Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1043

Archive 1040

Archive 1041

Archive 1042

Archive 1043

Archive 1044

Archive 1045

→

Archive 1050

RE: Deep Space Nine Vorta

Hi,

can I ask why you feel that the actor Jeffery Combs's Vorta character "Weyoun" is only one worth mentioning in the Section 31 article?

I'm only asking this because he also played Liquidator Brunt on a number of occasions in the same series (not mentioning the one time character "Tiron").

Regards

Juanpumpchump (talk) 16:59, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Juanpumpchump Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would suggest that if you have specific concerns about an article, you should use that article's talk page to discuss them with other editors that might follow that article and be more familiar with its content. There is a "talk" tab at the top of the article that you can use to access the talk page. 331dot (talk) 17:11, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Porygon2 and Porygon-Z article publication

Hi! I found somewhat of an article of both Porygon2 and Porygon-Z. I was wondering if someone could help me publish their articles, please. Thanks. UB Blacephalon (talk) 22:20, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Porygon Pokemon has been submitted for AFC review, and presumably will be considered within a few months. Porygon2 and Porygon-Z currently exist as redirects to other articles. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:34, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Also, there was a previous discussion here, at WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1039#Porygon2 and Porygon-Z articles. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:39, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, but I would like to publish the Porygon2 and Porygon-Z articles, the evolution of the article of which is currently under review. Could anyone help me with that? UB Blacephalon (talk) 03:35, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

I want to publish them but i don't know how. Can someone help me out? UB Blacephalon (talk) 17:36, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

how to edit "Dr. R(eginald) Denys Hornabrook"

C._A._Hornabrook contains text "Dr. R(eginald) Denys Hornabrook". the only reference i found is at https://www.adelaide.edu.au/records/university-archives/online-resources/news-cuttings/index-to-volume-21-1934-1935-university#h

should i update it as Dr. Reginald Denys Hornabrook ?

Leela52452 (talk) 01:53, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

In my opinion, C. A. Hornabrook as it exists should be deleted and the creator, Doug butler, advised to start over. Articles about a person are supposed to be about that person, not an extended genealogy of every ancestor, relative and descendant. Who his sister married and who drowned and who committed suicide have no part in the article. Even the core content about C.A. warrants deletion or else major work, as most of it is without references. David notMD (talk) 11:00, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

In the newspapers of the day, which are a good guide to common usage, this gentleman was commonly referred to as Dr. R. Denys Hornabrook or Dr. Denys Hornabrook, his full name being chiefly invoked for formal use (scholarships, army appointments etc). I recommend Trove to search the National Library of Australia's vast collection of OCR'd newspapers. Thanks for the query Leela52452, and thanks to David notMD for bringing it to my attention; I don't often visit the Teahouse. I hope you found the article interesting and useful. I certainly enjoyed compiling it. Doug butler (talk) 18:17, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Redirect without leaving a redirect

Hello there!

I would like to understand what the comment "over a redirect without leaving a redirect" means. My understanding is that it would mean a hyperlink directs the user to the wrong site. If that is correct, then I'm not sure why the page I was editing was moved from "Publishing accepted Articles for creation submission" back to draft.

Your help is much appreciate!

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philharmagical19 (talk • contribs) 18:28, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Philharmagical19: and welcome to the Teahouse! "over a redirect" means that the new page title had a redirect, which was replaced with the content. "without leaving a redirect" means that the old title is not redirecting to the new one; often, a page move results in a redirect from the old title, but when an article is moved to a draft, there shouldn't be a redirect, so this is nothing to be concerned about. Hope that makes sense. --bonadea contributions talk 19:00, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Philharmagical19: you can ignore that particular message: it doesn't tell you anything about why the draft was moved, it was just a technical detail about how Missvain moved it back to draft space after DGG moved it to main space. As to why: I'm not clear. DGG declined the draft (and said why in the comment), but moved it anyway: I don't know why, but it looks as if Missvain though it was a mistake and moved it back. I can't find any reason either of them gave, but I have pinged them both in this para, so perhaps they will come and comment. --ColinFine (talk) 19:08, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

(ec) Philharmagical19, it just means an admin moved the article back to draftspace. Usually moving pages leaves behind a redirect, admins can do that without leaving one. I think it was moved back because the draft was not properly cleaned up after it was moved to article space. Usually, the reviewing script automatically handles that. Perhaps it failed here and DGG didn't notice that, and Missvain didn't check whether the draft was moved by a reviewer or the submitter of the draft, before moving it back. That would be my best guess. You could ask DGG to re-accept it or wait for someone else to review it. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:12, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Ah...back in my old stomping grounds! (I helped create the Teahouse!) Hi - I moved it back to the submission space because it was moved to the article space despite being rejected from Articles for Creation repeatedly. Not sure how it ended up in article space. Thanks for your patience. Missvain (talk) 20:30, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

It appears that DGG moved it, since it was cleaned up. I did some more cleanup and think it looks good enough now to be moved back into namespace. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:47, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

I just accepted it, . DGG ( talk ) 18:45, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Requesting an addition to noted professor's bio page

