceptable for BLP articles. I don't believe those who wrote this policy sincerely intended that this would be the interpretation and I believe it is contrary to the spirit if not the letter of the existing policy, but believe the policy needs to be urgently updated and clarified to state whether think tanks, advocacy organizations and academic projects are "self-published" and whether they are acceptable for BLP articles. Noteduck (talk) 03:56, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

• This topic has a currently open RSN discussion here [[30]]. Springee (talk) 05:41, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

glad to see you follow my every move Springee. The purpose of this post is different from the RSN - I'm making a specific appeal for help amending WP:BLPSPS Noteduck (talk) 07:58, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Noteduck. The Teahouse is for less experienced editors to ask basic questions about editing Wikipedia, and for more experienced editors to answer. It is not a forum for discussing policy changes. Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) is the appropriate venue for that type of discussion. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:13, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

thanks Cullen³²⁸, I appreciate the heads up! Noteduck (talk) 08:31, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey I was just wondering. In this article I've been brushing up for the last little while https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Roam_(musician) there are a few parts where I cite different parts of the same sources. Should I just copy and paste the citation whenever I do this (for example, the two [17]'s in the 2020 section) or cite the additional info with a brand new citation. Does it really matter which way I do it?

Hope what I'm saying makes sense. Any pointers would be appreciated. IronThumb3000 (talk) 02:07, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

There's actually a way to do this: Help:Footnotes#Footnotes: using a source more than once. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 02:10, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

For an example, see Biotin, where refs 1-4 are used multiple times. By creating a reference name (ref name=) all you have to do is use the name thereafter. David notMD (talk) 09:23, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello I am new to this. I signed up becasue I wanted to add a "Notable people" section to my home towns wicapidia page but i dont know how. Other towns have it as a section you can edit but my towns page dosent have it at all and I'm confused on how to add that.

My town is Fanny bay canada BC

Thank you :) Arreis222222222 (talk) 03:19, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@Arreis222222222: You can suggest notable people (and provide references) at the article's talk page: Talk:Fanny Bay. GoingBatty (talk) 03:41, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

The usual practice is to not add a name to a Notable people list unless that person already has a Wikipedia article about them. With a population of under 1,000, it is unlikely that a notable person ever came from Fanny Bay or lives there now. David notMD (talk) 09:29, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Ron Johnson, an American baseballer died on January 26, 2021 aged 64. His article has two different photos which are supposed to be of him. However, they are clearly different people, although one is presumably correct. Are there any baseball aficionados who can sort out which is correct? Editrite! (talk) 10:19, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Editrite! - I had a look at the photos, not being a Baseball expert, but it looks to me as the same person, well, 25 years in between those photos. If you google him you will see these photos also in several other places. Did you address your concerns on the Discussion page of the article? Hope my answer was of help for you. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:27, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

How do I make an attachment as support to an edited article?

61.68.198.25 (talk) 08:57, 27 January 2021 (UTC) 61.68.198.25 (talk) 08:57, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

If you mean a citation, please see WP:RFB. If you mean something else, please explain.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:25, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Doubt regarding article Hello there,I am Maanas and I am new to wikipedia.My doubt is that whether or not can I create an article.I had tried out article wizard and made a draft for an upcoming search engine called neeva which I didn't find in Wikipedia.But the article takes time for verification.Would every of my article get delayed like this or would it happen only for the first time?

(Note for some reason I was not logged it but it was me who wrote about this doubt)  2409:4073:2E8A:78C0:5947:3E88:DC81:3208 (talk) 02:22, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Drafts are reviewed by volunteers and in no particular order. I think it is around 3500 drafts for review so it can take a long time whether you are new or not. RudolfRed (talk) 02:27, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@Maanas Ms: Draft:Neeva will not become an article until you submit the draft for review. I added a template to your draft to make this easier for you. However, before you submit it, please add several independent reliable sources to show that Neeva meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called notability. Help:Your first article has lots of helpful information. If there aren't any reliable sources for Neeva, it might be too soon to write an article about it. GoingBatty (talk) 02:47, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Articles should not have hyperlinks in the article. You hyperlink to Neeva twice. The way to provide a connection to the website of the company is in a section titled External links. David notMD (talk) 09:27, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I think you would be better off contributing to other existing software articles if that's what interests you. There is a policy described at WP:CRYSTAL which your description of Neeva as "upcoming" (rather than actual now) conflicts with. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:37, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Dear Team,

I hope you are doing well, I want to ask that How to Publish personal Biography on Wikipedia. Please explain all steps we need to public biography.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2400:ADC5:14F:CB00:99F7:8CA7:DF5:351D (talk) 12:25, 27 January 2021 (UTC) Thanks

Dear IP, creating autobiographies on Wikipedia is strongly discourages, as, when describing yourself, you're likely to fail our Neutral point of view policy. You would also have to take heavy measures to ensure that you follow the Conflict of interest policy. Finally, if you meet the inclusion criteria, then someone else will probably already make an article about you. I'd like to know, who do you mean by "we"? Opal|zukor^(discuss) 12:30, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps you meant a biography of someone else? See WP:YFA. Essential is not what you know about the person, or what they have written about themselves, or said in interviews, but instead what other people have written about them. David notMD (talk) 13:08, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I am having problems getting my translation published. It is rejected because of the references. I have tried to find the best and quality references, such as Bloomberg or STT which is reliable news outlet in Finland.

This is the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Oilon

I really appriciate any help I can get! Mmakinen (talk) 13:16, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Mmakinen, while you certainly have reliable references, the problem is now that not all claims in your draft are referenced. All statements that require citations require that a citation be placed next to them. You should also not literally throw citations; the citations placed next to the claim must support the claim. GeraldWL 13:21, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

 Anudip Ghosh (talk) 14:40, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Anudip Ghosh, the article isn't nominated for speedy deletion. It's nominated for regular deletion, because of a lack of notability. (Guidelines: WP:GNG, WP:NSPORT) To improve the chances of the article being kept, add sources to the article. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 14:44, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Maps and Graphs good for colour blind people Would it be possible to have a standard colour scheme for maps and graphs that allows people with the more common forms of colour blindness to be able to read them?

As an example, the very well done page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Fragile_States_Index uses colours that are impossible for people like me to see properly. The colours for "Very High Alert" and the opposite, "Very Sustainable" - look the same to me, as a protanopic dichromat.

It is actually very simple to choose colours that over 95% of colour blind people can see well, and it would make no difference whatsoever to anyone else.

Just wondering if this is something possible to do with the way Wikipedia is structured. Thanks for your time! JohnM9999 (talk) 13:09, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, JohnM9999. There is a large section of policy described at WP:COLOUR which shows that the issue has been considered. However, not all articles will have taken that into account. You could raise the issue on the Talk page of any article where you think a better scheme could be used, quoting the policy, or even be WP:BOLD and edit the article yourself, if you are confident enough to do so. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:26, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

JohnM9999, there's a very loose guideline on color: while colored articles are expected to satisfy the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, a lot of articles have such maps. Accessibility is of course important; it is a part of the Manual of Style. You can request it in the talk page. If you want to take things to the next level, you can propose a guideline for color blindness-friendly maps at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). GeraldWL 13:29, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi JohnM9999. The use of color in Wikipedia articles is covered in MOS:COLOR and editors are strongly encouraged to consider whether their choice of color adversely affects the ability of persons such as yourself to read the content of an article. Unfortunately, many simply like to add color because it looks good (at least to them) without giving much consideration to things like MOS:ACCESS. Such people most likely mean no harm, but it’s just that accessibility issues never cross their minds until someone actually points them out. The color usage you’re referring to above, however, is inherently part of the image File:Countries according to the Fragile States Index.svg, which means that changing the colors might be a little tricky and require changing the image itself. Since the image appears to be something a user created, perhaps discussing your concerns with the editor who created it will be one way to try and resolve things. Another possible way would be to see if anyone at c:COM:GL or WP:GL can figure out a way to make the map more accessible to color-blind readers. — Marchjuly (talk) 13:40, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

On a related note, I've reverted some silly/disruptive edits to the article by user 171.76.110.36, but I'm not sure which notice to leave on their talk page. I've never done it before and am a bit confused by all the different options. Could someone point me in the right direction please? Thanks! PrincessPersnickety (talk) 13:45, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@PrincessPersnickety: Done. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:20, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@Rotideypoc41352: Thank you! PrincessPersnickety (talk) 15:38, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I was wondering if articles are ever published when they are on the edge of Wikipedia's Notability guidelines, but the subject is likely to have further coverage. For instance, a subject that has recently occurred and is expected to continue (i.e. the first season of a tv show, the first book in a series, or the first season of a podcast). I noticed that WP:SNG mentions that an article can be published if "sourcing will likely be written for the topic in the future due to the strength of accomplishment (such as winning a Nobel prize)", which sounds close to what I'm asking but seems more focused on public recognition through an award of some kind (the guideline also appears to be under debate).

I'm partially asking because I'm working on a draft that seems on the edge of notability called Draft:The Mystery of Easter Island, which has only produced the first season and expects to produce a second season. If it doesn't meet notability guidelines I'll probably just wait until there is further coverage, but I was hoping that perhaps there was some guideline that would help get it published. Right now I'd say that the Cleveland, The Cleveland Scene, and the Austin Film Festival articles are all fairly reliable, but I don't know if such local coverage is considered less reliable or insignificant due to the limited geographic interest in the subject. TipsyElephant (talk) 14:52, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Sometimes such articles are written and just stored in draftspace until their notability becomes clear. Sometimes they're IAR published, ideally with a {{Notability}} tag. The risk is that, if AfDed, it might get deleted rather than draftified (unfortunately many !voters are not wise enough to realize that a subject on the verge of notability ought to be draftified), and you'd have to get it refunded, which can be a minor pain. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 16:04, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey there. I've been trying to create a Wikipedia page for the company I work for (3 times declined) and I'd like your help to connect the comments left by the last editor with the actual draft. Thank you in advance for you time! Here's the link to the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Workable_Software_Limited Zinovia.panagopoulou (talk) 13:48, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

If you click on the blue links in the comments, it should tell you everything you need to know. You are being paid to edit, we are not, so I advise reading all you can on wikipedia content policies. Polyamorph (talk) 15:01, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

That's one Speedy deletion and two Declined. I cut stuff that does not contribute to notability (funding series). In my opinion, what is left does not establish notability. But you are welcome to try again. David notMD (talk) 15:44, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

The thing to remember, Zinovia.panagopoulou, is that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.. You need to find such sources, then forget everything you know about the company and write and article based solely on what those indpendent sources say. --ColinFine (talk) 16:12, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

 Fred822 (talk) 16:28, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Is there a question? David notMD (talk) 16:30, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: Possibly the article's history provides some context... (see here). --CiaPan (talk) 16:50, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello! For some reason, I can't sign in to my Wikipedia account. I enter the correct username and password, and yet it doesn't sign me in. It exits out of the sign in menu once I press "log in" and then puts me pack on the page, not signed in. I got in one time and signed in, but when I tried to edit a page, it signed me out again. How do I fix this? 2601:644:8102:150:35B8:9232:1448:4B4 (talk) 16:38, 27 January 2021 (UTC) (but my account is User:DestinationFearFan)

I got signed in, but it says "The provided authentication token is either expired or invalid." What does this mean? DestinationFearFan (talk) 16:42, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@DestinationFearFan: looks like blocked cookies. Please make sure you are not blocking cookies for en.wikipedia.org, login.wikimedia.org and any other WMF wiki you try to login on. Depending on browsers, there might be different places where to check for that, in fact, any browser addon can delete cookies. Leaving addons aside, there are guides for enabling cookies available for Google chrome firefox or more general here. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:51, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! DestinationFearFan (talk) 16:55, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I'm looking into creating my first article, and how I would go about doing so. The article I want to create is about a music album, and happens to share the title of an unrelated Wikipedia article, so the article title would need be italicized (as in, "Album Title (album)"). I attempted to use the Article Wizard to create the article as a draft and work on it that way, but I noticed that I can't seem to italicize anything in an article title. Using the standard way (like encasing "italic title" in braces followed by the album title, encasing the album's title in braces, or encasing the album title in apostrophes) either doesn't work, or I receive a message saying that the article title can't contain those characters (particularly the braces) because they are "unsupported" characters. Is there something I'm doing wrong, or a different way to do this? Any other advice? Thank you. Francis Sloane (talk) 17:12, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Francis Sloane, welcome to the Teahouse. Just write {{italic title}} alone. If you use {{Infobox album}} then it happens automatically. If the draft is accepted then the reviewer will give it a suitable title and make sure it can be found by searchers. Don't worry about italics or article titles. Worry about Wikipedia:Notability (music). PrimeHunter (talk) 17:31, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the response and help. Will have a go at it again later. Francis Sloane (talk) 17:44, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi there,

I am new to Wikipedia editing (but a devout lifetime reader) and am reviewing the guidelines on your WP:YFA. I was one of Lukas' former students and agreed to create his Wikipedia page without realising that a WP:BLP page is one of the hardest to do right. I plan on editing a few articles and complete the tutorials before tackling his page. My question for you is do you believe the subject, Lukas, is notable enough to be included as a permanent Wikipedia page?

He is the author of 6 monographs; over 30 independent articles write about his work; his work is held in over 10 notable collections such as SFMOMA and Fotomuseum Winterthur; he's taught at universities for over 25 years including Stanford, Mills College, SFAI, and CCA; and recently was the recipient of a 2018 Guggenheim Fellowship.

I also read that the review process for a new article published by a newbie editor, like myself, can take months. Is there anything I can do to speed up this process? Any other advice for me as I undertake this article?

Thank you very much for your help! Skippytheroo (talk) 23:11, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@Skippytheroo: The criteria for any topic to be notable is the same, known as the "general notability guideline":

If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list.

— WP:GNG

From your response I think you've read WP:ARTIST (if you've haven't, do it now). This is a "subject-specific notability guideline", which is an alternative way of being notable. For both of these we need multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject to back up the information. Therefore, before you even begin writing you should start looking for these sources.

On a separate note, you say that you're "one of Lukas' former students" and you "agreed to create his Wikipedia page". That's a clear conflict of interest, which makes it hard to stay neutral in your writing. Please read WP:COI and declare your relationship to the subject with these templates. Submit your draft through the articles for creation process so that an experienced editor can check your work. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 00:33, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: Thank you for you for answering my questions. I will be sure to note my WP:COI when I submit my draft. Skippytheroo (talk) 18:00, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Once a draft is submitted to AfC it goes into the 'pile' of >3,000 drafts. It is not a queue. Reviews (bless their souls for diligence to the task) look at the drafts and select what they want to review next. So, from submitted, can be days, weeks, or sadly, even months. No short cuts. There is an informal policy of not letting drafts get too old. David notMD (talk) 09:17, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for that context on the review process @David notMD:. Skippytheroo (talk) 18:00, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I plan on submitting this article for review on the English-Wikipedia. However, some of the sources I'd like to include are written in German. How should I treat these cases? (1) A translation for the German source exists. (2) No translation for the German source exists. (3) I generate a translation from Google Translate. (4) I ask someone fluent in German to translate the source. @David notMD: @Ganbaruby: Skippytheroo (talk) 18:00, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Itamar Medical

Hello, my draft was rejected and i corrected all asked and resubmit. I must admit, someone else from the conpany tried to handle this before me but now Im in charge of this wikipedia article. The rejection was simply because it was rejected before and it seems there was no effrot in reading and seeing its improved. Can you guys help me better understand why and what should I do now? thanks, Shanisun (talk) 16:57, 26 January 2021 (UTC). Shanisun (talk) 16:57, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Shanisun, the draft was declined because it did not have sources establishing notability, and when subsequent submissions did not introduce such sources, it was rejected. Read the guideline I linked to understand why the sources were not sufficient. If there are qualifying sources, remove the current ones and replace with those. If such sources do not exist (and I'm guessing it's fairly likely they don't), there's nothing you can do to get the page approved, and you will save both yourself and us time if you stop trying. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 17:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@Shanisun:, it appears you're also working with a conflict of interest; please read WP:COI and WP:PAID. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 07:36, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

(talk • hi, i declared that I work for the company on my page, itsnt it enough? am I missing something? In regards to what you wrote, the sources I placed are more than sufficient according to what I read, i.e;

• Bloomberg
• Globes - a huge newspapper and website in israel concidred to be very proffisonal
• Themarker - another huge site in Israel
• Haaretz - very huge and well known newspaper and website
• calcalist - also major one newspaper and website
• and of course yahoo! finance and nasdaq.

