Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1156

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 1150

←

Archive 1154

Archive 1155

Archive 1156

Archive 1157

Archive 1158

→

Archive 1160

I was reading something about 'Herod the tetrarch' from the first century and wondered what was a tetrarch so I googled it and came across the article about 'tetrarchy' but it states that tetrarchy was 'instituted by Roman Emperor Diocletian in 293. It seems to me tetrarchy must have been instituted much earlier than 293. Ron L. Kuykendall (talk) 07:39, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Ron L. Kuykendall, please reread the text that appears at the very top of the article "Tetrarchy": "This article is about the tetrarchy created by Diocletian...." It continues by inviting you elsewhere for material about other tetrarchies. -- Hoary (talk) 09:05, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

At the top of Tetrarchy, it says "see Tetrarchy (Judea)". It might be better if it said "see Herodian Tetrarchy" – I'll consider changing that. Maproom (talk) 09:42, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

@Maproom Nice word "Herodian". 73.127.147.187 (talk) 06:53, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

I am writing an article about a French-language novel recently translated into English(Draft:Hadriana in All My Dreams) and the infobox for books recommends to use the ISBN/publisher of the original novel, but wouldn't it make more sense for the English-language Wikipedia to use the ISBN/publisher of the English translation? Many thanks Jaguarnik (talk) 00:56, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@Jaguarnik - You may wish to review Template talk:Infobox book/Archive 4#Translated books case study if you haven't done so already. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:51, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Jaguarnik, your draft is about the French-language novel, so that is the work whose ISBN you should list. Maproom (talk) 07:26, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

One: do you think that the sources in this draft are enough to establish notability?
And two, why is Screen Rant listed as a reliable source? It has a reputation as a content farm and churns out clickbaity articles. EDIT: Should it be used to establish notability?
Thanks, Vortex (talk) 06:07, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Screen Rant is considered a marginally reliable source, but there doesn't seem to be an overall consensus. You can view the relevant discussion here. Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:52, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

I found that search in the 'User' namespace with my user.name as a keyword shows subpages under my username space, but they also include other users' subpages. Can I see only under my user namespace? Regpath (talk) 13:11, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Regpath - at the bottom of your "contributions" page are several links - click on "subpages" - Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 13:16, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Regpath: Sure. See Special:PrefixIndex/User:Regpath/. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:17, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

If you want to get rid of any subpages use Template:db-user and then wait a little bit a poof! They're gone. Be sure to send thanks to whoever helps you with it. Their user name will appear in your watchlist under and entry for "Deletion log" NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:55, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Dear friends. Thank you to each of you for making Wikipedia such a healthy and useful tool. With the guidance of some helpful veteran wiki editors, I have been able to start a few wikipedia articles. Invariably one of my entries is now in an Afd (article for deletion) desiussion. In my opinion, the answer should be Keep, but of course I am biased. :-)

I know that you are not supposed to canvas people to take a side in an Afd debates. However I have seen in one of the category portals that some editors ask for help from other editors to weigh in on Afd debates. Is that a normative practice? Is there a page or group on wikipedia where you can ask others for help for Afd? Similarly, if I made relationship with another experienced editor, am I allowed to ask her to give an honest opinion in the Afd debate?

Any guidance you can give would be very appreciated. I thank you in advance. PaulPachad (talk) 17:52, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi PaulPachad and thanks for asking. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate_notification (as well as the rest of that policy page). Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:05, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

@Shantavira Thank you Shantavira|^{feed me}. I appreciate the reference. This was very helpful. The article mentions asking for help in:

A central location (such as the Village pump or other relevant noticeboards)

Is that true even for an AfD debate? Which central location is appropriate to ask for others to weigh in? (aside from the wikiproject page)

Thank you in advance. PaulPachad (talk) 18:53, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Well it says A central location (such as the Village pump or other relevant noticeboards) for discussions that have a wider impact such as policy or guideline discussions. I wouldn't expect that to apply to an Afd discussion. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:38, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

@Shantavira Ok thank you. So is there any other central location to ask for help aside from a wikiproject page? PaulPachad (talk) 17:09, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

where is the author of an article displayed Footballandgames (talk) 14:28, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@Footballandgames: Assuming you're refering to Wikipedia articles, articles often have mutiple authors. All authors are listed in the page history. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:43, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Footballandgames, If you want to see the biggest contributors on an article, a useful tool to use is XTools. To view statistics on a page (Like the user with the most edits to a page), go to a page's history (View History), and on "External Links" go to "Page statistics". Here's an example. Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk | contribs)} 18:15, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi. I have made a discussion on the proposal to re-introduce the notability guideline for at least of soccer (football) players and or coaches, and I have realized that I was all over the place at those two discussions are somehow related to these proposals [[1]], and [[2]]. Is it possible to merge those discussions into the one section so it makes everything a bit organize to discuss further? Thank you Ivan Milenin (talk) 18:51, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

P.S. They are also trying to discuss the leagues of which player's would receive significant coverage, so is it approbate to add another topic for notbalitly sports section, or at the wiki leagues? Thank you again. Ivan Milenin (talk) 18:51, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

When editing/creating an article about a town or city, do you link it as one (e.g. Portland, Maine) or separately (e.g. Portland, Maine)? L'Mainer (talk) 18:50, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@L'Mainer: Use the first one, where there is just one link. See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Linking RudolfRed (talk) 19:39, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@RudolfRed Thank you! L'Mainer (talk) 19:42, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello my name is Botswana. My page on The Organization was recently taken down because it “wasn’t constructive “. The thing is though, The Organization is a real thing that is torturing people against their human rights. It is secret but it can control apps and games and stuff. It even controls TikTok! Please put my page back up and help me and all the others dealing with The Organization. Anti Organization (talk) 20:33, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @Anti Organization, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia requires reliable sources backing up claims. Please see the article wizard for future drafting. Thanks, 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 20:40, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

OP has an indefinite block ("Clearly not here to build an encyclopedia"). -- Hoary (talk) 21:38, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi there! I’d like to add a citation to an article, and I’m certain that I’m doing it wrong. Here is what I did;

1. I pasted the cite web markup template into the article, in source view.

2. I added the URL for the website I’m citing into the correct place in the markup template, along with the website title and the access date in their places.

3. I published my changes.

• The result was that the citation appeared, in full, at the end of the paragraph.

• Additionally, the citation did not appear in the reference list at the bottom of the article.

• What I want is for my citation to appear as a number at the end of the paragraph, like the other in-text citations, and for the full text of the citation to appear in the reference list.

Advice would be greatly appreciated!! :)) Atomic putty? Rien! (talk) (talk) 22:03, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

— EDIT: I figured it out! ^[1]

To clarify for other readers, an inline reference requires an opening <ref> tag and a closing </ref> tag. Cullen328 (talk) 22:25, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello! I am planning to create a new article, but I am having trouble with its naming convention because it is a live-action yet it shares the same title and season as Laid-Back Camp (season 2), and they both released in the same year (2021). If I understand the WP:NCTV and WP:MOS-AM correctly then I'm thinking of naming it as Laid-Back Camp (TV series 2). Am I right? Or what would be the best title for the new article? Centcom08 (talk) 13:01, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@Centcom08: I recommend Laid-Back Camp (live action). There should be one new merged article entitled Laid-Back Camp (animated), and the episode guides should be forked off into two articles, List of Laid-Back Camp episodes - Season 1 (animated) and List of Laid-Back Camp episodes - Season 2 (animated). That gives you some flexibility. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:32, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Thank you so much! You gave me an idea of what to do. Centcom08 (talk) 23:41, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Please help me I just want to know how to make a election page. Such as the United States presidential of 2004 Daboof12345 (talk) 22:02, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Daboof12345, and welcome to the Teahouse. Writing an encyclopaedia article in Wikipedia (which is what you are asking about, rather than just "making a page") is one of the most difficult tasks there is for inexperienced editors, and those who try it before they have learnt how Wikipedia works often have a frustrating and disappointing time. For that reason I always advise new editors to spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works by making small edits to some of our six million existing articles before they try it.

Nevertheless, if you wish to try, you may do so. Creating an article about an election is exactly the same as creating an article about anything else: you should start by finding the the reliable independent published sources which cover the subject before you ever try writing a single word of it. Your first article has much more information. ColinFine (talk) 22:16, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@Daboof12345 Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia already has an article about the 2004 United States presidential election. For what specific election are you interested in creating a new article? GoingBatty (talk) 03:51, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I have a very big request.

I have been waiting for my draft - Draft:Philipp Hochmair - to be reviewed for almost four months and have revised it many times. Could someone please look at it and let me know if anything else is wrong so it doesn't get filed again.

I would appreciate it very much. Pacsolis (talk) 17:45, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Pacsolis Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. As noted on your draft, it could take four months "or more" for a review. Reviews are conducted by volunteers in no particular order(it is not a queue). Please continue to be patient. 331dot (talk) 18:01, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick reply.

The waiting time is quite understandable and I am also quite patient. I just wanted to know if a quick look at my design reveals anything that is wrong, since I have already been rejected several times.

Many greetings Pacsolis (talk) 18:09, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Pacsolis, I would guess your draft is good enough to be accepted if reviewed. But I am not a reviewer.

I note that the first two references are to interviews or accounts of meetings with the subject, the third is just a listing, and the fourth is an "about us" section. So arguably none of these counts as an independent in-depth discussion. There are some better references later. Reviewers may be deterred from completing a review if they read the first four sources without finding reason to accept; so if you want to expedite the review process, you could consider removing some of those early references (with the content they support). You can always put the content back in again later. Maproom (talk) 19:37, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

This draft has now been accepted and is at Philipp Hochmair. Cullen328 (talk) 22:05, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your support so far. Now I have one - hopefully - last question.

How to remove the template on the page?

I have shown my point of view on the talk page. Pacsolis (talk) 07:38, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

How does one go about making a complaint about a particularly rude moderator? Eagleye1001 (talk) 22:48, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@Eagleye1001: It doesn't look like anyone has been particularly rude to you. See Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot. ––FormalDude talk 22:54, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@Eagleye1001: I concur that no one has been particularly rude to you. I think some frustration with your edits may have creeped into their comments, but they weren't so rude as to require some sort of action in my opinion. I'd let this go and heed the advice you are being given. 331dot (talk) 22:57, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Will do. Eagleye1001 (talk) 22:58, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not have Moderators. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:43, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Google search "corey croft music" pulls up all my releases but I'm looking for a wikipedia page. Coreycroft (talk) 04:08, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Coreycroft, and welcome to the Teahouse! Please use the article wizard when creating new articles; in particular, we highly discourage writing about yourself, and if you do so, you need to disclose a conflict of interest. Cheers, 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 04:22, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Coreycroft, By starting here at the teahouse, you have saved your self some headaches. Namely, Wikipedia documents what reliable sources say (See WP:RS, WP:V). Notability is established through those reliable sources (WP:GNG,WP:NMUSIC). So, while google shows you exist, there is nothing from reliable sources for wikipedia to work with. The way this works is get famous and you can have a wikipedia article, not use Wikipedia to get famous (WP:PROMO). Finally, it is not always a good idea to have a wikipedia article, as you will have zero control of the content published (WP:AUTO).

So now that you have saved yourself time and aggravation, use that time to make music (or to help edit wikipedia in other ways) and if/when the time comes that you meet the requirements for a wikipedia article, most likely someone else will create it. Slywriter (talk) 04:25, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

A frequent misunderstanding at Wikipedia is that people assume that listing their output in music, film, TV, books, etc. is sufficient to establish notability, thus justifying an article. That type of information can be included in an article, but what is needed is published content about the person, created by people with no personal or paid connection to the person. (I oversimplify a bit there, but the guidance at WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC applies.) David notMD (talk) 08:38, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Another frequent misunderstanding is that a Wikipedia article about you, if such a thing were to exist, would be in any way "your page". It would not belong to you, it would not be controlled by you, it should be based almost entirely on what people unconnected with you had published about you, not on what you or your associates say or want to say, it may end up with content that you don't like, and above all it may never be used for promotion of any kind. ColinFine (talk) 10:17, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Here they say Draft:Ceno (rapper) that formal language issue but when i now added corrected one it goes to speedy delete. Gfxseries (talk) 13:08, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Gfxseries Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. We don't need an entire url- to link to another page on Wikipedia, simply place the target title of the Wikipedia page you want to link to in double brackets, like this, [[Draft:Ceno (rapper)]] . That draft was tagged with an author request deletion that you appear to have added, did you not intend to do that? 331dot (talk) 13:11, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Ceno (rapper) Gfxseries (talk) 13:12, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

I find his editorial behavior very puzzling, he thinks adding climate data to the article will affect the layout of the article. But that's not a valid reason for him to purge the climate class template, and there are plenty of articles with climate data to disprove his point, like Yerbogachen or Antipayuta. 迷斯拉10032号 (talk) 13:20, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

It's not clear what the dispute here is, but if there is a dispute, this is not really an appropriate venue. You may try WP:AN or WP:ANI instead. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/they)^{Talk to Me!} 13:58, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

I want to put a template that displays the day month and year such as June 20 2022 in an article in my user space. I found a template that uses only numbers named Today ymd at Template:Today ymd but I want to insert words and not numbers. Is there a way to create a template like this? ScientistBuilder (talk) 15:25, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

I think there might be a way to use Javascript but I'm not sure how to make a script with javascript programming on my own. ScientistBuilder (talk) 15:26, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder, the Template:Date provides the current date. Kpddg ^(talk) 15:32, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

I found a template

5:50 pm on 16 November 2024

but it doesn't change when I reload the page. ScientistBuilder (talk) 15:32, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

You might need to purge the page. Kpddg ^(talk) 15:38, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

How do I save and return to my drafted article? Fijipedia (talk) 14:53, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Fijipedia, welcome to the Teahouse - all you should need to do is press the button that says "Publish". 174.21.23.32 (talk) 15:08, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

You have an empty draft at Draft:Liverpool F.C 4-0 FC Barcelona. Be aware that there is mention of the game and its importance at 2018–19 UEFA Champions League knockout phase.David notMD (talk) 17:33, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

KibolLP keeps changing a few things without a clear source, they seem to have been warned about this before on their talk page but they aren't responding. They're randomly changing dates on various articles and I can't tell what for. Among Us for POTUS (talk) 18:02, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Oops, sorry, they responded on the talk page, it seems fine Among Us for POTUS (talk) 18:09, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi there,

I created an article for UBC Faculty of Forestry and it got declined when I submitted it for reviewing. The reason is "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article." It would really help me if anyone of you could help me figure out how I should fix it.

Thank you

Draft:UBC Faculty of Forestry Dhritibansal (talk) 19:12, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse, articles are based on what independent sources have reported in significant detail about a topic your draft has zero independent sources. You cannot use their own website to establish notability. Theroadislong (talk) 19:17, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Dhritibansai, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please note 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. ColinFine (talk) 19:34, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

•  Courtesy link: United States Football League (2022)

I removed the word minor, according to this article (link: https://www.ctinsider.com/business/article/Why-Stamford-s-NBC-Sports-is-broadcasting-a-new-17087690.php) - Jon Miller, NBC Sports' president of programming, “but this is not a developmental league. This is a competitive, professional league that will be designed to be its own league and have its own identity." Therefore the "rebooted" USFL is not a developmental, or in that case, minor league. Hope that helps. 2600:8805:AA00:730:E586:33D2:3350:28EC (talk) 19:42, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately, "Catfurball" kept adding the word minor. I gave the link above and thought that was sufficient that it's a major league with its own identity or platform. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8805:AA00:730:E586:33D2:3350:28EC (talk) 19:44, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Don't engage in an edit war. You and @Catfurball: should discuss this on the article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 19:49, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, i have started a draft for Alpha High Theft Solutions, i'm just wondering if it's ok since i'm not affiliated with the company in any way and also wondering if the sources are WP:RS

Sincrely OGWFP (talk) 21:26, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

@OGWFP: It is very much ok that you are not affiliated with the company. Your sources seem to be from the company website, instead they need to be from independent sources. I suggest you check out WP:YFA for advice on how to create an article. RudolfRed (talk) 21:51, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

a host is a person who helps people get more information about Wikipedia pages 41.116.48.52 (talk) 21:02, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

hi ip user and welcome to the teahouse! we hosts help new editors answer questions regarding Wikipedia and editing it, not giving information about articles in the encyclopedia (although we do often give information about the website's policies, which are usually in pages prefixed with Wikipedia:). for that, you might want to try out the Reference desk. happy reading! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:12, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi all, I'm relatively new to editing Wikipedia and I'm trying to add sources to an article I wrote that's been declined for havinf too few sources. I'm trying to add a blogspot source (independent album review and interview with the artist), but Wikipedia gave me a warning so I wanted to ask about the rules. Described the problem in further detail here: Draft talk:Macroblank

Thanks in advance for the help! LucasThree (talk) 16:27, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @LucasThree, welcome to the Teahouse. Blogs are generally considered unreliable, and since there's also an interview with the artist, the independence is questionable too. If the author of the blog is an established critic, the source might be usable in some ways, but probably not to establish notability. 174.21.23.32 (talk) 16:37, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

LucasThree, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you liked the place and decided to stay. For an article to be published here, it should be notable and should have reliable sources as citations/references for the sake of verifiability. Wikipedia doesn't accepted original research. Please go through introduction and referencing for beginners to learn more about how the site works. Baggaet (talk) 16:43, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

@LucasThree Just so you know, blogs aren't considered "reliable" because there is rarely any editorial control, no fact-checking, and there's generally no way for anyone else to ask for corrections or to highlight incorrect information. Anyone can say anything they want in a blog. If WP didn't restrict the use of blogs as sources, that incorrect info could be used to "source" a WP article. I hope that helps explain the policy. An interview and review probably wouldn't be "made up", but the WP policy is there so we don't need to figure that out. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 02:07, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I don't think I have ever visited the Hindi Wiki, and I certainly don't speak it. Why would I have an alert that someone posted to my (presumably) non-existent talk page there? Is this a sign of account hacking or spoofing or something? I didn't open it, or the Hindi wiki, so I don't have a diff. Thanks NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:06, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

You must have visited it today, they have an auto-generated welcome for all "new accounts" which means your account automatically attaches to any Wikipedia project you visit. PRAXIDICAE🌈 19:10, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Are you kidding? I've been deep into deleting fluff from my en.wiki watchlist, and working on pages directly related to the Jan 6 committee hearings. If I click an image (template FILE) on an article in the en.wiki, might it open in the Hindi wiki without my realizing it? That's the only thing I can remotely think that I did myself. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:19, 18 June 2022 (UTC) PS thanks for the help figuring it out. I guess I must not have sounded appreciative when I snorted..... I just don't think that's it. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:21, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

You can probably check your history, it's really not a big deal. If you clicked some sort of interwiki link, and it was through Hiwiki, it would automatically connect because of WP:CENTRALAUTH. PRAXIDICAE🌈 19:27, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

I know about version histories and contribs lists.... is there a log of what things I merely visited? That would be cool, how do I find it?NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:30, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

No, I meant your internet browser's history. PRAXIDICAE🌈 19:35, 18 June 2022 (UTC)les

I have all the bells and whistles set up to delete my footprints, at least periodically, and even restore my partition from an image file roughly monthly, so that's not an option.NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:02, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

CentralAuth should have a record of when you visited a given wiki and thus got autobestowed an account (due to SUL). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 19:44, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

That's interesting. It says I've been "Attached" to a long list of wikis (what the devil is test2.wiki?) .... but at login. And all those other wikis in the list are the same, attached at login. What's that about? I almost always do wiki on a desktop from home in the US. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:02, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

@NewsAndEventsGuy: That's your WP:SUL. It reserves your username on all wikis (so nobody else can impersonate you), and automatically creates your local account when you visit a wiki you've never visited before. ––FormalDude talk 20:08, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

"SUL"!!! How wonderfully ironic given the immediately following thread we both tried to answer about being NPOV writing on religion.... I still say I have NEVER visited these other places, so don't understand why I got a notice about my (fake?) talk page at the Hindi wiki today. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:16, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Your hindi talk page is real: hi:सदस्य वार्ता:NewsAndEventsGuy. I don't know why it would have been created without you visiting it though. ––FormalDude talk 20:24, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

It's because whether they realize it or not, they must have clicked something and visited hiwiki. This thread is a bit of a nothingburger though, there's nothing enwiki can do and it's a normal part of Wikimedia/mediawiki's functions. PRAXIDICAE🌈 20:27, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

@NewsAndEventsGuy A lot of browsers will preload pages to speed up your browsing experience, e.g. chrome has a setting to "preload pages for a faster browsing experience" in the cookie settings page. If this is enabled then when you visit a page with links to other projects in it your browser might start loading pages from other projects in the background, at which point the servers will create a local account for you and you'll recieve a welcome. 192.76.8.88 (talk) 20:33, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Test2.wiki is a test wiki for playing around with software features and testing the stability of new versions of mediawiki. 192.76.8.88 (talk) 20:36, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

@192.76.8.88: Thanks, preloading makes sense. I don't see anything in my settings (current Firefox). I use google for a home page, and there are icons for commonly used things, one of which is wikipedia. I click on that and get the global main wiki page. Do the other language wikis randomly populate, or change once in awhile? And could I be triggering some preload code just when my mouse rolls over one? That would explain it. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:49, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

@NewsAndEventsGuy Firefox will preload content from sites without you clicking on them in some situations, see this support document for the details. The language links on the homepage are based on the pageviews of each project and do get changed occasionally. It's probably going to be impossible to figure out exactly what caused you to visit the Hindi project. 192.76.8.88 (talk) 20:55, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

OK much obliged NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:58, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

THANKS ALL, my main concern was to verify this isn't a sign of hacking or ID theft or some other nasty so I'll relax and go feed the chickens.NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:58, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

@NewsAndEventsGuy: You are correct that you didn't visit the Hindi Wikipedia but it's not about preloading. You edited Template:Supplement years ago here at the English Wikipedia. Yesterday a user imported the template with page history to the Hindi Wikipedia.[4] You are in the imported page history so your account was automatically created at the Hindi Wikipedia: hi:Special:Logs/NewsAndEventsGuy. Some wikis post welcome messages to users when their account is created. You were alerted of such a post. This has confused many users. I proposed to disallow such welcome messages at meta:Welcoming policy but the proposal hasn't received much attention. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:31, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

That's flippin' insane. I did what I could and added a SUPPORT notvote there. I want these two hours back. Thanks for caring and explaining. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 02:04, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

This may be a red herring(?), but try going to your Preferences > Notifications > and make sure "Show notifications from other Wikis" is not checked. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:35, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

That's probably too drastic for most users. I find cross-wiki notifications useful most of the time. If you really don't want them then you can disable them at Special:GlobalPreferences#mw-prefsection-echo. If you only disable them at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo here at the English Wikipedia then you will still see them as soon as you visit any other Wikimedia wiki, e.g. Commons or Wikidata. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:28, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the preferences tip. Maybe a cross wiki notification could come with a smallcase link to HELP:Crosswiki Notices that would walk people through what I've learned here? Thanks for the help all NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 10:00, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Your proposed policy change says "if the user once edited a page..." I wonder if it would be clearer if the proposal said "edited a page (including a template)...". Still, you are right about it not getting much attention, sadly. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 02:14, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello,I would love to know if adding that a notable person has a twin sister is trivia? Example Noah Schnapp. I added that he has a twin sister named Chloe, another editor removed it saying I shouldn't add name of non notable minor,after debating we agreed on adding Noah has a twin sister only which I did and added citations. Another editor removed it saying is trivia ignoring the talk page which made me go straight to his user talk and question him. For an edit war not to begin I came here to know if adding that Noah Schnapp has a twin sister stand out as trivia? Thanks (also I don't know why "iii" are here I tried removing it but the won't go away) again Thanks Uricdivine (talk) 09:10, 19 June 2022 (UTC)iii

@Uricdivine: @Joeyconnick is not ignoring you, they gave justification in their edit summary and responded to you on their talk page. Unless you have a better source than Instagram, the content about his twin should not be added. ––FormalDude talk 09:36, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Fwiw, I re-added twin sister, also commented at Talk:Noah_Schnapp#Family. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:33, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@Uricdivine Is this really important, worth spending time on? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 02:19, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

@FormalDude your wrong he ignored the talk page and reverted my edit which made me go to his user talk page direct. And are you trying to say Noah doesn't have a twin sister?,if you are that is pure ignorance because everyone knows this including stranger things cast and crew and the whole fandom. You said I need reliable sources but any citations I upload about Noah having a twin sister editors will remove which made me go straight to Instagram to find Chloe Schnapp page and also a link to Noah Schnapp page where he celebrated his birthday on October 3. @ Gråbergs Gråa Sång Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uricdivine (talk • contribs) 13:42, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

The article Cradle of civilization includes near the bottom a section titled Timeline and a graph dating the founding civilizations of the world. I want to edit the graph but clicking the edit button, the timeline seems to have been put into the article by inserting only a template (if that is what it is called) of double curly brackets enclosing the words "World timeline." What is this? How does one go about editing the timeline? Smallchief (talk) 23:18, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

hi @Smallchief and welcome to the teahouse! you can find the page at {{Worldhistory}}. this template generates the timeline so it can be imported to other pages without repeating the code, and updates all other pages when it is updated. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 23:45, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Smallchief (talk) 00:27, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@Smallchief: Melecie linked the wrong template. As you said, the code says {{World timeline}}. That means Template:World timeline is used. See more at Help:A quick guide to templates. This template uses the feature at Help:EasyTimeline syntax. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:11, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, for the alert response.Smallchief (talk) 09:13, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

absolute pain. thanks for catching my mistake, happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 03:30, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

How do I improve the neutrality? I can’t think of a simpler way to convey the information about the subject. Draft:Brana Dane ChrisWallace22 (talk) 01:22, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

For a start, ChrisWallace22, you could change "supermodel" (i.e. "model you might have heard of") to "model". However, the much bigger problem with this draft, in my view, is that it doesn't show how she satisfies WP:PERSON. -- Hoary (talk) 09:23, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

This is a reply to a question that I was asked on my talk page about a source analysis table that I had provided in an AFD, and I would like the comments of other experienced editors. The question was asked at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robert_McClenon#Just_wish_to_understand_a_little . I had included a source analysis table at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warina Hussain, and was asked what is meant by Independent Sources. That is discussed in the guideline on Independent Sources. Since the article in question is about a person, the answer to the question is really (a), whether the source is connected directly or indirectly to the actress. A source that is connected to the entertainment industry in general may be positive, neutral, or negative about the actress. Sources generally associated with the entertainment industry may in fact be more likely to know about her, so being associated with the entertainment industry does not make a source non-independent, unless it is associated with the subject or her agent or agency. A source that is in the business of promoting the Indian cinema industry might not be independent. Option (c), about political outlook, is not really about the independence of sources, but about the bias of sources, which is a different related and important question. That is my thought. Do other experienced editors want to comment? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:23, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Robert McClenon. There are many entertainment industry sources that are both independent and reliable. So, a focus on the entertainment industry does not invalidate a source. I am not sure how political bias affects entertainment coverage. If reliable sources say different things about an actor based on different political affiliations, that should be reflected in a neutral article. Paid news in India explains the difficulties of finding truly independent news coverage of Indian topics. Cullen328 (talk) 18:36, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Wow, @Cullen328, I didn't know we had that article! I knew we couldn't trust Indian sources for news about the entertainment industry. Hadn't realized it extended to basically all living people and current businesses. That sucks. valereee (talk) 18:42, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Valereee. Also worth reading is The Times of India#Paid news. Cullen328 (talk) 18:47, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Jaysus. valereee (talk) 18:54, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, User:Cullen328. I forgot to notify User:Bookku, who had asked me originally. That confirms my doubts about Indian entertainment media. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:23, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

ToI isn't even entertainment media. They're a newspaper of record in India. valereee (talk) 19:47, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

This, unfortunately, means that it is often difficult to find reliable sources about people in India, because so much of the coverage is likely to be untrustworthy. The Hindu is a reliable newspaper of record in India, but the Times of India is not. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:51, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

See WP:TOI. Kpddg ^(talk) 10:34, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello,

I have been waiting to receive feedback on an article that I wrote and published back in March 2022 titled David Y. Choi. I am confused on how to check the status of that article or find how to read the feedback whether it was approved or not, and if published how to find it online. Any help from anyone who can point me in the right direction would be really appreciated! Thank you.