Please help. Professor Theodore Rappaport asked me to add his Wikipedia page that he was recently elected to the Wireless History Foundation's Wireless Hall of Fame. Here is third-party news item on Ted's receiving this honor. I posted the request for this addition to Ted's bio on the Talk tab of his Wikipedia page, and was informed that because neither the Wireless History Foundation nor the Wireless Hall of Fame have Wikipedia pages of their own, such an addition could not be made. But I did discover that the Wikipedia page for Tom Wheeler mentions Wheeler's having been elected to the Hall of Fame (in third paragraph under the "career" sub-head: "In recognition of his work in promoting the wireless industry, Wheeler was inducted into the Wireless Hall of Fame in 2003 and in 2009.") Was the placement of that note on Wheeler's page done in such a way as to allow for the mention? If so, could someone please note this on Ted Rappaport's page as well? Thanks for any assistance on this! Kgberg{{paid}} Kgberg (talk) 15:37, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Kgberg Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, since you state you are here at the request of Professor Rappaport, you must review the conflict of interest policy. If you are being compensated in any way, you must declare as a paid editor. The compensation does not need to be in money or any material good; say, being an unpaid intern counts.

You are welcome to make a formal edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page, detailing what you would like to see done, and another editor will review it. 331dot (talk) 15:43, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

331dot thanks for clarification. So I should use paid editor not just {{paid}}. I will make a formal request as well on the article talk page noting COI. Thanks very much. And I'll review the COI policy page again.Kgberg (talk) 15:59, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

@Kgberg: I suggest that you read both paid editor and {{paid}}; the first is the policy, while the second is the template which can be used for the declaration. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:06, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Other stuff exists says that finding an example does not necessarily mean a valid precedent. David notMD (talk) 21:38, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

HELP - project keeps getting declined

I'm making a wikipedia article for a individual named Betsy Sullenger. All my drafts have been declined because the sources are not 'reliable'. Most of thes sources are from old new artilces in print, which mention her by name and are focused on her work, but because they can not be confirmed they are not reliable. But, my article keeps getting rejected because the online sources I am using only mention her in passing. I have reliable sources (from the newspapers) and the subject is qualified for an article, but it keeps getting declined and there are no other online sources I can use for her. What do I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aejudy (talk • contribs) 19:45, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

You start at Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:03, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

​Articles from 2008 are not really "old news articles", and they are usually available online or in an open online magazine archive such as Archive.org. Are you sure you can't locate these articles or scans of them online? I would otherwise recommend letting this draft wait for a few months, writing an article from scratch is one of the hardest things to do (not to mention when you have a WP:COI) and we recommend spending a few weeks improving some of our already-existing articles to gain understanding of the process. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:06, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Stuartyeates, Variety (and Daily Variety) archives appear to be available online: the fact that they are paid services does not prevent using them as sources for Wikipedia: if you generate the citation with the {{cite news}} template (or a similar one) you can include a URL, and add a subscription= parameter to note that it is behind a paywall. --ColinFine (talk) 21:42, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Cleaned up the draft, but still need to delete all uses of IMBd as a ref and find replacements. AND, you are required to declare PAID on your User page. David notMD (talk) 22:00, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

It's also worth mentioning that print sources are acceptable if they are reliable publications, and the coverage of the subject is in-depth. Citing the article title and author, as well as the name of the book/periodical, date of publication, issue/volume number and ISBN (if applicable) is advised. See {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}}, {{cite magazine}} and {{cite news}}. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:01, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

How long do rejected article drafts stay on the website?

Hi, I recently submitted a draft article for review and it was declined on account of notability. I honestly was expecting that however as it was on a musician who recently left their band and forge on solo, but hasn't yet done anything overly notable outside of that band he had been in. I had only submitted it because I new articles can take months before getting reviewed at times, and figured I would spend the between time editing it as the musician released more music and did things that would be noteworthy. So, I was wondering since it was officially rejected so quickly, how long the draft will stay as a draft on the site for me to edit as needed until it's ready for resubmission, or if there were requirements like having to make X amount of edits on it per month to keep it from being deleted?

Also, I had a second question that is just a quick point me in the right direction type question so I hope it can be answered in the same thing and not need a second discussion posted, but if not let me know and i'll submit separately! In the note I got back for the rejection, it said that the page had "been deleted six times previously". How would one check that type of thing? EliotWL (talk) 17:34, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Drafts stay for six months after they were last edited. You'll be notified before the six months are up, giving you a chance to continue working on the draft (in which case it wont be deleted). When you open the article Ashley Purdy you should see a red log showing all the previous deletions. The deletions were all in 2011–2016 so if she has continued her career she might of course have become notable in the meantime. If you don't see the red log you can click on "Check the deletion log", or if the page already exist you can find previous deletions by going to History > View logs for this page. – Thjarkur (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

More than a nuance: the draft was Rejected, not Declined, meaning that the reviewer was of the opinion that the subject does not meet Wikipedia's definition of notability for music, and no amount of revision will save it. WP:TOOSOON clearly applies, but could be that six months from now AP's career has not blossomed and you should just let it go. David notMD (talk) 18:34, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the responses. And yes, like I said in my original question, I knew that he wasn't currently yet notable enough, and had only submitted the draft under the assumption that it would be months before someone even looked at it, at which point I would have edited the article significantly more to include everything else he works on in the time, as he's been steadily releasing content since becoming a solo act after 10 years in a band. Of course, if his career peeters out where it is, I'll drop it then, but seeing as the changes were so recent I'm still going to hold onto my original idea of editing the draft for the next few months to see if said career bumps him up to notable enough on his own, though I won't be resubmitting the article until it has reached the notable threshold now that I know how quickly the turn around time on submitted articles can be. Anyways, follow up question, the link you gave for the original article where the logs are located, how did you get that page, other than manually editing the URL? because it's not really possible to search for the page since it doesn't really exist in a searchable way... EliotWL (talk) 19:09, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