What am I missing here? and why does it seems there is something personal here and its ok to write it will save time? I'm resubmitting since this company deserves a page and I believe in this. Shanisun (talk) 08:53, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Shanisun. You are missing two things. First, reliability is only one of the criteria for a reference to support notability. The other two are independence from the subject, and that it contains significant coverage. The Bloomberg citation, along with several other stock market sources, are reliable, but are routine company listings, not significant coverage. I haven't tried to read the Hebrew newspaper articles, but I'm betting that several of them are based on interviews or press releases, and so not independent. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.. The content of the article should be almost 100% derived from what such independent sources have said, and hardly any of it from the company itself or sources connected to it.

The other thing that you are missing, as indicated by your phrase "this company deserves a page", is that nothing and nobody in the universe deserves a Wikipedia page, because nobody and nothing in the universe can have a Wikipedia page. Wikipedia has articles about notable subjects: these articles do not belong to their subjects, and are not, at all, for the benefit of their subjects. Of course, the subjects of many articles do benefit from Wikipedia's having articles about them (and some definitely do not!) but that is no part of Wikipedia's purpose. That is why Conflict of Interest is such a major issue: if you write an article with the thought of benefiting (or injuring) the subject anywhere in your mind, you're doing it wrong. --ColinFine (talk) 18:17, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

When I looked at my contributions, they almost all disappeared and when I made an edit, it did not show up in the contributions page. Is this a glitch? 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 16:22, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@Kepler-1229b: These are your edits: Special:Contributions/Kepler-1229b. What do you mean that they all disappeared? RudolfRed (talk) 16:25, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Kepler-1229b, welcome to the Teahouse - had a quick view at your last contributions via Special:Contributions/Kepler-1229b and in the very first view for me they seem to be pretty okay - can you give an example? CommanderWaterford (talk) 16:26, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

For example, when I edited HD 209458 b, it did not show up. I can give you a screenshot if you need one. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 18:22, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Okay, nevermind, they"re all there now. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 18:23, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I work with an Italian artist who is currently listed as follows in Wikipedia:

Benini is an Italian surname. Notable people with the surname include:

Bruno Benini (1925–2001), Australian-Italian photographer Bull Benini CMSgt USAF, Combat Controller Clarice Benini (1905–1976), Italian chess player Fides Benini (born 1929), Italian former swimmer Maurizio Benini, Italian conductor and composer Paulo André Cren Benini (born 1983), Brazilian soccer player Rodolfo Benini (1862–1956), Italian statistician and demographer Sigismondo Benini (17th century), Italian painter Benini, (born 1941), Italian painter Benigni (disambiguation)

I believe he may qualify for a biographical listing, but I do not have the knowledge to write an entry for him. Does anyone on this forum recommend a reputable service that we can engage to write an entry that fulfills your stylistic and attribution guidelines? There are many on the internet, but they do not appear to have been in operation for very long.

Thank you so much for any assistance you might be able to give! LisaBGiamporcaro (talk) 18:20, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

LisaBGiamporcaro, I strongly discourage you from using any Wikipedia writing service. They are often against our policies, and those that aren't are very controversial. Also, most of them are unreliable and many are scams. If you think that your person is notable, you can either make a request at WP:Requested Articles, or you can create one yourself via the WP:Articles for Creation process. This is a way of getting an article published with editorial oversight and guidance. Some helpful introductions to writing articles can be found at WP:Your first article, and WP:The Wikipedia Adventure. If you choose the latter, then you will need to declare a conflict-of-interest on your userpage. More information on that can be found here. Thanks, Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 19:28, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Guys, I saw someone Add another Genre Onto The Kim Possible Article, I thought it was false so I Removed it, But is anyone sure about this edit:[31] that I Made? LooneyTraceYT (talk) 19:25, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Desktop diff [1003173300] — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 19:38, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Could anyone please indicate if there are any guidelines regarding the replacement of existing photos in a Wikipedia article? I would like to replace the photo of Mr Max van Egmond, the Dutch singer, with the following: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Max_van_Egmond,_2006.jpg but I don't want to step on any toes. The current photo is terrible. I request this with Mr van Egmond's blessing. Also, if anyone would care to do the actual work of replacing the photo in the English, French and Dutch articles, that would be much appreciated, as the last time I tried doing it myself, I inadvertently deleted the biobox. Thank you. 24.48.56.81 (talk) 18:43, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I just changed the image. If you run into problems like this in the future, you can do it yourself by changing the value of the "image" parameter in the infobox. There usually aren't any issues with changing biographical images, unless the replacement is lower-quality or isn't under a free license; neither of those apply in this case. Vahurzpu (talk) 20:59, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

And if you change an image (or anything else in an article) and somebody disagrees, the worst that can happen is that they change it back (well, worse is if they say your edit was vandalism, but if you explain what you are doing and why in the edit summary, that is unlikely to happen). Then, if you wish to pursue the matter, you can open a discussion on the talk page: see BRD. --ColinFine (talk) 21:18, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you to both of you.

I decided to upload an image for 50_Things_That_Made_the_Modern_Economy and add it to the infobox, but the image is huge and I can't figure out how to use the image_size field of the infobox. What did I do wrong and how do I fix this problem? TipsyElephant (talk) 20:08, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

TipsyElephant, I shrunk the image. The image field of the infobox only needs the filename; it doesn't need the [[File:xx]] wrapping it. This will give the image its default size, which is usually what you want. If you do still need to change the size, most infoboxes have an image_size parameter for that. Vahurzpu (talk) 21:04, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@Vahurzpu: I couldn't figure out how to use the image_size parameter. How do you use it? Like if I wanted it to be 150x150 pixels what would I enter into the field? Thank you btw TipsyElephant (talk) 21:15, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: You should be able to set things like this:

• 200px (set width)
• x300px (set height)
• 200x300px (max width & max height).

However (and I didn't realize this before) it is now preferable to use image_upright or similar, which is just a scale factor. (not implemented in {{Infobox podcast}}) Vahurzpu (talk) 21:22, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

My draft article was declined to be moved into the namespace: "I have declined your request to move Draft:Master Braz dos Santos into the article namespace, as in its current state it is not good enough to be retained in the article namespace.". Can someone provide feedback as to what makes it not a good enough article? It's very detailed. Iriska13 (talk) 19:08, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Iriska13. The draft in question is Draft:Master Braz dos Santos. It is unreferenced and therefore fails the core content policy of Verifiability. It has a highly promotional tone and therefore fails the core content policy of the Neutral point of view. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:15, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Iriska13, welcome to the Teahouse. I had a quick view on your draft which was declined by Danski454 - first of all you should keep a by far more neutral view of your article subject, your article reads in the current state more like a fan post. Please have a look over here Wikipedia:NPOV, furthermore it misses references. Have please a close look at Help:Your_first_article, this will give you lots of help for modifying your draft. If you have any further question do not hesitate to ask, hope my answer was of help for you. CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:17, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

CommanderWaterford Cullen328 Thank you both! That is very helpful feedback and I will modify my draft accordingly - will add more references and will modify the tone to feel less promotional. Really appreciate the constructive feedback! Iriska13 (talk) 19:27, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hyperlinks are not allowed in articles. That includes all the Youtube performances. David notMD (talk) 21:45, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm new, just made my first contributions and want to add something to the Talk page, but not sure how. Thanks TrouserRoller (talk) 20:24, 27 January 2021 (UTC) TrouserRoller (talk) 20:24, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

At Talk page of an article, click on New section in top menu. This provides a blank new section, which will need a title and content. Within a section, preface your comment with one more : than the previous content. This creates indents. David notMD (talk) 22:10, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

There is an article that has had a big edit very recently but I have to believe it is incorrect. I've never edited before on the site so would struggle as to where to begin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_media_franchises - The Super Mario franchise was much higher than it is now in the list before the edit. I also have proof from verified accounts that it is much higher than it is currently.

https://www.titlemax.com/discovery-center/money-finance/the-25-highest-grossing-media-franchises-of-all-time/

https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/11/15/mario-sales-competition-infographic

I make it 36 billion which is what it was before a recent edit. Somehow Super Mario as a franchise has dropped to 16billon since the last time I was on the page late last year. Thomascasson (talk) 22:36, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Thomascasson. The proper place to discuss this is Talk:List of highest-grossing media franchises. Make your case there. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:55, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello friendly teahouse people. I've been having a lot of trouble telling which users are administrators and which aren't! I know there are userboxes and such, but not all admins want to have them on their user pages. Of course, this can be checked through Special:UserRights, but it's a little cumbersome. It might be helpful, particularly to new users who don't know about Special:UserRights, if there was a link under Tools to check user rights with Special:UserRights when viewing someone's user page. Who should I suggest this to for the suggestion to be considered? Benevolent human (talk) 16:24, 27 January 2021 (UTC) Benevolent human (talk) 16:24, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@Benevolent human: You can post your idea at WP:VPI for discussion. I can't recall the last time I cared whether a user was an admin or not, why are you checking this so often? RudolfRed (talk) 16:27, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. Here's where I ran into an issue: User_talk:El_C#Your_revert. Benevolent human (talk) 16:29, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Done: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab)#Proposal_for_new_toolbar_link Benevolent human (talk) 16:35, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I think that you can already do nearly what you want when looking at a user's page by clicking on the "View User Groups" tool on the left. That takes you straight to the Special:UserRights page, so I'm not sure that your new proposal will fly, Benevolent human .... Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:42, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: thanks for the tip! I removed my proposal. Benevolent human (talk) 16:44, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Benevolent human, also, you can go to your Preferences and on the Navigation tab, enable Navigation popups. With popups enabled, just hover the cursor over a hyperlinked user name to see their rights and number of edits (plus lots more via dropdown menus). The popups also enable you to view diffs and link previews; they're a big timesaver for me. Schazjmd (talk) 16:56, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Amazing, thank you! Benevolent human (talk) 17:00, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Benevolent human, if you're looking for a quick immediate method to identify admins on talk pages or article histories, you may find Galobtter's admin highlighter script very useful. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:13, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! Benevolent human (talk) 23:11, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Will moving a Sandbox page to Draft space automatically trigger a review by Wikipedia editors? To be clear, I want my page to be reviewed. I'm not sure if I need to add the "submit" code to the top of the page or if Drafts moved from Sandbox to Draft are already automatically submitted to the editors for review. I hope that question made sense, lol. If I need to add "submit" code, where and how do I do that? Thanks!

Jjphoenix (talk) 00:28, 28 January 2021 (UTC) Jjphoenix (talk) 00:28, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Jjphoenix: It won't be automatically submitted. When your draft is ready for review, put this at the top: {{subst:submit}} RudolfRed (talk) 00:36, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

A Thousand Pictures

Hello, My album article "A thousand pictures" by Craig Chaquico was removed after I published it and had help placing the image of the album cover into the article from editors in the Teahouse. Can someone please tell me why this happened? I've written several articles about Chaquico's albums before and they were published. Please help me retrieve this article and maybe someone could explain what happened.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 17:03, 25 January 2021 (UTC) Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 17:03, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

What seems to have happened according to "the edit history of the article". is that Onel5969 turned it into a redirect because (according to their edit comment) it failed WP:NALBUM: that is, they thought it was not sufficiently notable. I can't comment on that but you can discuss this with that editor. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:14, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Cheryl Fullerton, it appears that the article has been converted into a redirect to Chaquico's article. You may want to discuss this with Onel5969, who did the conversion and cited WP:NALBUM. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:22, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Cheryl Fullerton - Hi. The version you published had only 2 sources, neither were in-depth reviews of the album, rather short blurbs. Therefore, it didn't meet any of the 7 criteria of WP:NALBUM, which you can find in the link. I hope that helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

How can I remove the redirect from my article A Thousand Pictures when I'm ready to re-publish after I improve my sources and fill out the article with more info?Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 01:18, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Can you tell me how to restore the article to my Sandbox, so that I can work on it.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 18:30, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Click on this oid "here from the edit history". and you'll be at the last version previously available. Go into the source editor and copy/paste all the material into your sandbox. When you do that, make sure you include an edit summary which says where you got the text from, so that previous history can in principle be located. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:35, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, I'd like to request an article to be created for Yerba Buena Gardens Festival. Full disclosure, I work for them and understand that through conflict of interest policies it's not prudent for me to create an article myself. The main reason this page is needed is that there is common confusion between our org and Yerba Buena Center for the Arts. I believe the org is notable as it is a major tourist attraction in downtown SF; here are some references ^{[1] [2][3]}. I'm new here so not sure the best way to proceed. Any advice appreciated! Stonestageybgf (talk) 20:12, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Stonestageybgf. Thank you for complying with Wikipedia's required paid editing declaration. Wikipedia articles are encyclopedia articles for the benefit of our readers. We do not write articles to reduce confusion for the benefit of an organization. That being said, if your festival is truly notable, then you can use the Articles for creation process to write a draft for review by uninvolved editors. Please read and study Your first article and bend over backwards to write from the neutral point of view. The most common problem with editors with a conflict of interest is writing in an unacceptably promotional tone. I live in the San Francisco Bay Area and know the Yerba Buena complex quite well. Please feel to reach out to me if you have further questions. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:16, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

I created a user name for my employer, then posted his bio information in the sandbox but how do I now turn that into a viewable page.

This is the link to the page I am trying to create. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ian_Paulsen Ian Paulsen (talk) 04:25, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Ian Paulsen. You registered an account that says, on the face of it, that you are Ian Paulsen. Now, you state that you are Ian Paulsen's employee. What is up with that? You have a glaring conflict of interest and your first step is to comply with the mandatory Paid editing disclosure. Once you are in full compliance, then we can discuss whether or not this biography is viable. There is a general expectation that paid editors will do their jobs correctly, without imposing on the time of highly experienced volunteer editors who get no paycheck. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:41, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Ian Paulsen, okay, there are quite a few things here. First, if I'm understanding correctly, you are not Paulsen, but are editing on his behalf. That makes your username a violation of WP:REALNAME, so you should change it to one representing yourself at Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple. Next, since you have a conflict of interest, you should read our guide on that and make the proper disclosure. Next, since you want to create a page and your draft is not currently aligned with our standards in a whole bunch of ways, you should read Help:Your first article. Once you've done that, submit the page to articles for creation as instructed at the your first article help page. The good news is that Paulsen is likely notable per WP:NACADEMIC criterion 5, but you will need to go through the proper channels. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:44, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

I am sure User:Humanerror99 & User:Sleepyfish88 are same person. What to do now? Sonofstar (talk) 15:30, 27 January 2021 (UTC) Sonofstar (talk) 15:30, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@Sonofstar: I reported them at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Humanerror99. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:56, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Rotideypoc41352 I suggest withdrawing the Sock investigation. In an Edit summary at Thrasio, there is a statement "I wrote the content and created page from my official account which I later realized and then used my current personal profile to create and publish page." Having two accounts is allowed as long as not used to edit the same articles or Talk pages. The edit histories of the two accounts show no overlap except at Thrasio. David notMD (talk) 15:57, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: ? I must be missing the part of WP:VALIDALT you're referring to. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 16:04, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

In broad sense, I do not (yet) see sockpuppetry intent on the part of Jack/Joe's two accounts. Perhaps a better path would be to advise to stop using one of the accounts rather than pursue the SPI. David notMD (talk) 16:29, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@Sonofstar and David notMD: Has someone addressed the issue of ... created page from my official account which I later realized and then used my current personal profile ...? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:38, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

On wiki-Manning_formula, the equation is not equal to the cross-sectional average velocity (V), but FLOW in terms of ft^3/s. Velocity is derived afterwards with the area found in the hydraulic radius 2603:6080:3207:B03C:0:0:0:1000 (talk) 21:04, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

If you spot an error or have a suggestion for an article, start a discussion on that article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 21:48, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

In this case, that means discussing your concerns to Talk:Manning formula (or adding to an existing relevant discussion there). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:52, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Good morning Teahouse superstars. I have been working in my sandbox on a page about Shiji Group, a pretty massive international company somehow missing from our great encyclopedia. One of our super admins made some great suggestions about the content and especially how I should go about using images, but I am still somewhat lost.