Link to the page I am referring to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:David_Y._Choi_Ph.D.

Best,

Alex Villanueva Alex Villa 13 (talk) 03:30, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:David Y. Choi Ph.D.

hi @Alex Villa 13 and welcome to the teahouse! your draft has not been submitted yet. I've added the submission template to your draft, and if you feel like it's ready you can click the blue submit button. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 03:38, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Dan arndt declined it, on the grounds that it "appears to be a duplicate of another submission, David Y. Choi, which is also waiting to be reviewed". But the latter isn't, and I think wasn't, waiting to be reviewed, and it seems inferior, other than for its lack of the superfluous "Ph.D." in the title. (Me, I'd decline either draft, for lack of evident notability of the subject.) -- Hoary (talk) 11:15, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

I want to reformat a textbox I made. It looks fine on my Firefox browser but another experienced editor has mentioned a very likely problem, so I'll quote him:

I noticed you used wikimarkup in the textbox to force line breaks. They look fine on my fullsize desktop. Do you already know how that will display on a wide range of devices using both the web and app versions of the en.wiki? Or how it gets crunched when other platforms echo our articles? I was just wondering if maybe such things are reasons to let the text line returns and box length-width change automatically to fit the users technology for best viewing? But like I said, I'm not really interested in learning the tech side of our markup magic, so I'll just leave you to wonder if the line breakmarkup should be reevaluated, or if its good as is. Thanks for caring. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:53, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

The box, with my formatting, is at Attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election#Reactions. Here it is:

I suspect he has a point. What I need is a textbox that will look right for all browsers and cellphones. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 10:28, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

ValJean, no reason to use right justified text, centering, defined font size and forced breaks. Its not a poem where the style is as relevant as the words. Removing all of that excess formatting creates a blob of text that adjusts to screen size and doesn't look like an attempt to overemphasize parts of the quote.Slywriter (talk) 11:59, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

My focus is on just making a box at the right side of the screen. If I don't add line breaks, it becomes a box that extends from one side of the page to the other side. How can I keep it a box at the right (or left) side? -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 12:19, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Here's what a plain quotebox looks like:

I want a plain rightaligned smaller box of the size above. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 12:33, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Okay, now fixed using a width parameter. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 13:55, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@Valjean You entered the width in pixels. Is 300px what you want for all screen sizes, from cell phones to huge monitors? Isn't there a width percent parameter you could use? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 02:25, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Width percentage sounds good, but I have no idea how to do that. When I look at the page on my cellphone (Android) the box in any version spreads all the way across the screen, so it doesn't seem to make any difference. It doesn't look like on my pc. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 07:56, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

@Valjean Try this: instead of '300px' in the width bit, write '30%' (or whatever % you desire) - that worked for me, at least. StartGrammarTime (talk) 09:52, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

That works. Thanks! -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 11:39, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

I started this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:William_J._LaVarre when I learned he was the brother of John Merton and an interesting fellow. My eyes are bad and I'm having a hard time doing the referencing correctly when some of the most interesting references are in Google Books. Those URL addresses are beyond me. All help welcome!! JRW03 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 11:29, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @JRW03, and welcome to the Teahouse! The best way to find editors to help develop an article or draft is by contacting a WikiProject. There are many WikiProjects with different areas of interests, some more active than others, and if your lucky, someone might be willing to help if you post a notice on the project's talk page. Good luck with the draft, and happy editing! HenryTemplo (talk) 11:49, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Is it appropriate to put non-reliable sources in the "See also" section of an article? I've found blogs and news sites that have interesting information I can't use in the article I'm adding to, but it's a shame to waste them. -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 05:18, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Pete Best Beatles, would you please give us examples of these sources you wish to use?--Quisqualis (talk) 05:21, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. See my response to the answer below. Pete Best Beatles (talk) 12:00, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

@Pete Best Beatles "See also" is for links to WP-articles, I'm guessing you meant the WP:EL (guidance there) section. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:06, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

You are correct, that's exactly what I wanted, I just didn't know it at the time! Point #4 in sub-section "Links to be considered" (under Section "What to Link") answers my question perfectly. Thanks. Pete Best Beatles (talk) 11:59, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Since several years I write regularly in Swedish language Wikipedia and now and then I have also made some edits in enwp. Now I work with updating several Swedish articles on issues related to Kurdish issues. I have good help from what is written in enwp but I also find some things in need of furhter editing. BUT: I am not allowed to do this, as I am not autoconfirmed in enwp. Please help me! Administrators at svwp can surely confirm that I am serious. Best regards. --Chandra Varena (talk) 07:48, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

hi @Chandra Varena and welcome to the teahouse! you are already autoconfirmed, so you may edit semiprotected articles. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 08:57, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! Chandra Varena (talk) 09:02, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Chandra Varena, welcome to the English Wikipedia. I have just reverted one of your edits, because the addition was unsourced and you removed something sourced. But I'd be really glad to see you around in updating Kurdish articles or also creating new ones. I have seen Swedish MP Serkan Köse of Kurdish descent doesn't have an article yet. Might make a good DYK. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 13:07, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Cannot get a page that was previously accessible? Help! 82.16.216.90 (talk) 13:53, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Could you specify which article you are referring to? Kpddg ^(talk) 14:06, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

This? CD ripper AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 14:38, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

@AdmiralAckbar1977, the IP is referring to a specific software package - ABCDE (A Better CD Encoder) - which was indeed listed on that page at one point, but I can't find a deleted article. There's a deWiki article and a Wikidata entry. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:46, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

@199.208.172.35 Ah ok, could it have been moved to a draft? AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 14:49, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Nope, I found the AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ABCDE. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:50, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi fellow IP user, welcome to the Teahouse. If you follow the link I posted above, you'll see that the article was deleted last December because the subject did not seem to meet our notability standards (see WP:NSOFT for further explanation). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:00, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Please reinstate. Thanks. 82.16.216.90 (talk) 13:17, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Can you reinstate the article, as the software is one of the best flexible command line utilities of its kind in the free software world. And with all courtesy, whom ever said it was not notable is clearly not very technically oriented. Deleting free software articles that promote a free and open exchange of information really is not the best way to promote Wikipedia(“whom itself promote the free and open exchange of information“ Please reinstate article. Thank you. 82.16.216.90 (talk) 13:41, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Suppose I have a subpage in my user namespace. Can I make this subpage invisible to other users whatever the reason is? Regpath (talk) 11:24, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Don't think so, but you can hide it from webcrawling search engines (google, bing etc) by putting {{noindex}} at the top. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 11:27, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Regpath (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. No, that is not possible. All pages on Wikipedia are potentially visible to all. Some are harder to find than others, but all edits to all pages appear in the Recent Changes log. If you don't want other people to see something you are doing, do not put it on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 11:28, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Sometimes when I'm involved in WP:WIKIDRAMA with an editor who lacks competence in the interests of not pouring gas on the fire I'll try to prep a request for enforcement action but don't want the problem editor to see it until I'm ready for them to see it. So what I do is draft in my Sandbox, and hit preview to verify the markup, but actually save that work in an offwiki text editor. I also use the "nowiki" tags around their user names so they don't get notified if I slip and post my draft by mistake. If I do make that slip and really really care, I ask for that user page to get deleted and just hope the other party doesn't monitor my contribs and explode when they prematurely see a draft. At the same time,I resume work on a different userpage, but again only hitting preview and not "post" NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 11:35, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

This extension for VS Code also works quite well. 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 20:30, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

That's interesting thanks. I don't have brain capacity to read the tech manuals and deal with the steep learning curve. Are there any good training videos or something? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 21:01, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

NewsAndEventsGuy, sidenote, but: I also use the "nowiki" tags around their user names so they don't get notified if I slip and post my draft by mistake. You might be interested by the template {{noping}}. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 15:38, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Yahoo, that's a big help thanks Tigraan! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 16:01, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Do we care if editors bash the project and engage in activism against donations to the project? I mean, yeah, we probably care. But do any of the policies and guidelines address that behavior? (Disclaimer... although I'm presenting working in the area of US politics, the editor I ran across doing this on another platform is not.) NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 01:37, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

There's no real way to control what's done on other websites since none of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines would apply to such things as explained here and here. Even things like WP:BLP and WP:HARASSMENT only apply, in principle, to Wikipedia or Wikipedia user accounts; in other words, even if an account was blocked from editing Wikipedia, there would be no way to block the same person from editing other websites unless it was done by those websites themselves. Whether "you" care is entirely up to you, but personally I don't think there's anything that can be done via Wikipedia. Lots of people are unhappy with things Wikipedia and many often post about their unhappiness on other websites or on social media. There's not much that can be done from a Wikipedia perspective as long as such things stay off of Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:08, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to write all that. Pretty much what I thought. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 02:14, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

• @NewsAndEventsGuy: Notice that plenty of regular, well-respected editors engaged in activism against donations to the project on-wiki. That occurs when the WMF does the fundraising drive. Last year’s was so obnoxious that {{subst:HD/Donation}} was created; have a look at what it says. To my knowledge, none of those who used that banner have ever been at risk of any sanction. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 16:06, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I've moved on. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 16:11, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Greetings, I have been editing some articles and some of the changes I made stay but some modifications get removed. On my contribution list, next to the modifications I made says its reverted. Is there any way I could get in touch with the editor that removed it and ask him why he did it? ChasingLittlePrince (talk) 19:00, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, ChasingLittlePrince, and welcome to the Teahouse! Editors will often explain why they reverted an effort in the edit summary, so you can check there first (look in the page history). If you still have questions, you can ask the user on their talk page. This is usually found in a link in parentheses after the editor's username, like this: Example (talk). Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 19:10, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I have noticed that in the template “Politics sidebar”, there are two disciplines that could be added: Policy analysis and Political theory. I would add it myself, but I am not an autoconfirmed extended user in the english wikipeadia. Thank you very much. Best regards, Przelijpdahl (talk) 17:04, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Przelijpdahi. The place to suggest this is at Template talk:Politics sidebar. ColinFine (talk) 18:38, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

tnks buddy! Przelijpdahl (talk) 21:43, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

how can I see the deletion log on a page? Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:31, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Go to Special:log/delete, and enter the name of the deleted page in the "Target" box. ColinFine (talk) 21:42, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

It is hidden so I guess only the admin can access it. I will message them. Thank you! Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:56, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I am trying to create a page for Kimberly Hardin. It has gotten rejected stating that I am a 'paid contributor', but I am not.

Can someone please assist? Media updates2021 (talk) 19:56, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

I declined your draft because it has zero sources. In order to demonstrate notability, you need to provide multiple references to in-depth articles written about him in unrelated, independent journals, magazines, books or online. Theroadislong (talk)

Media updates2021, Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia with articles written about subjects that have received significant coverage in multiple reliable independent secondary sources (WP:N, WP:RS). This is Wikipedia's definition of notable. After looking at the draft on Kimberly Hardin I can see that @Theroadislong was justified in rejecting the article because it truly has no referenced sources (See WP:OR and WP:CITE). I would recommend you read over WP:YFA and then decide if you think you can find these reliable sources on Ms. Hardin. Make sure to properly cite any source in the article prior to resubmitting if that is your conclusion. --ARoseWolf 20:12, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Media updates2021, as well as being unreferenced, your draft also violates the Neutral point of view. Sentences like Her films are known to not just garner commercial success, but crossover success as well as critical acclaim are not acceptable in an encyclopedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 21:30, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Small note - it has been Declined, which is less severe than Rejected. For a living persion bio, everything needs to be referenced. Neither her own website not IMBd count. David notMD (talk) 22:36, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

I created an article for The Good Mother 2013 film; I wanted to correct the title of the article to have brackets around "2013 film" so that it would be consistent with other disambiguated movie articles on Wikipedia, but when I tried, I got an error message saying that I couldn't because of a redirect issue to the general phrase "good mother". I don't know how to fix the article's title now. I was wondering if any benefactor with some free time would mind helping me with this. I'd be really grateful for the help. 😇😇😇 PetSematary182 (talk) 17:10, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, there is already a redirection page at The Good Mother (2013 film). You need an admin to move over a redirect: WP:RM is the place to ask. ColinFine (talk) 18:41, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

FYI that it looks like it's done now. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:36, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

There's a paragraph on doujinshi convention that is a load of patent nonsense. Anyone who has even the slightest amount of knowledge on the subject can clearly see this. But the paragraph has a single source (clearly written by someone who has no idea what they're talking about) used to justify it, and another user is opposing its removal as a result. The material is so outlandish and ridiculous that I do not think I can find a source that would be able to refute it, because it's such patent nonsense that nobody would probably think of having to refute something like this. What are the options here? Should clear misinformation be left up, simply because someone published a load of nonsense 10 years ago and nobody bothered to fact check them? 2404:2D00:5000:701:B9D2:5B05:FC57:BA04 (talk) 21:46, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Actually, after checking, it turns out that the site being cited is listed as an unreliable source, so I'll be removing the offending material. That being said, I would still like to know how situations like this should be handled, when something is clearly wrong but has sources. This seems to be very common with non English language topics on Wikipedia. 2404:2D00:5000:701:B9D2:5B05:FC57:BA04 (talk) 21:57, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Someone tried reverting my edits claiming that the source was "published by a university". Given the topic material I find it highly doubtful that anyone knowledgeable about the subject vetted the paper, if at all, given how it was being used as a source for statements that were, again, patent nonsense. I cannot find any way to access the paper itself to verify if the patent nonsense is actually in the paper. How should this situation be approached? 2404:2D00:5000:701:B9D2:5B05:FC57:BA04 (talk) 22:17, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

@2404:2D00:5000:701:B9D2:5B05:FC57:BA0: Japanese art conventions are a bit out of my wheelhouse, but after a cursory reading, the issue isn't to me as outlandish and ridiculous as you make it seem in this post. I see you started a discussion on the talk page. Talk:Doujinshi convention#"How it works" section That was the right thing to do. If the source is clearly false, it shouldn't be too hard to find another source that contradicts the info. With incorrect info published in notable journals, a notable instance being the sad history with vaccines and autism, every case is different. Discuss, and if you can't get consensus, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:26, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

It really is as outlandish as I stated: The problem seems to be that editors on Wikipedia do not have the knowledge needed to deal with the topic either. I am Japanese and someone who has participated in such conventions for years. The crux of the problem with the statement I have issue with is that it states that some people have permission from "erotic game producers" to do something. The entire point of the these conventions is that nobody needs permission to do anything at all, and the "erotic game producers" thing is an absolute non-sequitur with no relevance. 2404:2D00:5000:701:B9D2:5B05:FC57:BA04 (talk) 23:44, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

If you don't have access to the source, you can ask at WP:RX for someone to look it up for you. RudolfRed (talk) 23:31, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

I was reading about the Austronesian languages when i came across an external link, The link led me to a wiktionary page, i hovered over the link thinking it was a Wikipedia article because it didn't have the blue external link icon when you link it, the link was auster. You can clearly see the blue external link icon to the right of the link. However, when i saw the link it didn't have the icon, so how did he remove it? Leahnn Rey (talk) 13:07, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

hi @Leahnn Rey! you can link to other Wikimedia projects, such as Wiktionary, through the use of inter-wiki links. for example, if you want to link to the definition of "vivacious", you would use [[:wikt:Vivacious|]], which outputs as Vivacious. (note the colon at the start, see Colon trick, and the pipe at the end, see Pipe trick, both are optional except for colons in inter-language links). similar things can be done with other projects, such as:

• [[:commons:Main Page|]]

...which displays as a link to Wikimedia Commons' Main Page

• [[:ja:メインページ|メインページ|]]

... which displays as a link to Japanese Wikipedia's Main Page: メインページ|

happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 13:17, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Huh, thanks @Melecie:... didn't know about the pipe trick, and I've been on WP a while... learn something new every day - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 21:50, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

quite a lot don't know about the pipe trick, oftentimes when I see it mentioned that's the first time someone, somewhere has heard of it. don't worry, you're just one of today's lucky ten thousand. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:08, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

(I think this is the correct place to ask about this? If not, my bad)

I have come across a book with a summary that leaves out significant portions of the plot. So much that I am uncomfortable adding it in. I went to the talk page to bring it up, but saw that someone else already has, but in 2010. Would it be acceptable to bring it up again? There is not much else on the talk page. Natasha862 (talk) 15:33, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, you can definitely raise this again on the talk page. You can do it yourself as well. Kpddg ^(talk) 15:35, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Natasha862,and welcome to the Teahouse. It is usually a judgment call whether to edit an article directly, or to discuss it first on the talk page. Generally, if somebody else has already suggested a change on the talk page that you agree with, and nobody has disagreed, you're pretty safe in making the edit yourself. The worst that can happen is that somebody else comes along and reverts, and then you can discuss it further on the talk page. See WP:BRD. ColinFine (talk) 15:44, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

@Natasha862 Are you planning to use a summary that is included in the book, or that someone else wrote? If so, there are copyright concerns. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 02:53, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

No. I would obviously write it myself. Natasha862 (talk) 13:53, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

@Natasha862 OK, I wasn't completely sure from your original post. Thanks. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 04:54, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

For example I'd like to jump to Line 518 in the article Romance languages. How do I do that? DE100 (talk) 09:16, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

hi @DE100 and welcome to the teahouse! unfortunately there is no easy way to do this (unless you are in chrome or edge and know how to encode a link to highlight a specific portion of an article, which I don't). but if you want to link to a section instead (which is possible and easy), you can link using hashes as such: WP:Teahouse#Creating Citations jumps you in the thread a few threads above. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 09:40, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick answer. DE100 (talk) 09:42, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

There is no such thing as "line 518" in an article: people look at articles on different devices, on different browsers, and with different screen sizes: the lines get split differently. ColinFine (talk) 10:19, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

It may not make any sense, but diffs do list line numbers, and the latest diff for Romance languages [5] does indeed say that it is for line 518, and it is independent of my display settings. Meters (talk) 10:33, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

I have wondered the same thing. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 02:50, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

DE100 Here's a short-cut trick for you: From the difference window, you can find a short phrase in the given line and search for it. (nothing in code or highlighted). That will jump you to that line. in the article, and the edit window. Good luck, GenQuest ^"scribble" 03:50, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

@GenQuest Thanks. What do the line numbers actually refer to, internally? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 04:52, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

@DE100: I believe they are just a holdover from early programming days, not sure if there is a purpose to them anymore. Probably ask a more tech-astute person about them. I've only ever seen them on print-outs of programming (esp.: BASIC, C, and CC). I think that was their main purpose, helpful for manually debugging old code. Not sure why they are still hanging around. GenQuest ^"scribble" 05:20, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

I searched up Roblox on Wikipedia and it shows some description. When I looked at the templates, there is an article about "Adopt Me!" Seeming, it is an only article about an Roblox game. But for some reason, there aren't articles about other Roblox games. That includes Work at the Pizza Place, Welcome to Bloxburg, Speed Run, and Zombie Rush, even they are played by tons of users. Since this game has a huge fanbase and popularity, why not create articles about each Roblox game. That would inform readers about the content and the gameplay. Just like other console games, Roblox is about new information and I think there should be a list about each game created. Can you explain why Roblox games don't have an article except Adopt Me? Thank you for answering my question and my curiosity. -- 2601:205:C001:EA0:CD77:605F:EFF3:6FE9 (talk) 00:51, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

hi ip user and welcome to the teahouse! popularity isn't the reason why games (or anything for that matter) get an article. articles are created only if they have significant coverage in reliable sources| such as news articles, which Adopt Me! has had. if you could find these sources and establish their notability, an article could be created. happy reading! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:09, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Why many Roblox Games except for Adopt Me, do not have a significant coverage in reliable sources| such as news articles? Why popularity does not determine notability in Roblox Games? Any further information? 2601:205:C001:EA0:CD77:605F:EFF3:6FE9 (talk) 01:16, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Adopt Me Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Work at the Pizza Place Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

let's use these as an example. click the News link from here for each of them, which would be the most relevant one to use here (searching for books and scholar would be more appropriate for scholarly/scientific topics). Adopt Me! has gotten some coverage documenting its life and development, while Work at the Pizza Place seems to only be covered in sources documenting opinions on what the best Roblox games are (plural), which isn't enough to establish notability.

additionally, something can be popular but not have enough reliable sources to build an article with, which are required in an article. plus popularity is also a very subjective and thoughts on whether something is popular (especially on a global scale) may vary from person to person. so instead of dealing with whether something is popular or not, we deal with whether something has enough sources to back up its existence and whatever is said in the article. happy reading! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:39, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Explain that while Wikipedia is about reliable sources, why popularity is also a very subjective that may vary from person to person? Does merchandise count as a notability since there are real-life toys about Roblox? -- 2601:205:C001:EA0:CD77:605F:EFF3:6FE9 (talk) 01:43, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi there! You may be interested in reading Wikipedia:Notability (video games) to learn about the types of independent reliable sources Wikipedia requires for an article about a video game. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:25, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for giving me new information! 2601:205:C001:EA0:CD77:605F:EFF3:6FE9 (talk) 02:34, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

I don't know whether you noticed this, but there are brief descriptions of various games at List of Roblox games. Deor (talk) 11:28, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Ok, I didn't see, but what about additional games that are added to this list of Roblox games? 2601:205:C001:EA0:FD7B:9157:D214:9AF5 (talk) 07:46, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I am looking to unprotect the following page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newgen_Software which has been protected due to promotional content. I wish to write content from a neutral perspective, backed by references. Please unlock the following page I have also submitted the request https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection/Decrease

Regards Neeshu30 (talk) 06:21, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

hi @Neeshu30 and welcome to the teahouse! you seem to have found the appropriate place for article unprotection, and an admin would be there shortly (or whenever they are free) to determine if the article should be unprotected. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 06:32, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

@Neeshu30 It's not actually a "protected page"; the page was deleted, and the page name was "salted" (the name was protected) to prevent an article by that name being recreated, in April 2021 (if I am reading the page log correctly). 73.127.147.187 (talk) 07:20, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

The next step is to contact the Admin who deleted/salted the draft. David notMD (talk) 09:41, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I am new to wikipedia, i am writing a biography and I would like to know how do i add that text on an image -

name

age

website

credentials

Thank You Nomonde Danisa (talk) 23:53, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Well, you might need to visit Articles for Creation help desk for assistance. -- 2601:205:C001:EA0:C88F:FB3C:BF32:6730 (talk) 00:06, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Nomonde Danisa. I see that you have submitted a draft. It looks as though you figured out how to add text to an image frame in the end. AFC editors will likely have some feedback for you on this submission - namely the neutrality and objectivity of the article. If you have any conflict of interest with this subject, or if you have received any payment for its creation, please disclose these? Thanks. MaxnaCarta (talk) 00:12, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Nomonde Danisa. In addition, to what's been already posted above, there's an issue with one of the images you uploaded to Commons that you're going to need to resolve if you want to avoid the file being deleted. You can find out more about this by checking your Commons' user talk page. Bascially, you're going to need to provide some way for formally verifying that the image uploaded has been released as licensed since the website hosting the image is claiming copyright ownership over the content appearing on it.

Another thing that you can help clarify is whether you're connected personally or professionally to Vanessa Farsadaki (the person you're trying to create an article about). If, by chance, you're connected to her in someway, you should take a close look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure to assess whether either page applies to your particular situation. Being connected to Farsadaki in some way doesn't mean a Wikipedia article about her can be created; it does, however, mean that you're going to need to carefully follow relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines if you're going to be the one trying to create the article. It's very important that you're as transparent as possible regarding any connection or relationship you may have with Farsadaki. Since Wikipedia is a collaborative editing project in which are participants are volunteers, experienced users are sometimes more willing to help others when they feel they're not being being misled or otherwise deceived. So, being transparent about any connection you may have will not only help you avoid problems, but it will also make it easier for others to want to help you if you do run into problems. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:09, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

...anyway, regarding your question it seems like you may be looking for infoboxes, in your case {{infobox doctor}}. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:46, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

@Nomonde Danisa For the image, in plainer language, you are claiming that you took the picture. Did you take that picture yourself, with your own camera? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 07:14, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

And remove all of the external links from the article text. - X201 (talk) 10:11, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I am unsure what to do about a recent edit to Samia Suluhu Hassan (leader of Tanzania). It is the last edit, you can read it at the end of the Political reforms and unity section. Its only citation is a literal URL posted as a paragraph rather than a ref. It also lacks any apparent attempt at neutrality and looks to me like agenda editing. As I understand this is bad for biographical pages?