@EliotWL: If you put "Ashley Purdy" into the Wikipedia search box, don't accept the default which is the redirect with a different capitalisation but accept the drop down saying "containing Ashley Purdy", that will give you search results at the top of which is "You may create the page "Ashley Purdy", ...", with the redlink to the place where the logs are shown. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Huh, thanks. I didn't even realize there was a dropdown on the search box. I just always typed what I was searching for and hit the enter key. Anyways, thanks for the help! EliotWL (talk) 19:22, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, EliotWL. Rather than "I would have edited the article significantly more to include everything else he works on in the time", I suggest you think in terms of "I would have edited the article to include what people had published about him". That is what makes a subject notable, and what should go into an article, not more things that the subject has done (though of course some of the things published about him might be about that further work). --ColinFine (talk) 21:31, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, ColinFine I feel like everyone assumes I don't take this really seriously when they reply to my threads here. To me, "to include everything else he works on in the time" literally means "to include the stuff that was noteworthy and establishes the necessary notability requirements, and has good, accurate, reliable sources that cover it." because those are the requirements of Wikipedia editing. Anything else would just be a waste of everyone's time. I'm just here to try to keep information accurate and available to everyone. That's why I didn't actually mean to have my draft be looked at for another few months at LEAST. Because I knew already that he wasn't yet notable enough to warrant his own page quite yet, as I read the musicians notability page about 30 times over the course of editing his and others' pages. But thanks for trying to help anyways. EliotWL (talk) 22:18, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for making assumptions, EliotWL. A lot of people who post questions here don't have much idea of what is appropriate to an article, so when I see somebody saying something that suggests that they haven't quite got the idea, I sometimes suggest a different way of looking at it. It's not a matter of you not taking it seriously; just not knowing how much you know. --ColinFine (talk) 23:18, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Can you edit articles about subjects that you like personally?

Is the Evil Sith Kitten serving tea?

For instance, If I had a cat and wanted to edit the Cat article, would it be okay for me to do so, or can I only edit things that I'm not biased toward? The Evil Sith Kitten (talk) 23:00, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

@Evil Sith Kitten: Yes, this is OK. There is no conflict of interest. Interstellarity (talk) 23:03, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

I didn't know that. I assume that you should still try to be as unbiased as possible while editing those articles, though? The Evil Sith Kitten (talk) 23:07, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Right. You should try to keep anything you write here unbiased. So if you feel you were way too into cats to write unbiasedly about them, you should refrain, otherwise personal interest is completely fine. EliotWL (talk) 23:19, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yes, The Evil Sith Kitten. Summarise in neutral language what the reliable published sources say that you are drawing on. (You should never insert any information into Wikipedia without having a reliable published source for it). --ColinFine (talk) 23:21, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Oops. I mean The Evil Sith Kitten. --ColinFine (talk) 23:24, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. I'm fairly new here (created account today, been drifting as IP maybe three or four), but I think I'm figuring it out... The Evil Sith Kitten (talk) 23:26, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

@Evil Sith Kitten: I thought you might a) like the photo; b) like to try The Wikipedia Adventure - our interactive tour of Wikipedia, with 15 different badges to be acquired. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:45, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Reporting Articles

How to report low quality or incomplete articles JuanGarciaFederalAgent (talk) 01:10, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@JuanGarciaFederalAgent: There is nothing to report. You can make a suggestion on the article's talk page, but it is better to just be WP:BOLD and improve it yourself. RudolfRed (talk) 01:14, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Most problems I see with Articles happen on Controversial Ones. For example, the First Section on Joseph Goebbels has no sources and contains some important things, which, if true, need quite a good bit of sources. JuanGarciaFederalAgent (talk) 01:19, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi JuanGarciaFederalAgent. Please take a look at WP:CITELEAD if by the "first section" of the article you mean the MOS:LEAD. Generally, an article lead is only intended to summarize content that comes later in the article; so, citations are not necessarily required if the content is properly sourced later on in the body of the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:25, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@JuanGarciaFederalAgent: The article on Joseph Goebbels is actually classed as a Good Article, meaning it has had some serious review by experienced editors prior to it reaching that standard. As has been mentioned, the lead section does not need to have references if expanded upon later. However, if you do ever find other articles where sections after the lead and Table of Contents have no references whatsoever, you are welcome to add this template: {{unreferenced section}} which makes it quite clear and visible that factual statements in that section need better sourcing. Otherwise, just add {{cn}} (citation needed) to key unsourced statements, or tag the entire article with {{More citations needed}}. But beware overtagging an article so that it become a mass of templates. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:43, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

How to create Category?