I have been (sort of) using Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc. as a template, and discovered the logos there were uploaded at Public Domain on account of being "simple geometric shapes or text".

I'm feeling pretty dense right now, but I cannot figure out if I should upload the logo from a link I was given by a LinkedIn associate who works with the company. I've tried to contact Shiji communications will no response. I am wondering if I should just finish the page and submit, or pursue the image issue beforehand?

Please, can you guys offer me some direction here? Philbutler (talk) 09:45, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Philbutler. The general principles are explained at WP:LOGOS, which covers the process for even non-free logos. Note that non-free images are only allowed in Main Space articles, not in sandboxes and drafts, so leave this until later. The logo will not be relevant to the notability of the company, which is the main issue in getting the article accepted. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:17, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Philbutler. Adding an image to the draft you’re working on in your sandbox will not affect whether the draft is ultimately accepted per Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies); so, often it’s best to wait until a draft is approved before adding any images to it. Non-free content, in particular, can’t be used in drafts, and it will be removed and possibly even deleted if you try to do so.

As for this particular logo itself, however, even though it does seem too simple to be eligible for copyright protection in the United States (where the Wikimedia Foundation’s servers are located), things aren’t as clear cut with respect to China (which is the country of origin); so, you might want to ask about this at c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright before trying to upload the file to Wikipedia Commons under a public domain license. In order for Commons to keep such a file it would need to be considered public domain in both the United States and China, or it would need to be released by the copyright holder under an acceptable free license. — Marchjuly (talk) 12:46, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the help Mike Turnbull and Marchjuly, I so appreciate the advise. I will do as you have suggested. For some reason, I thought the draft page needed to be absolutely complete. Philbutler (talk) 08:04, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

The rules of English grammar, particularly punctuation, and spelling vary according to preference and nationality. I am Anglo-Australian, and have a particular set of rules that I consider correct, but these sometimes differ from those evident in Wiki articles. I am also a keen proofreader / copy editor, and like to correct errors when I come across them, in the interests of maintaining Wiki's high standard as an educational tool. Where can I find the set of rules for English grammar and spelling that Wiki has adopted? Harry Audus (talk) 02:30, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Harry Audus: It will depend on the article. Some use American English, some use British English, and some use another variant. Check out WP:ENGVAR and Comparison_of_American_and_British_English. I think that is what you are looking for. RudolfRed (talk) 02:44, 28 January 2021 (UTC) RudolfRed (talk) 02:44, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks RudolfRed. My question is really much broader than comparisons of English usage in different anglophone countries, although the question of, for example, absence of the definite article in much Indian English is questionable for me. More specifically, my question relates to punctuation - e.g. the Oxford comma, form of dashes, quotation marks and so on. Harry Audus (talk) 02:51, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Harry Audus, you may also want to consult the Manual of Style from time to time, as Wikipedia occasionally departs from common professional writing styles.

Shameless plug: If you're interested in copy editing, you may be interested in the Guild of Copy Editors. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:56, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Harry Audus. For an overall view of these issues, please see Wikipedia:Manual of Style. That is a guideline, not a policy. Please be aware that several styles and formats are allowed, so you should avoid trying to force changes to impose your own preferred style. As for national variations of English, please see National varieties of English. Briefly stated, Sydney should be written in Australian English, New York City should be written in American English, Toronto should be written in Canadian English, London should be written in British English and Mumbai should be written in Indian English. General articles such as Mathematics and Philosophy should be written in the variety of English established by the original editor who began writing the article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:58, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the links. I've started a new thread in Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Abbreviations#Abbreviation_and_acronym_discussions_ongoing.

@Tenryuu 🐲, I may well be interested.

Harry Audus (talk) 04:13, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Harry Audus: See specifically MOS:PUNCT as one of those areas of the MoS where there is a lot of potential for difference between styles. Dashes, dates, "straight" quote marks, "logical quotation", and "serial commas" come to mind. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:05, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I started by changing for example Category:Djurgårdens IF Fotboll (women) players but stopped, as I'm not sure whether to use surname or firstname. Also on templates for example Category:Djurgårdens IF Fotboll (women) players, should Icelandic templates be forename or surname...GrahamHardy (talk)

Hello, GrahamHardy. Nearly all Icelanders do not have a surname, but a patro/matro-nymic. See MOS:PATRONYMIC for how to handle this in general, and WP:SUR for categories. --ColinFine (talk) 21:25, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Category:Djurgårdens IF Fotboll (women) players is an Icelandic category but contains more non-icelanders than icelanders, so shall I use surname or forename, as is the same for Icelandic football teams, there are more non-Icelanders than Icelanders... Any thoughts, my inclination is to use forenames rather than surnames...GrahamHardy (talk) 22:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Am I OK to use forenames? GrahamHardy (talk) 00:55, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@GrahamHardy: See Wikipedia:WikiProject Iceland/Style_advice#Sorting. Icelandic names are sorted just like other Western names. At the end of every article, there should be a DEFAULTSORT value like {{DEFAULTSORT:Indridason, Arnaldur}}, and the categories will be sorted like so. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 01:03, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

The issue is with categories is with Icelandic templates and categories; sometimes there are more than non-Icelandic people, for example the above categories and template: Category:Djurgårdens IF Fotboll (women) players & Category:Djurgårdens IF Fotboll (women) players: should I use forenames, surnames or a mix of both ?, happy to raise with Wikiproject Iceland...GrahamHardy (talk) 09:18, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey! How to upload non free images for fair use? Like film posters. Thanks in advance btw. Hyderabadi Wikipedian (talk) 08:40, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Hyderabadi Wikipedian::

1. go to WP:File Upload Wizard
2. Select the smaller, white button "Upload locally to Wikipedia"
3. Follow the steps there. These are essentially the same as for free files, except in step 3 you want to select "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use.". Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 09:20, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, not sure how to make a change on a page, but I see incorrect information which needs to be corrected. On the page for Mt. Everest here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Everest#Death_zone Under the subsection titled "Death Zone" a sentence in one paragraph is as follows "Travelling above 8,000 feet altitude..." This is incorrect, as it should read "8,000 meters" instead. The "Death Zone" when discussing mountain climbing is 8,000 meters above sea level, not 8,000 feet, no matter which mountain you climb nor where you are in the world.

I hops the incorrect info cant be fixed. Thanks DJ 100.12.121.28 (talk) 23:28, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@100.12.121.28: Hi, DJ. The sentence is not incorrect: it's not specifically referring to Everest or the Death zone, but more generally to brain/cerebral hypoxia, and is cited to an authoritative publication which indeed states "Other possible causes of oxygen depletion include: . . . traveling to high altitudes (above 8,000 feet)."

It's sheer coincidence that the figure in feet for the lower threashold of this risk happens to be the same as that of the Death zone's 8000 meters, but it's understandable that it looks like an error. We have to quote the feet measurement because that's what the source does, but perhaps it would help to give a bracketed conversion to metres (2438.4 is the exact conversion, but this would be over-precise). It might also help if the overall paragraph was reworded. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.40.9 (talk) 00:35, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Susceptible individuals may experience symptoms of Altitude sickness when traveling rapidly from near sea level to elevations as low as 8000 feet. In California where I live, there are at least eight highway passes above 8,000 feet that can be reached from near sea level in very few hours of driving. If someone does that and gets out of their car for a casual hike, they may well experience symptoms of altitude sickness. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:30, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

• For this kind of stuff, the template {{convert}} is very useful; it also attempts to keep a reasonable number of significant figures. For instance: {{convert|8000|feet|m}} → 8,000 feet (2,400 m). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 09:27, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I was editing a draft and I noticed that someone had cited a cutting of a newspaper as a post on Instagram. See this here [32]. My question: is it the right way to source physical newspapers coverages for which no link is available? If no, what is the right way? Or they can't be used at all? Thank you.

Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 13:30, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Nomadicghumakkad. It is acceptable to cite a newspaper article that is not available online, but you should not link to a copy that is not from the newspaper's website. That is a copyright violation. The reference should include the article title, the author, the name of the newspaper, the city if not part of the newspaper's name, the page number and the date of publication. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:12, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! I am not using it. I mean if someone has used it, you can't really verify it unless you have access to the newspaper copy which would be rarely possible. Very helpful though. Thanks!

Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 10:35, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi folks at Teahouse. I am a new editor, or rather a rusty one. I just created a page for Project 88 and wanted to make sure it works for Wikipedia. I got a message from GPL93 (and don't quite know how to reply to them) saying "An article you recently created, Project 88, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources." However all the citations were and the new ones I have added are from reliable and independent sources. Do you think it is ready to publish? Here it is: Draft:Project_88. I don't know if you can see it on your end. I tried to publish it again but I am not sure it has been. Thank you so very much for your time and efforts. Caring Feminist (talk) 23:29, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Caring Feminist, not all reliable sources count toward establishing notability. For instance, trivial mentions such as the piece from The New Yorker are fine as references but don't help with notability. Could you share the three sources that you think contribute most to notability, per our general notability guideline? We can then give you feedback on them. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:52, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Sdkb, Thank you for your clear reply. So, notability is harder for institutions not in the West, because not everyone knows the newspapers out there which I have cited, but here are my 3 choices from reputed sources:

https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/supplements/spice/story/20180115-galleries-project-88-democratised-and-dynamic-volte-gallery-1122666-2018-01-15 (this is like the Time Magazine of India)

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2012/mar/01/top-10-art-galleries-mumbai

http://travel.cnn.com/mumbai/play/mumbai-city-essentials/best-art-galleries-mumbai-863802/

Does this work? What would be the next steps. I want to add several contemporary Indian galleries of note (and especially those run by women) after I learn from this debacle, so any advice would be helpful. Thank you again note (and especially those run by women) after I finish this, so any advice would be helpful. Thank you again.

Sdkb, Thank you for your clear reply above. I am writing this here, because I wasn't sure if my reply would be read. You requested notability for Project 88, because the page was moved to my draft space by another editor.

So, notability is harder for institutions not in the West, because not everyone knows the newspapers out there which I have cited, but here are my 3 choices from reputed sources.

https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/supplements/spice/story/20180115-galleries-project-88-democratised-and-dynamic-volte-gallery-1122666-2018-01-15 (this is like the Time Magazine of India)

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2012/mar/01/top-10-art-galleries-mumbai

http://travel.cnn.com/mumbai/play/mumbai-city-essentials/best-art-galleries-mumbai-863802/

Does this work? What would be the next steps. I want to add several contemporary Indian galleries of note (and especially those run by women) after I learn from this debacle, so any advice would be helpful. Thank you again. Caring Feminist (talk) 05:48, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Project 88 TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 07:09, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

In the past 48 hours you have created (bypassing AfC) six articles about artists in addition to Project 88, three of whom are Wikilinked in Project 88: Neha Choksi, Rehaan Engineer and The Otolith Group. Some of your artist articles are being critiqued, and may not survive. Notability is not contagious - naming artists who have exhibited at Project 88 does not necessarily contribute to notability of the gallery. Likewise, naming shows where those artists have had work displayed (Choksi, Frieze London, 2011) does not contribute to the gallery's notability. David notMD (talk) 10:42, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

I know how to do a topic (ex. "|pol, |econ") but how does one insert a specific WikiProject so the bot can add the notice to it's talk page? I've seen it done on WP:TRUMP YallAHallatalk 09:27, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Yallahalla, welcome to the Teahouse - usually you will need to include the specific template of the Wikiproject onto the talk page of the referring article. Every Wikiproject page lists those templates. Hope my answer was of help for you. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:59, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi team,

A newbie here so I thought I ask before making mess.

I've noticed that Deprivation index page redirects to Multiple deprivation index. The latter can be understood as particular example of the former. I would like to build a bit of content around first page. Can I simply delete redirect and start doing so? Of course the page on MDI will be linked to the new page.

Thanks! 2A02:AA10:E281:FD80:3559:2E95:8C7C:39FC (talk) 08:02, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. You could do that, but since writing a new article (which is what you are proposing) is about the most difficult task there is for an inexperienced editor, I would advise you not to go straight at it.

Furthermore, if you look at Talk:Multiple deprivation index, you'll see that Deprivation index was a separate article until two years ago, when it was merged with the MDI article after a discussion. You need to read that discussion (there is a link to it on that talk page). If you think that you have new information or a different perspective that now justifies a separate article, you need to open a discussion on the MDI talk page, referencing the previous discussion, and explaining why you think it should be reversed. If you persuade other editors, some of them will probably work with you.

If you are going to take my suggestion and open a discussion, I strongly suggest that you create an account. This is not essential, but it makes it easier for editors to communicate with you, and some editors have been known to value contributions from unregistered editors less (which is against policy, but it does happen). --ColinFine (talk) 11:01, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

 Ejaz300 (talk) 11:33, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Ejaz300 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The article you submitted was blank, I think you accidentally cleared it when you submitted it. However, even if you hadn't, your draft had no reliable sources to support its content. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability(more specifically, that of a notable organization). Please read Your First Article for more information, you may also wish to use the new user tutorial. You might find it easier to use Articles for Creation to submit your draft instead of using your sandbox.

If you are associated with the subject of your draft, please review conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 11:49, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Brahmdev Mishra  Thaeon (talk) 10:50, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Reviews may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order - there is no way to expedite this. Although I would note that using facebook pages as a 'reference' is not going to work this article's favour. --Paul ❬talk❭ 12:32, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

How do i cite sources Wiki2873 (talk) 12:53, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Wiki2873 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You may learn more about references at this beginner's guide to referencing. 331dot (talk) 12:57, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

requesting submission for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lord_of_Little_Stambridge_Hall HI, i would like to request submission for this page. i have added more citatations. 213.205.194.125 (talk) 12:35, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

You added one ref to this unreferenced mess. I agree with it having been Rejected after two Declined. The history also includes you twice moving it from draft to mainspace despite being advised that it was not of article quality. David notMD (talk) 12:55, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I.P. As indicated, the subject doesn't appear notable, and notability is not inherited. If we allowed this page to be published, it would stand as nothing more than an advertisement page, as from my understanding titles such as 'Lord of the Manor of X' are a saleable asset. Zindor (talk) 13:05, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

What is the appropriate usage of Template:Talk header? I know it has a usage section, but I was a little unclear on some of it. It says "this template should not be added to otherwise empty talk pages. That changes the "discussion" tab at the top of the page from a "redlink" into a "bluelink", which may mislead people into thinking there is discussion.", and I was wondering if this means I can add the template to talk pages with no discussion but that already have WikiProject banners because then it wouldn't create any more confusion than the WikiProject banners already have. Can I include this on any or all article talk pages or is it intended only for high traffic and controversial articles? TipsyElephant (talk) 14:13, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: AFAIK it is intended to be used on talk pages which generate too much offtopic comments, or too many rule violations (WP:NPA etc...) as a reminder. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:19, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

I asked this on Talk:GameStop already, but I was wondering if Gamestop's recent surge in stock price[1] was notable enough to be included as a section in its article. Finder of Eggs^{How's My Editing?} 14:22, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Findanegg, there is already one. There is also an article: GameStop short squeeze. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 14:42, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

My bad, I seem to have skimmed over that part. Finder of Eggs^{How's My Editing?} 14:49, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I am writing a page about a man who was notable for his WWII resistance work in the Netherlands, Belgium and France. I am writing in English but the page would be interesting to Dutch and French speakers as well. If I have the page properly translated, can I post it in French and Dutch wikipedias myself? Or is it better to have the translators post the page in their own language wikipedia? The citations for the article are in English, Dutch and French. Thanks for your help! DP1944 (talk) 16:10, 28 January 2021 (UTC) DP1944 (talk) 16:10, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, DP1944, and welcome to the Teahouse. Adding translations of articles to other language Wikipedias is usually welcome, but you must attribute them properly: see Translate us. The policies and procedures of different editions are different, so just because an article is acceptable in one edition doesn't automatically mean that it will be in other editions. You'll need to ask at the French and Dutch encyclopaedias to see what the requirements are. --ColinFine (talk) 16:51, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Colin. I'll check the other editions. DP1944 (talk) 17:05, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

My first instinct is that it isn't. Actually I was picking some pages to do from Women in Red project and noticed this politician from Odisha. There is a news at multiple publications but it is credited to PTI. Does this count as independent and reliable? See this [33], [34]

Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 10:37, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Nomadicghumakkad. My intuition is that it's reliable and not paid-for content, but your best bet is asking this at WP:RSN to get a solid answer. There's currently questions being raised about another press agency, Asian News International, too. Also, please post new questions at the bottom, I noticed this thread by chance. Kind regards and happy editing, Zindor (talk) 17:10, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

• https://www.tvmaze.com/?
• https://spicyonion.com/
• http://live.coolhdtv.com/
• https://trakt.tv/people/
• https://www.themoviedata.com/
• http://www.binged.com/ 

HistoricalAccountings (talk) 13:48, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

HistoricalAccountings, The best thing to do is ask at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard S Philbrick(Talk) 17:19, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

- Thank you. --HistoricalAccountings (talk) 17:38, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm wanting to create a new page. Where do I start? Spnm987 (talk) 12:38, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Spnm987 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, and thanks for wanting to contribute. I will advise you that successfully creating a new article(not just a "page") is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. It takes time, effort, and practice. Many new users who dive right in to creating articles without experience and knowledge fail in their first attempts, and get frustrated and angry as their work is mercilessly edited and deleted by others. I don't want you to have any bad feelings. I would suggest that you first spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content(which might not be what you think it is). It's also a great idea to use the new user tutorial and review Your First Article.