A further question, how do non-developed countries best manage edits that focus on comments leaders make? For example, the page for the previous leader is significantly dedicated to comments he made (he had MUCH to say... haha) rather than anything he did in office, or what happened in Tanzania while he was in office. Is there a good way to avoid the pages being only about comments, and preferably more about providing encyclopedic information about the biographical subject? For another example, Mama Samia's comments on the breast size of the female football players were not a thing she should have said. But it is not particularly relevant to her biography or her role as leader of Tanzania. If the article is not often maintained, as most Tanzania articles are not, is there a way other than constant policing to address this? Maybe a section for them to go? BevoLJ (talk) 11:10, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @BevoLJ, I've reverted the edit because it contained original reporting and NPOV issues, thanks for bring it up here. I'm not sure how to answer your second question so I'll leave it for other hosts to answer. Although usually it really depends on a case by case basis. Justiyaya 11:42, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Can you please explain original reporting and NPOV to me? Is this non-natural or agenda editing? BevoLJ (talk) 11:46, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Neutral point of view means that all content should be written without any bias, and should represent all significant views about the subject.This especially applies when the topic is about a living person. It should also be ensured that the content is reliably sourced. So 'agenda-editing', etc. are violations of this policy. Kpddg ^(talk) 12:12, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. I had learned about the importance of care to living person biographies. But the wording, or acronyms, had confused me. BevoLJ (talk) 12:18, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

As for your article-specific questions, you will get better help at the article talk page, where interested editors can discuss this. Kpddg ^(talk) 13:08, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Is there a template that would allow me to stack the infobox, userboxes, and COI template on my user page? I want them to all be on the right side of the screen and I want them to stack, one above the other, rather than sitting in the middle of the page. I've tried using the Template:Align, but it doesn't appear to help. TipsyElephant (talk) 15:14, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hey there,

Yesterday I attempted to add the Suggest Bot to my User talk page Here, it doesn't appear to have worked. I'm sure I've done something wrong, does anyone know what? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk • contribs) 14:25, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

AdmiralAckbar1977 The code seems to be there on your Talk Page OK. I had a problem in the past which the user who runs the bot fixed very quickly. See the User:SuggestBot page for the link to the editor to contact via their Talk page. My thread with them is now archived at User_talk:Nettrom/Archive_2#Suggest_bot_stalled? Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:29, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

The user page states that the bot would be down on 20 June to fix some issues, so maybe it is still going on. Or you could try adding it to the top of your page? Kpddg ^(talk) 15:37, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Folks

I have uploaded citations for a living Motor Sports personality but am having trouble with the citations. Can anyone help please ?

Many Thanks

RacingProphit Racingprophit (talk) 15:15, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm confused by your question. You say you've uploaded citations, and you're having problems with said citations. Do you mean that some work, and some don't? Or do you mean that none of them work. Regardless, I'd look here: Wikipedia:Citing sources. Another answer might be that you're attempting to insert something into the Automatic Citation section and that isn't working, from there you might want to switch to Manual Citation. Also, you could be on source editor, which is way less straightforward then visual editor. What might help is telling us which article you need help on, and a more experienced editor can walk you through it.

Cheers, AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 15:27, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Presumably this is about Draft:James Derhaag. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:31, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Racingprophit, welcome to the Teahouse. Referencing for beginners is a good place to start learning how to format citations. I notice that there's a second draft for the same person at Jim Derhaag (yours is at James Derhaag) - that other draft's citations are better formatted, though it's far from perfect, so perhaps you could look at them to get an idea of what to do (and maybe integrate some of the info/sources from that draft into yours). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:22, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

As a Wikipedia Newcomer, how do I acquire a mentor? Daddy Warbuxx (talk) 16:18, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello Daddy Warbuxx and welcome to the Teahouse. You may see if you have a mentor or join the Newcomer Growth program by enabling the Newcomer Edit features under Preferences>User Profile. I have started a conversation on your user talk page to assist you further. --ARoseWolf 16:27, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Daddy Warbuxx. Along with the methods @ARoseWolf mentioned, you may consider signing up as an adoptee for the Adopt-a-user program. As mentioned on its main page, it's not recommended to very new users. However, as you aquire a little more experience, Adopters can help you understand the "ins and outs" of Wikipedia. Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk | contribs)} 17:45, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

I don't know if this is an appropriate question for the Teahouse, but I'll ask it anyway. When I was looking at WP:RSP, I noticed many of the sources considered reliable have a left-wing bias while many sources with a ring-wing bias are considered unreliable or partly reliable. Why is this? Interstellarity (talk) 16:12, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Interstellarity. This article may provide some insights. There are certainly publications on the left that are unreliable. The Palmer Report and Occupy Democrats come to mind. Cullen328 (talk) 16:33, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

On the other hand, conservative publications like the Wall Street Journal and The Weekly Standard (now defunct) are considered reliable, as is the libertarian publication Reason. Cullen328 (talk) 16:45, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Cullen328 has given pretty much the perfect answer, but I'd add that WP:RSP is only a list of the sources that are most discussed, not of every source. Larger conservative publications have garnered more scrutiny over the years, and controversy attracts attention + discussion. I think the article Ideological bias on Wikipedia is an interesting read as well - There are certain areas that seem to have a "liberal" bias, and others that seem to have a "conservative" bias. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/they)^{Talk to Me!} 17:44, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Cullen328 and ThadeusOfNazereth for your assistance. The reason why I asked this question is because I want to pay attention to whatever I’m reading online to make sure it is reliable, not solely to improve Wikipedia (although it’s obvious I want what is best for Wikipedia) but just to read to s:::tay informed about current and historical events. I never said that every liberal source is reliable and every conservative source is unreliable because that is obviously not the case. I know there are different kinds of reliable sources depending upon the context and biases. Please let me know how can I determine that the news I’m reading is reliable rather than looking at WP:RSP. Interstellarity (talk) 18:33, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Interstellarity, here are some useful tools from Rutgers University. Cullen328 (talk) 18:46, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the info. It helps a lot. Interstellarity (talk) 19:25, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

How to overcome this at all ? Currently i'm studying for Medical entrance examination and exam is on head and it is held by 17th July but i'm not sure about my selection coz i have not study well from past 9-10days and not securing good marks in mock .So ,now what should i have to do ?? Guptavirbhadra (talk) 19:51, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not give medical advice, but I've heard somewhere that pressing the random article button can help when learning. weeklyd3 (message me | my contributions) 19:53, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

I do a lot of Anti-Vandalism, and sometimes I come across edits that change links or names into their native language. Here is an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=James_Kr%C3%BCss&curid=5697112&diff=1094407247&oldid=1094407096&diffmode=source

How do I handle this? Is this okay, or is it considered disruptive? I'm asking because this is the English Wikipedia, I would assume that text should be kept in English. At least for phrases that are often used in their translated version. Kvoou ❯❯❯ Talk 12:52, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

It's not even slightly disruptive. Your assumption is mistaken. The IP changed a redlink to the/an English name for a prize to a working link to the article in en:Wikipedia titled with the original German name, and even retained the/an English name as a gloss. The IP should be commended for the edit. -- Hoary (talk) 13:00, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

In this particular case, they inserted a correct wikilink and used the name of the en-WP article, so it's quite constructive. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:51, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

That edit is definitely an improvement. It gives the correct name for the prize (which was not previously given), and follows it by an English translation. It also provides a working wikilink to WP's article about the prize, in place of a redlink. Maproom (talk) 20:05, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Recently found out that the article I desired to create is not considered notable enough, so I really need to delete it. Fijipedia (talk) 20:50, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Fijipedia. Place {{Db-g7}} at the top of your page. It should be deleted soon after. Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk | contribs)} 21:00, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I want to delete a draft that couldnt pass the approval to be on the mainspace. How can I do it? Any piece of advice? SDC3021 (talk) 07:24, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @SDC3021, welcome to the teahouse. I've tagged it for speed deletion under WP:G7, it should be deleted shortly.Justiyaya 07:42, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

whoops sorry, I didn't check the edit history. Since you are not the only contributor to the draft, it is not elegable for author requested deletion. However, it will be deleted in 6 months (if noone edits it). Justiyaya 07:41, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Oh, I see. So after six months it will be deleted automatically or do I need to request again? Thank you SDC3021 (talk) 01:20, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@SDC3021: What normally happens is that a semi-automated message will be sent to editors who have worked on the article (though I don't know if the messengers choose all the editors or just the primary ones who've contributed the most) at the 5-month inactivity mark warning them that the draft will be deleted soon. After that the draft will be deleted once it hits the six-month mark with no activity. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:30, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I used to be able to go to pages like this one quite easily. Now, I only got to it because I remembered its not-obvious name. What are new or potential editors to do? Also, I don't know how to find out about black-listed sources. I wanted to find out if there is a discussion of ''Ancient Origins" and if there are exceptions to its not being allowed as a linked source.Kdammers (talk) 21:00, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Oh, now I see that most of what I wanted in the case of black-listing is in the pink message box above me draft. But, still, in general, how are people to find the lsit?Kdammers (talk) 21:11, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

No can do: The pink comment block disappeared when I commented! Kdammers (talk) 21:15, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Kdammers. The latest discussion about that site is here (consensus seems to be no, never usable). As for new users, there are both editors and bots who go around placing welcome messages with helpful links on the talk pages of newcomers, plus there's the new mentorship/homepage thing. Hopefully less experienced users will ask questions and more experienced ones can point them to PS and the search box. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:18, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

additionally, the easiest way to see if a source has been discussed to see if it is reliable is Reliable sources/Perennial sources, whoch you can access with the shorthand WP:RSP (Reliable sources, perennial), or you could access it through a link at the very top of Reliable sources (or WP:RS, Reliable sources). Many other pages can be accessed in a similar way, like WP:TH for the Teahouse, and WP:MOS for the Manual of Style. To see if a page has this, keep an eye out for the Shortcut box in each meta page. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:43, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Where are the short-cut boxes? Kdammers (talk)

Hello, Kdammers. There are an enormous number of shortcuts, some of which are in common use, and others that are quite obscure. Take a look at Wikipedia:Shortcut index. If you do not know the shortcut, you can type "WP:" plus a keyword in the search box. In other words, both "WP:RS" and "WP:Reliable sources" takes you to Wikipedia:Reliable sources. And so on. Cullen328 (talk) 01:29, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

The shortcut boxes Melecie mentioned are usually at the top right of a page. The one for the Teahouse is embedded into the "Welcome to the Teahouse!" banner, right above the host picture. 174.21.23.32 (talk) 02:50, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

I was wondering where I should go to get more professional help a cleaning up a really messed up article that hasn’t been touched since 2013 (it”s written like WikiHow :/ ). The article in question is “new business developments”, which is written more like a guide or personal essay than an encyclopedic documentation… thanks.

Tschau, Dwightol102 (talk) 03:35, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Here is the link: New business development. Karenthewriter (talk) 03:51, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

@Dwightol102 - for starters, the first two sentences are a direct copyvio from [6]. This thing is probably a candidate for outright deletion. Dr. Duh 🩺 (talk) 07:18, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

@Dwightol102@Doctor Duh I have just cleared the Talk page for violating WP:NOTFORUM. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:42, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Either delete (it doesn’t seem like an article someone would actually need; they could use dictionary.com or whatever to find it out) or if you think it’s completely necessary so Wikipedia doesn’t crumple to ashes like so many football stadiums someone can rewrite it…

Hmph, Dwightol102 (talk) 03:19, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

When I add a reference or an external links to an article, I want the webpage to be archived. Then I have to check first if it is archived already in its 'normal' status and achive it if it is not. It would be very convenient it is archived automatically whatever link I added. It doesn't have to be archived periodically. Just once in its normal status is fine. I searched about Wikipedia auto archiving but it seems not what I expect. Is there some tool that I want? Regpath (talk) 03:24, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I am wondering if there is a way to see analytics for a Wikiproject such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Geography. I know there's article analytics, top view analytics, site analytics, language analytics, and category views at https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/ but I'm not sure how to look for Wikiproject views. ScientistBuilder (talk) 01:36, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Do you mean like this? [7] -- asilvering (talk) 02:02, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @ScientistBuilder, to access the tool @Asilvering mentioned, go to the WikiProjects main page, go to "View History", and click on "Page statistics". Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk | contribs)} 03:11, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Better still, enable "MoreMenu" in Preferences-->Gadgets. -- asilvering (talk) 03:41, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

If you don't know what i'm talking about, i'm talking about the line of the heading, basically, if you make a new section you will see a line, i was wondering how you can type in it, like the good articles and stuff. I'm using the {icon} template and i want to type at the line of the heading, basically if you use the {coord} templates it would appear on the right of the line of the heading. Leahnn Rey (talk) 04:52, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

hi @Leahnn Rey and welcome back! if you want to place stuff at the top of the heading (like the good article icon), you should use {{topicon}} instead of {{icon}} (which displays inline text). if you want to place stuff at the bottom of the heading (like {{coords}}), you'd want to use <span> as such: <span id="coordinates"> Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet </span>, replacing the lipsum with whatever you wanna put in, which assigns them to the location coordinates typically use. examples of both can be found here in my sandbox. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 08:39, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

While tidying up the article for a children's book series, I discovered the author (Jennifer Rowe) wrote the books under a pseudonym (Emily Rodda). The pseudonym is listed as the author, while the related articles are tagged as 'Books by Jennifer Rowe'. Initially I thought the article had been vandalized before discovering that 'Emily Rodda' links to 'Jennifer Rowe'.

My question: is it reasonable to add the author's name, with something like "Rowan of Rin is a series of five children's fantasy novels by Australian author Jennifer Rowe (under her pseudonym Emily Rodda)"? WP:PSEUDONYM didn't seem to have the answer, and I discovered that there doesn't seem to be much consistency - for example books by Mary Ann Evans aka George Eliot sometimes mention they were written under a pen name and sometimes do not. Thanks in advance for any advice! StartGrammarTime (talk) 06:33, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

• @StartGrammarTime: Well, that one is a mess.

If all books in that category had been written by "Emily Rodda", the easy fix would be to rename the category (we have Category:Lady Gaga albums, not Category:Stefani Germanotta albums). But the article Jennifer Rowe says that she wrote children’s books as Emily Rodda and adult books under her own name. The category includes Verity Birdwood, a character from the adult books (it is also questionable whether a character should be in "Category:Books by ...", but the books themselves have no article so far I suppose).

I would say go for your suggestion and see if anyone complains. If there is pushback, a trip to WP:CFD might be required. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks for definitive article on the BMW E36 saloon cars. The 1994 E36 that I have was classed as BMW E36 and is a 325iSE. The SE I am informed by BMW stands for "Special Equipment" and consists of an electric sun roof and rear headrests. Hope this is of some help. 81.178.174.73 (talk) 08:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and thank you for wanting to contribute to Wikipedia. If you have suggestions for improving an article, the best place to make then is on that article's talk page (rather than here, where thousands of editors hang out, quite probably none of whom know anything at about that subject or that article). However, all information in a Wikipedia article should be available in a reliable published source: information that is just from your (or my) personal knowledge is not acceptable - see Verifiability for why that is so important. ColinFine (talk) 09:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi so I recently updated the page of the California State Legislature, 2021–22 session as it very clearly had not been updated at all in several months (you can see in contributions I did over 3,000 characters worth. And for one of the things I was trying to update was the profile box for Mike McGuire who became Majority Leader of the California State Senate on January 19, 2022. Except whoever did the original table for his profile did it in a way that I have zero idea of adding in his new office as Majority Leader so if anyone who has a lot of experience in creating table's could possibly take a look and add that in that would be super helpful! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunnyboi18 (talk • contribs) 09:42, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Sunnyboi18. If nobody comes forward to help, I suggest asking at WT:WikiProject California or WT:WikiProject Politics. ColinFine (talk) 09:49, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I am trying to submit an article in my sandbox for review but there is no button on the page to enable submission. Kindly assist. ∼∼∼∼ Nellydieli (talk) 20:40, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Nellydieli. You have submitted your draft but there is very little chance that it will be accepted. You would need to provide compelling evidence that this student event is notable, which is unlikely. Most of your references do not discuss the event. Your draft is written more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. I suggest that you read and study Your first article, and perhaps consider another topic. Cullen328 (talk) 20:49, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Cullen328, thanks so much for your comment. I appreciate; and I will check to see what I can do about that article. However, this is not the article I am referring to. This page provided a "submit for review" button with which I submitted but not so with my other pages. I have other articles in my sandbox that I want to submit as well.Thanks to assist.∼∼∼∼ Nellydieli (talk) 21:04, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Nellydieli. That is why it is always advisable to mention the specific page. I guess that you are talking about User:Nellydieli/sandbox/Sotonye Denton West. I have submitted that draft for you. I believe that this person is almost certainly notable. I recommend, though, that you spend some time improving and expanding the draft. There are only two references in the draft, and certainly there must be other reliable sources that devote significant coverage to such an accomplished jurist. And even the two references now present include a lot of biographical information that can easily be incorporated into the draft. Cullen328 (talk) 02:20, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Cullen328, I sure need a guide on Wikipedia and it looks like I found one in you already. Thank you so much. I was not gonna submit Sotonye Denton-West yet because as you rightly noted, there are only two references and my Instructor (from AfLIA) had informed, at the time we were training last year, that we needed at least four references to begin with. I will do more research on Denton-West in due course. Kindly check User:Nellydieli/sandbox/Opubo Da Lilly-Tariah. I have other articles to submit and I will do this in a while. Nellydieli (talk) 10:11, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Nellydieli If you want to develop articles in your sandbox(es) and then submit them when you judge they are ready, the easiest way to do that is to place the template {{User sandbox}} at the top of each sandbox page. You'll find that the template adds a button that you can use for submission. The alternative is to use the main articles for creation process. Thanks for your contributions. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:17, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Mike, Fantastic! I checked and it worked. Thank you so much. Nellydieli (talk) 11:13, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Where and how can a concern be addressed regarding a non-admin editor who appears to be misusing their rollback tool? 50.237.67.210 (talk) 10:02, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the Teahouse, I would raise the matter at ANI (Administrators Noticeboard/Incidents) where administrators and other users can comment on it. Thanks, | Zippybonzo | Talk | 10:15, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

...after having tried to discuss the matter with them, of course. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 11:24, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

better advice possible if you specify an aticle. David notMD (talk) 11:28, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I just tried to make my first edit to a semi-protected article, an addition to the short description, and I ran into trouble. First, I'm not an anonymous editor and I'm not newly registered (I just qualified for Wikipedia Library priviileges). The edit didn't show up in the preview, or on the page after I published the change. However, the edit showed up just fine in my list of contributions, and in the arti79.155.36.178cle's revision history. The edit is still there on the edit page. The article is The Batman (film) (I justified my edit in the edit summary). Pete Best Beatles (talk) 05:48, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Pete Best Beatles. That article is not semi-protected. It is Extended confirmed protected, which is a more stringent form of protection. As for your edit, you are trying to change the short description to 2022 American neo-noir superhero film by Matt Reeves. That description is way too detailed and it should be much more concise. Per Wikipedia:Short description, Editors should bear in mind that short descriptions are not intended to define the subject of the article. Rather, they provide a very brief indication of the field that is covered. You have jammed six different things into the "short" description. Be extremely concise. Cullen328 (talk) 06:05, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328: I was just trying to add "neo-noir" to the existing description. Does "extended confirmed protected" mean I won't be able to make my addition (or that anyone will be able to take your advice either)? "Semi-protected" is what it says in the template on the edit page, that's why I said that. I think it's weird that my edit shows as legitimate on my list of contributions and in the article's revision history, since it didn't take. Pete Best Beatles (talk) 09:27, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Pete Best Beatles: If you look at the edit history of the article, you'll see that your edit "took" for a few hours, until SirDot removed it with an edit summary of "Only the primary genre". Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:28, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Pete Best Beatles (talk) 11:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I don't want to leave this draft to rot, but I also can't develop it. The subject is covered a lot in books (which I don't have access to) after a quick search on Google, but history isn't exactly my area of expertise, nor do I have an area of expertise. It's probably not gonna get any new editors. What should I do with it? Vortex (talk) 12:23, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

You can boldly press the blue button and see what the AfC reviewers think. Consider leaving a comment that it is an abandoned draft that you think is notable. Slywriter (talk) 12:56, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Vortex3427 Welcome to the Teahouse! You could post the information about the books on the draft, make a note on the draft talk page asking for assistance, and ask the appropriate WikiProject for assistance (e.g. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portugal). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 12:54, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Slywriter I might do that after I follow GoingBatty's suggestions. Maybe others could find the time to improve the article in a way that I can't? Vortex (talk) 12:58, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I think that da Mata already meets the notability requirement of WP:NPOL, given that he was a Portuguese minister. Why don't you just submit the draft as-is (it is otherwise OK in terms of citing etc.) and let others improve it when in Mainspace, Vortex3427? Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:03, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I think I noticed that a few months back when I was still editing the article, but I was confused if it would override WP:GNG. I've already notified the WikiProject and might include some of GoingBatty's other suggestions, but I'll try it now and see how it goes. Thanks, Vortex (talk) 13:06, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I need some help with defining which links are proving that the company is notable. I`ve read the instruction, still have doubts about these links:

- http://us.acrofan.com/detail.php?number=651891

- https://www.gamblinginsider.com/connections/1363/internet-vikings

- https://www.igamingsuppliers.com/vendor/internet-vikings-ab/

- http://momathandscience.com/news-and-events-on-science-and-events/services-offered-by-internet-vikings/

- https://sbcamericas.com/2022/03/07/internet-vikings-kicks-off-igaming-hosting-operations-in-indiana/

Could you please help me with defining which ones are reliable sources?

Also, there is an article about the company on Ukrainian Wikipedia. Does it make the company notable if the other Wikipedia branch decided it is? Or every country Wikipedia is autonomous and makes its own decisions? Sofia.pavlivna (talk) 12:24, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Every Wikimedia project is autonomous and basically independent from each other. Vortex (talk) 12:29, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I don't know what company you're referring to, but can you try the sources in that Ukrainian-language article and see if they're reliable? Non-English sources are also allowed on here. Note that I have been on Wikipedia for a scant thirty days and have no idea if the advice I'm giving is good or not. Vortex (talk) 12:30, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Vortex3427 - Your replies are correct! Every article on the English Wikipedia must meet the English Wikipedia's criteria for notability (in this case WP:NORG), regardless of whether an article exists on any other Wikipedia site. GoingBatty (talk) 12:49, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I can confirm that the advice given by @Vortex3427: is 100% correct (Wikimedia projects are independent, looking up the sources in other languages is usually the first step, that non-en sources are accepted on en-wp).

Regarding the sources... Sofia.pavlivna, when you say you have read the instruction[s] (by which I assume you mean WP:GNG), did you understand them? Your first three links are press releases (not even trying to hide it for the second one: Our client portfolio...), which pretty clearly fail the "independent from the subject" test.

The fourth one is written in dubious English, and it’s even worse on their main page. I am pretty sure that is some random person’s blog, which fails (at least) the "reliable source" test.

The fifth one superficially resembles the sort of thing we want (apparently a press article, with a journalist signing it, dealing directly with the subject with some amount of detail). However, if you look at the content, it is pretty clear that it contains only stuff that several persons from the company said to the journalist. Such interview-like content is not considered independent.

A side note, since you are a paid editor. Please tell whoever is in charge of such things at your company (possibly yourself) that writing on Wikipedia is a risky adventure, with a very serious risk of spending lots of time accomplishing nothing. If the client was promised they would get a Wikipedia article, I suggest you withdraw that promise immediately, and explain that you can try but that you have very little control about whether the article stays or not and what it will say if it does, no matter how much they pay you. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 13:14, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Sofia.pavlivna: Welcome to the Teahouse! Press releases and directory listings like these are not independent reliable sources. GoingBatty (talk) 12:48, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Brand My great-grandfather was Sir William Alfred Brand C.B.E., cane farmer and politian, who I knew personally - I was a teenager when he passed away. There is a Wikipedia page on his life, which I have no problem with, EXCEPT the fact that the attached PHOTO is NOT him. My mum thinks it is a photo of another man who was also in politics, possibly before or after he served in politics. Anyone who didn't know my "Da" might easily have confused the 2 men as both wearing glasses and similar builds, but it is NOT the same man. Having the incorrect photo on his profile page is somewhat distressing to the older members of my family ie. my mum and her siblings (grandchildren of Sir W A Brand). Is it possible to have this photo removed? You can see a correct photo of my great-grandfather on the website of Australian Dictionary of Biography - https://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/brand-sir-william-alfred-9573 2001:8003:6460:7800:2D06:7FBA:65EE:E5B3 (talk) 05:00, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for raising this. I have taken the liberty of removing the image from the article. Images here tend to be uploaded at Wikimedia Commons, and looking at the information associated with that image, I can't see where it came from, or what evidence there might be that it's genuinely William Brand. We can only include reliable, sourced information, so it shouldn't be there. When it comes to images, unfortunately we can only use images that are free of copyright, or where the copyright has been released in a very generous way, so I don't feel able to use the image you provided. Maybe someone with a better understanding of copyright can reassess! Alternatively, if you have an image to which you own the copyright, you could upload it. I haven't gone looking for the image in other Wikipedias; you might like to do so, as it may have been used incorrectly elsewhere. Elemimele (talk) 06:07, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Rather to my surprise, Elemimele, Commons shows that this fuzzy little image, which you rightly removed from the en:Wikipedia article, gets quite a lot of use outside en:Wikipedia (and indeed is still used within it). That is unsatisfactory even now; and if nothing is done about it then I imagine that the image will creep back into the article on Brand. However, hasty removal is likely to be summarily reverted. I'll make a start. -- Hoary (talk) 06:17, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Elemimele, Per the licensing info at [8], this image [9] appears to be annoyingly out of Commons reach. Ping @Alexis Jazz, if you have any wisdom for us. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:33, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, as Tigraan said below, you'll need to find a somewhat older image. Before 1955 would be {{PD-Australia}} (and should be used per WP:FREER if found, but still with a fair use rationale), before 1946 would also be {{PD-URAA}} and could be used without a fair use rationale. I'd also suggest putting Rocketrod1960's uploads in a maintenance category to check and improve the sources. c:File:William Drayton Armstrong - Queensland politician.jpg is also found on [10] for example. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 14:08, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Feel free to add comments to Deletion requests/File:William Brand.jpg. -- Hoary (talk) 06:32, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I don't think that we should have too much trouble getting a new image for the article. One solution would be for the IP to upload to Commons a photo of Brand (assuming the IP took one at some point). Alternatively, for deceased individuals, a WP:FAIRUSE image can be hosted on English Wikipedia for use in the article and the one at the link the IP provided seems to meet all the criteria. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:37, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

 Done I've uploaded that image as fair-use and added it into the article. If we subsequently find a higher-resolution or properly licensed image that can be put on Commons, the fair-use one will be deleted. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:08, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: According to WP:URAA and/or [11], photographs taken in 1954 or earlier are public domain now in Australia (the copyright regime was "50 years after creation" which means everything went into PD in 2019 the latest).

That does not help for this exact image, because according to this entry from the National Archives of Australia, it seems it was taken in 1956. However, if during your search, you found earlier images on other websites, those might be fair game. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:35, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

And in a couple of years we can move the fair-use one to Commons. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:15, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

This is not a question; it is just an observation. I recently asked advice from Wikipedia on whether I could add a section to an already very good Wikipedia article on Colonial Pipeline Company. I was advised by the person that responded that I needed to provide primary or original sources. I do not have such, so I abandoned the task.

The CPC article is long and informative, but it does not mention or skims very lightly the control systems that allow this 5500 mile system with more than 200 facilities to be operated from a remote site. There is a lot of whiz-bang stuff about the large diameter pipe, the pumps and motors, the giant valves, the enormous BPD throughput but nothing about how it is controlled. Hint: it is not by humans on site at those facilities.