Hi All,

Can anyone let me know, how to create category? I just created an article Salarpur, Budaun, it is a Block in Budaun district and there is no category named 'Blocks in Budaun District'. This is the resource for justification. DMySon (talk) 06:27, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi DMySon. Please refer to Wikipedia:Categorization#Creating category pages. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:42, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

My dear friend Marchjuly, Thank you for your help. I have successfully created category now.DMySon (talk) 06:49, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Are there any women adopters?

I'm new to all this, and would dearly like to be adopted. But all the adopters seem to be men. Is there a way of establishing how many X chromosomes the adopters on the list carry? Thanks Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 20:10, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

There is no way of knowing the gender of most editors, including those on the list of adopters. Some people disclose their gender, for whatever reason, but most of us don't. Some people might tell you if they are asked, some would find such questions inappropriate... it's just like anywhere else in life. Out of curiosity, what makes you believe the adopters are male? --bonadea contributions talk 20:16, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

​The adopt-a-user system is currently not very active, but the adopters that have marked themselves as female in their Preferences are PlanespotterA320, SouthernKangaroo, and LPS and MLP Fan. You can otherwise just ask any question you have here at the Teahouse. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:23, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Maryanne Cunningham, and congratulations on nearly completing The Wikipedia Adventure - just two more badges to collect to get all fifteen! I made my first edit on Wikipedia ten years ago to this very day. And, like you, I didn't have a clue what I was doing, and just stumbled my way along, all on my own, just making small edits at first, learning in small steps as I went. I discovered little bits, and wasn't aware of any of our basic help resources - nor our rules - for ages. Nor did I know I could get help 24 hours a day, any day of the year from editors here at the Teahouse. To be frank, for a complete newcomer, I recommend The Teahouse over Adoption, as you'll get much quicker answers to your questions here from a multitude of editors. Speaking for myself, I tend to recommend Adoption to slightly more experienced editors who can demonstrate they have already tried to edit across a range of topic areas, and who need more complex answers than we can give here. But if you do go down the adoption route so soon, you might like to put together a little list of some of the things you'd like assistance with as adoption takes commitment on both sides, and the adopter really needs to know they can work together with a shared interest. In fact there's nothing to stop you putting a list together on your userpage of things you find confusing here, and then popping over here to ask someone to look through it. (They will answer on your talk page, though) Did you get an answer to how to use your own personal sandbox? - it's reached via a link at the top of every page when you're logged in, and you can use it to either draft a new article, or simply to practice editing, playing with adding references and all sorts of stuff you worry you might mess up if you try to do it on a live page. You can try out our two different editing tools - Source Editor (which you have to use on the Teahouse page, and Visual Editor which is more 'what you see is what you get' - but not so powerful when it comes to some tasks, and most long-term editors prefer Source Editor

I do hope this doesn't put you off, as we not only need more articles about women here, but we also need more female editors too. (Confession: I'm white, middle aged and middle class from middle England - sorry). We even have a project focussing on creating more articles about women - just follow the link to The Women in Red Project to find out more. I read your talk page, and you're right - it's all too easy for us to write guidance from the perspective of someone who already knows what to do. You'll find when people reply to you they'll include links (often as abbreviated letters, mostly starting "WP:xxx") - these are meant to be logically-named shortcuts. So if you click H:GS you get taken to Help:Getting started - a page full of links to lots of other help pages! So may I suggest you visit Wikipedia:Tutorial and follow the different Tabs there to find out more things for yourself?

Because the Teahouse posts get archived within about three days, I'll pop over to your own talk page and expand on this a bit more. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:00, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

To add to Women in red, I recently learned there's also Wikipedia:WikiProject Women/Women in Green. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:51, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Rejected submission of new article 'Board Software'

Dear all, my article draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Board_software

has been rejected, but I do not understand why. May I ask you for some suggestions to edit a "successfull" draft? Thank you :)

Marco Simionato (Marketing Executive at Board International). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marco Simionato 1983 (talk • contribs) 10:57, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Marco Simionato 1983: Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. Wikipedia articles need to maintain a neutral point of view and they should not sound like PR releases. Majavah ^(t/c) 11:58, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Hello, Marco Simionato 1983. First of all, please notice that by the terms of use of Wikipedia, you are required to make a disclosure if you are editing for direct or indirect monetary compensation. Basically, if you are making those edits during work hours and your boss is fine with it, which seems likely to me from the job title you gave, you must disclose it. See WP:PAID for details about how to make that disclosure. EDIT: never mind, disclosure was already properly made on user page.

DGG left a comment that this is advertising, not a Wikipedia article. I am forced to agree. I can find zero factual information in the first half of the article (before "history"). For example, Board can help different departments and job roles (...) to solve their varied business challenges, enhancing their decision-making processes is a sentence that could be applied with equal (lack of) validity to MS Powerpoint, standing desks, or pens.

That problem can be fixed. However, the more significant barrier is that Wikipedia articles must be about "notable" topics, which roughly means "has been talked/written about at length by independent, reliable third-party sources". I am not inclined to check the current sources or search online for better ones, but 99.99% of company products do not meet that threshold. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 12:01, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Corporate notability

Hi, i need some help why my article about reTyre) has been declined and how can i make it follow wikipedia rules ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maryam_Khawaja (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 12:18, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Maryam Khawaja: I recommend following the instructions in this guide I wrote. In short, all you need to do is find three or more professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are not connected with, affiliated with, produced by, nor dependent upon ReTyre in any way, but are still specifically and primarily about ReTyre. Once you find three good ones, summarize them (citing the sources at the end of each summary), then paraphrase that summary. Then you will have something that proves right away that the subject is notable and can be readily approved. After that, you can expand it using other reliable sources. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:28, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

How can I change my account name?