If you still want to attempt to write a new article, you should use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft. I'd still read Your First Article, and you will want to make sure you have at least three independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the topic you want to write about, and make sure that it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. 331dot (talk) 12:44, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello (talk) thank you for response to the above question, which is basically mine somewhere else here on Teahouse. I will try first to edit pages in my area of interest - public education in Los Angeles County - and I did find a page that I wanted to edit because one of my clients is mentioned on it, a large public agency, but there is no wikipedia page for it, so I edited the Los Angeles County page (and had my edit reverted back) to have this public agency hyperlinked to their website, though that appears to not be the way. Is there a proper web reference I can use to "cite" this public agency mentioned in the Los Angeles County page? Thanks. Karlomarcelo (talk) 17:55, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Los Angeles County Office of Education

New page / new reference Hello, I noticed on the Los Angeles County page that my client is mentioned, but there is no hyperlink for them, to a wikipedia page or external source. I'd like to either create a page or add an external source, such as their website for reference. Is this possible? I did read the help page on writing your first Wikipedia article and when I searched for the organization, I was sent to the Los Angeles County page. Thank you. Karlomarcelo (talk) 17:52, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Karlomarcelo: "client"? If you are paid to edit Wikipedia, you must comply with WP:PAID, which is a Terms of Use requirement and not negotiable. That being out of the way, in theory you could create a new article (not mere "page") there, replacing the redirect. However, please be advised that sucessfully creating a new article on Wikipedia is one of the absolute hardest tasks one can undertake on Wikipedia. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:28, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello! An article I have created, Bordrin, has been turned into a draft (Draft:Bordrin). They left a comment saying that is is written like an advertisement and needs better sources. I would be extremely grateful if a ore experienced editor could take a look at it, and either help me fix it, or give me suggestions on how to fix it. DestinationFearFan (talk) 18:45, 28 January 2021 (UTC) DestinationFearFan (talk) 18:45, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Categories for an article. Hello. How do I add another category at the bottom of an article that I have updated with new information? The article already has 4 categories. They are all valid, but it really belongs in at least one more. Thanks for your help. DP1944 (talk) 16:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

DP1944, see Wikipedia:FAQ/Categorization#How_do_I_add_an_article_to_a_category?. Or, if you're using Wikipedia:VisualEditor, click edit and then click in the category field at the bottom of the article, you get a helpful pop-up window. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:07, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your help DP1944 (talk) 19:08, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

I found an image from their website and would like to use it in a article. I got a message saying that it wasent identified as having the right copyright for it. Could someone help? Starman2377 (talk) 18:27, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Starman2377: Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. You should have asked the question about the image license before uplaoding the image. I am serious about it. Failure to do so almost always leads to trouble. As with nearly all images found on the internet, this image does not appear to be under any free license that Wikipedia accepts. Because of this, we can only use the image under fair use, provided that all of the non-free content criteria are met. In fact, I am pretty not sure that we can keep the image. I repeat myself for clairty: DO NOT upload a media file if you are unsure about it's licensing, especially if it comes from the internet. If in doubt, please ask. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:42, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Starman2377, forgottenweapons.com has a standard copyright notice at the bottom of their home page. You need to assume that every image you find on the internet is restricted by copyright, unless you have solid evidence to the contrary. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:11, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Someone used my IP address to edit a Wikipedia page for something I never heard of before. Does someone know why this might have happened?  64.139.108.210 (talk) 19:38, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. IP addresses can be used by multiple people in several different ways. If you don't wish for your edits to be confused with those of others, you can create an account. 331dot (talk) 19:58, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

I say this because, well, not only do I have close to zero knowledge of editing, but also because not much can be done on a mobile phone, or anything that isn't a computer for that matter. My native language is Portuguese, and besides that I'm also fluent in English. I feel that I can provide some much needed translation work on important pages (as well as just about anything), so I'm just wondering how anything can be done from my viewpoint considering my lack of experience in editing wikipedia pages, as well as from anyone else's viewpoint so, help? (•‿•) Orpheus432 (talk) 20:16, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, you can find some excellent advice about editing on a mobile phone here User:Cullen328/Smartphone editing. Theroadislong (talk) 20:46, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Orpheus432. I am a very experienced editor and administrator, and I do over 99% of my editing on Android smartphones. If you scroll to the bottom of the home page on the mobile site, you can switch to the desktop site, which works perfectly on modern smartphones. The desktop site is fully functional and allows you to do pretty much anything on Wikipedia, except for complex image editing where a bigger screen is useful. Feel free to ask me questions about mobile editing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:03, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello! On my User:DestinationFearFan/sandbox2, some of my sections don't appear, even though in edit mode, they show up. Could someone help me? Thanks, DestinationFearFan (talk) 20:02, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Resolved my question. DestinationFearFan (talk) 21:07, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

thank you for your letter i am very greatful for this site because believe me i have MANY questions. ill ask you some when they are needed thank you  Jm unicorn grl (talk) 21:29, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

What template or bot made this announcement at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Donald_Trump#User:Pretzel_butterfly_has_an_RFC? YallAHallatalk 21:43, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Yallahalla, it was a substitution of {{Rfc notice}}. That's why the markup was rendered. Regards, Zindor (talk) 22:26, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Recently an editor has been making hundreds of category changes in biographical articles in which they remove the Category:[year] deaths and replace it with Category:[year] suicides. Mykola Khvylovy is an example. Is this appropriate? Although I understand that categories should be as specific as possible, I thought that (for example) Category:1933 deaths was a standard biography category and should be there regardless of the means or cause of death. That's how I read Wikipedia:Categorization_of_people#N but I could well be wrong. I don't want to approach the user about this without knowing what's correct. Thanks HazelAB (talk) 23:11, 28 January 2021 (UTC) HazelAB (talk) 23:11, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey HazelAB. I'd note that there is discussion about this at User talk:Marcocapelle#Your recent edits. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:37, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

My draft, Draft:Thomas & Friends: All Engines Go! got not accepted. How Can I fix it? To be accepted? Also I’m 142.105.209.171, my ip changed. 2603:7081:5940:7500:1089:57E1:8000:33FD (talk) 23:35, 28 January 2021 (UTC) 2603:7081:5940:7500:1089:57E1:8000:33FD (talk) 23:35, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

An earlier article was started and turned into a redirect. There's a different naming convention for new seasons, but the consensus is to not have an article until the series has completed filming. See [[35]] TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:03, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Not a new editor, but wanted some second opinions. Would a section on a CEO's page relating to criticism of that CEO's company be considered a COATRACK? Note that most of the sources do not seem to mention the CEO directly, just the company.

Sdrqaz (talk) 22:11, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Sdrqaz: If the criticism is something that's not the CEO's fault, then it could very well be COATRACK, as well as WP:UNDUE to include it in his (or her) article. If you provide the link we can review. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:21, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Tim. The article is Jonathan D. Gray; I am quite cautious of removing the "controversies" section, given that it was requested by a COI editor. Sdrqaz (talk) 22:23, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Sdrqaz: after reading the sources and understanding the situation, it appears that the dedicated controversies section violates WP:STRUCTURE. I moved the info into the history section, but linked to the company article that had more info about the controversy. Hopefully that addresses things in a fair and balanced way. Now, Gray needs to be added to Invitation Homes. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:09, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Your work there was much appreciated, Tim, thank you! Sdrqaz (talk) 02:47, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirsad_Bekti%C4%87 There is no such thing as Bosnian Cyrillic. In fact, even the Wikipedia page, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_Cyrillic clearly states that it is extinct "is an extinct variant of the Cyrillic alphabet that originated in medieval Bosnia". I made this correction, but Cassiopeia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cassiopeia undid the correction "because they did not appear constructive." It would be more accurate to simply say Cyrillic, or Serbian Cyrillic. Thank you. 159.87.155.177 (talk) 02:36, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Your edit did remove the language description but without any explanation. Moreover, that same edit removed his middle name, with an edit summary only talking about the removal of his middle name, while invoking the anecdotal, general idea that "He does not have a middle name, this is not common at all among Bosnians". The portion stating "this is not common at all among Bosnians", makes it sound like your are guessing, and not stating something specific, like "I have researched, and he has no middle name, and it is unsourced here so I am removing under WP:BURDEN" (or even better, provide a source that states what his birth name is in conjunction).

If he actually has no middle name, of course, it should be removed, but your edit summary does not provide a lot of confidence you were stating a fact. I note that when I look at the article I see no reference for his name; when I open multiple links included in the references I find not one of them using the middle name, so for all I know, the middle name may be vandalism. (I may look into that further.) However, if it is his middle name, then it belongs. It's also not suprising that many sources would not use it, if his common name is usually provided without it. For why it belongs if its exist, see MOS:BIRTHNAME:

"While the article title should generally be the name by which the subject is most commonly known, the subject's full name, if known, should usually be given in the lead sentence (including middle names, if known, or middle initials). Many cultures have a tradition of not using the full name of a person in everyday reference, but the article should start with the complete version in most cases".

For these reasons, in my view you were properly reverted. If you wanted that edit to "stick", you needed to explain the language issue in the edit summary, and not combine it with the middle name – I invite you to go do that.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:22, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I recently created a portal for January 30, 2021, because Cyberbot couldn't create one. However, that particular portal actually has events for January 29, which is the day BEFORE. What do I do? Call me when you get the chance (talk) 03:53, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I need assistance with an Infobox problem on my new article Greenland Lake McAnnis59 (talk) 04:05, 29 January 2021 (UTC) McAnnis59 (talk) 04:05, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I copied from Mormon Lake, so so t know why ended up with an Infox problem. (2nd note for assistance) McAnnis59 (talk) 04:09, 29 January 2021 (UTC) McAnnis59 (talk) 04:09, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

sorry about spelling. An Infobox problem. Don’t know why. McAnnis59 (talk) 04:11, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@McAnnis59: Looks like Victor Schmidt fixed it at Special:Diff/1003489093 by removing duplicate parameters and an extra template closing (}}). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:17, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

My pages titled Vincenzo Nicoli, Alejandro Edda and Denise Dowse need images in their infobox. Can someone find pictures of them so I can have good views on my pages? 174.215.217.60 (talk) 03:23, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

First, there is no such thing as "My pages." I am guessing that you created these three articles while editing as User:MetaWiz4331 and then for some reason stopped using that account in July 2020 and took up editing as a non-account IP. I doubt any Teahouse host has the means or the inclination to help search for non-copyright images. Daily page views look to be about 50, 300 and 300 resepctively for the three actors. I doubt adding an image would change that. David notMD (talk) 12:10, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

i would like this page deleted as its not notable enough FredBensen (talk) 09:47, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, FredBensen. After six months with no edits to the draft, it will be deleted. The main author is EvWills, only they can request early deletion under G7. Kind regards, Zindor 12:16, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm very confused about the process of renaming, creating, moving, and deleting categories. I was under the impression that all these actions required discussion and consensus. I opened a discussion (here), and before any consensus was reached a random user started creating and moving the categories we were discussing without providing any input into the discussion and without even saying anything on the WikiProject talk page (I don't think they are even an active member of the WikiProject). The actions they took also further confused people in the discussion who hadn't understood what I was trying to do.

I was wondering if this user is allowed to move and create categories on a whim then am I allowed to as well? Can I ignore the discussion I opened and simply make the changes I intended to make despite the fact that I seemed to only receive opposition? And if so, what happens when I disagree with how they are organizing the categories? I can see something like this very quickly devolving into an edit war. TipsyElephant (talk) 01:39, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

TipsyElephant, category changes can be fairly disruptive, so while I don't know the specifics of the situation you're describing and don't dabble in categories too much myself, I'd think editors would be expected to discuss before making mass edits. I'd ping the editor or post on their talk page to try to get them to engage and explain their actions, and if they don't and keep making them, then it'd be time to consider escalating. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:47, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Sdkb: I decided to just ask them why they were doing it in the discussion and they responded by saying that, "No discussion is required for creating categories, though whether they are kept or deleted is a matter of consensus. Removing categories from Category:Speculative fiction podcasts would also remove them from the wider category tree for speculative fiction, which is probably ill-advised."

But now they saying that my nomination is out of date because of a parent category that they were responsible for creating without any discussion or consensus and they are recommending that I nominate that parent category for merging, which would result in everything being exactly the same as it was before I created the original nomination in the first place. I'm not sure what the rules are here, but if I go through that lengthy process then what's to stop them from doing the exact same thing to make my nomination obsolete again and force me to go through the process all over again. To be honest I'm having trouble assuming good faith at this point. TipsyElephant (talk) 13:48, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

So I want to question this: Is Wikipedia Left-wing or Right-wing or Center? I DON'T CARE IF YOU BAN ME Scoophole2021 (talk) 23:45, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Going to be honest in my opinion. On a full political scale, say CNN is 50% left and Fox News is 50% rights. AP News is about centered. From my opinion and what I have seen, Wikipedia (The foundation) is centered, but the majority of admins are slightly left. I would say Wikipedia (per discussions/generic editors that are more than 500 editors), it is maybe 10% left. Not like a major left swing, but small things make it left IMO.

Also, @Scoophole2021: do you have a specific question about how to edit Wikipedia, since this area if for those type of questions, not the ones you asked. Elijahandskip (talk) 23:51, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

"The facts have a well-known liberal bias." —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 01:15, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

"Sometimes we can disagree with the facts." - Sean Spicer Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:12, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I'll add my opinion that Elijahandskip is not monumentaly wrong, but that scale is very "USA today". Other countries and US 20/40 years ago is/was different, CNN appears noway near 50% left to me, being left of Fox doesn't make it left. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:11, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Scoophole2021, Wikipedia aims to be centered, but of course given the many left-wing editors, it still is leaning left. Of course this is unacceptable, and attempts are being made to centerize Wikipedia. It's a large website, so it takes time to refurbish. If you can neutralize biased articles, do so. GeraldWL 08:17, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: but that is only true for one specific and limited definition of "left". Wikipedia is not only a concern for persons based in the US, although there is a very heavy US bias, and the US centric definition of political "left" and "right" are often taken as some kind of global norm in discussions here. And that is unfortunate. --bonadea contributions talk 08:39, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Bonadea, I am not trying to be diverse here; the OP clearly is asking about US politics and Wikipedia (no other people have asked "is WP left or right" other than US people). Feel free to include a more global definition of left and right, but that is unlikely to be useful. GeraldWL 08:43, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Well, on the face of it, there was nothing US in the OP. WP (even en-WP) doesn't necessarily mean to be US-today centered in all it's content. I get the impression that many people considers attempting a WP:NPOV slant is a leftist position (sometimes it's considered a rightist or other position, but less often). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:00, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Here is some fair and balanced coverage: "Liberal Bias of Wikipedia Called Out in 5 Studies" Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:20, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

It's funny how this unreliable source cites both Harvard and Wikipediocracy which are... quite different? Even more amusing is how the second Harvard study (didn't read the first one) is actually pretty interesting and attesting that Wikipedia is becoming less biased over time and we are actually slowly getting nearer to NPOV overall. Which is not really what Newsmax stated the study would say, but eh, whatever. An interesting read (the Harvard thing), thanks Gråbergs Gråa Sång! --LordPeterII (talk) 12:21, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Waitaminute, you did find some fair and balanced coverage? Joke's on me, then :p Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:48, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Scoophole2021, you may or may not find this article interesting: Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-11-29/Op-Ed. And don't miss the comment section. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:19, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Previously I added the DOB of John Flint (businessman) according to [36] and [37]. But someone reverted my edits. What's the problem?--219.79.78.55 (talk) 13:43, 29 January 2021 (UTC) 219.79.78.55 (talk) 13:43, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

WP has strict rules about any content about living people, see the relevant one at WP:DOB. Your first link is a primary source, that's out for this. I don't know what the second is supposed to be (so my basic assumption is that it shouldn't be used), but it says "Estimated date of birth" which isn't good enough. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:54, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

OK, I will add that after his death.--219.79.78.55 (talk) 14:39, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

... Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:43, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! I'm having a back-and-forth series with an editor who is repeatedly reverting my edits.