I know this because I worked directly on designing, building, and installing those SCADA and control systems from 1966 until 2002. But in the end it is not really important. Keep up the good work. MisterURL (talk) 11:13, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

In explanation, this is a side-effect of what Wikipedia is. We are a tertiary source. We rely on secondary sources to decide that something is interesting, go looking for the facts, and check their accuracy. We then collate and summarise information from the secondary sources. We shouldn't go directly to the primary sources: simplistically, primary sources are often biased by their authors, who are inevitably closely connected with the subject. A good author of a secondary source has enough distance to see the subject in perspective and assess how important is that particular primary source, and to know its bias. Also we cannot use our own knowledge, because then we would be our own primary source. If you know something about a subject, what you have to do is go and write the primary or secondary material yourself, and then Wikipedia will have something to work with! It can be very frustrating when we encounter an article that is obviously incomplete, but this usually comes down to the fact that although we consider it interesting and important, so far no one else has done so, at least not enough to get it into print. But this is also what separates us from blog sites and general interest sites. There is nothing to stop a blog from being as accurate as Wikipedia - it's just we try to guarantee the reader sources, and some neutrality as enforced by being a collaborative effort of multiple editors based on the multiple efforts of many secondary sources. Elemimele (talk) 12:21, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

I do understand that, and you make it very clear. It would be difficult for me to remain entirely objective. Thank you for the response. This arcane dab of knowledge is indeed of interest to very few - maybe none other than a handful of people that worked on it way back then - so I will be content to just know it happened myself. MisterURL (talk) 15:00, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I want to add a pdf link to a source but I already have a URL. Is there a way to add a second URL? ScientistBuilder (talk) 20:18, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Can you be more specific? What kind of url do you have now? Ruslik_Zero 20:39, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder I thought that PDFs are generally not considered to be reliable, published, verifiable sources. Are you using a PDF as a source? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 03:19, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

It depends entirely on who has published them and where. A PDF is just a medium, like paper, or websites. Some of these are published by organisations with a reputation for editorial control and fact checking. Some are published by some random guy who wants to say something. Most are somewhere in between.

A PDF found on the website of a reputable newspaper is probably a reliable source (which may or may not be independent of the subject). If somebody sends you a copy of that PDF, it cannot be used as a reliable source. If somebody uploads the PDF to their own website or Dropbox, it is not a reliable source (and may be a copyright violation). But if somebody sends you the original URL of that PDF on the publisher's website, it probably is a reliable source. ColinFine (talk) 16:55, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I have recently tried to draft a page and submitted it for AFC approval but my submission was declined. The reason provided is that the subject is not notable, my question is how will I get know which subject is notable or not? Wikiboss1311 (talk) 16:07, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Are you asking about Draft:Ross Dickerson? weeklyd3 (message me | my contributions) 16:11, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Of course, Yes! Wikiboss1311 (talk) 16:15, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Wikiboss1311: Check out WP:N, which has lots of info on that. RudolfRed (talk) 16:12, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I heard somewhere that a good way to check if a subject was notable was to pretend that you know nothing about the subject and try to find sources that support statements in the article. But I might be wrong. weeklyd3 (message me | my contributions) 16:17, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

That's a good way to start, weeklyd3. But if you find such sources, you need to evaluate the quality of those sources: if they're on social media, blogs, forums, wikis, iMDB, they're probably not reliable and do not contibute to notability. If they're written, commissioned, or published by the subject or their associates, or based primarily on interviews or press releases, then they're not independent, and don't contribute to notability. 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. ColinFine (talk) 17:04, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

And indeed, there's a template to help you start looking: {{find sources}}. ColinFine (talk) 17:05, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Citation has been added to draft:Ceno (rapper) so kindly move it to article space. Gfxseries (talk) 18:28, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

That's not how this works, go back and resubmit it through the Article Creation process. I'll say though that it appears that all the "citations" you added are just to discography-type pages, apple.com, etc... That's not gonna cut it. ValarianB (talk) 18:34, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Gfxseries. That draft in its current form has zero chance of being accepted. The references are pretty much worthless. Please read and study Your first article. Cullen328 (talk) 18:40, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

STATUS: Declined, then Rejected, and miscellany-nominated for deletion. Paid editors are expected to demonstrate competence. The draft has no reliable source references. David notMD (talk) 19:22, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

"... identifying with the blue side of the spectrum crisp." I just don't understand the kids' lingo these days. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 03:10, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

User:David notMD and others: Volunteer editors are also expected to demonstrate competence, and usually do. It is surprising how often paid editors, who should be demonstrating their competence to their clients, demonstrate to the volunteer community that they don't know what they are doing. Maybe there should be a lesson for their clients that they would be better off to spend their money on improving a corporate web site, which they control, than on trying to pay for Wikipedia listings. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:06, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I've recently taken an interest in improving certain Wikipedia Articles to A rated status or more. I would like to reassess an article I've recently been working on, because it's last assessment was on October 9, 2009. I would ask for one at WP:Good article reassessment, however I'm certain it doesn't qualify as a GA. Where should I report it? (This is the article) Dinoz1 (chat?) 18:32, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I believe you just need to remove the current rating so that it appears on lists of articles needing quality assessments. ––FormalDude talk 18:40, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Dinoz1 (chat?) 18:42, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Dinoz1 A status is actually above GA status, so if you think it's not a GA, it's definitely not A-level. I've assessed it at C-class. Good luck with it! -- asilvering (talk) 18:51, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

User:Asilvering, User:Dinoz1 - A-class and GA have different rating bases and are not entirely comparable. Some WikiProjects, such as Military History, have A-class ratings, but most do not, so for most WikiProjects the scale is Start - C - B - Good Article - Featured Article. There has recently been pointless argument over whether A is above GA, or GA is above A, or neither. Most WikiProjects don't have A. Military History is a project that has a well-organized assessment scheme. Many B-class assessments and nearly all C-class assessments are done by one person, usually by common sense. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:13, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Who is saying GA is above A? I'm not familiar with any wikiprojects that rank them in that manner...? -- asilvering (talk) 21:29, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

For example, there is a template, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Men%27s_professional_basketball_leagues.

The name of this template is 'Men's professional basketball leagues' and the title is 'Men's basketball leagues' I understand what the title is. It is what is really displayed on the screen. Then what is the function of 'name'? Is it just a unique identifier?

I also wonder whether the name or title should be unique in the English wikipedia space. Regpath (talk) 22:11, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Regpath, and welcome to the Teahouse. The name of the template is how you invoke (make use of) the template. If you want to use it on a page you put its name in double curly brackets to transclude it:

{{Men's professional basketball leagues}}

and it displays whatever that template happens to display; in this case

.

This particular template is a navigation template, and the concept of a "title" is meaningful; but for many templates there is nothing that may reasonably be called a "title" about them. ColinFine (talk) 22:35, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Why was I being accused of trolling when I made a valid request on a talk page? 73.167.238.120 (talk) 21:12, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Claiming you don't understand something when you do understand it can be construed as trolling. RudolfRed (talk) 21:20, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Well, the claim of trolling is incorrect, just to be clear. Thanks! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 21:39, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Please note that failure or refusal to "get the point" may be seen as disruptive editing. weeklyd3 (message me | my contributions) 01:56, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I assure you that trolling was not the case. Thank you again for the information! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 01:08, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Can I see all my previous teahouse questions in one place whether it has been archived or not? Regpath (talk) 22:17, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Regpath: You can view all your contributions to the Teahouse here. ––FormalDude talk 22:20, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Regpath (talk) 01:11, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I’ve been editing for a few months but trying to publish a few pages with no luck. My current draft:ForagerFunds is the closest I have to getting a page to work. I have followed a few others in the same industry to match the quality of sources and right tone. In this case I am referring to Magellan Financial Group and Australian Ethical. I can’t work out why the Forager Funds page isn’t allowed compared to the others. Any tips? (And yes I’m kinda into investing so I like editing this type of content). TrueStay (talk) 05:15, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Forager Funds 💜  melecie  talk - 06:20, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, TrueStay. The other two articles you mentioned, Magellan Financial Group and Australian Ethical Investment are start class articles with significant problems that are quite obvious to experienced editors. But we have over 6.5 million articles and millions of them are mediocre or poor. Editors work to improve such articles or delete such articles 24/7/365 but it is a daunting task. Your argument that you have found two mediocre articles so we should accept your mediocre draft is not very persuasive. When I look at your list of references and click on a few of them, I am unimpressed. The bibliographic information is incomplete. Several are behind paywalls but you can always include a brief, substantive quotation from the source so that reviews know that it is not a passing mention. Please explain how this business meets WP:NCORP when the vast majority of companies don't. In the end, it is all about the quality of the significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Nothing else matters nearly as much. Cullen328 (talk) 06:40, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I am writing about emerging artists who have done pretty well in their fields. any suggestions! Anuaurora (talk) 09:20, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

@Anuaurora, welcome to the Teahouse! A few points.

Writing a WP-article that "sticks" without any previous WP-experience is hard. Consider just editing some topics that interest you for a while, and check WP:TUTORIAL. Learning how to add references properly is essential, especially if you write about living people, WP has rules about these things. As an example, Oscar Ukonu is an article I wrote. It's pretty basic, but not glaringly WP-awful. Note how sources are used, depending on what they are and say. Your task as a Wikipedian is not to sell your subject, it is to summarize what independent sources (WP:RS) say.

If you have a subject in mind, check WP:BASIC. If you conclude "Yeah, I have those sources, no problem!", move on to WP:BLP and WP:YFA. Good luck! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:57, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Anuaurora If you mean visial or performing contemporary artists, then List of contemporary artists has plenty of examples of articles. David notMD (talk) 21:11, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

@Anuaurora It's a fine line--if an artist is too emerging, it will be harder to find reliable, independent coverage that shows how they are notable. But it's possible. Good luck. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 07:10, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Is it appropriate to vote for "Keep" for an article nominated for deletion that is originally created by yourself? Insight 3 (talk) 03:54, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Insight 3. I don't think there's anything improper with the creator of an article nominated for deletion voting "keep", but keep in mind that the result of the discussion will still be determined through consensus-building. What I mean is that if you just post something like "keep because I created the article", then you’re not likely going to convince others to agree with you. You might want to take a look at WP:AFDEQ and WP:ATA for some insight into how to participate in an AfD discussion. — Marchjuly (talk) 05:16, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! got it. Insight 3 (talk) 07:40, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

• Comment I would like to know what about voting "delete" by the same nominator. Is it countable ? Onmyway22 talk 03:58, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

  Hi Onmyway22. It's going to be assumed that someone nominating an article for deletion is casting a vote in favor of such an outcome even though they might not explicitly state as much in their nomination; so, it's not really necessary for them to "vote" again per se, except perhaps in some cases where an alternative to deletion has be proposed by someone else in the discussion. Each participant is only supposed to vote once; a participant may change or amend their vote, but there's a correct way to do so that doesn't require casting a second vote. — Marchjuly (talk) 05:25, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Onmyway22, administrators who close AfDs know to ignore duplicate "votes". For what it's worth, I am an administrator. Cullen328 (talk) 07:21, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I have been watching this nomination page. The nomination seems an attack to delete the article with multiple accounts, the nominator is a novice (with contributions) and (experienced with activity), and the user only nominated that article and he voted in the same as delete. which is the only nomination and delete vote from the user, see AfD Statistics for User:Zinjan32 User:Slowvansz (nominator). When I see the nomination page, there was another delete vote from another novice account user:Aoyoigian. The participant Ayogian got blocked for paid edit and sockpuppet. Both the nominator and the participant do not even create their user page.

After the block of User:Aoyoigian again another novice account named User:Zinjan32 came up with a delete vote. with the same nature of edits. The only contribution of this account is voting delete for the nomination. See the contributions and see the AfD stats. The account only contested only in this nomination as delete. All these three accounts having same nature of edits. So I strongly suspect these two contestants are the sockpuppets of the nominator. Onmyway22 talk 03:55, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

hi @Onmyway22 and welcome to the teahouse! sockpuppet reports should go to Sockpuppet investigations, follow the instructions over there to see how to report a case. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 06:18, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

• @Onmyway22: I took the liberty of correcting the text of your link to Slowvansz’s AfD contributions. As said above, accusations of misconduct, especially sockpuppetry, should be done in an appropriate forum with relevant evidence. That is to avoid snide attacks like "I think X is a sockpuppet, just saying" which poison the atmosphere. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:38, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Glass production doesn't actually say at any point what the raw materials are. This was reported in March 2011 and is still an issue today. A candidate for {{technical}}? 79.176.46.235 (talk) 08:39, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

You will find that information in the glass article. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:42, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I was wondering how does one cite an unpublished diary that resides at a state library such as the following?

http://search.slv.vic.gov.au/permalink/f/1cl35st/SLV_VOYAGER1640424 Robbiegibbons (talk) 01:35, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@Robbiegibbons Near the bottom of that search result there is a "Link to online item" which opens a page that has the full details to build a citation. The {{Cite archive}} template may be useful. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:38, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

How do I add a new entry to the list of Deaths May 2022? Is May 2022 closed for missed notable deaths? Where can I find guidance on this particular issue? Andymcteddybear (talk) 09:51, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

May has its own article Deaths in May 2022. Make sure that it's a notable person and remember to add a reliable source. The criteria are at the top of the article - X201 (talk) 10:10, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

I was able to do updates on the above-mentioned article as I forgot to add a reference link upon creating it. Can you please assist to check if this article can now be moved to article space?

Thanks for help! Alexander marshall 07 (talk) 11:09, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

my first article was deleted due to lack of proper references ,told by an admin.

So I have re-written the article with proper references to prove / show the notability of the article.

So, I request a Review of my draft article . Baruah ranuj (talk) 11:29, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Baruah ranuj Your Draft:Nituparna Rajbongshi has been submitted, and is waiting for a Reviewer. Teahouse hosts advise, but are not necessarily also Reviewers. Asking here is not a short cut to a faster review. As noted a few queries back, articles with this title have been deleted four times in the past, so unless this new effort is significantly improved, expect the same result. David notMD (talk) 11:48, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

My edits are being revised and deleted on this page Cedric Henderson (basketball, born 1975) which is a biography of a living person. My attempts to revise are positive in nature and attempts to delete harmful information posted by @wikiamazing75. If you look at this user's history, they contribute contentious information and pictures that are harmful to the living person. Elitebasketball23 (talk) 13:13, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I see you removing sourced information without so much as a policy based explanation as to why. PRAXIDICAE🌈 13:14, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I did explain why, I said it was harmful to the living person. Elitebasketball23 (talk) 13:15, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Being "harmful to the living person" is not a valid reason. WP:NPOV says that information about the subject that is negative should be included in the article, provided it is reliably sourced. —C.Fred (talk) 13:19, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Elitebasketball23 The information seems to be well sourced; if those sources are not being summarized accurately, please tell how on the article talk page. If the sources are summarized accurately, there is not much we can do. Do you have a connection to this person? 331dot (talk) 13:21, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes but their information is one-sided and the specific user continues to delete my edits in my attempts to protect the living person. I am making edits at the request of the living person. Elitebasketball23 (talk) 13:24, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Could we enable page protection? Elitebasketball23 (talk) 13:24, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@Elitebasketball23: From Wikipedia's perspective, we may need to, as we appear have a paid editor, or at the least an editor with a conflict of interest, sterilizing the article and removing negative information. —C.Fred (talk) 13:27, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Just look at the page history. My posts are attempts to revise harmful information posted by @Wikimazing75. Look at their contributions to the page and you will see. Again, my posts are the request of the living person (not paid) Elitebasketball23 (talk) 13:32, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Elitebasketball23 Please read about conflict of interest. The onus is on you to explain on the article talk page why sourced information should be removed. I don't agree it is one sided, it contains a quote from him. It's doubtful page protection will be granted, but you may be blocked should you persist in edit warring. Please go to the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 13:28, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

See extended discussion on your Talk page for why the photo you wanted to add is not yours to add (you did not take the photo). David notMD (talk) 13:40, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I am not an editor of Wikipedia. I sought editorial help from Wikipedia editors in editing and publishing an article about my life, which I believe satisfies the applicable notability requirement. The article was published on the main Wikipedia pages and after about three months was removed to draft status, republished and removed again to draft status with the lead comment that the article "may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use" and that "the author has been sanctioned for failing to disclose paid contributions". I was unaware of any noncompliance with Wikipedia policies by the editor and would like to resubmit this article (and cure an additonal comment that the article may have been promotional) with the help of an editor who will comply with applicable disclosure rules and policies. Can you please advise now to proceed and identify one or more editors who will provide proper editorial assistance and comply with applicable rules and policies, so that the article has a fair chance of being and remaining published. 2603:8001:A401:EB00:4D5C:A4B1:D65D:A793 (talk) 18:47, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. Without knowing which draft you're talking about, there's not much any other editor can do to help you. The editor that you communicated most likely ran afoul of neglecting Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure, which is a recurring problem Wikipedia has, and is something that is strongly looked down upon. While you're waiting to see if any interested editor is willing to help you, I encourage you to read the essay An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:59, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Based on what was said by the IP, the draft in question seems to be Jack Samet (or maybe Anita Gupta, but that seems less likely). Unfortunately both have been rejected and two of the editors who submitted them have been blocked for COI violations, among other things (a third has simply gone inactive). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:21, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

See User talk:GenomeBon for information about the block of the editor who submitted the draft about Jack Samet. Cullen328 (talk) 20:17, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Your analysis is correct. The draft I am talking about is the one about Jack Samet. I did read the article you site, as well as Wikipedia notability requirements and I still believe, (although I well understand my belief is not controlling) that disregarding the vioation of the the editor (which I had no part in knowing or committing) that fairly considered, the article merits publication on the main pages. As to notability, there are relevant citations supporting factual statements in the Draft to 38 independent reliable published statements including those in the New York Times, New York Daily Mirror (now defunct), Columbia Daily Spectator, San Francisco Herald Examiner, Los Angeles Daily Journal, The Business Lawyer, United States Supreme Court official reports, UCLA Daily Bruin Prime Magazine, San Diego Union, Los Angeles Times, San Diego Daily Transcript, among others. Most of these are more than incidental and go into detail about a specific activity I was involved in and at least two, the Prime Magazine and the Forest Hills High School Beacon review my life in some detail. I appreciate the comment that the Draft may be promotional and I desire editorial assistance in removing and editing those aspects of the article. All I am asking is for a fair review of the Draft, editorially revised to eliminate possible promotional aspects, and free of the taint of actions by editors not of my making. Is this possible, and if so, please advise as to how I should proceed? 2603:8001:A401:EB00:2488:B44C:8FCD:621D (talk) 22:03, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

If the draft article about your life was Declined there is a chance it can be improved and published. However, if it has been Rejected then it is a lost cause, and the project needs to be abandoned. I don’t know what article you are concerned about, so I don’t know the status of it.

Have you read Notability and Referencing for beginners? It isn’t enough for a potential Wikipedia encyclopedia article to prove that you exist, it must also show that your life story meets the notability standards established by Wikipedia. And the way to prove that notability is by finding at least 3 good published references that don’t just mention you in passing, but discuss your life in depth. These references have to be independent of you or anyone working to promote your life. No press releases, information from personal websites, or interviews of you.

The vast majority of Wikipedia editors are volunteers who work on projects they are interested it, and I have no idea how to find an actual experienced Wikipedia editor willing to help write your autobiography. But while you are waiting to find someone to assist you I would suggest you start gathering up as many good references as you can find, so that you can give them to the person who becomes interested in writing your life story. Karenthewriter (talk) 01:43, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

You (unregistered editor) have been given good advice. My advice is to reconsider whether to pay anyone to write a Wikipedia article for you. Paid editors will almost always assure you of their skill in Wikipedia, but they usually do not have the skill that they claim. Some paid editors ask a lot of stupid questions. Other paid editors get into a lot of stupid arguments with the Wikipedia community. Many of them think that, because they are being paid, they know what they are doing, but they often don't. If you want to publicize your life, it might be better to hire someone to improve your personal or corporate web site, which you do have control of. Paid editors often cannot deliver what they promise. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:30, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

The Draft article has been both declined and rejected, but I believe in each action, due to the violations of Wikipedia policies re disclosure of payments, of which I had no knowledge. I have read the article you refer to above, on Notability and Referencing for Beginners (See my response above to Cullen328) and I do not believe the Draft:Jack Samet, considered without regard to the prior editorial violations, is precluded from publication on the Main Pages of Wikipedia by a fair interpretation of any of the contents of that article. I have gathered good references, as you suggest, and the 38 citations are contained in the Draft in its current condition. How can I present the Draft to Wikipedia editors so that they can evaluate whether they think it merits publication and would be interested in editing a Draft which is already largely complete? It was published on the Main Pages of Wikipedia in October, 2021 and was not removed until late January 2022. 2603:8001:A401:EB00:2488:B44C:8FCD:621D (talk) 22:19, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Somehow, my replies to Karenthewriter and Robert McLenon have been conflated, which demonstrates unintentionally, my clear need for editorial assistance and guidance in dealing with the Wikipedia world. Hopefully, Karen and Robert will each read both replies, and what was intended to respond to each of them will be evident. I agree with Robert's advice regarding paid editors and I certainly have learned my lesson. I do not have a website, and so have no interest in publicizing my life for the purpose of growing business as I am retired. My hope was to make a legacy statement, so that those interested in the activities in which I took part, will have an additional vehicle for obtaining knowledge about them. 2603:8001:A401:EB00:2488:B44C:8FCD:621D (talk) 22:29, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

IP editor/Mr Samet, I'm going to try to address all your various questions/concerns in one post.

Writing a good article is hard; writing a bad article and moving it to mainspace (what you called "publishing" it) is easy. Many people do the latter every day, rather than going through our review process (Articles for Creation). We have a corps of overworked reviewers who go around and assess such articles to see what needs to be done with them. It took several months in the case of this article, but it was finally deemed wanting and moved back to draft. This is a common occurrence.

About the list of potential sources you posted above - only two of those, the student publications, seem to be about you rather than something you did, so those are the only ones which can be used to determine notability. The high school paper is unlikely to be reliable by our standards. The Daily Bruin is pretty highly regarded and may work as a source, but it will entirely depend on the content of the article. If it's non-independent - for instance, if it's an interview with you - it will not qualify. Assuming it does qualify, that's only one source, which is usually not enough (typically reviewers look for three).

Everyone here is a volunteer who works on stuff they're interested in. Trying to find a stranger who will take enough interest in your life and career to write an acceptable article about you will be difficult, perhaps impossible. We do have a place where you can request that an article be written - it's here - but no one may ever pick up the suggestion.

Finally, what to do about the rejected draft. I can't find any firm guidance to quote you on this, but the best thing would probably be starting over again from scratch, following carefully the guidance at Your First Article, especially the part about gathering good sources that demonstrate the notability of the subject - without those, it's all wasted effort. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:10, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I've just joined wikipedia and my IP address is partially blocked.I've followed the links to "ping the administrator" or email them using the links provided, but I just land on instructional pages. I've never contributed to wikipedia in any way and would just like to understand how to go about removing this block, because I am unable to even sign in... Thanks in advance for the advice. 178.197.217.159 (talk) 13:08, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you could edit this page, you are not blocked. It may help you to create an account(or request one at WP:ACC) if sometimes the IP you use is blocked and sometimes it isn't. 331dot (talk) 13:22, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@331dot They're p-rangeblocked from the User- and User talk namespace. @IP you can requests an account at WP:ACC. In theory one could also attempt to appeal the block, using the {{unblock}} template but since you're most likely not the intended block target and want to sign in anyway, ACC will be faster. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 14:14, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

my first article is deleted . i don't know why it's deleted. can anyone tell me whether my topic is notable. details available in talk page of me. Baruah ranuj (talk) 07:11, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Baruah ranuj. This seems to be concerning a person named "Nituparna Rajbongshi". Articles with this title have been deleted four times and the title itself has now been protected so that only highly experienced editors can create a fifth version. I happen to be an administrator so I took a look at the deleted fourth version. Vast swathes of that article were unreferenced which is highly problematic. There were only two references, neither of which were independent, and neither of which established the notability of this person. What is required is significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. This article lacked any such references and was therefore unacceptable. Please read and study Your first article. Cullen328 (talk) 07:40, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

cannot i create the fifth version ? Baruah ranuj (talk) 08:08, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Baruah ranuj, first you should find appropriate sources. If such sources do not exist, any work on a fifth version is futile, because the article will not be accepted in Wikipedia. Appropriate sources are those that are all at once (1) independent of the subject (→ no interviews, press releases etc.), (2) reliable (→ no random blogs, social media, etc.) and (3) deal with the subject in-depth (→ no phone book entry, company listings, routine newspaper entries about recurring events, etc.).

If you can find a few such sources, bring them here and we will tell them if they’re ok. Make sure to select the best three or four rather than drowning us under thousand bad sources. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:23, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

i have just submitted draft article with the title Draft:Nituparna Rajbongshi. Please review it and help me to work in wikipedia and to learn more . Baruah ranuj (talk) 09:17, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Baruah ranuj, considering the current sources in the article, you do not seem to have read the advice I gave regarding what sources are needed ([12] is the only one that is even close to meeting the standards). If you had said that you are confident the new sources are sufficient, that would have been one thing, but I just feel you did not care. I am therefore not inclined to "help you to work in Wikipedia and learn more". Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:39, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hey there,

How do I switch to visual from source editing?

Thanks, AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 15:07, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@AdmiralAckbar1977, when you are editing in the source mode, there should be a button on the top right corner where you can switch. See this image Kpddg ^(talk) 15:58, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I have been looking over and throughout Wikipedia and still have the slightest idea of what I am truly supposed to be doing next. I need help with this one move and I should hopefully see the gist of what's needed and/or expected from me. Thank you all. Have a wonderful day! Pocohontas77 (talk) 17:15, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@Pocohontas77: Welcome to the Teahouse. You're not obliged to do anything if you have an account. There was a long gap between my first edit and account creation. If you would like to contribute, new users should have a homepage on their profile (the link should take you to yours) where the Suggested edits panel may give you some ideas. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:18, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@Pocohontas77 my Wikipedia work is based entirely on what interests me. I'll begin thinking of an old movie I liked, a favorite author, or a historical event, and decide to see what Wikipedia has on the subject. Sometimes the article I read has few or no references, I think that one section may have errors, or I'm annoyed that the article is just a stub. That article becomes my next project. I look for references through newspapers.com (I do enough volunteer work to qualify for a free subscription) through research books I own or can find at local libraries, and I check Google Books to see if there are short "previews" that provide me with a few useful details. I improve the article, leave an edit summary and hit "Publish changes." On occasion I'll research and write a new encyclopedia article on a notable subject that fascinates me enough to put in all the required work, but mostly I just intend to do a quick read of a subject that interests me, and then discover I'm not satisfied with the current state of the article. I hope this helps. Karenthewriter (talk) 18:03, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Just got eligible and need to know what this is all about before I give away personal data..., also, do experienced editors even use it? Fijipedia (talk) 16:22, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, experienced editors use the Wikipedia Library all the time - I personally use the ProQuest Historical New York Times and the Newspapers.com access pretty much everyday. AFAIK the only data you automatically share is your Wikipedia account, which is just to confirm that you're eligible. It'll automatically give you access to something like 50 different research databases, and you can apply for access to others. When I applied for Newspapers.com access, it just linked it to my existing account there. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/they)^{Talk to Me!} 17:11, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I think The Wikipedia Library (TWL) is absolutely fantastic. I'm very privacy-conscious but haven't had any concerns about using it. Your use case will vary depending on what type of topics you work on, but it's worth signing up and giving it a spin next time you're looking for sources. — Bilorv (talk) 17:52, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@Fijipedia I signed up for newspapers.com and use it constantly. It did take a while to get my subscription started, I kept seeing it was pending, and when I decided to check and see what it would cost to pay for the subscription myself I discovered I'd been given access but hadn't been told that, so it takes a bit of work to get everything sorted out. Then a year later my subscription expired and I had to reapply for a renewal. Some may consider it a lot of bother, but I'm low income and willing to do a bit of work to get a subscription that's allowed me to improve countless Wikipedia articles. I really appreciate the free subscription. Karenthewriter (talk) 19:15, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I know I'm not relatively new here, but I'm still new enough to use the teahouse. I just have a question on Cluebot NG and that is, is Cluebot a software that I or any RC Patroller can use, or is it a bot that is run by some random dude. thanks Msaskiw (talk) 02:01, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Msaskiw, welcome to the Teahouse. ClueBot NG is a bot account. Also, if you’d like to learn more about how it works, feel free to check out its user page. Helen(💬📖) 02:25, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@Msaskiw Or maybe a "random female"; not everyone here is a "dude". 71.228.112.175 (talk) 07:58, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, that helps clear it up. Msaskiw (talk) 20:34, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I'm going to be starting big edits on Harrowgate, County Durham, when I came across something which could be confusing to readers and editors.