How can I change my account name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aodaitt0905353779 (talk • contribs) 13:16, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Aodaitt0905353779. As your account has only ever made two accounts, it's simply not worth the bother of requesting an account name change. Simply abandon that account, forget the password and just create a new one, only ever using the new account from hereon in. (Using two accounts at concurrently is not permitted) If you wish, you could leave a note on the old account name to say you've abandoned it, and are now editing under a new name. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:55, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Acceptable sources for proposed content for wikipedia article

Please refer to this link -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1042#Should_the_section_%22Indian_Government_response%22_of_Citizenship_Amendment_Act_2019_have_content_for_the_official_Government_Response_of_FAQs_on_CAA_?

I am trying to give reliable references for proposed content for this article.

For example, When I put some sources of critique for Government Response in my proposal like sabrangindia and radicalsocialist, they were being rejected as being not "mainstream". However, the Wiki Policy on mainstream has something totally different to say - WP:Wikipedia is a mainstream encyclopedia

I was told that "For sources: linking to a government's wordpress blog in the lead is not appropriate" Please note that PIB source which I was told is inappropriate as a reference, was already referenced in the lead of the article and still is. Here is the link of that reference in the article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_(Amendment)_Act,_2019#cite_note-PIBPassesBill-2

In light of these things, I would like to know whether some editors are granted special privileges that they do not have to follow Wikipedia policies ? Or do we have to just follow what the involved 2-3 editors and admin are saying at that moment ?

Kmoksha (talk) 09:39, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Kmoksha No one(including admins) has "special privileges". All editors are expected to collaborate with each other to achieve a consensus as to how a dispute is resolved. If that fails, there are avenues of dispute resolution to use. 331dot (talk) 09:48, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

As this is a volunteer project, it is possible for inappropriate edits to go undetected; only things that are pointed out can be addressed. 331dot (talk) 09:50, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@331dot Thanks for your response. I had gone to the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. But the Talk page editor said that there is no dispute (even though he disagrees with my proposed addition) !! And the admin at Dispute Resolution closed that dispute resolution request using the same logic. Please see - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard/Archive_184#Citizenship_(Amendment)_Act,_2019#Indian_government_response So, please suggest what can be further done regarding this matter to resolve this dispute and improve the article.

Also, please tell how to decide in reality if a source is mainstream or not. The Wiki policy is saying one thing and the Article Talk page editors seem to be saying another. Can Consensus of editors and admins of Article Talk page overrule a Wiki guideline or policy ?

Kmoksha (talk) 10:31, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

If you want to refer to another Wikipedia page, please use a wikilink such as WP:Wikipedia is a mainstream encyclopedia, rather than an unwieldy URL like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_a_mainstream_encyclopedia. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:46, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Done. David Biddulph Would you like to answer the questions I have ? -- Kmoksha (talk) 10:52, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

This has all been discussed at length here. Kmoksha wants changes made to Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, but despite repeated requests, he doesn't say what they are, making any discussion fruitless. Maproom (talk) 12:00, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Maproom I have given concrete proposals. Please see these 2 sections of the Article Talk page. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Citizenship_(Amendment)_Act,_2019#Second_line_of_lead_of_this_article_incomplete_and_misleading and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Citizenship_(Amendment)_Act,_2019#Proposal_for_section_%22Indian_Government_Response%22_to_be_marked_as_needing_improvement_and_inserting_Indian_Government_response_with_counter-points . No one said that the proposal is unclear. Only they do not agree to the proposals saying that the sources are not mainstream. As far as I see, "Mainstream sources" WP:Wikipedia is a mainstream encyclopedia is not a policy of Wiki, it is only a guideline or essay. But even that guideline is saying something else than what the Talk page editors are saying.

According to the Wiki guideline, sabrangindia and radicalsocialist seem to be acceptable. That is why I wanted clarification as to what is the viewpoint regarding sources being mainstream. Please give more information regarding that.

Kmoksha (talk) 12:42, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Kmoksha: you first proposal linked above was to add the text "and who have been exempted by the Central Government by or under clause (c) of sub-section(2) of section 3 of the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 or from the application of the provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946 or any rule or order made thereunder". You were asked to "propose again by using English rather than Legalese", and replied "The wording is in commonly used English only. There is no legal terminology used in the proposal." I cannot agree with that. "by or under clause (c) of sub-section(2) of section 3" and "any rule or order made thereunder" are legalese, not commonly used English.

In your second "proposal", you wrote "I would like to give the full proposal ...", but you never said what it was. My impression is that no-one is disagreeing with you, they just can't make out what changes you want made. Things could be a lot clearer if you stated what changes you want before stating your reasons for them. Maproom (talk) 13:32, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Maproom Please see my first proposal thread. I had edited and given the alternate wording also and who have been exempted by the Central Government under the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 or the Foreigners Act, 1946 [1]. There has been no response on that. Is this acceptable according to you ? Please give your detailed reasons.