Reached out to Teahouse in this archived thread, where two editors helped to restore some edits, and advised me to reach out to the editor to have a conversation on the subject's talk page here (I pinged him with no response), as well as the editor's User Talk page, where I also received no response, after multiple attempts. Trying to remain positive here, just unsure how to proceed? I really believe I am editorially improving the integrity of this stub as someone passionate about fashion history and brands. Is it possible to resolve this for the betterment of the page? Elp1108 (talk) 20:10, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Article is Bally Shoe. Elp1108 declared not paid and not COI, but this statement is sort of buried on E's Talk page. E and GSS have been back and forth on this article since August 2020, with as of yet no serious attempt at hashing it out on the Talk page. David notMD (talk) 21:54, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you David notMD – I heeded the very helpful advice you and other editors gave me from the previous thread and updated my User Page + reached out to GSS by pinging him on the Bally Shoe talk page and also on his User Talk page a few times, which he finally responded to yesterday, but doesn't seem open to conversation. I've been told by him to wait for a response and will do so accordingly. Elp1108 (talk) 14:57, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Elp1108 Patience is a good trait. David notMD (talk) 14:45, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

dear Teahouse, I note an error on a Wikipedia page. It appears on the page but not on the editable version. What do I do?

The page is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Griffin_(psychologist)

thanks, AriaFortuna AriaFortuna (talk) 12:30, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Specify the error and where in the article it appears. David notMD (talk) 12:36, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, AriaFortuna, and welcome to the Teahouse. As David indicates, it's hard to answer without you specifying what the problem is. But I'm guessing from your heading that the problem is in one of the citations, and I'm also guessing that you are trying to fix it by editing the "References" section, and not finding it there. This is because references are defined in the source where they are used: it is the software that collects them together and puts them in the "References" section. So you would need to edit the section where the particular reference is footnoted. --ColinFine (talk) 13:47, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I'll see whether I can figure that out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AriaFortuna (talk • contribs) 15:22, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

What is the teahouse? How do I use it? (Yes stupid question I know lol) Tickery (talk) 16:13, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@Tickery: Hello, and welcome to The Teahouse. The Teahouse is intended as a question forum for new users. We respond to questions about using or editing Wikipedia. If you have a question, you can always ask by clicking the big blue button in the page header. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:49, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Relativity and Cosmology Galilei, Newton, Bohr, Heisenberg, Maxwell, Einstein, Feynman and Vlcek https://vixra.org/abs/1907.0512 https://vixra.org/pdf/1907.0512v1.pdf is my work GALILEI, NEWTON, BOHR, HEISENBERG, MAXWELL, EINSTEIN, FEYNMAN and Vlcek 22.7.2019 ccc Research • Oct 2019 • DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19670.40009 • Lubomir Vlcek • Galilei • Vlcek Newton GALILEI, NEWTON, BOHR, HEISENBERG, MAXWELL, EINSTEIN, FEYNMAN and Vlcek 22.7.2019 copppy Preprint • Jul 2019 • DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28687.74400 • Lubomir Vlcek On ResearchGate are my works. GALILEI, NEWTON, BOHR, HEISENBERG, MAXWELL, EINSTEIN, FEYNMAN and Vlcek 22.7.2019 ccc Research Oct 2019DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19670.40009 Lubomir VlcekGalileiVlcek Newton GALILEI, NEWTON, BOHR, HEISENBERG, MAXWELL, EINSTEIN, FEYNMAN and Vlcek 22.7.2019 copppy Preprint Jul 2019DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28687.74400 Lubomir Vlcek https://www.researchgate.net/search/publication?q=%2B%2B%2BLubomir%2BVlcek AE1851 (talk) 15:07, 29 January 2021 (UTC) Authors: Lubomir Vlcek AE1851 (talk) 14:55, 29 January 2021 (UTC) AE1851 (talk) 14:55, 29 January 2021 (UTC) AE1851 (talk) 15:07, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

AE1851 can you give us some context for this statement, or do you have a question? TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:09, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I think it refers to an article in the User's sandbox which was declined as WP:OR and similar "On ResearchGate are my works" in the text above. Still own research, whether here or elsewhere. The links are to preprints that are, in my opinion, likely to be refused publication. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:15, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

What is in your Sandbox User:AE1851/sandbox in no way whatsoever resembles an encyclopedia article. All it has is hyperlinks to your unpublished 10-page manuscript. David notMD (talk) 17:50, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Is there anyone available to help edit my wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Bennion? Jbb10020 (talk) 15:18, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Jbb10020, if you think it needs extensive edit, you can submit it for copyedit at WP:GOCE/R. GeraldWL 15:24, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Jbb10020 you can make an edit request on the talk page. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:26, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Timtempleton, I really cannot use this forum. In the past, a grad student helped me. Can we converse on email? I just need a few items edited on my page. I could use the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbb10020 (talk • contribs) 16:43, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

The impression I get is that Janet Bennion is about you, and was created by you in 2013. If this is true, you should not directly edit the article. Instead, you should declare on your User page that the article is about you. Then, at the Talk page of the article, you should propose specific changes, providing references. There is a process for asking a non-involved editor to visit the user page and decide to incorporate your proposed changes or not. David notMD (talk) 18:00, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Jbb10020 we can discuss on the article talk page. Ping me with my user name in double brackets like I pinged you here. But please keep in mind that in general biographies of living people are hard to source, and we can’t take people for their word about anything without a reliable source. Too many people try to white wash their biographies or spin them a certain way. Indeed, we don’t really know that you are who you say you are. But I will help if I can. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:44, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Please help me. I have loved editing and one day want to admin but... I have a problem I can't fix. I have actually got a copy of this man's drivers license to prove we have his name wrong on Wikipedia. Can you help me change the big bold top line to spell his name correctly. It's kind of urgent if possible.20footfish (talk) 10:56, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

page is Park Yoo-chun Hi name is Park Yu Chun and he wants it to change. I have his license for you :) 20footfish (talk) 10:56, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

20footfish, we can't use private documents to source on Wikipedia, as it is entirely inaccessible to others, thus can't be verified. Online sources are preferred. GeraldWL 11:42, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Gerard Waldo Louis mate, I am so glad to see you here again. I think we may have spoken before. You are awesome and have helped me before. I have online ones we can use but I don't have admin rights to change the name at the top from Yoo_chun to Yu Chun. How do I get that changed? I'd love your help. I am Kiwi in NZ but I often help this group and fans with English translations etc ( I will elaborate here too, I shouldn't have said often, I did few to help after 6 Jan when wikicommons research for copyright meant I had to reach out for permissions..it's been very hard to get this far and now I have come across as COI, I am very very sad that I wrote this here and that it had made everything I have done become suspicious. 80 hours I have worked 80 hours alone, I am so proud of my work and research. I worked hard to be neutral and impartial and to consider your Living persons policy). That's how I got asked to update his page. I am enjoying it so much that I will do more wiki updates for other pages soon. Can you tell me how to get his main name changed? Where do I request that an Admin helps me?20footfish (talk) 12:06, 29 January 2021 (UTC) 20footfish (talk) 12:07, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpwejT777yH6jCltuLcq99w https://www.parkyuchun.com/en/park-yoo-chun-official-fan-site-blue-cielo-open/

There is a lot of mistakes online but these will be my sources if possible as they match his license. 20footfish (talk) 12:12, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@20footfish: You can ask for an article to be moved to a new title at WP:RM, but it is really not clear from the sources that the new spelling is more correct than the old one, so you would need to present reliable independent sources supporting that. --bonadea contributions talk 14:24, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@20footfish: "Right" article title on WP is WP:COMMONNAME, it may or may not be what the subject wants (yet, anyway). Yusuf Islam is a good example. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:30, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

20footfish, I suggest you read WP:COI regarding conflict of interests towards a subject; you seem to have one. Or maybe WP:PAID, if you are paid to edit Wikipedia. You can change your username; see WP:CHU. GeraldWL 14:34, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerard I will look into the COI. There is none from my end but I will look into why someone would think I am promoting or knowing the person. Wikipedia isn't easy to figure out. I will look at user20footfish (talk) 15:40, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@20footfish: Above, you claim to have a copy of his driving licence, and you also said I often help this group and fans with English translations etc. That's how I got asked to update his page. So it is not a matter of somebody thinking you have a COI – you stated yourself that you have one. --bonadea contributions talk 16:13, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Oh I see... I don't communicate as well as I should.20footfish (talk) 16:25, 29 January 2021 (UTC) This is my first profile to fix and it was an interest to be an editor. I made contact after wikicommons told me to go find the person to send the form to. I wouldn't have found people if it wans't for wikipedia in the first place.. its so hard. But the Licence was emailed to me from the people who own the image and were looking at copyright to let us use the photo... so what is my next step because your change meant that information I can prove is incorrect is now back... do we have to have a mediation meeting thingy? I am not sure how it works but I want you to help me sort out this misunderstanding even if I type it because of my language.20footfish (talk) 16:18, 29 January 2021 (UTC)20footfish (talk) 16:50, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I really regret this now20footfish (talk) 16:50, 29 January 2021 (UTC) and the sad thing is that I am correct with y edits. I can prove it20footfish (talk) 16:50, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@20footfish: Note that even the link you posted from their website contains both "yu" (in the domain) and "yoo" (in the article's filename): https://www.parkyuchun.com/en/park-yoo-chun-official-fan-site-blue-cielo-open . When it comes to transliterations of names (especially) from non-Latin character sets (like Hangul) into the Latin script used in English, there are often different practices among people and sources and, therefore, Wikipedia. There is no "correct". We try to choose the most common form used in English-language sources, per WP:COMMONNAME. What's on a driver's license may be arbitrary, based on personal preference, or more likely, follows a government-specified scheme, none of which directly affects what Wikipedia chooses to name the article. BTW, please don't try to "prove" it by revealing a private, personal information document like a driver's license – it wouldn't change anything and would cause problems that neither you nor the subject want/need. Thanks for understanding. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:09, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Alan, I accept your reasons. I have completely misunderstood everything and have gotten into a really tough spot. Quite upsetting. It will be okay. I am praying now that the page is edited back or fixed to be able to remove the COI because it's so upsetting for me. You see, other editors on here that are also being changed think that I have a personal connection. It's not true, I am guilty of not understanding the COI policy and yes, I used other articles to counter cited articles because how can you tell which one is correct? that aside, I am happy to learn how to send a request next time, for now I am sitting with COI on here.20footfish (talk) 20:18, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I have just done the article about musician, with references , I do not know how to publish for review in order to public seen. Please advise. Thanks. Sam Novras (talk) 20:25, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Sam Novras Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You need to click the "Resubmit" button in the decline notice. 331dot (talk) 20:29, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

• Link: Park Yoo-chun

I just hope someone can explain so that I understand... when does the COI message disappear? does it disappear ever? is it permanent? I am not meant to edit anything am I? and who edits the problem? How does Wikipedia get the COI issue resolved? I have read it, I just don't understand because it says any user can remove it but then I do get told not to. The admin is probably correct but it says I can remove it when my edit was corrected. It was corrected.. so I don't know why it must stay. I do know that I won't be editing again, but I want to know when the COI will go20footfish (talk) 19:36, 29 January 2021 (UTC) 20footfish (talk) 19:36, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

20footfish While most maintenance notices can be removed by anyone, a COI notice cannot be removed by the editor with the COI. The notice is not permanent but can't be removed until an independent editor evaluates the article. You can request that with an edit request on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 19:44, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much... this is extremely helpful. Now I understand that my taking it off could not have given a good impression. I will request edit because I would like to to be resolved sooner rather than later.. I would be so happy to see that banner go. The edits, well that's fair enough.. the banner, I want it to go quickly. I am less stressed knowing that it's not permanent. Thank you so very much.20footfish (talk) 19:48, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@20footfish: I'm sorry that I have been unclear before. Let me try to explain again. The COI notice on that article concerns the edits of multiple editors over many months. It is not only about your edits (although you are the only one who has been honest about having a COI). It is perfectly OK that there is a maintenance template on the article. It is perfectly OK if a template stays on an article for a few months, until an uninvolved editor reviews the article. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 20:08, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I wish you could put that onto talk page on article.20footfish (talk) 20:23, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. It is confusing with all these different places. I wrote on your talk page as an apology. Thank you for the explanation there Bonadea. I just would appreciate a comment to say that its for multiple editors. I would love to explain but everyone can read everything here so, my reasons are personal and not COI but I should not even have started this, I guess. Its okay. I would really like that comment there if you are allowed and able to do it on the talk page.20footfish (talk) 20:30, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

How can I add a page/article on Wikipedia myself? Do I need to pay? 2071mall (talk) 05:31, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@2071mall: You should not write a Wikipedia page about yourself (see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY). One of the core policies at Wikipedia is a neutral point of view, and it is very hard to write about yourself strictly from a neutral perspective. You can't pay us to let that happen either. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 05:51, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@2071mall: Take the time to read Help:Your first article thoroughly. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:28, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Actually, this user wants to know how to add an article to Wikipedia. --Uptherial (talk) 21:51, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Will I get a notification when the 4 days are up? I have made 10 edits already. LilyIsGreat (talk) 23:02, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, LilyIsGreat. You are now autoconfirmed and can edit semi-protected articles. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:09, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Header inserted by ColinFine (talk) 13:43, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I have just created a new page and would be so happy if it was reviewed by the community. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ekvita Thanks in advance to you all! Nargizyl (talk) 13:23, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Nargizyl. It looks to me like you're writing about a non-notable company—one for which insufficient reliable, secondary, independent sources exist that demonstrate the world taking note of the company to meet our standards, and on which verifiable article content can be based. While it's possible there are good sources out there, what you've cited thus far (as noted in the declines of the draft), are not enough. If much better sourcing doesn't exist, don't waste your time, no suitable article is possible.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:47, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I understand, but what is wrong with the sources? I tried to find the most comprehensive links that are directly related to the topic.