The article begins with "Harrowgate is an area, or township, of north Darlington". The part that confused me the most was "Harrowgate is an area, or township". According to the township article, The term "township" isn't in use in London for official purposes. What should I do? Thanks. Dinoz1 (chat?) 18:20, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@Dinoz1, the township article also says that some councils in the north of England have revived the term. However, what's really important is what the sources call it - do either of the sources in the article (or any of the sources you'll use for your big edits) use the term? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:16, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Lately I've been adding species to categories based on who named them. I noticed two different styles regarding the categories and the zoologists. In some cases, the zoologist is added to the taxa named by them category, for example René Léon Bourret. In other cases they're not in the category, for example Arthur Adams (zoologist) & Category:Taxa named by Arthur Adams (zoologist). Sometimes the category is added to a "see also" section of the zoologist, for example Jacques Daget. Which style should be followed? Rusentaja (talk) 16:31, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@Rusentaja, you could try asking at WikiProject Animals if there's any agreed-upon standard, since those are likely the folks who'd be drafting any such standard. It's possible there simply isn't one. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:20, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

i have submitted a draft article.

I request a review of the article.

Thank you Baruah ranuj (talk) 20:36, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Dimpu Baruah

Hi, Baruah ranuj, and welcome to the Teahouse! It looks like the draft was already reviewed and declined. You can improve the draft by adding more reliable sources that establish notability. Happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 20:40, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@Baruah ranuj: I don't think its a bot. Don't engage in an edit war. There is a reply at User_talk:Aishik_Rehman. Continue the discussion there. RudolfRed (talk) 20:44, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@RudolfRed, I assume this was meant to be a reply to TheLastOfTheGiants (pinging so they'll see it). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, sorry for the misplaced post. RudolfRed (talk) 21:38, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@Baruah ranuj, submitting a draft article is a request for a review. Asking again at the Teahouse can be seen as an attempt to jump the queue - please be patient. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:10, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

Though I've been editing for a few years, whenever I create an article, I do it via a red link to an existing name in other articles. However, I have just created a new one (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Beryl_reid_fan/sandbox), but I'm not sure how to get it out of my sandbox and onto Wikipedia. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

Beryl reid fan (talk) 18:55, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@Beryl reid fan: Welcome to the Teahouse. As an extended confirmed user, you can click "Move" in the More dropdown menu at the top of the page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:01, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ),

Thanks for your help. However, following your suggestion I have succeeded only in creating the page 'User:Karen Lloyd' (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Karen_Lloyd&redirect=no). Can anyone else offer any help, please?

Beryl reid fan (talk) 19:51, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

No worries, have sorted this now (by googling it).

Beryl reid fan (talk) 20:11, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@Beryl reid fan, for future non-Googling reference: Help:MOVE. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:12, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

FYI, I nominated the accidental userpage for speedy deletion (CSD U2). Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk | contribs)} 23:13, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk | contribs)}

Beryl reid fan (talk) 23:44, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Not sure what best to do about it but someone has added a silly political satire to the World War 11 article: World War 11

I am inclined to delete this article entirely but if not the satire probably needs to go. It has been added and reverted then rereverted so I think it perhaos needs to be protected to avoid an edit war.

MarylandGeoffrey (talk) 18:49, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@MarylandGeoffrey: Welcome to the Teahouse. I've re-reverted the silliness, and warned the editor who re-added it. There's no reason to delete the pre-vandalism disambiguation page, and the restrictions against edit-warring do not apply when it comes to reverting obvious vandalism like that. That said, protection would not be warranted unless the vandalism persists. Thanks for calling it to our attention, and happy editing! --Finngall ^talk 19:09, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

[Edit Conflict] Hi MarylandGeoffrey. The 'article' is a useful disambiguation page, so should not be deleted. So far there have only been two insertions and revisions, so it may be that the contributor involved (a new account with only one other, serious, contribution) knows not to make a third attempt amounting to 'declaration of edit war.' Two different editors made the reversions, so evidently the page (or the contributor) is well-watched. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.201.73.76 (talk) 19:09, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with this. 173.8.2.78 (talk) 20:00, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

If the user is obviously vandalizing (which he is) you have the right to bypass the 3 revert rule and edit war as you please until an administrator steps in. There's no reason to delete a page because of a troll. Fijipedia (talk) 00:50, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm trying to add a couple of words to the end of my signature yet I have no clue where to even go. Thanks for helping. Fijipedia (talk) 00:58, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Fijipedia, go to Special:Preferences and scroll down until you reach the "Signature" section. Make sure the "Treat the above as wiki markup." option is selected, and follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Signature tutorial. Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk | contribs)} 02:10, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

I need help fixing my article. Whenever I save a change for fixing my footnotes on my article, it reverses it back, no matter how hard i try to fix it. Can you help me fix my article? @Dormiojrkiller 67.241.60.112 (talk) 02:22, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Please be aware nobody owns any article. However, you are welcome to discuss problems on the talk page. Such as Draft talk:Miranda Doll (fictional character). weeklyd3 (message me | my contributions) 02:31, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

The draft is obvious junk, and I have rejected it accordingly. As for its illustration, see this deletion request. -- Hoary (talk) 03:05, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajkumari_Amrit_Kaur_College RathishN (talk) 05:19, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

RathishN, I've retitled ("moved") the article. -- Hoary (talk) 07:59, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Hoary , much appreciated RathishN (talk) 05:08, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

This series of pages talks about the elections for the Aberdare Urban District Council. I have corrected the summary to show that the Council remained in place after 1910 (previously it was shown as being abolished in 1910). The Council remained in place until 1974 (with the last election for the Council being in 1972. I have the records of these elections and want to add the results from 1910 to 1972. However the only records I have been able to use are manuscript records, in some cases backed by microfiche records of newspaper articles. Can I enter these as sources? - the manuscript records are held at Aberdare Central Library and within the 'W W Price Collection' and are backed by a record kept for about 50 years by a local Councillor which is in my possession. I have shown a link to the 1910 record which is here: 1910 Aberdare Urban District Council election. Thanks in advance for your help and advice. Alunwms (talk) 19:13, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Alunwms. Reading a microfiche record of a newspaper article is completely equivalent to reading the original paper version. It is nice when a reliable source is available online, and if it is, a link should be provided. But there is no requirement that sources be available online. Include as much bibliographic information as you can. For a newspaper article that you read by microfiche, that would be the name of the newspaper (wikilinked if there is an article about the newspaper), the date of publication, the precise title of the article, the authors name(s), and the page number. Cullen328 (talk) 04:49, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help Alunwms (talk) 07:16, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello there, I wanted to ask something regarding filmography tables. So, I have noticed that usually in most artists, actors, etc.—people who are involved in entertainment, film, television, and such - the rowspan of years in their filmography is merged if there's more than one film release in a specific year, and roles as well, if a role has been portrayed consecutively. However, in some articles, despite of the artist portraying a role in succession as in follow ups (2-3 times, for instance), the role is not merged as one row spanning over the required cells, and likewise happens with year count in some articles. There weren't any invisible comments there or remarks in the talk pages of those articles. Hence, I would like to know what's the reason behind it, I mean besides - wouldn't a merged row be much cleaner and less confusing as well? Thank you in advance, and have a good day. Sam (talk) 19:32, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@Sam0006, in the end it comes down to the person creating the table (I assume you mean table, not infobox). They may either not want or not know how to merge cells. It can be daunting, especially to newcomers and especially in the source editor - I hear it's somewhat easier in the visual editor. As far as I know, there's no rule that says they must or must not be merged; if you think Wikipedia is improved by merging them, have at it (using a really good one like List of Tom Hanks performances as a guide is usually helpful). But if someone doesn't like the change and reverts you, remember to have a discussion or - perhaps - just move on. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:44, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Sam (talk) 09:00, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Please advise - I have provided a source in a citation, a website with the necessary information but it is only accessible if someone is registered on the site (no subscription or payment required). Since I cannot expect an editor to do this I would like to upload a screenshot/jpeg of the relevant information. Is this possible and acceptable? I am a new editor and am having some trouble navigating on the system. Thanks very much. Rwarsager (talk) 11:56, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Rwarsager Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It's not necessary to do that; there is no requirement that a source be able to be accessed without registering, or even that it be without payment(see WP:PAYWALL). A source need not be easy or free to access. It doesn't even have to be online. 331dot (talk) 12:03, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm not aware of whether or not its possible, but it's not required in any way - See WP:PAYWALL. That said, there's consensus that FamilySearch is usually unreliable because of how much of its content is user-generated - Unless you're linking directly to an obituary or death certificate it should not be used. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/they)^{Talk to Me!} 12:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

You should also change the "title" field to the name of the page/document you're linking too instead of the URL, otherwise it doesn't render properly. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/they)^{Talk to Me!} 12:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Thaddeus, many thanks for your reply. It's very helpful. I did not realize that about FamilySearch or that it is considered unreliable so I will try to get a death certificate from the official source in England. I hope that in the meantime it is satisfactory to list the UK death location. And thank you for the tip on the 'title' field. I appreciate your guidance! Best regards. Randy Warsager Rwarsager (talk) 12:39, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

No problem! Just to clarify, if you're linking to a document that's hosted on FamilySearch, like a scan of a certificate or something like that, it would be fine. It just can't be "this user on FamilySearch said this." ThadeusOfNazereth(he/they)^{Talk to Me!} 12:54, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you again. Much appreciated. Rwarsager (talk) 23:08, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

I think I have finally cracked the fortress wall and figured out how to get a page started in my sandbox. but it is far from finished. How can I save my work but not "publish" it for review yet? I have extensive sources and links to fill in still. I'm using the visual editor, but I suspect the command line at the top was created automatically because I loaded some information from a Word doc into which I'd originally copied another Wikipedia page to use as a template (which seemed easier at the time, when I couldn't figure out how to find one on Wikipedia). It reads {{subst:AfC submission/draftnew}}. It also could have been created when I clicked through the "let's get started" sections. Either way, I don't know if that's the command I want in order to save the work I've done so far but not submit it for review yet. Right now, the only apparent way for me to save the work I've done is to hit "publish page." I did see a mention somewhere saying it won't actually publish, but I've also seen info that says "ready to have your work reviewed? Click the blue "publish" button." So which is it?

Color me confused — and frustrated that I keep clicking on "help" links, instructions, live chat links, etc., and cannot for the life of me get this answer. The live chat link won't even work, for some reason. I've tried to get in by entering my user name in the box instead of the one that appears under the name "Nick" (no idea who that is), and tried it with the ghost name in the box under "Nick" and my password. It won't work either way. I have a screenshot if you'd like to see it.

I've put a lot of work into this entry, so I'd like to see it get posted, if possible.

Thanks for any insight you can offer!

"～～～～" TexasEditor1 (talk) 11:16, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

TexasEditor1, There's no saving without it being visible on wiki. That is why button the button is labeled "publish". However, articles in your sandbox can be worked on without any worry that they will be deleted and have minimal visibility. Slywriter (talk) 11:19, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. TexasEditor1 (talk) 11:22, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

There are exceptions to Sandbox content not being deleted. A major one is having copy/pasted content that is copyright protected. Another is being unabashedly promotional. David notMD (talk) 11:51, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@TexasEditor1 if you are concerned about hitting "publish" to save your work-in-progress you can do the majority of work off-line, before transferring it to Wikipedia. I have written and published several Wikipedia articles, and I'm just more comfortable doing my work in a couple of off-line documents so that I know that everything stays under my control until I've completed my work. I have a Mac laptop so use TextEdit files – one for collecting all of my notes and references, and one for the actual writing and formatting. Once I believe my draft manuscript is complete I copy and paste it into my sandbox to see if I've made reference formatting mistakes, or if any sentences seem awkward or confusing. This is just a suggestion of what works for me.

Also, even though I'd done a small amount of freelance writing before discovering Wikipedia, I still limited myself to editing for 3 years before I felt experienced enough to try and create a new online article. And then I read Your first article so many times I practically had it memorized! I understood that the process was rather complicated for beginners in the "Wiki writing world" so I took it slow, read a half-dozen similar Wikipedia articles for examples, double and triple-checked everything I did to make sure I wasn't making any noticeable errors, and submitted my work for review. More than a decade later I'm still learning, but very much appreciate being able to publish articles that I believe will of help and interest to others.

Best wishes on your Wikipedia volunteer work. Karenthewriter (talk) 17:33, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice! I did create this offline, but there are so many footnotes, external links and Wikipedia links, I thought I would try to get the numbering straightened out in my sandbox. I've been trying for quite a long time to figure out how to get this posted, and I'd finally gotten to the point where I thought I could create a sandbox draft and store it till I finished (I couldn't finish it all at once because there a lot of links and I wanted to make sure they still work, etc. and get footnotes right, and check to make sure I am following protocols and instructions as carefully as possible. I know this page is legit; I just want to make sure I've done it right and conform to specs before I actually ask for a review. And this one is a big job. Y'all are being very helpful and I appreciate it!

I think part of my confusion is that everywhere I tried to turn for more info or help, it seemed to get more complicated, with coding complexities I was hoping to avoid by using Visual Editor. And when I got into that, I saw all kinds of caveats that made it sound as if it probably wouldn't work. I decided to try anyway, because I have a huge table that would be horrid to have to rebuild on the actual page. I haven't figured out how to manipulate column widths yet (it doesn't appear that dragging them works, as it does on my Mac), but I don't really need to and will research if I decide I do. TexasEditor1 (talk) 22:26, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

TexasEditor1 I hope you're able to get everything figured out in time. I've never attempted a table of any kind, so I won't attempt to give suggestions on creating them. The only advice my non-technical brain can say is that when I feel overwhelmed with trying to figure out what's going wrong with an article I set the project aside for a couple of days. When I come back with rested eyes and mind it's often easier to see the mistake that's causing the "log jam" in my data formatting. Karenthewriter (talk) 00:34, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! TexasEditor1 (talk) 22:17, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Right now, I'm just trying to get all my references correct and linked. TexasEditor1 (talk) 20:46, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Does WIkipedia provide a list of approved, paid -for-editing wikipedia editors? Steve K. Sgkukolich (talk) 23:20, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Well, we have Wikipedia:List of paid editing companies, but some of them fail to disclose their paid editing and are blocked (or even banned). weeklyd3 (message me | my contributions) 23:21, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@Sgkukolich: Also, I wouldn't recommend paying someone to edit for you because:

• The paid editor has to disclose who is paying them.
• Paid editors, no matter how they advertise their "page protection services" (hint: they can't), no Wikipedian can control the outcome of anything for sure.
• Also, stuff written on Wikipedia must be neutral. Articles created by paid public relations firms are often speedily deleted.

And I don't think Wikipedia approves specific editors, although Wikipedia:List_of_paid_editing_companies#Never_blocked may give you some ideas. weeklyd3 (message me | my contributions) 23:24, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

For an example of the consequences paid editing without disclosure, see Orangemoody editing of Wikipedia. One company even got a cease and desist letter for undisclosed paid editing once. Hope this helps. weeklyd3 (message me | my contributions) 23:30, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I'm wondering what the policy is on using identity terms (like transgender, nonbinary, etc) when discussing individuals who died before those terms came into use. For example, in the article on the history of crossdressing: "Harry Allen (1888-1922), born female under the name Nell Pickerell in the Pacific Northwest, was categorized as a ‘male impersonator’ who cross-dressed, rather than as a transgender male which is how he identified." From a practical perspective I understand why the term is used here; it's the best shorthand we have for someone who was assigned female but lived as a man. However, it feels inaccurate to say that he identified as a transgender male when the term transgender was created decades after his death (although early versions of it existed towards the end of his life); it seems that, if the term is being used as shorthand for how he lived his life, a qualifier is needed to clarify that he never explicitly called himself transgender. What is the policy on this? Trashheel (talk) 20:55, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@Trashheel: Welcome to the Teahouse! I took a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies/Resources and didn't notice any mention of this situation. You may want to ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:01, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

this is probably what you're looking for. PRAXIDICAE🌈 23:05, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much!! I'll definitely ask over there :) Trashheel (talk) 23:11, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! That doesn't quite answer what I'm looking for in terms of applying modern terms to historical figures, but very helpful as a resource as I learn how to edit articles. Trashheel (talk) 23:13, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

THis may not help for the specific issue, but it is well worth reading. Wikipedia:Gender identity. -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 23:28, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! That is a great read. Trashheel (talk) 23:53, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

I could not find any reference to this book! I suspect that the article should therefore be deleted...GrahamHardy (talk) 23:31, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

hi @GrahamHardy and welcome to the teahouse! you could tag the article with proposed deletion, see that page for more, and if nobody objects in a week's time the article can be deleted. otherwise, you could try out Articles for deletion, see that page for instructions, where you can start a discussion with others on whether the page should be deleted. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:39, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

How do you create a new article on Wikipedia? I have tried searching for info about a company but an article about it did not appear. Thank you 82.132.184.206 (talk) 13:41, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Check out WP:YFA for instructions, but keep in mind that creating a new article from scratch is one of the hardest things you can do on Wikipedia. I recommend trying out some other smaller tasks first to get the hang of things around here; take a look at the task center for that. Happy editing! Bsoyka (talk) 13:43, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

WP:NCORP has advice specific to articles about companies. Be aware that there are articles about organizations and companies that do not meet current standards for referencing or neutral point of view (WP:NPOV), so modeling after other articles is not a guarantee of success. David notMD (talk) 14:32, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

other reading material I suggest you check out include notability for companies, which outlines what criteria companies have to meet in order to have an article (and may explain why the company you're looking for doesn't), and reliable sources, which outlines what you can use to prove the points you made in the article you're writing, especially regarding the notability criteria. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:47, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I recently uploaded a bunch of images through Wiki Commons and decided it would be a good idea to use one. But when I typed in the address for the image another image (not mine) that appeared to have the same address. I'm very confused and will want some advice soon. Image Address: [[File:Llanite.jpg|thumb]] Texas Lane (talk) 01:31, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

hi @Texas Lane and welcome to the teahouse! it seems like there's a file named Llanite.jpg both the English Wikipedia and Commons. since the other Llanite.jpg is also due to be moved to Commons at some point, what you could do is rename your image in Commons to a different (ideally more specific) name so that it doesn't conflict with the existing one in Wikipedia, then use that name instead in adding your image. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:19, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Melecie, thanks for the advice but I have had no experience renaming an image's name before or even how to. Texas Lane (talk) 02:23, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Texas Lane, you could check out File renaming to see how renaming works in Commons, then press More > Move and fill out the details to request a rename. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:28, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm referring to the page preview you get when you mouse over a blue link. Is this function locked behind admin status? I tried but couldn't find any answers about this. Jasonkwe (talk) (contribs) 03:13, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

The preview should be just the first few sentences of the article's lede, assuming we're talking popups. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 03:15, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Jéské Couriano Oh, sorry, I meant which image shows up in the preview. Had a few articles where either no image shows in the preview or an image other than the one in the infobox is used in the preview.Jasonkwe (talk) (contribs) 03:24, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Hey Guys, i'm new here, just wondering why my article is regarded as promoting a company or instituion? Since the data resource i provided is coming from a concret and solit media resource, i choose the topic i like to contribute in WikiPedia but still get denied and rejected by directly deleting my contribution withour letting me know where the issue is at, i sincerely ask for help if anyone can guide me on this, Thank you for reading and replying, stay safe. 010e0e (talk) 07:34, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

• Hello, 010e0e. I cannot see the article that was deleted after that discussion, but I assume it is similar to Draft:ThunderCore. Some advice has been posted to your talk page, the most important of which being

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

As far as I can tell, the current draft is sourced mostly to press releases and other sources closely associated to ThunderCore, which are therefore not independent. The only source approaching something of the quality we are looking for is Coindesk, but there is consensus that it should not be used because of conflict of interest issues.

I do not really think the draft has issues of promotional tone, but the "qualification for a Wikipedia article" part (called "notability" here) is a big issue. If you cannot find good sources (e.g. mainstream newspaper sources) then you should stop working on the draft altogether because it will never be accepted. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:02, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the advices! I will check on this closely: Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) 010e0e (talk) 03:16, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

An important thing to remember, 010e0e, 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. ColinFine (talk) 09:44, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

In addition to ThunderCore being deleted, the draft you moved to article about Chris Wang (ThunderCore CEO) is at AfD and likely to be deleted. You have not yet replied to a query on your Talk page asking whether you have a conflict of interest (WP:COI) or are paid or otherwise compensated (WP:PAID) for your attempts to create articles about ThunderCore and Wang. David notMD (talk) 10:27, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts: I do a lot of copyedits, but is there any reason to copyedit an article that is up for deletion? I would guess the answer is No, but in that article about Chris Wang of ThunderCore, the phrase "Chris borned in Taiwan" just cries out to be fixed.

010e0e created ths article, then commented that "This page is a solid article content" in an edit summary; Praxidicae and TheRoadIsLong both draftified it at different times. I'm trying to resist making copyedits... 71.228.112.175 (talk) 07:51, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

As someone who coordinates at the Guild of Copy Editors, I would recommend refraining from copyediting unstable articles (whether in edits or namespaces), as there's a decent chance that they may end up being deleted and your efforts wasted. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:27, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, @Tenryuu, I was leaning in that direction. You have convinced me. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:04, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello. Can someone tell me why when putting manga cover images, for most you chose first volume cover like "Golgo 13", "Dragon ball" or "naruto", but for some you chose others like "One piece" which is 61, "detective conan" which is 36 or "Oishinbo" which is 102? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfp5 (talk • contribs) 17:22, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@Wolfp5 The answer could very well be "someone thought it was a good idea and noone has changed it", but try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga, the editors who hang out there may know something. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:49, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@Wolfp5 You might be thinking that the same person created and named all of these -- that is not the case. There is no single "you" who is doing this, but rather, many different "yous" who each have their own ideas as Gråbergs Gråa Sång says. And yes, please ask at the talk page. Hope this helps. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:28, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

This is a question about how to rewrite the head sentence of "Comfort Woman" article. It is a well-known fact that "comfort women" have two opinions: "licensed prostitutes" and "sex slaves." However, in the current article, the first paragraph says "Comfort women or comfort girls were women and girls forced into sexual slavery by the Imperial Japanese Army…　and editor is eliminating the "licensed prostitutes" claim on this basis. This clearly violates 5P1 and 5P2. To maintain neutrality, this paragraph should be changed to, for example, "Comfort women or comfort girls were women and girls to provide sexual services to the Imperial Japanese Army.... The discussion on both sides regarding this rewrite has been exhausted on Talk. Please let me know what procedures are required for this rewrite. Eyagi (talk) 01:09, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Eyagi's question might instead be stated, "How can I take control of a page in which talk page consensus is solidly against me". Eyagi misrepresents the topic here, creating a false balance between two points of view, one generally held by topic scholars and the other held by nationalist Japanese revisionists. One of those views is definitive, while the other is a minor viewpoint. Binksternet (talk) 01:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

In any case, the Teahouse is not set up to handle content disputes or behavioral issues. @Eyagi, if you believe talk page discussion has not resolved the issue, you should pursue mediation or one of the options listed here. 174.21.23.32 (talk) 01:32, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. I post to the neutral point of view notice board. Eyagi (talk) 05:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Eyagi, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. Its articles are about subjects, not words or phrases. The opening sentence of Comfort women makes it clear what its subject is. Maproom (talk) 07:27, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

It is pointed out that this definition violates the wiki's policy. Please read Talk. 240F:32:5F34:1:B01B:84D1:7EAE:641 (talk) 01:33, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Maybe this isn't the right venue. Was perusing articles and found Major League Hacking. It has passing mentions like [13], [14], [15] (not independent), and one source with any depth [16], but I'm not experienced actually looking for sources or understanding the threshold for corporations. Ovinus (talk) 02:44, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Ovinus I marked it for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Major League Hacking after confirming none of the sources in article, and a WP:BEFORE check provided anything reliable either. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 10:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Odd that it has been an article since 2014 and not challenged earlier. David notMD (talk) 10:42, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Please tell me the procedures to get an article done on my books and me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Divya Hariharan (Kasi) (talk • contribs)

Are there multiple in-depth, non-routine, independent news articles or book reviews about you and your work that are written by identifiable authors and published in outlets that have competent editorial oversight that fact-checks, discloses, corrects, and retracts? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori}

If you feel that these guiidelines are met, read WP:YFA. Additionally, you need to declare that you have a conflict of interest. Kpddg ^(talk) 04:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia recommends not attempting autobiography (see WP:AUTO), but does not forbid. The great majority of attempts fail. The problem is that what you know about yourself needs to be verified by independent references. David notMD (talk) 11:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I have just joined this greatest amazing group who are tirelessly into storing nurturing and expanding human knowledge. Can some one tell me how I can be of help in this amazing work and start contributing positively. Suman250690 (talk) 06:41, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Suman250690, welcome to Wikipedia! The welcome message I left on your talk page should help you in getting started. Kpddg ^(talk) 06:51, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Gaining experience by improving existing articles is strongly recommeded over attempting to create new articles. David notMD (talk) 11:05, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I would post this on Wikiquote but I don’t expect to get a quick answer there.