Regarding the second proposal, I have given sample proposal in the opening of the thread. Maybe, you missed that, so I will put that here -

1. In a series of tweets posted through the Press Bureau of India (PIB) Twitter handle, the government has tried to bust the myths about the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019. "Mythbusters focusing on North-Eastern India, especially Assam, surrounding the Citizenship Amendment Act. The 11-points address the most common misconceptions and fears in the region," PIB tweeted. livemint

Critics claim that "The ‘myths’ that the PIB attempts to bust in these posts, amount to little more than the government’s propaganda, an attempt to stifle criticism and generate public support for this anti-secular agenda."sabrangindia

2. In the FAQs released by Home Ministry, it also mentioned that CAA has nothing to do with deportation of illegal Muslim immigrants. However, the deportation of any foreigner irrespective of their religion is implemented as per the Foreigners Act, 1946 and/or The Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920. Mumbai Mirror

The Government has said that "Baluchis, Ahmediyas & Rohingayas can always apply to become Indian citizens as and when they fulfill the qualifications provided in the relevant sections of The Citizenship Act, 1955." Sentinel

But critics have said that "The answers released by the Central Government to FAQs on CAA/NRC are highly misleading and at times totally false, hiding more than they reveal."radicalsocialist

So, the proposals which I gave at the Article Talk page, I have put both the proposals here also for convenience. And request you to please see the full thread opener. The reasons are given there as well. For convenience, I will put that also here -

"The article section says "Indian Government Response" but that section does not have any Indian Government Response in reality. Saying the PM response to be Indian Government Response is incorrect. It is like saying that view of a Wikipedia editor is view of Wikipedia community. Indian Government gives response based on consensus amongst the various ministers and officials of the Government. Hence, the Indian Government Response should be put in that section and not what the PM said on this issue. Otherwise, what is the purpose of the section "Indian Government Response" ?"

"If Government is lying or is contradicting itself, still the Indian Government Response should be given since that is what the section says. To keep the section neutral, counter-points should also be put."

"So, I propose to mark that section needing improvement to include all the viewpoints and counter-viewpoint according to the section title. And then we can build up the section having viewpoints and counter-points by means of discussion here."

Please see all this and tell why this proposed content is acceptable or non-acceptable in your opinion with detailed reasons. Also, please give more information as to regarding my query for Mainstream sources. Thanks.

Kmoksha (talk) 14:25, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Kmoksha: I have no opinion on whether what you want is an improvement. I have no opinion on which sources are acceptable. I don't even know what changes to the text of the article you are arguing for. I shall not make any more contributions to this discussion. Maproom (talk) 15:14, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Maproom It is your wish whether you would like to give opinion. I have put the detailed proposal along with the reasons here also because you claimed that I did not give any detailed proposal. I gave the detailed proposal on the Article Talk page and no-one on the Article Talk page said the proposal is not clear. However, I would like to thank you for giving your time.

I would request other volunteers to give more information regarding what is the viewpoint on "Mainstream media" which was my main question. Thanks.

Kmoksha (talk) 15:41, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

DISH Network discussion

Hello, my name is Caroline. As an employee of DISH Network, I presented an edit request at Talk:Dish_Network#Dish_México. The reviewing editor (User:Spintendo) recommended that others engaged in the subject area discuss the issue. I have placed a number of requests on the DISH Network Talk page, and Spintendo has been the only person to reply to any of them, so I am asking editors at the Teahouse how I might get others to take a look.

Briefly, here is the issue: The DISH Network infobox says that DISH owns 49% of Dish México and this is not correct. Dish México is a joint venture between EchoStar and MVS Comunicaciones. I have outlined in greater detail at the DISH Network Talk page, but let me know if I can explain more here. The company now called "DISH Network Corporation" was formerly called "EchoStar Communications Corporation"; but in 2007, EchoStar Communications Corporation split into two separate companies: DISH Network Corporation (the topic of the DISH Network article) and EchoStar (which holds a stake in Dish México). Spintendo has questioned whether the split off companies are really separate, and I'm not sure what else I can share to more clearly show that Dish México is a joint venture between EchoStar and MVS Comunicaciones, as I've already offered EchoStar's annual reports and a secondary source.

Can any editors here contribute to the discussion or correct the infobox? Thanks for your advice! CK-DISH (talk) 20:43, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello CK-DISH, I have removed the claim this one time, as it was added back without explanation while you have been engaged in discussing the issue at the talk page. Hopefully this will cause a discussion to happen at the talk page before it is added again. We'll just have to wait and see. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:50, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Googling a page

Why doesn't this page show up when I google it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadina_LaSpina. I can connect with the direct link but if I look up Nadina LaSpina's name it doesn't come up. Can someone help me with this? This is the case even if I type in "Nadina LaSpina wikipedia" I made the page almost a month ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elpi19 (talk • contribs)

@Elpi19: The reason why it doesn't show up on Google is because an editor needs to review the page before it shows up on Google. Even if it's reviewed, it may take time to show up on Google because Wikipedia has no control over Google's search results. Interstellarity (talk) 15:50, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

REQUEST TO SEE PICTURES OF USS CVN 80 BEING BUILT. I WAS ON USS ENTERPRISE CVAN -65 FROM 1967-1969

I was on the USS Enterprise CVAN 65 from 1967 to 1969. I would like to see pictures of the CVN 80 currently being built and progress pictures as it is being built. Lee A Clark — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.6.118.234 (talk) 15:39, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello Lee A Clark! This page is for asking questions about editing Wikipedia. But you could try and ask at the Reference desk if folks there can find out whether such pictures exist, and if they do, whether they are publicly available online. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:06, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Adding Photos With My Own Copyright

Hi,

I'm recently new to being an editor for Wikipedia and I was wonder how you can upload photos with your own copyright.