I started a conversation on the Podcasting WikiProject talk page (here) about the quality and importance graph without realizing that there was an entire page about these guidelines (here). Would it be appropriate to move or at least copy and paste the discussion into the talk page as the discussion was explicitly about creating guidelines for quality and importance and ended with someone suggesting I edit the page, which I did do after some discussion and research. TipsyElephant (talk) 15:08, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: you can put anything you want on the talk page that you think will help other readers or editors better understand or improve the article. If it’s seen as excessive or out of place, it can be compacted or moved by anybody. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:15, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: would it be appropriate to remove it from the WikiProject talk page after copying it to the assessment talk page? TipsyElephant (talk) 15:27, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi TipsyElephant. I agree with Timtempleton's utility standard as a good basis here. However, please understand that unless content on a talk page is extremely rudimentary—content that clearly doesn't meet threshold of originality (a very low bar, not at all applicable here)—you must provide copyright attribution when you copy and paste the content from one Wikipedia page to another. For how to do this, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia#Proper attribution (Shortcut: WP:PATT). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:58, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Why not just keep it there but add at the end of the thread "Discussion moved to talk page" with a link to the continuing discussion? You'd think it would be be archived at some point anyway. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:19, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

I want to know how many locks are there in Wikipedia. (such as semi-protection). I am also autoconfirmed and made 13 edits here. So please tell me everything about it. I am also new, btw. Wiki2873 (talk) 17:35, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello Wiki2873, and welcome to the Teahouse! A full list of the protection levels that pages can have can be found at Wikipedia:Protection policy. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 17:41, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! But can you help me? I want to learn more about the locks in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki2873 (talk • contribs) 17:45, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

The Wikipedia site Pahunkat provided has the information about article locks. What else are you seeking? David notMD (talk) 18:03, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Wiki2873. The above-linked page is a very good overview. I'm not sure if this helps but since you specifically asked about the number protected, the approximate number is available for each type of protection by looking at the associated category. Thus Category:Wikipedia semi-protected pages shows there are approx. 2,017 pages in it currently. Follows that naming format to locate other types of protected page categories. You can also try the tool Petscan. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:22, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Do you make my page? Aditya Chaurasia (Sahil) (talk) 00:23, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

The content of your draft Draft:Sr timeline appears to be to promote your business. This is not what Wikipedia is. Please delete all content. Teahouse hosts are volunteers who anser question about how to be an editor, not to make articles on request. David notMD (talk) 01:19, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Currently, the page on Shell Companies says this (listing two instances from the page): On Friday, January 8, 2021 the US Congress banned all anonymous shell companies. In January 2021 anonymous shell companies were effectively banned via a provision in the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021.[20]

These are not true statements. Instead, US Congress setup a CONFIDENTIAL DATABASE of the owners behind shell companies. Only federal law enforcement and banks have access to this database (thus, to the public shell companies are still anonymous and are not banned).

Link to Page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_corporation 70.162.85.74 (talk) 22:57, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

You see that "[20]" in your excerpt? That's the source being cited for that claim. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 22:59, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

The best place for you to post concerns or questions about a Wikipedia article is the associated talk page (e.g. Talk:Shell corporation). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:52, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, i am regular reader of WIKI for last 15 years and more. as usual today i came to know Roman polanski birthday is this date as it shows in my facebook memory and i remember i read it too there in Wiki page for years but today as i checked here i found Roam Polanski birthday is on 18th of August. why is it so? please correct it. Dubeydelhi (talk) 04:16, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

@Dubeydelhi: the date of birth comes from All Movie Guide. "Roman Polanski – Biography". The New York Times website. Archived from the original on 24 November 2013. Retrieved 20 November 2013. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 05:11, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

How do I write an infobox? Cinnamon Bells 4040 (talk) 02:18, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Cinnamon Bells 4040. You can find out more information about infoboxes at WP:INFOBOX. In most cases, you don't need to write (i.e. create) and infobox yourself from scratch; there are many infoboxes which have already been created to others as seen here. All you need to do is add an infobox template to an article and then fill in the parameters. If you do want to create a new infobox, you can find out information on how to do so here, but you probably should ask a place like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes first to see if a new infobox is really needed first. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:12, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

@Cinnamon Bells 4040: Another way to find an appropriate existing infobox is to look for articles about similar subjects that have infoboxes and copy the code from one. I.e., edit the article from which you want to copy the infobox, copy the code to your clipboard, cancel, edit the article into which you want to insert the infobox, paste your clipboard into it, edit parameter values as needed. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:28, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I am Wikipedian Whamrockers. I have a question about how to deal with edit wars. There are lots of editors who likes to involve in edit war. They delete correct and important information with sources. So please tell me how can I deal with such editors. Whamrockers (talk) 16:55, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Whamrockers, welcome to the Teahouse. Everything you need to know about Edit Wars you will find here Wikipedia:Edit_warring, especially in the Section "Handling of edit-warring behaviors". Hope my answer was of help for you, enjoy editing here. CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:47, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Whamrockers. Note that takes (at least) two to edit war, and almost always both of them are certain that they are right. The way to "deal with" such editors is explained in WP:BRD: discuss it with them (letting go of "I'm right and you're wrong", which never solves anything), and if you still can't reach consensus, follow DR. --ColinFine (talk) 19:28, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Whamrockers, when you see another editor engage in edit warring behavior, the first thing to do is to ask them to stop, linking to the policy. If they refuse to stop, report them to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Chronic edit warriors are routinely blocked. Never, ever engage in edit warring yourself, even if you are convinced that you are right. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:34, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

ADMINS! PLEASE DELETE MY DRAFT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kizana_Sunobu PLEASE! I DON'T WANNA BE BANNED JUST YET MY WIKI IS TOO YOUNG TO BE BANNED! AHHHHH HELP ME AS QUICK AS YOU CAN! H0MARUP (talk) 10:33, 29 January 2021 (UTC)H0MARUP H0MARUP (talk) 10:33, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

H0MARUP, the article is being deleted as an extreme violation of our copyright policy, which is serious. Violations of this policy which can have legal consequences for the Wikimedia Foundation. The page will be deleted, unless you re-write the entire thing in your own words. You will not be blocked unless this happens repeatedly, but take it as a warning. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 10:42, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Oh god thank you! H0MARUP (talk) 10:44, 29 January 2021 (UTC)H0MARUP

H0MARUP Please refrain from all capital letters, as that is considered shouting. New editors are allowed a grace period to learn about Wkikipedia's guidelines and rules. However, what you did at Yandere Simulator was clearly vandalism. Behavior like that will lead to you being blocked. David notMD (talk) 12:24, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't wanted to do that. I really love Yandere Simulator and there are some references that doesn't even talking about Yandere Simulator so I tried to delete and it turned out... Anyway thanks! H0MARUP (talk) 06:47, 30 January 2021 (UTC)H0MARUP

I know I'm asking too much question and sorry if I bother you but, how can I be an admin? And is it free? Please let me know! Oh, and by the way, how can I make a discussion like Teahouse? I want to make one to! Is it possible? H0MARUP (talk) 09:49, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

H0MARUP Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. In short, the community will grant you the administrator tools if you spend a great deal of time(typically years) developing a good edit history that shows you have a good temperament, good judgement, understand Wikipedia policies, and can demonstrate a need for the tools. There is no cost to be a Wikipedia participant regardless of the toolset you have- being an administrator only means that you have tools that would be irresponsible for the general public to have(such as deleting articles). You can do 95% of things here without the administrator tools. You can learn more about the process at WP:RFA.

I'm a bit unclear as to your other question- we have the Teahouse and Help Desk so I'm not sure why another similar forum is needed. Please understand that Wikipedia is not a place to merely have discussions- pages here must be pertinent to improving this encyclopedia. You do have your own user talk page where other users can communicate with you, but it is not a place for unlimited off-topic discussion. 331dot (talk) 09:54, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

(ec) H0MARUP, in short, you edit for at least a couple of years, make thousands of helpful good edits so when people look at your edits they think "It would be a good idea to make this person an admin." Then you apply. See Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:57, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I understood. So maybe for how many years exactly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by H0MARUP (talk • contribs) 10:00, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

H0MARUP There isn't a specific number. If you are the most fantastic editor in Wikipedia history out of the tens of millions of people who participated here, it might be a year, but that's not very likely. For most people, it takes many years and several thousand edits. As I said, "being an administrator" is just a toolset to have- it is not a hat to wear or an accomplishment to obtain; administrators have no more authority than any other editor. It's also a lot of tedious work. Is there a particular reason you are eager to get the administrator tools? In most successful cases, the tools are not given to people who seek out the status of being an administrator- they are given to people who demonstrate a need for them that would benefit the project. 331dot (talk) 10:06, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Well, I don't have any reasons. I just wanna be an admin but I don't really know why do I want! And is there any shorter ways to find a page that is needed to edit or I have to search and hoping there will be one? Help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by H0MARUP (talk • contribs) 10:15, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

H0MARUP A good place to find things to do is the Community Portal. And please sign your future talk page posts(but never articles) with four tildes(~~~~) so we know you wrote them. Thanks 331dot (talk) 10:18, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

See WP:How to help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:20, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Oh thank you so much! I usually have trouble with that but now I'm good! H0MARUP (talk) 10:27, 29 January 2021 (UTC)H0MARUP

H0MARUP, I suggest you not seek to be an admin for now. It takes time (and I mean time) for an editor to really understand what it takes to be an admin. I know this because I have been editing for nearly a year (which is long for me, is it long for you?) and still haven't understood some stuff about Wikipedia. Admins have the tools to delete pages and stuff like that, so the question is Why do you want to get that tool, and will you use that responsibly? Given the low experience you still have, don't think much about adminship, and just edit. GeraldWL 14:42, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@H0MARUP: Please also see the essay WP:HATCOLLECTING (something to be avoided here). I think the last time I researched it, the "youngest" username that was granted admin rights was 13 months, and that was quite unusual, as the average was much longer (years, with thousands of edits to their credit).

Minor nit: please make the four tildes the very last thing in your post (i.e., don't put anything after it). The software turns the tildes into a link to your username and a timestamp, which should appear last for the benefit of scripts and bots (as well as humans) that expect it. Thanks! —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:17, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Update: At Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1067#Applying for admin in July 2020, I wrote: Out of about 1100 admins, only 25 joined Wikipedia in 2013 or later. The newest of those joined 19 months ago.. That was based on this search, which today shows that Hog Farm holds the distinction of "youngest" admin account, at near 15 months, during which he made 25,000 edits. Second place goes to GeneralNotability at 23 months and over 50,000 edits. 99% of the 1100 admins joined more than 4 years ago. 95% of the admins joined more than 10 years ago. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:47, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Oof, a year? It's kinda long because I can only edit on weekends. Welp, I can do 95% of things here without being an admin so I'll stop thinking about being admin. Thanks! H0MARUP (talk) 06:43, 30 January 2021 (UTC)H0MARUP

H0MARUP, I am an administrator and I edited almost every day for eight years before becoming an administrator. People asked me many times but I waited because I considered that to be a major commitment and I wanted my family to be supportive. When I finally put my name forward, I got very strong support. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:53, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

I am wondering if I can use wikipedia as a citation? I am also wondering what to do if I'd like to have two citations.... Rosenberg.suzanne (talk) 02:52, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Rosenberg.suzanne. If you mean as a "citation for another Wikipedia article", then the answer is no; Wikipedia doesn't consider itself to be a reliable source for any purpose as explained here (except perhaps if it's an article about Wikipedia itself). Moreover, many other websites take their content directly from Wikipedia and such content is also not considered a reliable source per WP:MIRROR or WP:CIRCULAR. As for your second question, I'm not sure what you mean by two citations. If you mean cite the same source more than once for different content in the same article, then that is allowed. If you mean have two citations to different sources for the same content in the same article, then that is also allowed. A citation is allowed to be multiple times or multiple citations are allowed to be used. You can find a little more about citations in Wikipedia:Citing sources. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:07, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

If you mean that you want to cite WP in an off-WP work, see WP:Citing Wikipedia. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:59, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, i want to upload a new image shoted in the 1989. I know who is the photographer but he don't have this particular image in this online archive, but i'm sure that the image is his becouse the pictures are the same frame but in two different moment. I see that so many journal article use this image and they don't gave the credit to the photographer. What do you think? Meaby he don't ask for the copyright for this particular image or maybe it free. What i can do? Thanks All the bests --TommasoRmndn (talk) 16:55, 29 January 2021 (UTC) TommasoRmndn (talk) 16:55, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome TommasoRmndn. Without knowing any more about the image than what you've just described, your best option would be to get the photographer to upload the image himself (under a creative commons license or into the public domain) by having him follow these instructions. The fact that some publications use the image in question without crediting the photographer is not proof that that photograph is in the public domain. Chetsford (talk) 19:25, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, TommasoRmndn. When a photo is published anywhere, is is copyrighted automatically and there is no requirement that the photographer "ask for copyright". Copyrights last for 95 years. Exceptions are rare. Photos taken by employees of the U.S. federal government as part of their job duties are not copyrighted. They are public domain. You can only upload a photo if you have solid evidence that it is freely licensed or not copyrighted. This is a matter of policy. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:53, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Chetsford and Cullen328. I'll try to find a solution. --TommasoRmndn (talk) 11:00, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

I am updating and existing article that currently has 10 plus quality references. before I began my update, the article was fine. Now its saying that my reference sources are not enough, but these are references from notice news outlets, publications etc.

What am I doing wrong?

Here is the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavar_Munroe Fredlin82! (talk) 13:41, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Fredlin82! The page had just never been noticed and tagged before. Before your edits it needed tagging and after them it still certainly did. The article has quite a lot of poorly attributed references, some of them cited in the form of bare urls – some of them added by you. I don't want to minimize your contributions. Thank you for these edits to expand the article! Nevertheless, these forms of citations are not ideal. As an example, you added as a reference:

<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/arts/design/drawing-exhibitions.html]</ref>.

Please see Wikipedia:Citing sources#What information to include for an overview, but let me provide an example of a citation that in my view provides better attribution for that reference (using the citation template, {{Cite news}} to provide consistency of formatting):

<ref>{{Cite news|last=Graeber|first=Laurel|work=The New York Times|title=Putting Pencil to Paper, in Galleries and in the Voting Booth|date=October 22, 2020|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/arts/design/drawing-exhibitions.html}}</ref>.

At the end of this sentence I will post both your form of that citation and mine, and then you can see how they display below and compare their output; I think you'll see what I mean.^[1][2] Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:24, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, There is a red link to Steve Retson in the Scottish Aids Monitor page and I am trying to collate an article on the Steve Retson Project as there is very little on Steve Retson but a lot on the project named in his memory. The idea is to include a bio for him as part of that article until/unless someone can find enough material for him to have his own article.

So how would I go about creating The Steve Retson Project page and making links to Steve Retson go to it? I have been reading up on this but am not quite able to see what I am doing!

In the meantime I will continue to collect information in my sandbox.

Thanks! Siobhanjc (talk) 13:41, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Siobhanjc. You would create a redirect from his name to the article on the project. That is very easy. You would simply create a page at his name, and place there the redirect code shown on the page I linked. Note that if source editing, you can automatically insert the redirect code through the advanced toolbar (look for the symbol ). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:40, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Whenever we upload an image on wikipedia it asks us that if it is our own work, but I have seen many non free images which are uploaded under fair use, How do I upload fair use images as it always asks "Is it your own work" and if yen, only then we are able to upload images. ExclusiveEditor (talk) 16:43, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: Try using the Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard, where you will be prompted with the appropriate fair use options. GoingBatty (talk) 16:47, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Is it ok to leave a link in red(non-existent page) or should I go further and leave out the posible link in black? I'm editing squads of football clubs and some don't have a wikipedia page SportingFan FC (talk) 16:35, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

@SportingFan FC: The appropriate guideline is Wikipedia:Red link. GoingBatty (talk) 16:45, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi SportingFan FC. Do you think the subjects of these links are plausibly notable? – that is, does it appear likely to you that multiple reliable, secondary, independent sources sources have written about the subjects in substantive detail such that a verifable article could be written based upon them that would be more than a stub? If "yes", make a red link. If "no", don't link. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:49, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

How can i make a userboxes?

--🇰🇷Republic of korea🇰🇷 (KOREA) 14:17, 30 January 2021 (UTC) 🇰🇷Republic of korea🇰🇷 (KOREA) 14:17, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi 윤은강 I'm not very clear on what you're asking. Is your question about using (or creating) an infobox here or at the Korean Wikipedia?

If the former, please see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Infoboxes and Help:Infobox for material about their use here, and please note that numerous infoboxes already exist; you probably just need to find the right one and fill out the parameters for any particular use, rather than create a new one. (often the easiest way to place one is to find a similarly situated article that is already using an infobox; copy its code; tailor for your use.)

If the latter, the Korean Wikipedia has infoboxes; its overview page about them is at 위키백과:편집 지침/정보상자, and the main (meta) infobox template in use there appears to be {{틀:정보상자}}. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:58, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Machine translation/기계 번역:

안녕하세요 윤은강 나는 당신이 무엇을 요구하는지 명확하지 않습니다. 여기 또는 한국어 위키 백과에서 정보 상자를 사용 (또는 생성)하는 것에 대한 질문이 있습니까?

전자의 경우 참조하십시오 Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Infoboxes 과 Help:Infobox 여기에 사용에 대한 자료가 있으며 수많은 정보 상자가 이미 존재합니다. 당신은 아마도 새로운 것을 생성하는 대신 적합한 것을 찾아서 특정 용도에 대한 매개 변수를 채워야 할 것입니다. (종종 하나를 배치하는 가장 쉬운 방법은 이미 정보 상자를 사용하고있는 유사하게 배치 된 기사를 찾고 코드를 복사하고 사용에 맞게 조정하는 것입니다.)