Could someone please explain:

1) What it is

2) How it works

3) How to use it

– Ilovemydoodle (talk) 07:08, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

{{dbs|no lol, 107.119.53.87 (talk) 07:25, 26 June 2022 (UTC)}}

Hello, Ilovemydoodle. The Teahouse is for discussing how to contribute to Wikipedia, not for asking questions about how to participate on unrelated websites. Search that website for advice. Cullen328 (talk) 07:33, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I thought Wikipedia was linked to libera chat. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 07:35, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Libera.chat is an IRC network. There are official channels on it, yes, but those channels are technically off-wiki and any conversations held on it cannot be used to influence on-wiki consensus-building. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 08:43, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Okay, but could I please have some basic information on how to use it? – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 09:04, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Ilovemydoodle, Welcome to the Teahouse, while the teahouse isn’t for asking about off-wiki topics, however, I will point you towards the IRC info page. I would give you basic info, but I don’t know anything about IRC and I don’t actually use it, but the page should have some useful information that may help you. | Zippybonzo | Talk | 11:07, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Zippybonzo: Thank you for helping! – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 11:17, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I made an edit to the page History of Transylvania and user Aishik Rehman reverted my edit, instantly, by instantly I mean not even 1 minute has passed. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_Transylvania&diff=1094837207&oldid=1094837154 So I was okay, I reverted it back and asked him "could you explain me why you undid the edit?", he literally did the same, instant revert, no explaination given https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_Transylvania&diff=1094837982&oldid=1094837948 and not even 1 minute passed. I said it must be a bot account so I reverted again, the undoed my edit again for the 3rd time, without explaining why again, and then again I reverted and asked him if he could explain why https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_Transylvania&diff=1094838369&oldid=1094838226.

He then stopped: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_Transylvania&action=history

Kind of weird, so I went on his profile page.

Looks normal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aishik_Rehman

Then I went to his contribution pages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Aishik_Rehman it's insane. From 19:35 to 20:19 he made 50 edits, all of them removing content. And all of them to very unrelated pages. One is a Korean singer, one is a religious page, one is the history of England, one is a German school for girls, and one was my edit with the History of Transylvania.

I'm 99.9% it's a bot. Hard to believe a human can make 50 edits in 40 minutes on greatly unrelated topics. Not sure if bots are allowed or any stuff like that so I just wanted to bring this to attention. TheLastOfTheGiants (talk) 20:31, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@TheLastOfTheGiants, they seem to be doing some sort of anti-vandalism patrol, in which case it's quite possible for a non-bot to make such edits. They recently responded to a post on their talk page - you could bring up the issue there. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:07, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

This account doesn't look like a bot. I've seen non-bots revert vandal edits in seconds, and stuff being reverted in less than a minute is normal. I would consider taking this to their user talk page or ANI if all else fails. 47.227.95.73 (talk) 21:12, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, TheLastOfTheGiants. Bots are allowed and your 99.9% confidence level was incorrect. This is a human being editing rapidly. Bot accounts must be approved at the end of a stringent review process and all bot account names end with the three characters "bot". Bots do enormously important work here. Antivandalism bots are highly effective and getting better all the time. Many bots do repetitive maintenance and housekeeping tasks. Properly programmed bots are essential to this encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 04:23, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi TheLastOfTheGiants. This isn't a bot account, but the account is likely using a special script or tool to help in make lots of similar edits quickly. (You can tell this by look at the edit summaries they're leaving.) Editors who use such things are responsible for how they use them and for the most part many do use them correctly. In some cases, however, an editor with the best of intentions may actually go a little over board based on some misunderstanding of a relevant Wikipedia policy and guideline and not realize they're making a mistake. If you think that's the case here, you should try to avoid anything that could be perceived as edit warring on your part and instead either (1) ask the other editor about it directly on their user talk page or (2) start a discussion about the matter on the article talk page. What you try to do was discuss things via edit summaries as explained in WP:REVTALK, and such an approach is usually not productive. Moreover, if you were actually dealing with a bot, then a bot is not going to respond to you via an edit summary: a bot is only going to continue doing what it was tasked to do no matter how wrong you think the bot may be. FWIW, its possible for human users to quickly make lots of consecutive similar edits without using scripts or tools, but once again they're responsible for their edits just the same as anyone else. In some cases, an editor might be warned about such a thing if they're making the same mistake over and over again, but there's usually seems to need to be an established pattern of WP:MEATBOT behavior before any administrator will step in and take action. So, before starting any discussion about this at WP:ANI and before calling another editor "dubious", I would first be cognizant of WP:BOOMERANG and WP:ANIADVICE and try to resolve this like you would any other content dispute in accordance with WP:DR. It's only when it clearly has become a behavior issue that you should go to ANI. You need to remember that the WP:ONUS is still on you when trying to make changes to an article and sometimes this could mean being a little more WP:CAUTIOUS than WP:BOLD. Major changes made to articles often end up being noticed by bots or user using scripts/tools more for the size of the change than the quality of the change, and in some cases they might end up being reverted without a close examination. This, of course, isn't idea in a way since quality obviously matters more than quantity, but it's something that can happen. So, keep this in mind if something similar happens to you again because simply reverting back and forth usually will make things worse. It's best for you to stop and seek assistance since the change can always be restored after discussing it and establishing a consensus for it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:16, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you all for your responses. The editor has stopped reverting my edits. If he does it again I will not edit war but instead talk to him about his reasons for reverting my edits. TheLastOfTheGiants (talk) 15:16, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm sure Wikipedia has some sort of guideline on whether editors and writers should use one or the other. How do we decide, please? Augnablik (talk) 15:35, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Augnablik, Wikipedia does not prefer any one variety; it is chosen based on the article's closest variety. See MOS:ENGVAR and MOS:TIES. Kpddg ^(talk) 15:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I wanted to make templates that were only accessible for me. I didn't want it to make it accessible to the public. The template is the hex code #0645ad (which basically is a shade of blue) and i wanted to use it for my sandbox. However, i had to use the {color} template. I would have to paste the hex code and put the string of text is just time-consuming. So i wanted to make a template only accessible for me. If there's no way to do that, guess i'm doomed. Leahnn Rey (talk) 13:46, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Everything you write on WP is accessible (not necessarily editable) to those in the public who knows where to look. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:49, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Leahnn Rey I suggest you don't try doing that. Your application of putting colour, instead of proper links, seems wholly unnecessary, and you seem just to be creating what looks like a hoax article in your sandbox with dummy links. Every apparent wikilink you've added with that colour is just dead blue text, and every fake reference self-cites your sandbox page, and none appear to be legitimate. I wonder if you could explain what you are trying to achieve there? Hoax articles are liable to deletion, and going to these extreme lengths in your sandbox seems unwise. If, however, you are genuinely working on a real draft article, and simply want to highlight key words so you don't forget to link them later on, I suggest you simply use a bold font as a much quicker and clearer alternative. It would be wide to use real references right from the start, too. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:17, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm new and I want to help editing wikipedia. I found the place where it shows which articles need editing but the tags above it redirect to a completely new page with the topic i searched for. The only problem is that the articles on that page don't need updates Gopher god (talk) 15:23, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Gopher god, could you specify your problem? Kpddg ^(talk) 15:25, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Kpddg whenever i go to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:All_Wikipedia_articles_in_need_of_updating and click the hyperlink for STEM it shows me articles that do not need updating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gopher god (talk • contribs) 15:39, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Gopher god, those articles do need updating - they're all tagged somewhere with an {{update}} template. If it's a long article and the location of the tag is hard to see, just search (ctl+f or the equivalent) the page for the word "update" and look through the results until you find the template. 174.21.23.32 (talk) 15:48, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@174.21.23.32 Thanks for the help! Comment added by Gopher god — Preceding undated comment added 16:14, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Gopher god Talk pages for articles (click on Talk, upper left) usually show an article's rating: unrated, stub, start, C, B, GA, FA. Bottom ratings need work. David notMD (talk) 17:12, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

So usual on pages there is a references section that is acting like one block, for example under the references section on Cochrane, Alberta. I can never figure out how to edit them when it acts like a big block like that. Please help. Msaskiw (talk) 13:25, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

sorry, let me ad to this, when you are in the edit mode it acts like one big block. Msaskiw (talk) 13:27, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@Msaskiw: Each reference is actually in the article text, following the material it supports; the "References" section just displays them all together. If you click on the ^ at the beginning of a reference, you will jump to its place in the text, and it can be edited there. Deor (talk) 13:31, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@Deor, well I added a citation which lead to a news article, which is in the article text, I do not see it in the references? or is that not a reference. Msaskiw (talk) 13:40, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@Msaskiw: If you're referring to the Canada Day reference you added, I see that as number 40 in the list of references. (There seems to be two Canada Day items in the bulleted list under "Arts and culture"; probably only one is needed.) Deor (talk) 13:51, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@Deor No i did not add Canada day, I added the pumpkin light up. I added a citation and it is not in the references. Msaskiw (talk) 17:08, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Msaskiw: I see that as reference 38. Deor (talk) 17:14, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi. I want to create an article about this new song called "Talk About Me." (There are reliable sources.)

However, a page called Talk About Me already exists. It's a redirect page to Justin Caruso because that artist apparently has a 2017 song with the same name.

What should I do in a situation like this? Castlepalace 09:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Castlepalace. Presuming that the proposed article topic meets Wikipedia's notability criteria, one or both article names will need disambiguating. See Wikipedia:Disambiguation on this. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:06, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Okay. Can you give me some guidance on how exactly I should disambiguate these pages? This is where my problem is. Like exactly what these articles should be called. Castlepalace 09:20, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Castlepalace I have to disagree with @Cordless Larry here. In your place, I'd write the article at Draft:Talk About Me, and then WP:MOVE it to the redirect Talk About Me. If you can't move it yourself for some reason, ask an admin. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:16, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Think that's what I will do! Thanks. Castlepalace 10:37, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Apologies, Gråbergs Gråa Sång and Castlepalace: I misunderstood the original question somehow and thought that Talk About Me was an article rather than a redirect. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:28, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång Hey. I need more help. I did exactly this, I created Draft:Talk About Me – how do I go about moving it now? I can't quite figure it out. Castlepalace 16:48, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Castlepalace Seems you figured it out. Now, add some categories. And some wikiprojects on the talkpage. Look at similar articles for guidance. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:54, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Ah, I see there's 2 pages now, Talk About Me (song) and the old one. @Cordless Larry, can you sort it out? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I created Talk About Me (song) and I requested to move it to Talk About Me. Castlepalace 16:58, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång @Cordless Larry Castlepalace 17:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Done. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:29, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very very much!!! Castlepalace 17:30, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Castlepalace Welcome to Teahouse! I checked, virtually nothing links to Talk About Me right now except this Teahost page, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Talk_About_Me which leaves the question of what to do with it. The page exists already, and you could just start filling it in. Or you could create Talk About Me (album) or whatever it is, and then request a switch of redirects, so that you get credit for creating the article and then request at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests for someone to move your page over the redirect. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 10:16, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Castlepalace 10:38, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I want to see all my sandbox subpages in my sandbox main page. I think this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:My_sandbox#My_subpages is what I'm looking for, but it does not seem to work. Could anybody see my sandbox and tell me what went wrong? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Regpath/sandbox Regpath (talk) 05:57, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Regpath. I am not an expert programmer but I just recommend that you create a clean wikilink from one page to another. Cullen328 (talk) 06:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, @Cullen328. Thank you for your suggestion. W←]hat I want to do, however, is to show all my subapages automatically, without including wikilinks every time I create a sandbox subpage. Regpath (talk) 06:08, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Regpath. Why do you want to view all of your subpages when you can already view all of your contributions? What matters here on Wikipedia are edits that actually improve the encyclopedia. Everything else is far less relevant. Cullen328 (talk) 06:23, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

There are a lot of reasons somebody might want quick access to subpages - In this case, it looks like Regpath has seven different drafts/workspaces for specific pages. They almost certainly just want to be able to get to them quickly. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/they)^{Talk to Me!} 07:46, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Regpath, probably this is not exactly the solution you're looking for, but by putting

{{ucb|Regpath}} on your userpage or your sandbox, it will create this:

Regpath: Subpages · Contribs · Edit count · SUL Info · Global Contribs

Neat and handy... --Maresa63 ^Talk 07:13, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

As far as I am aware you can either simply place a link to all subpages on your main sandbox. Otherwise, this should work too:

(Note: Not all special pages can be embeded via this way, and not all parameters are supported) Hope this helps, Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:15, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

That's a neat trick, Victor! I didn't know that (some?) Special: pages created transcludable wiki-code. Pinging Regpath. (The transclusion code that Victor used is {{Special:PrefixIndex/User:Regpath/}}). ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 19:53, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I am wondering if there is a way to make an article with thoughts and solutions to Giancoli physics without infringing on the Pearson copyright. WalkingRadiance (talk) 19:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I want to make a Wikibook or a Wikisource or Wikiversity thing with content from Giancoli physics but I think this would infringe on the copyright. WalkingRadiance (talk) 19:29, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

WalkingRadiance, articles here are not for editors' thoughts about particular books or for editors' solutions to problems in those books. Rather than making "a Wikibook or a Wikisource or Wikiversity thing", how about creating your own blog for this purpose? -- Hoary (talk) 22:18, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I want to use MediaWiki software but that's pretty technical and I want to avoid starting my own wiki WalkingRadiance (talk) 23:17, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Recently, I have been unable to find reliable sources for the Changhe CoolCar draft page. The 3 unreliable sources in the draft are all I could find, but I’m sure there might be still some reliable sources for the draft. Which sources that I could find online about the Changhe CoolCar are reliable? I really need help on this one. MegaMack02 (talk) 04:22, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

COURTESY: Draft:Changhe CoolCar. David notMD (talk) 11:04, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD I know that’s where it came from. But what help do I need? Don’t answer my question if you’re not going to help me. MegaMack02 (talk) 20:52, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

My "COURTESY" was intended for other Teahouse editors who might have an interest in advising you, but would want to see the draft and its existing references. Personally, I know nothing about the topic. David notMD (talk) 22:41, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

The existing references are at Draft:Changhe CoolCar#References. MegaMack02 (talk) 00:21, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Becaus this thread is not replied to after a few days, this discussion thread is terminated. MegaMack02 (talk) 21:55, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

I just tried to make my first edit to a semi-protected article, an addition to the short description, and I ran into trouble. First, I'm not an anonymous editor and I'm not newly registered (I just qualified for Wikipedia Library priviileges). The edit didn't show up in the preview, or on the page after I published the change. However, the edit showed up just fine in my list of contributions, and in the arti79.155.36.178cle's revision history. The edit is still there on the edit page. The article is The Batman (film) (I justified my edit in the edit summary). Pete Best Beatles (talk) 05:48, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Pete Best Beatles. That article is not semi-protected. It is Extended confirmed protected, which is a more stringent form of protection. As for your edit, you are trying to change the short description to 2022 American neo-noir superhero film by Matt Reeves. That description is way too detailed and it should be much more concise. Per Wikipedia:Short description, Editors should bear in mind that short descriptions are not intended to define the subject of the article. Rather, they provide a very brief indication of the field that is covered. You have jammed six different things into the "short" description. Be extremely concise. Cullen328 (talk) 06:05, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328: I was just trying to add "neo-noir" to the existing description. Does "extended confirmed protected" mean I won't be able to make my addition (or that anyone will be able to take your advice either)? "Semi-protected" is what it says in the template on the edit page, that's why I said that. I think it's weird that my edit shows as legitimate on my list of contributions and in the article's revision history, since it didn't take. Pete Best Beatles (talk) 09:27, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Pete Best Beatles: If you look at the edit history of the article, you'll see that your edit "took" for a few hours, until SirDot removed it with an edit summary of "Only the primary genre". Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:28, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Pete Best Beatles (talk) 11:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

New comments: While contemplating @Cullen328: and @SirDot:'s rules for short description inclusion (extreme conciseness and "only the primary genre" respectively), I looked up the short descriptions for several prominent neo-noir movies. Here's what I found:

• 1. Chinatown (1974 film) - "1974 American neo-noir mystery drama" (3 genres)
• 2. L.A. Confidential (film) - "1974 American neo-noir mystery drama" (3 genres)
• 3. Blood Simple - "1984 American independent neo-noir crime film" (3 genres)
• 4. The Grifters (film) - "1990 American neo-noir crime thriller" (3 genres)
• 5. Red Rock West - "1993 American neo-noir thriller" (2 genres)
• 6. The Long Goodbye - "1973 American neo-noir satirical mystery crime thriller" (5 genres)
• 7. Miller's Crossing - "1990 American neo-noir gangster film" (2 genres)
• 8. Mulholland Drive - "2001 Surrealist neo-noir mystery film" (3 genres)

According to the logic of the two rules above, some trimming needs to be done: they're not extremely concise and they don't have only the primary genre. But why should "neo-noir" automatically go? Who decides what the primary genre is? The genres in the short descriptions aren't referenced. Actually, not true. Interestingly, although none of the other genres are referenced, five of the above have "neo-noir" referenced. Four of those (examples 4, 5, 7 and 8) reference Alain Silver's Film Noir: An Encyclopedic Reference. None of the references to this book list page numbers, so I looked up every reference to each movie, and the story's the same. For The Grifters, Red Rock West, and Miller's Crossing, the status of these movies as neo-noirs may be established, but none of the references say anything about the hierarchy of genres in these movies; heck, they don't say anything about any other genres at all. (Although Mulholland Drive references Silver's book, I could not find it in the index. Maybe a different edition? Nevertheless, I assume the situation would be the same.) The Long Goodbye's short description's "neo-noir" uses three different references. The first reference, #2, establishes the movie as a neo-noir but doesn't address the other genres that are in the short description (four additional!). (The second reference, #3 doesn't contain the word neo-noir, and the third reference, #4 only asks a question: "maybe it's neo-noir", so those two might be stricken from the article). Regarding Mulholland Drive's reference to "neo-noir" in the short description, besides the non-existent reference to Silver's book, the article references a book entitled The Philosophy of TV Noir, which does categorize the movie as neo-noir but once again doesn't address the issue of other genres.

So, let's throw this open to discussion. Why do the two rules listed above apply only to The Batman, and not any other movies? -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 08:07, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Pete Best Beatles. For future reference, please don't "unarchive" Teahouse questions that have already been archived like you did here. Your original question had already been archived as Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1156#Semi-protected article; so, if you want to ask something else about it or want to make reference to it in a new discussion, simply providing a link to the archived location is generally sufficient. If you're not sure how to provide a link, you can simply mention that the discussion has already been archived for reference. Next, unless you're truly Pete Best who was once a member of The Beatles, you're just as anonymous as any IP account posting on Wikipedia; in fact, in some ways you're more anonymous than an IP account because your IP address is not publically visible.

As for your question about genre, the advice Cullen328 gave you in his response was based on best practice and his long experience as an editor, but it's not usual that you would find examples that might show things done differently by other editors. Often on Wikipedia, you'll find examples of WP:OTHERCONTENT when it comes to things like this because not users are the same and not all users have the same experience.

For general guidance with respect to something like this, the first thing to do (in my opinion) is look at a page like Wikipedia:Short description or Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film#Lead section to try and figure out what the best practice is supposed to be. If things are still unclear after that, then perhaps the next thing to do would be WP:BOLD and make the change you think needs to be made. If you're BOLD and are subsequently WP:REVERTed by another editor (which seems to be the case here), the next thing to do would be to start an article talk page discussion to try and sort things out. Ultimately, the WP:ONUS is going to fall upon you to establish a WP:CONSENSUS for the change you want to make, and you'll have a much better chance of doing that if your position is strongly rooted in some policy or guideline. You can cite other examples in other articles which are similar to what you're trying to do, but this in and of itself is usually not seen as a sufficient justification: it could be those other articles have done it incorrectly and nobody has noticed yet.

FWIW, disagreements over genre happen all the time on Wikipedia; so much so that someone actually created the Wikipedia essay Wikipedia:Genre warrior about it. If you want to discuss the genre of a particular film, then the best place to do that would be on the corresponding article talk page for the film like you've done at Talk:The Batman (film)#The Batman and noir. If you want to discuss the genre of films in general, then the best place would probably be on the talk page of a WikiProject like Wikipedia:WikiProject Film. It's quite possible that the questions you have were once asked by someone else and have already sorted out at the WikiProject level. The Teahouse isn't really set up for an in-depth discussion about something such as this; Teahouse hosts can try and give you a quick, easy and hopefully helpful answer, but sometimes you need to seek out others on article talk pages or WikiProject talk pages for more detailed discussion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:09, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Thanks for your response. I didn't know the discussion had been archived, I didn't recciev a notice like I usually do, so I assumed I had somehow deleated it. (And why was it archived after just a few days? Every other time my questions were archived it was after some length of time of no activity, another reason I didn't perceive the archivization.) And you're right, I wouldn't know how to link to something like that. My user name isn't Pete Best, it's Pete Best Beatles as in the Pete Best Beatles and there's a disclaimer on my user page, placed there because of the concerns of another editor (or admin.), who said that would be sufficient to ally any fears about the name. I guess I'll try to get something about neo-added to the body of the lead. I tried once and got reverted. I put all the noir-related phrases that reliable sources had used to describe the movie: neo-noir, film noir, emo noir and pop noir. I just strongly feel that there ought to be something about noir somewhere in the article, its such and overwhelming aspect of the movie. I found so many articles about the noir aspects, and it wasn't just passing mentions, it was the subject of the articles. Pete Best Beatles (talk) 11:23, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

You should continue to discuss this on the article's talk page and see if you can establish a consensus in favor of the changes you want to make. Feeling strongly about something doesn't mean others will feel the same way, but if you can establish that a preponderance of reliable sources also consider the film to be as such, then that may be more persuasive. Finally, my comment about your choice of username wasn't meant to imply that I though you were that "Pete Best" of "Beatles"; only that registering for an account doesn't make you "not anonymous" or any less anonymous than an IP editor, unless you register under your WP:REALNAME and post other personally identifying information on your user page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:06, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Marchjuly:Thanks again for your advice, but now that I reread your replies I realize I don't understand your discussion of anonymity, don't understand the context. I've never mentioned that topic in any of my posts. Pete Best Beatles (talk) 14:40, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

You began this whole discussion by saying "I am not an anonymous editor". I believe that that is what Marchjuly was referring to. ColinFine (talk) 23:27, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Oh, yea. He says there's no distinction between editors with a user name and those only with IP addresses in terms of anonymity, but I was talking about editing a semi-protected article, and Wikipedia does make a distinction there, so I'm still confused. Pete Best Beatles (talk) 00:05, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi again Pete Best Beatles. Please don't mind my comment. I was trying clarify (in a rather wordy, unsuccessful and unnecessary way) that the most basic form of page protection restricts editing based on whether an account is registered, not whether an account is anonymous. In addition, there a various levels of page protection and in some cases even registered accounts may find their ability to edit an article restricted in some way. My apologies for any confusion I might have caused with my unnecessary segue away from the main thing you were asking about. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:10, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

OK! Pete Best Beatles (talk) 01:17, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

How Can I Add Biography? Anonymous078 (talk) 06:05, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@Anonymous078: Follow the directions at Wikipedia:Articles for creation.

If it's a biography about you, well, basically don't write about yourself on Wikipedia! See Wikipedia:Autobiographies. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:10, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Please help me! I created a new article entitled Anthony Drake by clicking red link to a death listed under Deaths in 2022 1 June 2022. I created the article by moving it from Draft Space and the titled changed to Draft:Anthony Drake. Once the article was finished, I moved it back article space by clicking "Move" in the More dropdown menu at the top of the page. When I go to the list of Deaths in 2022 the entry for Anthony Drake is no longer there. Also, the article I created does not have the Talk page anymore. What has gone wrong? Andymcteddybear (talk) 22:55, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Andymcteddybear, welcome to the Teahouse. The entry was removed from Deaths in 2022 in this edit because the article was still a draft at that time. 174.21.23.32 (talk) 23:14, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. How do I restore the entry to Deaths in 2022 and link it to this article: Anthony Drake? Do I need to make a new entry? Andymcteddybear (talk) 06:59, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@Andymcteddybear, yes, just make a new entry for the appropriate date. However, I notice that his date of death is not actually sourced in the article you created - where did you get that information? 174.21.23.32 (talk) 07:15, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

The entry was listed by another user in Deaths in 2022 but there was no article. I simply clicked on the red link and created the article.

I can make a new entry and provide the necessary citation if I am allowed to do so. Andymcteddybear (talk) 07:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@Andymcteddybear, yes, you're certainly allowed to. Just follow the directions at the top of the article (and remember to add your source for the date of death to the Anthony Drake article too). 174.21.23.32 (talk) 07:25, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks Andymcteddybear (talk) 07:27, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I made edits to the article One Mega Group but my edits got removed after a few days. Why did this happen? Themissmargaux (talk) 07:36, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Themissmargaux, welcome to the Teahouse. You have already asked this question at the Help Desk and received an explanation there - please do not ask the same question in multiple places, to avoid duplication of volunteer effort. 174.21.23.32 (talk) 07:47, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@Themissmargaux You added large amounts of promotional wording ("Exploring endless possibilities... started conquering the world...ONEMEGA.com is the ultimate Filipino lifestyle portal..."), multiple logos, huge sections of unreferenced text. Most of the deleted content was written from a point of view of the company. Make content neutral and factual. On the plus side, you did attempt to add references. Use those again if in support of content, and not created by the company (not press releases, website, etc.). David notMD (talk) 08:45, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

You declared paid for AGC, but not for One Mega Group. What is your connection to One Mega Group? David notMD (talk) 09:28, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Last, a lot of your content (since cut) was close paraphrasing from the reference https://agcpowerholdingscorp.com/one-mega-group/ and hence copyright infringement. David notMD (talk) 09:35, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Can somebody create a quick redirect for me?

You should create a redirect for Khalistan Liberation Army which will redirect to Khalistan Liberation Force#KLA. There is already a section about this militant wing there. 122.170.42.250 (talk) 02:28, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi 122.170.42.250 and welcome to the Teahouse. From what I can see, the redirect you've suggested has already been created. Is there anything else I can help you with? Clovermoss (talk) 02:30, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

User:Clovermoss Thanks. I didn't saw it already exist. 122.170.42.250 (talk) 02:34, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

That's okay. Better to ask a question than not to if you're ever unsure about something. Feel free to come back here if you have any other questions. Clovermoss (talk) 02:42, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Alright User:Clovermoss. Can you redirect HAL Tejas Mk1A to HAL Tejas? It is a recognizable subject[17] and we already got an article for HAL Tejas Mk2. 122.170.42.250 (talk) 04:59, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Done. It took me awhile because I went to sleep. Are you aware that one of the benefits of creating an account is being able to create redirects yourself? Alternatively you could try going through Articles for Creation. I'm mentioning this because I do work and sleep sometimes and it's entirely possible you didn't know any of this. Thank you for the suggestion, though. Anything that improves the enyclopedia is a good thing. Clovermoss (talk) 10:41, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi. I added the page Isabel Dutaud Nagle Lachaise. But in another article I'd like to embed a link, but her name there is Isabel Dutaud Nagle, as she was not yet married. I cannot link "Isabel Dutaud Nagle" as it only suggests I make a page for her. Would not this be duplicative? Thanks for any help. Pbrhornbostel (talk) 02:32, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Pbrhornbostel. Welcome to Wikipedia and the Teahouse. Thanks for asking your question here, you were on the right track! I created something called a redirect so if you someone types in "Isabel Dutaud Nagle" they will actually get to see the article at Isabel Dutaud Nagle Lachaise. You can read more about redirects here if that's something you'd like to learn more about. Clovermoss (talk) 02:41, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Amazing. I just clicked on it, and indeed, just as I had hoped. I have been reading tutorials, and finally got to piped link. but you solved the problem! Thank you! I am now waiting on permission for the image of the Lachaise home to add into both pages on Gaston Lachaise and on Isabel Lachaise. thanks so much. Pbrhornbostel (talk) 02:47, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome. If you ever have any other questions, feel free to come back here or to ask me here. There's some useful links there that you might find useful in general. Have you heard about Women in Red? It's a wikiproject and those can be interesting to get involved in. If you have any specific interests, I might be able to help you find something that aligns with those. Regardless, I hope you have a good day. Sincerely, Clovermoss (talk) 02:52, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@Pbrhornbostel: I forgot to "ping" you so this should give you a notification that I replied back. Clovermoss (talk) 10:47, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Dear wiki-editors,

could you please point me to information about whether or not it is okay to cite books authored by the subject of BLP, to expand on the content of his/her teachings?