Thank you for any help.

FigureSkate321 — Preceding unsigned comment added by FigureSkate321 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@FigureSkate321: It seems like you are talking about uploading an image you created. In that case, use the WP:File upload wizard, and tag the photo claiming it is your own work. LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 17:25, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Tobias Hoheisel page in German

Hi all, I would like to create a German and French language page for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobias_Hoheisel Please could someone give me a bit of advice. Thank you Vielen dank Merci Swithun — Preceding unsigned comment added by SwithunWells (talk • contribs) 17:26, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

You'll find advice at WP:Translate us. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:29, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@SwithunWells: Thanks for wanting to add to the Wikipedia. See WP:TRANSLATEUS for guidelines on translating English into other languages. Also, note that each Wikipedia has its own guidelines, so you may want to ask at the help desk for those Wikipedias for any other advice, which I think are here [2] and here [3] RudolfRed (talk) 17:33, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

How to Make Edits to a Bio

The artist Tye Tribbett is a 2x Grammy Award winner but he is listed here as a Grammmy Nominee...how can this be corrected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.164.118.130 (talk) 17:12, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Please sign your posts, like this one. Also, all you can do is click the edit button, make changes, and save. LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 17:27, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@12.164.118.130: His Grammy awards were in the article, just not the lede. I added the info and added sources. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:34, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

making article live

Hello,

I have submitted the article called Jasmin Shojai (Draft:Jasmin Shojai). Wanted to know by when my article is going to get live. Can anyone help me out.Arjunsingh5478 (talk) 06:17, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Arjunsingh5478 Welcome to Teahouse. The article needs to be submitted for review first and if it passes the Wikipedia notability guidelines then it will be placed in mainspace. To submit the draft for review, please place {{subst:submit}} on top of the draft page. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:49, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIAThank you!Arjunsingh5478 (talk) 07:09, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

This draft was submitted to AfC on 8 Jan and approved on 8 Jan. In my opinion, the approval was an error, as of the seven references, the first five are interviews (three uses of one interview, and two others). I suggest this be considered as being reverted to draft so that the creator can attempt to approve referencing. David notMD (talk) 19:28, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Obama's Ethnicity/Race

Can you make corrections across the board to omit Obama's ethnicity as African American when he is actually a mixed race, White/African. Describing him as only African American is incorrect and misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.194.127.194 (talk) 16:24, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Please make an edit request on the talk page of the article if you can't the article yourself. Interstellarity (talk) 16:31, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

See Q2 at Talk:Barack Obama/FAQ. This is very unlikely to change on WP, but you can think about him how you like. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:39, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

How to provide references for the biography of an internationally renowned 84-year-old scientist who passed away yesterday?

Greetings from Switzerland, I have submitted the English translation of a German Wikipedia article created (by my colleagues and me at the Swiss federal institute for forest, snow and landscape research) a few years ago about Prof. Fritz Schweingruber. His passing away yesterday will be announced in various international fora and social media, which prompted us to translate his German article into English today. This scientist founded Europe's largest tree-ring research lab in 1970 and has been a world-wide leading expert in this field. He published dozens of text books in English and German up until this year (aged 83). He still has a personal webpage on our institute's website (https://www.wsl.ch/en/employees/schweing.html). Since the German Wikipedia article about him was successfully reviewed, I am at loss about providing additional references. Can you suggest any way to do so? Thank you. Michèle — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michelekd (talk • contribs) 14:05, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Michelekd Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please keep in mind that other language versions of Wikipedia may have different rules from this one, as each version is a separate project. What is acceptable on the German version is not necessarily acceptable here. Here, the scientist will need to have received significant coverage in independent reliable sources to merit an article here. The sources do not need to be online and do not need to be in English (though it helps). 331dot (talk) 14:25, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Michelekd: The International Association of Wood Anatomists citation in the German article looks like a good independent reference showing notability. Although most Google results are about his publications (which don't prove notability), I did find this reference from the University of East Anglia. There's even this - which, despite being a joke, is from Dendrochronologia, a good source.

It is too soon for obituaries to have been published, but ones in respected publications will also be good sources. Narky Blert (talk) 16:31, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Michelekd: I'm sorry for the loss of your colleague. If you create it here as Draft:Fritz Schweingruber, those suggestions can be added and others here may review and make enwiki-specific changes to it while waiting for additional sources, before moving it to main article space. You may also find enwiki-specific pointers at WP:YFA. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 19:31, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

some more specific advice

• Actually,Michelekd, the enWP has a special rule for professors and other researchers, WP:PROF Unlike other fields of human endeavor, we do not require the usual sort of independent reliable sources to show notability. Rather, the principal criterion is being known as an authority in the person's field, and this is normally shown by the influence of their scholarly research, which for books is shown by reviews, for journal articles by citations..(for someone who mainly wrote textbooks, their wide use is thr equivalent) We do require a reliable source in the usual sense for the facts of their life, but for routine things such as degrees and positions it does not have to be an independent source, and their university website is fine for the purpose and is what should be cited.