후자의 경우 한국어 Wikipedia에 정보 상자가 있습니다. 그들에 대한 개요 페이지는 위키백과:편집 지침/정보상자, 사용중인 기본 (메타) 정보 상자 템플릿은 {{틀:정보상자}}. 친애하는--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:13, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

@윤은강: It seems you're asking about userboxes, not infoboxes. You might be interested in Wikipedia:Userboxes. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:44, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Thank you

--🇰🇷Republic of korea🇰🇷 (KOREA) 16:46, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Ha! Thanks GoingBatty! Sorry @윤은강:... obviously ... d'oh! Brain fart.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:12, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I am trying to create a textbox. So far, I have got the following: {|style="background:none;width:{{{width|100}}}px;border-collapse:collapse;align:{{{align|center}}}" | {{{payload}}} |}

There are two problems that I need resolving: 1) removing the border around the text, and 2) correctly aligning the text within the box. I have searched through Help:Tables, and the above is the best I can find. Any suggestions? Thanks. DBoffey (talk) 21:30, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

CSS border and text-align may help you. WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 21:46, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. That seems to have solved it. DBoffey (talk) 17:22, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey, I don't know what this Teahouse is about anyone can tell me? is it about questions & something ? Bebrasofficial (talk) 17:13, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

@Bebrasofficial: Hello, and Welcome to the Teahouse. The Teahouse is intended to be a question forum for new users when they have questions about using or editing Wikipedia. Other questions can be asked at the reference desk. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:40, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I am fluent in both Hebrew and English. There is a wonderful Wikipedia entry for "Nahal HaArava" in Hebrew. When clicking on "Languages", "English", the reader is directed to a "stub" with a minimal amount of material. Who translates entries from one language to another? Specifically, from Hebrew to English? What is the procedure to get this accomplished? Awaiting your response. Yitzchak Miskin Yitzchakm2 (talk) 08:38, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Yitzchakm2, welcome to the Teahouse. Short answer: You :) For more information have a close look at Wikipedia:HOWTRANS. Hope my answer was of help. CommanderWaterford (talk) 08:41, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Yitzchakm2. I notice that he:נחל הערבה has only two references, one of them to what looks like a government document, and the other to YouTube. I haven't tried to read them, but I suspect that they do not, together, meet the requirements for sourcing for an article in English Wikipedia: Government documents are usually primary sources, and YouTube can rarely be used as a source. So if you translated that article, you would need to find some secondary sources. (Yes, I know the existing stub has no references; but we are more picky about new articles). --ColinFine (talk) 18:05, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians. I notice on this page Birkbeck, University of London that the list of notable people includes the name of my aunt Shirley Toulson. Of course I understand that it would not be appropriate for me to create a page for her but if we can agree that such a page would meet the requirements of notability maybe someone else would like to create one. Bughub (talk) 11:35, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Under unintended consequences, because there is not an existing article about her, her name has been removed from the list of notables. David notMD (talk) 17:09, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

@Bughub:requests here do not often translate in to articles, but today you got lucky: Shirley Toulson. The subject was also notable, which helped. Thanks also to @AleatoryPonderings:. Bughub, as you have a WP:COI you should of course leave the editing to others. Thanks. Possibly (talk) 19:35, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

@Possibly:Wow ! Thank you so much !!! Bughub (talk)

Hi there, I'm new to wiki. I made a few mis-steps when I first joined but am trying to reach a consensus on this page Jota Aviation. I think it comes down to this: I think the company Chairman and Owner's political campaigning and statements against government mandated face masks are relevant to an airline that has a policy enforcing face masks, particularly as the Chairman and Owner has founded a political movement that campaigns against mandated face masks. Another poster disagrees that it is relevant so feels it doesn't belong on the wiki article, and then removes my edits.

I'm going to work on the assumption that we are both acting in good faith but how do we resolve this? I've started a discussion on the Talk page but it doesn't feel like we're getting anywhere.

It may be relevant to say that the article is tagged, 'This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by removing promotional content and inappropriate external links, and by adding encyclopedic content written from a neutral point of view.'

Thanks in advance for any advice. Itcontractor (talk) 19:40, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Itcontractor, when a talk page discussion between two users stalls, the best place to go is WP:3O, where you can get a third opinion from someone uninvolved. Looking at the talk page in question, I haven't read it but your reply is quite long, which can be a deterrent to productive discussion. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:47, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your response. Will give that a try. Itcontractor — Preceding undated comment added 19:51, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

I crafted Draft:Honourable Nyerere Ogbonna since few days ago. Why has this article not yet been reviewed in order to get a page of its own on Wikipedia. Why the delay? Please can someome assist me to do justice to this article? Nwachinazo (talk) 09:35, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Nwachinazo You have not actually submitted the draft for review; I will shortly add the appropriate information so you can do so. 331dot (talk) 09:39, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Nwachinazo I have added the proper information so you can submit the draft. Due to the backlog, it may take several months. Do you have a particular need for a speedy review? 331dot (talk) 09:42, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Nwachinazo, welcome to the Teahouse. Another user submitted your draft for review a couple of minutes ago. Unfortunately due to the amount of drafts it can take up to several months before it is getting reviewed. Hope my answer was of help for you and thanks 331dot. CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:43, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Contrary to what CommanderWaterford wrote, I do not see the draft as submitted. Editor 331dot provided the means to submit it. Reviews can occur within days or as long as several months (the system is not a queue). Also, If accepted, there is a period potentially as long as 90 days before the article would show up for a Google or Bing search. David notMD (talk) 09:48, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

And now, you have successfully submitted it. You can continue to work on improving the draft while awaiting review. David notMD (talk) 11:03, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you all for your concerns. I am particularly grateful. There's no need for the article Draft:Honourable Nyerere Ogbonna to still be delayed since you can help out in giving it a speedy review and approval. I have tried to cite 11 independent sources and tried as much as possible to maintain a neutra tone. Also, I am guided by the Wikipedia policies and guidelines to the best of my knowledge. I think this article needs your supports. Thank you once one.Nwachinazo (talk) 11:17, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Nwachinazo, check in the submission template at the top of the draft where it says "Improving your odds of a speedy review". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:50, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts answer questions about how to edit. Reviewers are an entirely different group of volunteers (although a few people do both). As it states in the notice that this will be reviewed, there are thousands of drafts. The system is not a queue, although reviewers do try to make sure none get too old. Again, can be days, weeks, or sadly, months. The quality of the draft has no bearing on the timing. David notMD (talk) 13:50, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Nwachinazo Sorry to disappoint but I have declined the draft, the awards are not notable, and a number of the "sources" were written by the article's subject so are not independent. Theroadislong (talk) 14:05, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

User:Nwachinazo - Do you have a conflict of interest? When an author is in as much of a hurry as you are to get an article approved, we ask whether they have a conflict of interest. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:15, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

User:McClenon, I have no conflict of interest.Nwachinazo (talk) 19:54, 30 January 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nwachinazo (talk • contribs) 19:52, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Help needed

There's a brief Wikipedia entry about an individual (not me!) that is quite inadequate and misleading. Based on something I've previously written for a journal, I've drafted a new entry complete with references and have been trying (in the sandbox) to get it into your format. But I'm 84 and no good at this kind of thing – the demos are too fast and the jargon is beyond me. Incredibly frustrating. I really need an experienced Wikipedia contributor to take my copy and place it on your site. Have you asny suggestions as to what I might do?

Retepsnrub (talk) 15:22, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello Retepsnrub, and welcome to the Teahouse. It is possible somebody here could look over it - but not if you don't tell us which article it is! You have no previous edits on this account, so we can't tell. --ColinFine (talk) 15:59, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks, Colin. The entry I wish to improve is on John Voelcker who was an architect. I can send you the draft I am trying to replace it with if you can give me an address. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Retepsnrub (talk • contribs) 16:08, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello again, Retepsnrub. That's not the way we work, and I wasn't volunteering specifically. If you don't think that you can edit John Voelcker incrementally, what I would suggest is to put your draft in your sandbox: assuming you're using a browser on a computer, there should be a link "Sandbox" at the top of every screen, next to your notifications and preferences. It'll be red, meaning that the sandbox hasn't been created yet, but you can pick it, and say to create it, then paste your draft and there and people can look at it. You'll need to save it by picking "Publish changes", but that is "publish" in the sense that anybody can see it who knows to look, not that it yet becomes part of the encyclopaedia. Then come back here and tell people that it's there and you're asking for help with it, and probably somebody will have a look - maybe me, but I'm not promising.

Something it is as well to ask at this point is whether your work contains any previously unpublished information or conclusions? If it does, you should be aware that Wikipedia does not publish Original research: if there is any new information, and especially any conclusions, in your work, that part will not be suitable for Wikipedia: not even if all you are doing is synthesising information from multiple sources. If your paper was published somewhere that Wikipedia regards as a reliable source, then it is possible that a Wikipedia article might cite it, but it should not be you that cites it, as that would be regarded as a conflict of interest.

But the first step is to get it into your sandbox so that people can have a look at it. --ColinFine (talk) 16:48, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Colin. Many thanks again. Actually I wasn't expecting/hoping that you were voluntering – merely thought that you might like/wish to see what I had drafted. But your response is most helpful. I was using the sandbox – which is how I realised that it was all beyond me. But I'll follow your advice sometime next week once I've got over the fact that I can't even refer to my own previousy peer-reviewed published research. I hadn't realised that – but I can (now) understand the objections. Since I'm the 'leading authority' on the subject, my draft will have to be substantially cut – but should still be more informative than what'a on the web now. Thanks again – possibly see you in the sandbox next week. Peter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Retepsnrub (talk • contribs) 17:15, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello once more, Peter. The Wikipedia article may not itself contain any arguments or conclusions in Wikipedia's voice: it can say "Peter Burns has argued that ..." with a reference to your paper (again, presuming it was in a reliable journal). The COI issue says that it should not normally be you that inserts such text or citation. If you were editing an existing article, you would put an edit request in the article's talk page; if you were writing an article from scratch, you would use the articles for creation mechanism to create it in draft, being open about your COI, and when you submitted it for review, the review would note that and decide whether the citations were acceptable. Unfortunately, what you are doing - writing an article to replace an existing one - is not common enough that there is a formal procedure for it, as far as I am aware. But if you work on it in your sandbox and invite help, and continue to be open about your COI, there is probably a way that it can work.

By the way: please sign your contributions on talk and discussion pages like this one, with four tildes (~~~~). In addition, you can ping another editor (such as me) by using a template such as {{u}}. So if you look at the source, you'll see I started my first reply to you with {{{U|Retepsnrub}}, which displays as your username, but sends you a notification, as long as I also signed my contribution. --ColinFine (talk) 17:33, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Retepsnrub: To add to the excellent suggestions above, you'll also want to post a note on the article's talk page linking to your sandbox draft, asking for help. That way you'll be able to alert anyone who is watching that article and its talk page. Good luck! TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:43, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Retepsnrub: I have left a message for you on your talk page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Retepsnrub#Welcome_to_Wikipedia ... Also, to get things started, I added a new section to the talk page for John Voelcker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:John_Voelcker#Proposed_changes ... Bughub (talk) 21:04, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

I can't find the article which I began and am editing. I saved it as I thought I was supposed to under publish Rosenberg.suzanne (talk) 21:02, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

@Rosenberg.suzanne: you probbably meant to look for Draft:Rob Crocker. You can find a list of all your contributions to the english Wikipedia, sorted by date with newest first, at Special:Contributions/Rosenberg.suzanne. Victor Schmidt (talk) 21:22, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Created proper sections David notMD (talk) 23:13, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

I've put in references and links and I'm not sure what the procedure is for having it published. Thanks! Vero11up (talk) 23:16, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Vero11up, and welcome to the Teahouse. I've added a header to User:Vero11up/sandbox/Nice Strong Arm so that you can submit it for review when it's ready; but I'm afraid that that is not yet. There are several problems with it, but the main one is the lack of independent reliable sources: I'm afraid that Wikipedia may never be cited as a source, because it is user-generated, and therfore unreliable (see CIRCULAR) and Discogs is not independent. The Trouserpress might be reliable, I'm not sure; but it doesn't say very much about the band. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. - you need to find at least three such sources in order to establish that the band meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability: if you can't, there is no chance of having the draft accepted. If you can, please look at REFB to find out how to cite sources most usefully. --ColinFine (talk) 23:37, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

I would like to know if I can recover a deleted article and work on it so it won’t be removed anymore or if I could get help from someone to write that article about a Romanian singer. 2A02:C7F:A07F:E600:80AE:D861:84A4:3975 (talk) 01:04, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi! Can you let us know the title of the article? — The Earwig ^talk 01:17, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Possible interference to Arecibo Observatory by MURS Radios. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Use_Radio_Service Why was my edit of the MURS radio page not constructive to users in Puerto Rico? 70.95.138.14 (talk) 00:28, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Your commentary about the article would be better on the article's talk page Talk:Multi-Use Radio Service. GoingBatty (talk) 00:52, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

The Arecibo Observatory collapsed on December 1, 2020 and was effectively destroyed. Therefore, there is no possibility of radio interference. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:26, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I knew a footballer named Krystian Pearce who represented England at youth level and had switched to Barbados at senior level, in 2018. According to sources from CONCACAF, he was declared ineligible to represent Barbados. I recently changed his FIFA nationality to England due to the fact with accordance to sources that he was not eligible to represent that country. I'm not questioning why they changed it to Barbados, but the issue is, we don't know that decision was overturned or not, but based on what I am told with sources from CONCACAF, he was inelegible to represent Barbados. And according to the template with flags of nationality of players, it says "Flags indicate national team as defined under FIFA eligibility rules". Should I leave it as it is, or follow the guidelines as sourcing as required says? Let me know, and have a great day. Ivan Milenin (talk) 02:20, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ivan Milenin: The best place to discuss this is the article's talk page, Talk:Krystian Pearce. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:38, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

If I make multiple different edits in a section, am I expected to make all of them before I publish and get credit for 1 edit or is it acceptable to publish after each edit and get credit for each one?

I don't want to appear to cut corners.