Thank you! Netanya9 (talk) 11:52, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

You can find something in WP:BLPSELFPUB. Ruslik_Zero 12:13, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Netanya9 Generally not, see WP:ABOUTSELF. The default WP-attitude is "If no independent WP:RS bothered to write about his teachings, we shouldn't either." It's probably ok include a list of his MOS:WORKS, or a list of his noted works if there's a lot. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:17, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much for these helpful links @Gråbergs Gråa Sång and @Ruslik0

So..

1) It is okay to create a 'publication' section with a list of links to the author's publications in magazines.

2) If there is a book published by a publisher about the subject, by a different author, but the subject of BLP has co-operated with the book and is therefore kind of a co-author, but it's not his name on the book. Can we use that book as a source?

3) I see a lot of examples like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Robbins that cite the BLP's books to explain his work. Is this a grey area, or should a third party WP:RS write about the teaching of the subject before it can be mentioned.

4) Related topic: how do you use content from a source without plagiarism or direct quotes. Do you rewrite the content? Can you recommend Wiki sources that explain this?

Thank you very much for helping out! Netanya9 (talk) 09:28, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

1) Pretty much, but too much "everything and the kitchen sink" may cause opposition.

2) It can be an ok source depending what you use it for, context matters. Consider WP:EXTRAORDINARY. WP:INTERVIEW may be relevant.

3) Right. Here's the thing: because of it's open nature, WP has a lot of crap. More at WP:OTHERCONTENT. Your mission, should you chose to accept it, is to do better. For example, "He subsequently learned to firewalk and incorporated it into his seminars." sourced to his own book is clear fail of WP:BLPSELFPUB, and it's quite alright to remove it, or see if there's a better source for that (there may well be, apparently he had some troubles related to firewalking). There's also a variety of templates like ^{[better source needed]} that can be used. It's often helpful to look at other WP-stuff for guidance, but then one should look at good WP-stuff.

4) Yes, you write it in your own words. Some guidance at WP:COPYPASTE, WP:PLAGIARISM, WP:PARAPHRASE and WP:QUOTE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:08, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

So, the description on its page about it being "an open research hub" isn't particularly helpful. From what I've gathered, it's basically free-of-charge subscriptions for Wikipedia editors with 500+ edits? What subscriptions are included under the library? Vortex (talk) 11:10, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@Vortex3427: See the About page and the Partners page. As I understand it, an editor can access some of the resources simply by being accepted by the Wikipedia Library, whereas others require separate applications. Deor (talk) 12:03, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, that's about right Deor. Vortex3427 if there's something in particular you're looking for, I can see if there's anything through my access to the Wikipedia Library. I haven't applied to any of the more specific resources, but it's something. You could also try making a resource request here. Hope that helps, Clovermoss (talk) 12:14, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

I am pretty sure the picture on Leonard Davis page is not the Leonard Davis who played for the NFL. I could be wrong but I certainly do not think so. I was only reading about Leonard when I saw that picture. I have no idea how it would be changed if it is not Leonard. ADCOLBAR (talk) 04:02, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ADCOLBAR. It seems like you are discussing Leonard Davis (American football). The photo now in the article seems to have an acceptable provenance. When I go to Google Images and search for "leonard davis football", I see a lot of photos of a man who looks like the person in the article. So, what is the problem? Cullen328 (talk) 04:12, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Furthermore, ADCOLBAR, if you click through to the file's page on Commons you will find it came from a source that's very plausibly correct and it has the correct license. If you are in any doubt, you could ask the uploader of the file, namely BlueAg09. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:31, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

•  Courtesy link: Metropolitan Cattle Market

I would like to add the details to the main page but of course don't have any citations. It is additional details in the late fifties and early sixties. These include the location of the slaughtehouse on the East side of Shearing road, the animal hide hall and the Post office depot both inside the railings on the west side. The first stage of development was the demolition of the slaughterhouse replaced by Prefabricated Tadcaster cottages as temporary dwellings AndrewPiesse (talk) 18:40, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

AndrewPiesse Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, we cannot accept personal recollections for article content, as there is no way to verify that. 331dot (talk) 19:12, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello AndrewPiesse. Thank you for wanting to help Wikipedia. Unfortunately, as 331dot has stated, you will not be able to ad personal recollections to the article, for a reliable published reference is needed. Perhaps there is a local historical society or library that has a book or article that can be used as a reference for additions to the article. If not, you could ask if a local history group would be interested in having a copy of your written recollections. That way, what you remember could be preserved for others to read it. Best wishes. Karenthewriter (talk) 19:30, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@AndrewPiesse: The article Metropolitan Cattle Market is currently not well sourced, so if you are interested in the topic and can find published information held by local societies or libraries, please add them. It would also be feasible to get interest from a local newspaper in publishing your reminiscences and once that's done, Wikipedia can use that article as our source. Equally, if you have photos you took that show the items you mention, they can be uploaded to Commons for use. However, Wikipedia can't rely on sources like blogs, no matter how accurate you think your contributions are. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:52, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Is there any way to edit a signature? I know on scratch i've been able to, but i'm not sure about here 684pika (talk) 13:50, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, 684pika, and welcome! Does this have what you're looking for? Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 13:52, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that is exactly what i'm looking for! Thank you! 684pika (talk) 13:54, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

For now, I have my user page in | Czech Wikipedia, including links to my photos which I uploaded to Commons. In my English user page I have link to Czech page.

But to make my content (photos in Commons) accessible to more users, I think about creating another language versions of my page (as normal Wiki pages have) or moving everything to English version. What would be the best solution? I do not have time to edit all language mutations, so it would be great if I would extend my Commons gallery just on one place and I do not have to edit it 2 or 5 times.

Also, I want to divide this my page to more smaller ones, so I am considering where to created needed photo subpages. https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedista:Penguin9/Moje_fotogalerie_MHD Penguin9 (talk) 17:13, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Penguin9! There's no ideal solution, but one tool you have comes from the fact that, if you create a userpage on Meta-Wiki (meta.wikimedia.org), it'll display on any Wikipedia or other WMF project where you don't have a page. You can only make it one language, though (although templates like meta:Template:User page do translate to a user's interface language). Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

It means I could request deletion of my already created pages and let them all be copies from Metadata? Does it work for subpages too? Penguin9 (talk) 20:39, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Penguin9, yep, the way you'd implement would be to write your user page on Meta and then request your page on the local wiki(s) be deleted. I'm not sure about subpages, but you could try testing. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:13, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@Penguin9: If your objective is to get more of your photos used in multi-language Wikipedia articles and elsewhere, I think that you can just focus on your page commons:User:Penguin9 since anyone noticing one good picture will likely be within Commons when they click through to the uploader's page to see their other contributions. Also, individual photos are more likely to be found and used if they have comprehensive tagging into useful categories. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:06, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Basically i wanted to make an efn or foot note. However when i do it, it doesn't appear in the reflist. You can check here. Leahnn Rey (talk) 14:37, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@Leahnn Rey, it should be {{Notelist}} Kpddg ^(talk) 14:39, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Is these website considered reliable? >indiaglitz.com >nowrunning.com >filmibeat.com >chitraloka.com PravinGanechari (talk) 13:58, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

The place to ask about reliability of sources is WP:RSN - it's worth searching the archives of that noticeboard to see if they have been discussed previously. It's also worth seeing whether they are listed at WP:RSNP. ColinFine (talk) 16:48, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

For the record, though, the answer is no. Scandal rags are not usable sources due to their "damn-the-facts" approach meaning they have ineffectual editorial oversight, if any at all. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 17:49, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm havin some issues with the deletion process so I have a couple of questions, if part of the page is not sourced correctly in the opinion as vote from some editors, when they place the vote, is the intent to get the entire page deleted even the parts that have enough notability/reliable sources? does it has to be 100% spot on from the moment it is published? or do we have the chance to improve it gradually once published, is there a set time limit on how long this process is allowed to take? if the page gets deleted, can the contributor create it again after sufficient notabilty/good sources is found? Emanuelrodriguez232 (talk) 17:26, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@Emanuelrodriguez232: When an article is nominated for deletion, the intent is to have the entire article deleted, because the nominator believes that the topic does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability" - see Articles for Deletion. This can happen even if certain parts of the article are properly sourced. To greatly reduce the chance of deletion, contributors can follow the Articles for Creation process by creating a draft and having it reviewed before it becomes an article. Articles may be improved at any time. If an article is deleted, an editor can create it again if they can better demonstrate notability; however, recreated articles may be speedily deleted if the new article isn't significantly better. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:39, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Articles at AfD can be improved, especially if lack of valid references is a major reason why nominated. If this is done, a comment explaining what was done can be made at the AfD. Typically, articles are at AfD seven days or longer before an Aministrator makes a decision. It is not a 'vote' per se of the people who have left their recommendations. David notMD (talk) 19:08, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

I had a question about an article and asked in on the talk page. What is the average expected response time? Is someone automatically notified or do I have to get lucky and hope someone sees it? Or do I advertise it here? Jinkevin (talk) 17:52, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Jinkevin, the response time may vary depending on the page, time asked, etc. If the talk page is on someone's watchlist, it may get a faster response. Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk | contribs)} 18:28, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Editors who have the article on their watchlist will be notified of edits to the Talk Page. I would give it a week, and then go ahead and be WP:BOLD if there is an edit you want to make, or you could ask the question to other editors directly who have participated in the article or Talk Page. If it fits on a relevant noticeboard, that might be an option, too. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 18:30, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

For articles in English Wikipedia, View history, and then Pageviews with show views per day, and to the right, may show the number of editors who have the article on their Watch list. Pyrrho mentioned another approach - messaging editors who have recently edited the article. List of best-selling Atari 2600 video games, the article in question, has one editor who was very active in 2021, so query that person. David notMD (talk) 19:13, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@Jinkevin The article talk page also has some WikiProject templates at the top. If no one responds to your talk page post after a week, you could ask on the WikiProject talk page to have interested editors answer your question on the article's talk page. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:05, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Is the event of a 17-year-old individual becoming a judge with the power to adjudicate civil and criminal proceedings, a notable event? Is that event something worthy of notice? I have ten different newspaper sources surrounding this event and an article in a legal journal. I think that would satisfy the notability requirement for significant coverage by reliable sources if it's a notable event under Wikipedia standards. And if it were a notable event, how would I keep the article from being reviewed for submission as a notable person? The individual is significant for their role in the single event. I do not have references for the person. I wouldn't want the submission to be denied because I didn't have references as would be found in a biography of a notable person. Lastly, how would I title such an article? Judgehistorian (talk) 00:57, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Subjects have to be notable, whether it's a person, corporation, thing, place...and more context here would be useful. A 17 year old, at least in the US would not be able to become a judge. PRAXIDICAE🌈 00:58, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Not so. That's why I want to submit the article because most would think it is not possible. See: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/95157293/the-indianapolis-star/ and https://www.newspapers.com/clip/95161670/the-indianapolis-star/ I have significant coverage from newspapers all across the country of this event. This is a person who was performing marriages before he was legally old enough to get married. Judgehistorian (talk) 01:15, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Marc Griffin 174.21.23.32 (talk) 01:12, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Please take a look at WP:BLP1E. Julietdeltalima (talk) 21:18, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, good evening to the people in the teahouse. This is my 1st post here, so please forgive me for troubling you. I would also like to inform you that english is not my 1st language. Ok, I will get to the point now. Recently I have made contributions to a page. And another editor apparently "corrected" some grammatical mistakes I have made. But I believe my grammer was ok. So what should I do? I don't want to revert because I am not confident in my grammatical knowledge. Nor do I want to trust the other editor blindly. Should the next step be to get a neutral opinion from someone expert in english? If so, how, and if not, what can be done? Thank you for reading! Comfortable East (talk) 19:59, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Just ask the person who corrected your grammar where exactly the errors were. Castlepalace 20:13, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Comfortable East, there's an enormous variety in what editors confidently describe as their corrections of grammatical mistakes. (Plenty of what are alleged to be grammatical mistakes are not grammatical mistakes.) Please point us to the/an exact edit in question. -- Hoary (talk) 22:13, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Here's the edit history. I was wondering if the use of “since” was grammatically incorrect. Comfortable East (talk) 05:50, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Comfortable East, if you want an opinion on what has happened with your edits on a particular page, you're much more likely to get a useful opinion if you let us know which page. Maproom (talk) 22:50, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

At Nicoladoni–Branham sign you added a person's name as a Wikilink, with "Dr." outside the Wikilink. Per WP:MOSBIO, under Titles of people, Wikipedia does not put Dr. before or M.D. or Ph.D. after a person's name. The editor who made the change mentioned MOS CREDENTIALS in the Edit summary. David notMD (talk) 22:52, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I later read the “policy” of the use of titles. I admit it was a mistake on my part. But, I think it is not related to grammar? Comfortable East (talk) 05:55, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

You're right: it isn't. -- Hoary (talk) 08:16, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Here's the edit history. I was wondering if the use of “since” was grammatically incorrect. Comfortable East (talk) 05:51, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Doremo has added some indefinite articles where I too would have added them. As for the word since, it can mean "because" -- any "language expert" or book that tells you otherwise is plain wrong. In some contexts, the word is undesirable: discussing two people, "X started embezzling his employer since he met Y" might mean either because of or after this meeting, and rephrasing to avoid potential ambiguity would be a good idea. However, even beneficial avoidance of potential ambiguity such as this doesn't mean that there was anything wrong grammatically. Also, the contexts of your uses of since don't allow misinterpretation as "after". I'd say that you know how to use since and are most welcome to continue to use it. -- Hoary (talk) 08:03, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much @Hoary! This really helped a lot to clear my doubts. I agree that the misinterpretation of the word “since” maybe more likely on Literary articles, as opposed to more sciencey articles I'm interested in. Anyway, I learned something new, and will take that as a win for sure.

Cheers!

And have a great day! Comfortable East (talk) 18:06, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

"X started embezzling from his employer since he met Y" is correct; "embezzling his employer" isn't. Julietdeltalima (talk) 21:15, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

"Embezzling his employer" does indeed sound strange, Julietdeltalima. Perhaps I was sleepy when I typed it. -- Hoary (talk) 21:24, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

The mathematician is pretty obviously the primary topic. 84.236.107.131 (talk) 09:39, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Both articles are detailed and well referenced and about the same length, so the primary topic is not at all obvious to me, but you are welcome to make your case on the appropriate talk page. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:11, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

I, for one, was not familiar with the mathematician (before reading this thread) but was familiar with the horror/fantasy writer, so what to you is obvious isn't obvious to me. It seems to me that someone searching for "Carl Jacobi" is about equally likely to want either of the articles. Deor (talk) 13:39, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

The mathematician gets 34 times as many page views [18] so he does look primary. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:29, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

I have continued the discussion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Carl_Jacobi . In my opinion I also think the mathematician should be the primary topic, since WP:PRIMARYTOPIC states the primary topic should have "long-term significance" and it's pretty clear from the list of things named after him that Carl Jacobi the mathematician has more long-term significance. -- Charlesreid1 (talk) 00:53, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Are both Meena tribe and Matsya (tribe) same? -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 00:55, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! I would assume that if the two tribes have seperate articles they would be different. If you are still not sure I would read both articles thoroughly. If not ask at the reference desk. Thanks! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 👋❤️ (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔🤔) 01:25, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello! I found a topic that I feel needs more coverage and I would like to make a Wikiproject for it. How do I do that? Thanks! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 👋❤️ (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔🤔) 01:21, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

@Helloheart: Hi there! See Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Creating a WikiProject. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:50, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I would like to update history information to add the following to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCAN_Health_Plan - SCAN began enrollment in Alameda County on January 1, 2022. 2601:644:8E7F:9F0:2C07:1159:2A7A:510D (talk) 00:13, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

hi ip user! feel free to edit the page, but please back it up with a reliable source first - check that page to see how you can find one and what kinds of sources count as reliable. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:34, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Melecie and IP user... that article has puffery such as "seniors who represented the most active and prominent organizations for older adults in the city" and some unreferenced claims. I'm not up for trimming the unreferenced parts at the moment though. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:18, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I am new. I added one recipient of Khan Sahib Title in wiki page Khan Sahib. The recipient name is Md Yousuf Uddin Sarker. In attempt to make the linked page, as I was directed, I prepared and submitted a draft. Recently, once I clicked the link on Khan Sahib recipient page (Md Yousuf Uddin Sarker) I found a prompt to create a page. As the draft is not yet approved, I thought of trying that and prepared and submitted almost same page. Only difference was, draft as I submitted was with title Khan Sahib Md Yousuf Uddin Sarker and the new one was named only Md Yousuf Uddin Sarker. Intention is very clear. I shall have a feeling of great achievement, if this decision to delete is revised and the new page as I created in published. How can I be helped? Best wishes to all. Md Farid Alam (talk) 04:15, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

@Md Farid Alam: Nothing you did was deleted. The article you wrote was not ready for publication in article space. It was moved to Draft:Khan Shaib Md Yousuf Uddin Sarker. It has not been deleted, but simply declined. The idea is for you to improve on it to the point where it is acceptable. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:28, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm moving TV channel articles that just use (Country) to get them up to current naming standards (Country adjective TV channel). I've seen New Zealand not use a more adjective-y form, but I found Canal 3 (Burkina Faso), and I have no idea how to alter it, or even whether to or just put it in New Zealand's pile and just add TV channel without altering the country. Apparently according to Siri the people are Burkinabe but I don't know if Wikipedia uses it in relevant disambiguations--CreecregofLife (talk) 04:14, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I decided to go ahead and use it, but I am curious whether Myanmarese or Burmese is preferred for the country currently at Myanmar CreecregofLife (talk) 05:27, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Is there any MOS guidance on when and when not to make a column into two or more divided columns? I often times do this for aesthetic reasons if the lists (especially "Notable people" lists in various towns are cities) are over 20 entries in depth. Otherwise, if the list/column is pretty short, I'll leave it be. I just wanted to see though if there is some MOS "standard" that one might operate by here for purposes of both readability and consistency. Thanks wiki-world! ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 19:41, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@Th78blue Remember that some readers are reading on a narrow cell phone, so if the entries are wide, the result might not look good if you force two columns. I don't know how to use markup to say "use 2 columns if the screen is wide enough" but I think there's a way.71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:30, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Actually, I am pretty sure that it doesn't render unless the screen allows for it. So in that regard it is somewhat less material. That said, I still was just curious if there was any guideline that I am unaware of. Also, I could be wrong about that rendering notion, but I am pretty sure that is how it works based on past experience with this exact item. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 13:46, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

{{div col}} indeed only breaks into multiple columns if the screen allows for it. It uses a fixed column-width (however-many such widths fit on the screen) rather than a fixed number of columns. DMacks (talk) 06:24, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I AM A MUSIC LOVE WHO WOULD WISH TO WRITE ABOUT ARTISTS, WHAT DO I NEED TO DO SO? Sulaimanprofitug (talk) 11:20, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

First, stop writing in all capital letters, as that is considered the same as shouting. David notMD (talk) 11:36, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Sulaimanprofitug. First, go to the guide at Help:Your first article to learn how to write an article. However, a quick look at your contributions shows that you probably don't have enough experience at Wikipedia -- try making simple edits first, and then attempt an article. Please reply if you have any questions. Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk | contribs)} 12:21, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Girdhar Swami (born 10 January 1989) is a Mumbai-based Indian casting director]] who has cast several actors for movies including director Rajkumar Hirani's 3 Idiots, Sriram Raghavan's Andhadhun, Prabhu Deva's Rowdy Rathore and David Dhawan's Coolie No. 1 (2020 film) Girdhar Swami (talk) 11:24, 28 June 2022 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Girdhar_Swami

Girdhar Swami girdhar swami The draft: Draft:Girdhar Swami exists. Do you have a question? David notMD (talk) 11:46, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

help me my wikipedia articles Girdhar Swami (talk) 11:50, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts are here to advise, not to be co-authors. I restored the four Declineds and a Comment for this draft. My advice: Do not delete Declineds nor Comments. Also, see Help:Referencing for beginners to learn how to properly reference. At no point in time has the draft had valid references. David notMD (talk) 11:53, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Draft deleted, poster blocked for spam and sock-puppetry. DMacks (talk) 12:48, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I have used the excellent Wikipedia for many years pretty much on a daily basis. I also contribute to the cause by means of a financial donation each time I am asked to. I have only ever made a very small number of minor contributions to articles, usually only to correct a typing/spelling error. I have recently been accused of making edits to articles and that these edits are considered to be vandalism, however I have never done any such thing particularly since I had never visited the article pages of the subjects involved and in fact had never even heard of the subjects. I am concerned that I am being wrongly accused and wish to "clear my name". Could my account have been hacked? Should I change login password? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks "Balbridie" Balbridie (talk) 12:49, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Exactly where was the accusation (were the accusations) made, Balbridie? -- Hoary (talk) 12:53, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Are you referring to this? Kpddg ^(talk) 13:05, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

This was not a constructive edit, but it came from an IP address (most likely the one you use). So those edits may not have been made by you. Once you've created an account, only you can edit from it. Kpddg ^(talk) 13:07, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for getting in touch. I happened to notice a message flagged for me a week or so ago. See the following and my response. I also came across another accusation the other day when I was going to make a minor edit in an article I was reading and I was prevented from making the edit. However, I can find no record of this. Perhaps the following might explain what is going on?

Balbridie (talk) 13:09, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Balbridie, there's a good chance that someone else (not you) used the IP to vandalize, and you received the warning. Editing signed in will avoid any false accusations of vandalism. Sungodtemple (talk) 13:17, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks but why was my user name identified as having made the vandalised edit? Does this not indicate that someone has hacked my account and is signing in using my user name and password? Balbridie (talk) 13:25, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I should explain that I am not very tech-savvy and am not clear how someone else can use the IP address referred to... Balbridie (talk) 13:27, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I think you may be confusing user name and IP address there have been no posts on User talk:Balbridie, which is where any warnings about edits made by your user name would be posted. IP addresses, however, are increasingly "dynamic" - the address is allocated and/or re-allocated whenever someone uses the system, so you may be allocated one address one day, and another address the next, so someone else may be allocated the address you were using yesterday, and you may be allocated the address used by a vandal the day before, so may be seeing warnings given because of the actions of that earlier IP user. This is why we urge people to create an account. - Arjayay (talk) 13:49, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining this. I normally sign in but perhaps I haven't always. I'll take your advice and ensure I'm always signed in when using Wikipedia from now on. Balbridie (talk) 13:57, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

@Balbridie I'm glad you got the explanation you sought. The IP address that received the warning is a Three Mobile broadband number - probably assigned in a variable manner to hundreds of people over time (in a 'dynamic' way, as mentioned above). Of those hundreds of address users, you are perhaps the first - well, second - ever to have used it to edit Wikipedia. One user who was allocated that address at one point in time was malicious, and received a warning from us. You then came along on your mobile broadband, got allocated that same IP address at that time and edited Wikipedia, albeit not logged in, and thus you saw that warning aimed at another person. It's a bit like all the passengers on a bus being able to see a speeding ticket given just to the person driving the bus that day. It wasn't you, and there's nothing to worry about, as this kind of concern gets raised all the time. As you have learned, being registered and staying logged in is the best way, and allows every edit you make to only be assigned to that one account - and hence to you. (Further info on IP address assignment here) Hope this has all helped. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:20, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks Nick - a very clear explanation! Thanks to all others who took the time to respond to my, as it turned out, unwarranted concerns. Balbridie (talk) 14:26, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Balbridie, there is never an unwarranted concern. This is why we are helping at the Teahouse. We want to explain and assist you and others in their editing concerns and questions here on Wikipedia. Just as in normal editing, every helper or host here is a volunteer that gives up a portion of their time editing to assist others and, for the most part, we enjoy helping. I'm glad Nick and others were able to assist you. Good luck and happy editing. If you have any other concerns in the future please bring them up. We are ready to offer assistance. --ARoseWolf 14:47, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Nick Moyes to clarify that warning in my absence. Good job keep it up. Dove's talk (talk) 17:21, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Sorry for the belated response but many thanks! Balbridie (talk) 17:35, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello

I have been dealing with this page Abd al-Mu'min that contains inaccurate information , and it appears that a particular user brushes off reporting a dispute, but the user keeps reverting the disputed page. I have provided references that shows why the provided references are dubious. Because these references may seem at first glance to be conflicting, the chronology of Almoravid dynasty rise and reign are well documented. Also, Abd Al-m'umin isn't the founder he is the Caliph, the founder is Ibn Tumart.

How does one resolve this issue, the page should be 'Disputed' at the least ? Warrior4just (talk) 16:52, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

• Warrior4just, as far as I can tell you've been reverted by two editors, and you were edit warring on User talk:M.Bitton before you sought the talk page. What I suggest you do is raise the issue on the talk page in a different way, by specifically outlining your evidence, rather than make a somewhat vague general statement. Drmies (talk) 16:58, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Warrior4just, Wikipedia is a collaborative project, that works by consensus. Please read WP:BRD carefully. Also, given your user name, I suggest you carefully read WP:RIGHTINGGREATWRONGS. ColinFine (talk) 17:21, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Editor has a 72 hour block for edit warring now. Doug Weller talk 17:34, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Please help! Original includes photos. How do I load the photos? DrVickie (talk) 06:58, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi DrVickie, welcome to the Teahouse! I highly recommend you check out the guide at Your First Article - it will help you learn where to post your draft, what kinds of sources are needed, and other useful things. I'm afraid that photos are the least of your concerns at this point; the major problem is an entire lack of reliable, independent, published secondary sources which demonstrate the subject's notability.