TIA UClaudius (talk) 03:29, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@UClaudius: You can do it either way. There may be times when it's appropriate to do one thing at a time and make a few edits in a row. There may be other times when you can easily do everything in one edit (and maybe preview several times before clicking "Publish changes"). GoingBatty (talk) 04:03, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

UClaudius, experienced editors never talk about "credit" for edits. Either method is fine, as long as you are improving the encyclopedia, and I use both, depending on the circumstances. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:12, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Here's an essay, Wikipedia:Editcountitis, that is both amusing and informative. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:16, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

you have deleted all my edits Hdeare (talk) 12:41, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hdeare You may wish to politely address the actual user who reverted your edits- they seem to be doing so because they are unsourced. If you have a source for your edits, please provide it. You may wish to discuss your edits on the relevant article talk page. 331dot (talk) 12:47, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Every edit you have made have been reverted, by several editors. It's not them - it's you. You have received increasingly severe warnings on your Talk page. If you persist, you will be blocked. Even if your changes are true, they cannot remain unless you provide references at the same time. David notMD (talk) 13:09, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

These are actually true edits now please put them back Hdeare (talk) 13:58, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hdeare Please edit this existing section for follow up comments, instead of creating new sections. That your edits are true is not sufficient, you must have a source for your edits. We can't just take your word for it. 331dot (talk) 14:06, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Excuse me i have a source now if you please put them back — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hdeare (talk • contribs) 14:31, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

And that source would be? (Please give enough information that others can verify it) Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:34, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

You can add claims yourself along with the source, there's no point adding a claim on the promise that a source will be added eventually. --Paul ❬talk❭ 14:38, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

If you wish, you can go to each article, make the change again, and add the reference at the same time. There is no Teahouse editor that will do this for you. David notMD (talk) 15:12, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Hdeare, once you have a source, a good approach is to first put the supported statement into the main text like "Soandso changed clubs from Middle Ham to Middle Chester in 2021^[1]". Then, once that is established, update the lead sentence and infobox. Lead and box shouldn’t need reference footnotes if they are supported by the text. What is the source that you have? — Pelagic ( messages ) – (15:40 Sun 31, AEDT) 04:40, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Lin Wood is immediately damned by being called a Conspiracy Theorist. This is an unwarranted judgement - as a lawyer he is perfectly entitled to present to anyone that an accusation has been presented in the public domain. The topic is "questioning the validity of the 2020 US presidential election result". It has not been established to the satisfaction of 12 jurors that this assertion is false - highly expert witness statements have been presented and NO LEGAL BODY has properly examined and tested the evidence. I wish to have that part of the entry removed or varied to say something like "who is accused to being a Conspiracy Theorist" OfNoAccount (talk) 05:08, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

OfNoAccount (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarnetteD (talk • contribs) 05:14, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, OfNoAccount. Wikipedia does no independent reporting, but instead summarizes what reliable published sources say. And almost all reliable sources writing about Lin Wood in recent months call him a conspiracy theorist, because of all the deranged things he has said. Therefore, Wikipedia will call him that too. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:22, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Well said. -- Hoary (talk) 05:27, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm not an IT person. The alleged explanation page is all Chinese to me. Useless. I need to place a hatnote with the content
"This article includes a list of general references, but it remains largely unverified because it lacks sufficient corresponding inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (Learn how and when to remove this template message)"
WHAT IS THE TEMPLATE? Just one line, to copy and paste, user-friendly and short. Thank you! Arminden (talk) 02:17, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Arminden, just... literally type {{More footnotes needed}}. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:34, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

:@Arminden: It's hard to give precise instructions since you didn't mention the article you're referring to. If you're asking for the template to create inline citations, try filling in these fields from Template:Cite web:

<ref>{{cite web |url= |title= |last= |first= |date= |website= |publisher= |access-date= |quote=}}</ref>

Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 02:37, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Folks, please read what I wrote: I need the hatnote you can see at the indicated page, once again:
THIS ONE, the first one at the top of the page wikilinked here.
The editors offered a heap of sources in the bibliography, but no INLINE citations, none, so one never knows which source covers which sentence or detail. And that was between 2009 and 2013, so link rot has probably befallen most of the sources and w/o details the bots can't help. A hatnote like the one I'm asking for might give an impulse for people to re-source the article or even go through the old ones one by one and figure them out. This is the article, Jakob Reimer, and the hatnote I have placed is not the correct one, as it says "no sources", and there are plenty, just not inline and in an unorganised and defective manner. OK? Thanks. Arminden (talk) 03:31, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@Arminden: Sorry, Tenryuu's response was correct and mine was not. GoingBatty (talk) 03:59, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Arminden, ...just use {{No footnotes}} if there are no inline citations? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:36, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu and GoingBatty: thanks to you both. Tenryuu, I followed your advice and it looks good. It's a bit counterintuitive when you see the raw template, as "No footnotes" is wrong, no inline citations is the issue, but it works and that's what matters, so thanks again. Have a great Sunday!

I like to write and have enjoyed looking at your articles as of late, and especially the editor notes, seeing how everything works. I was just perusing the Nancy Pelosi main TALK page & noticed what appeared to be a Sheriff Badge Square & an Editor whose profile did not seem in line with other edits/editors. I believe the name was "Sons" or Sans or similar to that - not completely sure. His profile said he would be leaving for Japan for 9 months and the content seemed entirely out of place from others. When I went back in to review, I could not see it posted any longer, which is also strange. I believe this was vandalism of some kind, or perhaps some virus & was hoping you could review your data storage, as I would not want to see Wiki be exploited, or for any mischief to occur. Or maybe I just clicked back into the wrong place? Thank you. Assistance1026 (talk) 11:52, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Assistance1026, I can't seem to understand your query. You seem to link an editor real-life activity with his nature of edits? Can you clarify your point to give other editors an easier time understanding? GeraldWL 14:37, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I may be able to help. I will take a look because it can be removed however it will be in history.20footfish (talk) 12:18, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I can't find your user as there are many. Take a look at the talk page but view history and the top. You can look at prev on the left side of each edit to find it. If you find it and think it was removed by someone else, you can see their reason. If you disagree, you can ask here again and some-one experienced will help you. I apologise if you have already done this as I may have misunderstood but I wanted to help. Someone will check this conversation soon :)20footfish (talk) 12:22, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Likewise. @Assistance1026: Due to the way Wikipedia works, pages can be and are often edited while one is browsing, so I would not consider this anything out of the ordinary. It's entirely possible that it was removed as vandalism, that the user removed it because they've made it there/came back, or for any other number of completely legitimate reasons. I would not consider this anything nefarious in the slightest. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 21:31, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@Assistance1026: Looking at [38], Mubogshu removed and hid an edit (what's called "revision deletion" or "revdel") at 22:37 on the 29th, if I’m doing my timezone maths correctly. But that's after you posted here. The one before that was 16 Jan, so I might be barking up the wrong tree. Pelagic ( messages ) – (17:50 Sun 31, AEDT) 06:50, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Long-time reader, first-time editor. I think I mostly understand the difference between major and minor edits. But if you just simply find a source for one of the sentences or sections, especially when there was no source before, would that be considered a minor edit? Thank you for your answer! Gilfanon (talk) 06:40, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@Gilfanon: That would be a major edit. A minor edit is anything that would in no way be controversial, like a spelling correction, removing an extra line break, fixing a broken Wikilink etc. Good advice is that when in doubt, don't mark it as a minor edit. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 06:48, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: Gotcha, thanks! Can I go back and change the label from minor to major? And if not should I do something else? It is for a minor page (the year 993) Gilfanon (talk) 07:11, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@Gilfanon: You can't change it anymore, but don't stress out about it. We all mark our edits wrong from time to time. Just be careful next time. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:24, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

The page for Royal Canin is completely false. The company was originally Medi-Cal. That pet food is what was sold in veterinary clinics for years. It wasn't made by Mars, it was made by Medi-Cal. It had nothing to do with Royal Canin or Mars. The entire article states that it was originally Royal Canin and every change or issue in the company's history was as Royal Canin. That is totally false.

This is a problem because as a vet diet, it had a completely different presence than it did once it was bought by Mars. It takes the trust of millions, if not billions of pet owners and manipulates that trust. It basically uses Wikipedia to scam those people. Royal Canin after they bought out Medi-Cal introduces a non-vet line and sold that for a few years. This let the public get used to seeing it. They eventually dropped the name Medi-Cal from the vet line and replaced it with Royal Canin. Making people who didn't buy vet food think they've always produced two lines, one vet, one not. A complete snow job by Mars. Now Mars has bought out VCA, the largest vet chain in the USA and with the other vet chains they've acquired, makes them the largest veterinary chain in the world. That gives them billions of additional customers to sell their food to, all under false pretenses.

This is not some small error. This is major. This page completely rewrites history. The only one who benefits from doing that is Mars. It makes it sound like Mars has been in the business of making vet diets for years which is crap. It looks like they've scrubbed the entire web. You have to dig deep to find the real truth anywhere. That's pretty scary. I can't change this page by myself as I don't know when Mars bought the company or dropped the name. There must be previous versions of the page when it was Medi-Cal and the real page + edits existed on Wikipedia. How do I find someone to help me change it back to say Medi-Cal in the right places? Wikimakeitright (talk) 07:42, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikimakeitright Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state If the sources in the Royal Canin article are not being summarized accurately, please discuss those concerns on the article talk page. The same goes if you have independent reliable sources to support what you state- posing your personal views on the conduct of the company is not appropriate, but we can post reliably sourced content. Wikipedia does not deal in truth, since truth is in the eye of the beholder, but we do deal in what can be verified. If you just want to tell the world about how you see the company, you should do that on social media. 331dot (talk) 07:52, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

There is a number of people who keep deleting content on a page that is cited and appropriate.

How do I handle the situation when that happens?

Sorry if I’m asking a stupid question, aim just knew and finding it hard to understand how to do these things. BomiRustomji (talk) 07:29, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

BomiRustomji Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There are no stupid questions here, we are here to help where we can. If you are having a content dispute with another editor or editors, you should first attempt to discuss the matter on the article talk page to attempt to arrive at a consensus as to what the article should say. If discussion fails to resolve the matter, there are channels of dispute resolution that can be used. Users should not simply continue to revert each other's edits to protect their preferred version of an article, that is called edit warring and is not permitted. Being correct is not a defense to edit warring, as every user in an edit war thinks that they are correct. 331dot (talk) 08:31, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

I had a tough time with a reviewer who accused me on many issues. I have tried as much as possible to prove my innocence, even to the extent of re-editing my draft, especially on the issues of neutral tone and primary sourcing. First, are articles on Opera News Nigeria not a third party independent sources good enough to be cited on Wikipedia article? Why did the reviewer Theroadislong fail to recognise that the subject of the article and the news reporter on Opera News are not the same person? Anyway, for the sake of peace, I have removed the sources and allowed the remaining seven sources to stay. I believe they are good enough to support the article since I have elsewhere justified that the subject was given enough treatment in the reportage. So, I resubmitted the article for possible review. Please I need your help at least to see that my efforts since morning see the light of the day. Thank you as I believe no one is a monopoly of knowledge. Wikipedia bestows everyone freedom to make contributions with the armpit of its policies and guidelines. No one should use their position to frustrate the genuine efforts of others, especially the young ones. I am not new on Wikipedia and I have two articles I have created own my own and I have made some edits in other pages. I await your review on my newest draft Draft:Nyerere Ogbonna for an inclusion into Wikipedia space. Thanks you once again.Nwachinazo (talk) 00:09, 31 January 2021 (UTC) Nwachinazo (talk) 00:09, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy ping for @Theroadislong:. GoingBatty (talk) 00:33, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@Nwachinazo: Note that the yellow template says "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 4,060 pending submissions waiting for review." While you're waiting, you can add references to replace the [citation needed] messages. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:42, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@Nwachinazo: I have commented twice on your desire for haste on having your draft reviewed, and yet you persist, so now I will shout: TEAHOUSE HOSTS ARE NOT DRAFT REVIEWERS. YOU CAN ASK HERE AS MANY TIMES AS YOU WANT AND THAT WILL NOT SPEED A REVIEW. You have resubmitted your once-declined draft after addressing comments. Could be days. Could be weeks. Could be months. Is what it is. David notMD (talk) 02:12, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

David notMD you are very funny with your shouting. Anyway, I am patient. But you know what it is to see your work come to pass. It is not overdesperation, but a belief that there is dignity of labour. Hahaha.

GoingBatty citation needed given by that reviewer is overstretching the whole issue. Must content creator cite every statement made? The two statements in which tags are added do not always need citation. Or does the reviewer want me to remove the statements because there is no references for them. Meanwhile, the reviewer does not look into the two other newspaper articles (references in the draft) which do not have online sites. I have continued to prove that Wikipedia does not make room for every sentence be cited. In fact, how many sources can make a draft pass for a Wikipedia page? Does Wikipedia give a number? Let me know, friends.Nwachinazo (talk) 07:27, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Nwachinazo, it's not the number of citations that matters, so much as the quality. To establish that the subject is notable, you'll need several reliable independent published sources with in-depth discussion of him. Maproom (talk) 09:22, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Maproom for your explanation. I have tried to establish in my various comments here and elsewhere that the article'ssubject has been given in-depth coverage. To cite up to 7 third-party quality sources with four given enough treatment on the subject, is this not enough for an inclusion into Wikipedia space? Of course, all of us know that Wikipedia article once approved is an article in progress. More and more facts and sources emerge every day. No article was published on the Wikipedia is self-sufficient. I repeat, I have used quality and "several references" in Draft:Nyerere Ogbonna good enough to warrant a positive review. But someone is there including redundancies in the space provided for the place of birth and education of the article'ssubject. This is quite unprofessional and unnecessarily bureaucratic, my brother. Anyway, I am positive!Nwachinazo (talk) 09:37, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

hi i sent a change in Knowledge page snowed send me : (Please don't use wikipedia to write down your own opinion) snowerFor reference ----- i dont sent my opinion i sent Ph.d Farhang Mehrvash opinion about knowledge But since his opinion has not been published yet, you can search the internet for [personal information redacted], an associate professor at the Islamic Azad University of Gorgan, and write to him about his opinion on science and ask for his opinion or article. Get my confirmation from them on your site Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by معین پورصادق (talk • contribs) 11:47, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Two experienced editors have now reverted your addition to an article. The reason is that the content you added does not reference what is considered a reliable source publication. You say above that Mehrvash has not published the work. If you wish to have a discussion on what belongs in the article in question, the right place is on the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 11:57, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@معین پورصادق: welcome to the Teahouse. Please do not post any personal information or contact information for yourself or other people here. Wikipedia articles are based on information that has been published in reliable secondary sources, and Wikipedia cannot be used to publish such information unless other, independent, sources have written about it first. You can't require that other editors (or Wikipedia's readers) should contact another individual to have any information verified. Please read more about this important principle here. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 11:59, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

 Hanold claqueyu (talk) 12:45, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

• Note: very similar section without a question added at the help desk.

@Hanold claqueyu: Do you have a question about how to use or edit Wikipedia? Eagleash (talk) 12:57, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

How to enable it on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.181.116.105 (talk) 10:07, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Are you using the Android App for Wikipedia? It has a light/dark mode toggle in its display settings.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:03, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

hi, Am new here, I will like the process and steps to take when adding an individual and an organisation. i will also appreciate any help that can make this process faster. thank you Rileydanerd (talk) 14:22, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Rileydanerd, Welcome to the teahouse. If you are associated with the organization than the first thing you should read is wp:Coi. If you have no association with the individual or the organization, then WP:MFA is the place to go, after reading the info on your talk page. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:49, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

After moving article from my sandbox I have this message at the top of page and do not know how to rectify "This sandbox is in the article namespace. Either move this page into your userspace, or remove the {{User sandbox}} template." Torchbearer-Ted (talk) 13:50, 31 January 2021 (UTC) Torchbearer-Ted (talk) 13:50, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@Torchbearer-Ted: Looks like you resolved the issue in this edit by removing the {{user sandbox}} template. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:04, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I would like to add the reference #4 that I created in the 4th source of the Review scores box. How do I do that? Also, can I link Colin Larkin's Wikipedia page to the 4th source (The Virgin Encyclopedia of 60s Music) since there are no page for the book itself, but it's mentionned on Colin's page ? Here's the page Work Song (Nat Adderley album). Thank you! The Music Guides Playlists (talk) 14:18, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@The Music Guides Playlists: In this edit, I named the reference and duplicated it in the Review scores box. In this edit, I added a link from the reference to Larkin's Wikipedia article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:11, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

So the name ref was simply Larkin! That simple. All good, learning each day. Thanks for your help and the edit :@GoingBatty:

I want to create a page for boxer Horst Stump who won a Bronze medal at the 1971 European Amateur Boxing Championships, he is also known as being used by the Romanian Communist authorities to to harass and beat up anti-communist writer Paul Goma but I don't know if that is enough to meet Wikipedia's notability rules. Sebi1990TheSecond (talk) 12:08, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@Sebi1990TheSecond: Per Wikipedia:Notability (people), it depends on how much significant coverage you can find. If you like, you could gather all the sources you have and start a draft listing every source as a reference, and then ask for the editors at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing to see if they would be willing to help you. Also see WP:Your First Article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:16, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Sebi1990TheSecond, and welcome to the Teahouse. Notability does not depends on what a person has done, but on what has been published about them. You need at least three sources that are published in reliable sources (such as major newspapers, or books from reputable publishers), independent of the subject (not based on interviews or press releases), and contain significant coverage about him. See NSPORTS. I see that Paul Goma contains the claim about Stump, which is cited to a book. My guess is that the book does not say much about Stump, just mentions him, but I may be wrong: if it has significant information about him, that could be one of your sources. You will need to check that book yourself. --ColinFine (talk) 15:16, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Where can i practice? --윤은강 (KOREA) 10:20, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@윤은강: On your user page you should have a sandbox tag. In the sandbox you can paractice wikipedia edits, pages, templates and ererything else and it will published there on your sandbox page. From there you can copy and paste to reader-visible pages. So you can use the sandbox to experiment, to construct complex stuff, new pages, &c and then use the contents in the "real" wikipedia. Good luck, best wishes. Brunswicknic (talk) 11:11, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@윤은강: You could also create a subpage of your userpage if you like. GoingBatty (talk) 15:19, 31 January 2021 (UTC)