What is the copyright status of the photos you want to use? Did you take them yourself? If not, have they been released under a compatible license by the copyright holder? They will need to be uploaded either to Wikipedia or to Wikimedia Commons in order to be used; their copyright status will determine which one of those is appropriate (if they can be uploaded at all). 174.21.23.32 (talk) 08:13, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

You don't, DrVickie. You create the draft. You improve it, considerably. (For one thing, its references are now utterly inadequate.) You clarify your relationship with your biographee or his estate (because it hardly looks like the work of a disinterested volunteer). You submit it. It's accepted (you hope). You then upload a photograph of him that you took and whose copyright you own, or a photograph that's by somebody else and that has explicitly been released according to one or other of the extraordinarily permissive copyleft licenses acceptable to Wikimedia Commons. -- Hoary (talk) 08:13, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

DrVickie, I first read and responded to your question "How do I load the photos?" It's only now that I notice the sentence that immediately precedes it: "Original includes photos." What is the "original", who wrote it, where is it published, and what is its copyright status? In the meantime, I note that some of the text above either is lifted from, or shares a source with, Michael Dumas, "Charles Sellier Jr., creator of 'Grizzly Adams,' dies at 67", Gulflive.com (Alabama Media Group), 8 February 2011. -- Hoary (talk) 21:35, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so very much for your message. I really need help to get my late partner, David Balsiger, on Wikipedia. I’m surprised someone didn’t do it many years ago. When his business partner Charles Sellier died in 2011, his page was up within a month or so. Anyway, I’m elderly and disabled, and don’t have the technical skills to do what seems to be required. I can provide all the content, photos, references, etc. if you or someone can give me a template in which to put them. I appreciate any assistance you can provide. In the meantime, here's a link to what I created for him shortly after he died. www.hourforpeace.org/BalsigerObit.pdf . I've been the coordinator of the International Hour For Peace in Northern Colorado since 2006. Regarding copyright, etc., David's will left his Legacy to me and a Judge's order confirmed it. So I have the legal authority to use any of his photos, books, information, etc. in whatever way I deem appropriate. 2601:283:8401:3510:44FA:491:E39C:6C77 (talk) 02:20, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Condolences to you. I'm sure others will chime in, but he almost certainly did not own the copyright in pictures of him. The photographer almost always owns those copyrights, unless there is an explicit, signed, transfer-of-copyright agreement in place. I am not sure that a judge's order would override that-- you need a copyright expert to help. Now that he has passed, his estate (and you) still likely do not own the image copyrights, even if you own the actual photos. There are ways to use one representative photo in an article under "fair use", and others can help with that. An article should be accepted first. Hope this helps. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 05:14, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I would recommend using the Article wizard to create a draft.

Note several of the problems mentioned in the comments above: you have a conflict of interest which you need to disclose (the Article Wizard will walk you through doing that), some of your text seems to have been directly copied from elsewhere (everything should be written in your own words), and at the moment your draft has no sources that meet our requirements. Were there published obituaries? Those would be good starting points, along with any other newspaper or magazine articles you have access to that are about David Balsiger, specifically, not one of his projects. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:49, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I would like to nominate SCB-27 as a good article but I can not figure out how? History Buff1239ubj (talk) 00:45, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello History Buff1239ubj! First, you want to make sure that the article has met the criteria of a good article (see WP:CLASS). It helps if you have contributed to the article significantly as well. Then, add {{subst:GAN|subtopic=}}

to the top of the article page. Then, add a parameter for the subtopic section (I would add Warfare.) Save the page, then that's it! However, this page is rated as C-class and has failed the criteria for B-class. I can work on the article to improve it, but I would wait until this fits the criteria for GA-status. Thanks! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 👋❤️ (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔🤔) 01:04, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

(For more information see WP:GAI) 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 👋❤️ (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔🤔) 01:05, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

SCB-27 has large amounts of unreferenced content. It is currently C-class, and you have made no edits to it. I have raised C-class articles to GA, but it took dozens of edits before I considered the article good enough to nominate, and then dozens more edits to address weaknesses identified by the reviewer. Given your newness to Wikipedia and the problems with your creating a valid draft (Draft:The Dreadnought Battleship (research)), I recommend working on improving this and many other warship articles before nominating any for a GA review. David notMD (talk) 11:08, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the offer. I would really appreciate it if you could work on it a bit to get it to GA-class as it is about a key part of U.S. naval modernization. Once again thank you for the offer. History Buff1239ubj (talk) 19:51, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I was thinking, there are so many people working on the pages and so much information connected by these,

why shouldn't we create free language courses on the regular wikipedia (or as a subproject)

to not only make information freely available but languages themselves as well (in form of way longer and more detailed pages).

-created, maintained, expanded and checked by the users themselves

-exercises could include instructions to read pages in the corresponding wikipedia version (either with links or with coding).

I will start doing some, but I wanted to know, if

-this project is somehow forbidden (dunno why it should be),

-it already exists

and

-if people would be motivated

if no one stops me (or shows me where there is such a project here) i will just start doing the first course,

I hope many think alike

Ps: How about a structure like

respective_language_medium.wikpedia.org/course_or_learn_or_.../language_name Atsutsaquu (talk) 16:16, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

@Atsutsaquu: Welcome to the Teahouse. It is very unlikely that this proposal will be sanctioned here as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. You may want to contribute to its sister project Wikibooks instead, as it has some structured modules over there, like German/Grammar/Sentences. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:34, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much, this was exactly the type of project I meant, I just checked it out and evem if im not that much a fan of linking every detail on a different page (Latin page) I think I will contribute. :-) Atsutsaquu (talk) 16:40, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

on a second thought, i think a structure like: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/course/German would also suffice Atsutsaquu (talk) 16:35, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Again, that doesn't sound like it would be appropriate for an encyclopedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:48, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

It might be a suitable idea for Wikiversity, although that's not the most active of Wikimedia projects. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:51, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

@Atsutsaquu Wikipedia is a project specifically about creating an encyclopedia, see the first of the five pillars. The wikimedia foundation (which runs the project) has a number of other websites that are aiming to create different things, wiktionary is a dictionary, commons is a media repository, wikivoyage is a travel guide etc. Instructional texts are not within scope of an encyclopedia, but they would be ok at wikiversity 192.76.8.85 (talk) 20:46, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

so basically, I am a autocomfirmed user but there is no "edit" section for semi-protected pages. I can still edit source, I'm not sure that's the same, please help AARSOMEONE (talk) 23:35, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@AARSOMEONE: Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! The "Edit source" tab will allow you to edit the source code of a page, while the "Edit" tab will allow you to use the VisualEditor to edit articles in an easier fashion. At the top right of any Wikipedia page, click "Preferences" and go to the "Editing" tab. Under the "Editing mode" drop down, you can make a choice:

• If you want to see the "Edit" tab only, select "Always give me the visual editor if possible"
• If you want to see both the "Edit" and "Edit source" tabs, select "Show me both editor tabs".

After making your selection, click the "Save" button at the top of the page. You might need to bypass your cache after making the selection to see the "Edit" tab. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:12, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

@AARSOMEONE What page are you attempting to edit? You can only use the visual editor on articles, drafts and user pages, in other namespaces you have to use the source editor. 192.76.8.85 (talk) 20:53, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I came across this Wikipedia article: Contemporary Psychoanalytic Studies. I was going to flag it for not using any sources, but then I saw that there was an external link at the bottom to this page: [19]. It looks like whoever wrote this Wikipedia article directly copied everything from this source, word-for-word. I am going to work on fixing the article if I have time, but I wanted to flag it first so that other people will know. What tag would be appropriate for this instance, or do I need to do something else? I looked at the template index briefly but wasn't sure where to look, as I didn't immediately see anything concerning plagiarism. A. E. Katz (talk) 19:38, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @A. E. Katz - the primary problem here is that most of the article, certainly the only useful part, is a copyright violation and has been since its creation (source copyrighted in 2002, article created in 2009, so not a backwards copy). Such a situation is covered here. Basically you need to remove the copied bits, tag it for copyvio and post at the copyright problems page. The whole article may end up just being deleted. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:55, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! I decided to nominate it for speedy deletion, since it would basically need to be completely rewritten and I'm not sure that the subject would be notable enough to be worth it, and it looks like it has just been deleted. A. E. Katz (talk) 20:14, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for flagging it! DMacks (talk) 21:49, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I was wondering if editorial only images were okay to upload to wikipedia?

Here’s the image I’m trying to upload: https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/los-angeles-ca-june-26-2019-1435719113

If this isn’t acceptable, do you know where I can find similar images that are accepted? Juliacheeto711 (talk) 21:15, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Juliacheeto711, welcome to the Teahouse. The copyright status of the image is going to determine whether you can upload it or not. The criteria for Wikipedia are laid out here; the most basic summary of those criteria is: If you didn't take the picture, and it's not clearly marked as either freely licensed or public domain, you probably can't use it. The best place to look for compatibly-licensed images is over at Wikimedia Commons. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:56, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

@Juliacheeto711 The answer is 100% NO - you cannot upload that image to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. The latter only accepts images that are freely licenced for commercial re-use. Your image is not. English Wikipedia itself does allow (under extremely limited circumstances) one non-free image of a person, so long as they are deceased, and no other freely-licensable image is available of them. So, unless you know a friendly hitman to do the unspeakable deed (oxymoron alert!), no images of living people are permitted unless the copyright owner has clearly released it under an appropriate Creative Commons licence that permits commercial re-use. Sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:37, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Where has the article page gone? 82.16.216.90 (talk) 12:47, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

You asked the same question here a few days ago. Here it is, with answers. Are the answers hard to understand? -- Hoary (talk) 12:57, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Very sad that someone has put work into the article(including myself) only for it to be deleted! The article must have only taken up a few bytes of data. I won't be editing any more articles or donating to the foundation again as deleting it seems very petty. 82.16.216.90 (talk) 13:10, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Well, the issue is that the information on the article might not be accurate because of its limited coverage in reliable sources, not that it takes up too much space on Wikipedia's servers. Sungodtemple (talk) 13:20, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

IP editor, please don't reply to archived posts or closed deletion discussions; we can answer any questions you have here. Since the result of the AfD was a soft delete (WP:SOFTDELETE) you can request the article be undeleted at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. If notability is still not demonstrated, though, it may just end up being deleted again. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 13:57, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply, have put in a request to have undeleted. 82.16.216.90 (talk) 17:35, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Restored to Draft:ABCDE. Jay (talk) 02:01, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Every time I click the link to my username, it takes me to this retarded “homepage” that I have no use for. I can navigate the community portal for stuff to do and I don’t really need this. Is there a way to get rid of it? Quiefe (talk) 02:05, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

@Quiefe: In preferences, under User Profile near the bottom, try unchecking "Display newcomer homepage", that might disable the feature you're asking about. RudolfRed (talk) 02:14, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

This worked, thanks! Quiefe (talk) 03:03, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Draft: ILENE I have been on assignment working on the page Draft: ILENE for the past 3 days, which included a large amount of sourced information from numerous sources. My computer installed an overnight update, but upon restarting, 90% of information was lost, reverting the article back to an early version that is not acceptable and will not be used. Is there any possible way to recover all of the lost information, or the last version of this article which should be dated either June 23, or June 24, 2022? Please help. At my wits end. Thank you. 247ice (talk) 17:10, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@247ice: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you didn't click on the Publish changes button to save the draft, there is unfortunately no way to recover the text. Sometimes the browser may save it locally, but this doesn't seem to be the case. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:15, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying. It does unfortunately appear to be lost. I will redraft , thanks again. 247ice (talk) 17:17, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Publish changes means save. It's called "Publish" because it can be seen by others, although not found by searches. David notMD (talk) 19:26, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@247ice Please, who has made this assignment that you are on? 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:18, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@247ice Did you take that picture of Ilene yourself, with your own camera? Please let us know. Thanks. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 05:31, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

I don't know if Wikimedia Commons is the right place to ask this question.

If I record a book out loud or make a video of something copyrighted am I violating copyright if I share it with other people or post it online?

Here are a few examples

I read a book out loud and post in on YouTube or Wikimedia Commons or another website

I do examples from a physics textbook and post them on YouTube or a Wikimedia Foundation website

WalkingRadiance (talk) 00:19, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that is a violation. Don't do that. Also, Wikimedia sites are not a web hosting service. You should not be uploading stuff that is not related to the missions of these sites. MrOllie (talk) 00:23, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Is there a legal way to work out problems from a book and put them on the Internet or do I have to be the author or publisher of a book to make a YouTube video with the solutions for example? WalkingRadiance (talk) 01:40, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@WalkingRadiance I think you are asking two different questions here, and the answer very much depends on whether you are posting something to YouTube or to Wkimedia. You can do anything on YouTube that YouTube allows, and that will not affect Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. WP/WM is completely separate from YT. Copyright violations that appear on YouTube are usually, but not always, deleted; again, that is up to YT to enforce, not WP or WM. That doesn't make copyright-infringing YT posts actually legal.

If you post copyrighted material to Wikimedia Commons, it will be quickly deleted.

YouTube is generally not acceptable as a source in a Wikipedia article to establish notability, and Wikipedia articles must not link to anything, anywhere, that infringes copyright. Hope this helps. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 05:00, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

My video passed the copyright check on YouTube. WalkingRadiance (talk) 13:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

The video may have passed an automated check, but if you are reading from a copyrighted work, and posting that recording, I believe it is a copyright violation. I'll bow out now; good luck. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 05:47, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

I can make up my own questions with different wording and numbers if there is no legal way. WalkingRadiance (talk) 01:41, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi WalkingRadiance and welcome to Wikipedia and the Teahouse. My understanding is that the answer to your question would be no. If you look at the first page in a book, it usually says something along the lines of recording the information by any means (e.g. an audio recording) would be a copyright violation. I appreciate your willingness to help others learn though, even if this isn't the best way. Is there anything else I can help you with? Clovermoss (talk) 02:06, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@WalkingRadiance: My understanding is that making your own questions wouldn't be a copyright violation but I can't think of how that could be used on the English Wikipedia. I could be wrong, though. Maybe Wikimedia Commons would appreciate a contribution like that, I'm not sure. You could try asking here [20]. Clovermoss (talk) 02:12, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

• The Sydney Morning Herald
• https://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/books/why-are-wealthy-people-known-as-toffee-nosed-20060819-gdo76y.html
• https://www.theguardian.com/books/2006/feb/04/featuresreviews.guardianreview25

0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 03:22, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi 0mtwb9gd5wx. It's not clear what your question is so perhaps you can clarify. Some general information about the types of sources Wikipedia tends to consider reliable for its articles can be found at Wikipedia:Reliable sources, but it's often hard to say whether a source is reliable without knowing more about the context of its intended use. What Wikipedia article do you want to use these as sources? What information do you want to use them to support? -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:39, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello! When citing websites, do you archive it on Wayback Machine and link that archive as a matter of course or only in some situations? I'm going to add this as a citation in the Ahmedabad page and would like to prevent potential link rot. Quadriporticus (talk) 09:01, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Quadriporticus, please see our article Wayback machine, The Wayback machine works by crawling the web, and storing what it finds (as does Google and other search engines), rather than having people deliberately post material on it. There is a parallel system, Archive-It.org, which does allow institutions to archive their data, but AFAIK Wikipedia does not do that, as every version of every page that has ever been on Wikipedia can be re-created. It is, of course, not the material on Wikipedia that "rots", but the non-wikipedia websites cited in the references. News-sites like CNN are preserved more frequently than many other sites, because their pages are far more dynamic - Arjayay (talk) 14:07, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

@Quadriporticus, there now exists a recent snapshot of the article in question here: [21]. If you come across a link that hasn't yet been archived in the future, you can use the "Save Page Now" feature on the Wayback Machine's main page. In my experience, the quickest way of checking the archives of any given URL is by typing web.archive.org/ before it (for example web.archive.org/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page). Hope this helps. Dr. Duh 🩺 (talk) 07:47, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

I would like to write a letter to the state representatives concerning the need to amend the rate set by the State for Personal Care Attendants in Texas. Citizen of texas (talk) 22:50, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Citizen of Texas, and welcome to the Teahouse! Unfortunately I think you are in the wrong place; the Teahouse is for answering questions related to editing Wikipedia. You might try the Reference Desk instead. Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 22:54, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Citizen of texas. You could Google the name of your representative and see whether they have an official website of some kind. These days I'd imagine that pretty much all elected officials in the US have some kind of online presence and most probably provide some way for their constituents to contact them. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:50, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Should Sinology and terms derived from it be capitalised, considering that the prefix "Sino-" is usually capitalised as well? 2A01:36D:1200:4F8:C9D3:ED0E:FF21:D238 (talk) 05:48, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

The Concise Oxford Dictionary does not capitalize sinologist, sinology etc. but the Collins Concise Dictionary does capitalize them, so it's a borderline case. I suggest you try to keep it consistent within the article, but don't change the existing style throughout for no good reason. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:26, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

You should probably post something about this on its talk page. VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 08:28, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

{{unbulleted list|{{marriage|Élisabeth Bourquin (née Jacot)|1770|1771|end=her death}}|{{marriage|Marie-Madelaine Jean-Richard-dit-Bressel|1771|1781|end=her death}}|{{marriage|{{Marie-Anne Masson (née Jeannot)|1783|1798|end=divorced}}|{{marriage|Rosalie Bouverat|1806}}}}

 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 05:22, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Ficaia. It might be easier for someone to help you if you can provide a link to the article where the template you're asking about it being used, but the problem appears to be that you've mistakenly formatted "Marie-Anne Masson (née Jeannot)" as a template by adding the syntax {{ before her name. Instead of {{marriage|{{Marie-Anne Masson (née Jeannot)|1783|1798|end=divorced}}, try {{marriage|Marie-Anne Masson (née Jeannot)|1783|1798|end=divorced}} and see if that works. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:46, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Pierre-Louis Guinand 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 09:13, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I am new writer to the community,

I recently did two different wikipedia pages about two social media stars that I strongly believe deserve a wikipedia page. When I went to go write about Mary Magdalene there wasn't much available known about her (Instagram Plastic Surgery Model). Mary has a ton of main stream press and is almost unforgettable, a car crash you cannot look away from. Mary's social media's channels keep getting removed so I was unable to add an external link. The second star Jessy Taylor, I wrote about had a lot of sources and was fairly a lot easier.

edit: It is my second day on here!! just simply looking for advice from experienced writers as one myself just new to wikipedia. please do not pentalize me!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Me2638 (talk • contribs) 09:10, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Can anyone assist me on adding "free" pictures to these and taking a good look and seeing what could be needed with editing. It's estimating 4 months for both pages.

Draft:Jessy Taylor

Draft:Mary Magdalene

Me2638 (talk) 05:36, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

@Me2638: In re Magdalene:

• We can't use the Daily Mail source (deprecated).
• We can't use the Sun's US edition (deprecated).
• We can't use The Metro (deprecated).

In re Jessy:

• We can't use TikTok (unknown provenance, too sparse).
• We can't use https://justrichest.com/jessy-taylor-deleted-instagram-account/ (no editorial oversight). "Justrichest.com does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any...information posted on Justrichest[.]", from their disclaimer page. Disclaimers like this mean a source is flat-out unusable.
• We can't cite their YouTube channel (connexion to subject, no editorial oversight).
• https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/worklife/a27098191/instagram-jessy-taylor-9-5-job/ is worthless for notability (too sparse). The bulk of the article is extended direct quotes from her.
• We can't - and absolutely SHOULD NOT - cite Dr. Phil (no editorial oversight, connexion to subject). Talk shows like this are not going to hold up to even the lightest of WP:BLP-related scrutiny.
• We can't use the Daily Star (deprecated).

In summary, all of your sources across both articles are unusable, and one article is sourced entirely to sources we have explicitly deprecated. We're looking for in-depth, non-routine, independent news pieces about the subject written by identifiable journalists and published in outlets that have competent editorial oversight responsible for fact-checking, disclosure, corrections, and retractions. What you have here falls well short of that. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 05:53, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Jéské Couriano. Tabloid journalism gossip rags are utterly unacceptable for use on Wikipedia. The freak show aspects of their coverage, which prioritizes sensationalism over accuracy, are incompatible with a neutrally written encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 06:08, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

In addition, things you have written, such as Catapulted to stardom aged 21 and Taylor's love for performance and entertainment is rooted in theatre and Magdalene had youth-promoting hyaluronic acid jabs into her cheeks all violate the Neutral point of view, which is a core content policy. Cullen328 (talk)

And according to your sources, that should read "jabs into his cheeks".--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:55, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hey! Thank you for the feedback! These were my first two articles!! I hope to learn more Me2638 (talk) 09:15, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

I have added references but after adding, it is mentioning as missing title. I am unable to rectify it. Reference Nos are : 5, 14, 18 and 21. Shruti Malaker (talk) 07:40, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

I assume that this relates to Chandrima Shaha. Citation bot has fixed the missing titles. I have also removed the enormous list of published papers. By all means include a very few really important papers but a Wikipedia article is not a CV. Thanks  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   08:16, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Consider restoring selected publications, but limit to five or six. David notMD (talk) 13:21, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi really want to make a page you can find it in my user page.. I declared that I have a conflict of interest with that so I wrote the page the more objective and encyclopedic I could but It got deleted for ambiguous advertising. The show in question is niche but famous I have seen other pages that have much less of a following on wikipedia, I say this because I had seen a flag before it was deleted Jdtw2022 (talk) 08:17, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi. The page in question isn't available anymore, but please be aware that all articles need to meet WP:GNG. Your claim that the podcast is "niche but famous" has to be backed up reliable and independent sources that talk about the subject in detail for it to be included. Additionally, editing articles which you have a COI with is heavily discouraged. See this guide for more information. Thanks, VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 08:24, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Also other pages that have much less of a following on wikipedia count for nothing. Maybe they shouldn't have Wikipedia articles either. Please see WP:Other stuff exists.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:05, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

@Jdtw2022: The deleted Draft:Italian wine podcast consisted of nothing but an infobox and meaningless placeholder text. Yesterday you created Italianwinepodcast, which was moved to Draft:Italianwinepodcast and can be edited and improved there. When you think it's ready, you can submit it for Articles for creation review by clicking the blue button in the box at the top of it. Deor (talk) 15:31, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

yes the first one was a test that I should not have published now I am editing the draft page I hope some users in the coming months will help me as they can thank you @Deor @Shantavira @Vortex3427 Jdtw2022 (talk) 15:43, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

There is a difference of opinion over when Saline County voted to become a "wet" county. It was considered "dry" after the 1930's but We would like to know when that changed. 38.130.41.149 (talk) 15:40, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6.5 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:49, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) :Your best course would be to post your question at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous. The Teahouse is for questions about using or editing Wikipedia. Deor (talk) 15:53, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

That said, a Google search easily turned up a Jan. 23, 2015, article saying that liquor sales were then permitted for the first time. This page, however, says that liquor sales are not permitted in unincorporated Saline County. Deor (talk) 16:04, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

I was planning on making a template, but it needed an html code. I don't know any way, i do know TemplateStyles, for example some templates actually use TemplateStyles and they actually link it to a TemplateStyles. for example i'm making the article 'foo'. suppose i needed a stylesheet so i'd do something like:<templatestyles src="foo/styles.css"/><span title=sometitle class="someclass">{{{foo1|foo2=foo2.1|foo3=foo3.1}}}</span>. But what about an html file? say that i wanted some element to be a div, i can't find a way to do it. Ryj430 (talk) 14:05, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

<span>...</span> is html, so you're already doing it without realizing. If you need a div, just put <div>...</div> in directly.

This example with various styling options produces what you see on the right:

<div style="float:right; width:100px; text-align:center; color:red; border:2px green dotted">div contents blah blah blah</div>

If you need further assistance, it would better if you can point us to what you're actually working on rather than just discussing in generalities. — 2406:3003:2077:1E60:C998:20C6:8CCF:5730 (talk) 17:23, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

I created an article for a musical album weeks ago, and I was wondering how long it will take for my article to be approved. TrooperTru2022 (talk) 10:50, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, welcome to The Teahouse. Your draft Draft:Showdown (Show-Ya album) has not been submitted for review yet and currently has no reliable independent sources, which is what articles are based on, so would be declined if not improved first. Theroadislong (talk) 10:56, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Submitted and declined. See Help:Referencing for beginners to learn how to properly reference. David notMD (talk) 11:36, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

@TrooperTru2022: You can't just slap a few bare links onto the end of the article and expect it to be approved. I made a comment there as to what needs to be done. Also read David notMD's comment above. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:35, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Can a person edit a another person subpage? 2604:B000:C218:128F:1077:199E:F339:A7AE (talk) 17:10, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Sure, but it's nice to let that person know you're doing it. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:11, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP user. I agree with Anachronist, but there is no reason to edit another user's page unless you are reverting vandalism or it is to that user's request. There are some exceptions, but I find ninety-nine percent of the time it is with those two reasons. Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk | contribs)} 17:51, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi everyone, I would like to share my issue with logo dimensions and sizes. The issues i was facing is - it seems like there is not enough room in the frame for logo, as it become very big in the frame. Please suggest what dimensions and sizes i can use for a picture in order not to face the same issues again. Best regards Denzo9909 (talk) 14:35, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Denzo9909, welcome to the Teahouse. You asked a very similar question at the Help Desk a few days ago and got several responses - the post is archived at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2022 June 24#Logo picture sizes. Arjayay's reply seems particularly useful. Can you give an example of an article where the logo size is a problem? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:23, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

@Denzo9909: All your article edits are to Silk Way Airlines and Silk Way West Airlines so I guess those logos are your main interest. File:Logo of silk way airlines.png and File:Silk Way West Airlines logo.svg both have large letters going right to the edge of the uploaded file. The default size in {{Infobox airline}} is 250px but I think those logos look better with | logo_size = 200 like Silk Way Airlines already has. It varies how to control the image size in infoboxes and many other logos look fine at 250px. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:51, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Angus Barbieri's fast

What would be the fastest way to do this? I am a native Russian speaker, moved to the U.S. when young, with about a 3rd grade level vocabulary. I want to show the article to a relative who only speaks Russian. This would be my first time editing Wikipedia. I just created an account moments ago.

Thank you for your help! Aorliche (talk) 16:57, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Aorliche, and welcome to the Teahouse. Translating articles to another (language) edition of Wikipedia is encouraged: see Translate us. Note that different editions have different requirements, so it doesn't automatically follow that a translation of an article in one Wikipedia will be accepted into another Wikipedia; but that article appears to be well-sourced, so I would guess that a translation would be accepted into ru-wiki.

The image used is non-free, which means that it has been uploaded directly into en-wiki, rather than Commons, and can't be accessed in ru-wiki. If its use meets the criteria in ru:Википедия:Критерии добросовестного использования, then you can use it in ru-wiki, but you will need to download it to your device and upload it separately to ru-wiki. ColinFine (talk) 17:16, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

@Aorliche If you have any further questions come back here. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:21, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Aorliche, I'd also check out the Russian Wikipedia to see if the said article already exists in the language, if you haven't already. Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk | contribs)} 19:10, 29 June 2022 (UTC)