Biography of academic faculty is somewhat of a specialty field here (as you may have noticed, most of all our biographies are about politicians and sportspeople and performers), so not all reviewers always remember about the special rule. For the last 12 years as an editor and administrator, I've specialized in dealing with these biographies. I do not remember in those 12 years any instance of an academic who is notable enough for an unchallenged article in the German WP who has not been found to meet our standards, unless there were special considerations. I have therefore accepted the article.

It does need some adjustments to meet our usual manner of presentation, and I shall make them in a day or two. I know enough German to be familiar with the problems in translating from the deWP (see our guide at WP:Translating German Wikipedia , and also with the differences between the German academic system and that in the USA or UK, so I translate such articles myself , fix poor quality Google translations, and adjust those that—like this one— just need adjusting

What you will need to do to help is to add reference to obituaries as they become published, and to look for published reviews of his textbooks, which are likely to be in periodicals I will have difficulty locating. If you have any further difficulties, let me know on my use talk page here: DGG ( talk ) 19:40, 8 January 2020 (UTC).

I must have typo'd when searching, because I didn't find Fritz Hans Schweingruber (I assumed it had not been posted yet when I wrote above). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 21:14, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Where to get started?

Hello! I am new to (editing) Wikipedia! Please someone get me advice on how to get started good. Thanks! :) NTCloud (talk) 21:54, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello NTCloud! Check Help:Getting started. Much depend on what you're interested in. Try to start with simple stuff and see where that takes you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:04, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: I want to be adopted at WP:ADOPT. How do I do that?

According to "Participation" on that page, you look at the list, pick one and ask them on their talkpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:15, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

UPDATE: This so-called 'inexperienced' editor had some rather unusual first edits, and has just been indefinitely blocked as a prolific sock puppet. For this reason I would rarely ever recommend Adoption to totally new users. I believe we can help them all far better in fora like the Teahouse and not waste the time of earnest adopters who are keen to support committed editors. To find oneself being used purely as camouflage so that a blocked user can hopefully return unnoticed to editing, serves only to disillusion potential adopters and thus harm the chances of genuinely committed users from being given long-term, in depth support by the adoption process. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:57, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Possible Hoax Article

Hello, I am not a new editor but I noticed articles on several different places called Fairview, Maryland. Including one in my county. There is little information on the articles and the citations don’t lead to anywhere. The articles are also all created by the same person. I can’t find any info on the places. I do know the one of the articles is for a legit place. ColinBear (talk) 22:49, 8 January 2020 (UTC) ColinBear

Hello {{}}. I haven't looked closely at these articles but per the guidance at WP:GEOLAND they maybe ok if a decent cite just shows they exist. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 23:00, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Ping ColinBear Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 23:01, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2) @ColinBear: They're not hoaxes. The problem is that the citations need to be updated as the website cited has changed. Digging up what the source looked like when it was cited, it would have had the information it was cited for. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:01, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Need a Help

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closing this since the IP account who posted the question has been blocked per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Oon835/Archive#08 January 2020. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:57, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

---

Can you help me to move this Draft:Lego Jurassic World to Draft:Lego Jurassic World (theme). Also please remove the semi-protected from all the draft pages so as I can intend to work on it:

• Draft:Lego Jurassic World
• Draft:Lego Scooby-Doo!
• Draft:Lego Overwatch
• Draft:Lego The Powerpuff Girls
• Draft:Lego DC Super Hero Girls
• Draft:Lego The Lone Ranger

118.100.73.97 (talk) 06:03, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP 118.100.73.97. It looks like many those drafts were protected because they were being disrupted by people using multiple accounts in an inappropriate way. If you want to be able to edit them then you can ask the administrator who protected for suggestions on what you need to do. They were all protected by Jo-Jo Eumerus, so you can post a message at User talk:Jo-Jo Eumerus explaining that you want to work on the drafts. It may turn out that only way you'll be able to edit the drafts is to WP:REGISTER for an account and wait until your account becomes WP:AUTOCONFIRMED. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:49, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

I have renamed the draft to Draft:Lego Jurassic World (theme) as there is a existing article name in mainspace Lego Jurassic World. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:57, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@CASSIOPEIA:How about the other draft pages need to rename it and here are the belows:

• Draft:Lego Scooby-Doo! rename to Draft:Lego Scooby-Doo! (theme)
• Draft:Lego Overwatch rename to Draft:Lego Overwatch (theme)
• Draft:Lego The Powerpuff Girls rename to Draft:Lego The Powerpuff Girls (theme)
• Draft:Lego DC Super Hero Girls rename to Draft:Lego DC Super Hero Girls (theme)
• Draft:Lego The Lone Ranger rename to Draft:Lego The Lone Ranger (theme)

118.100.73.97 (talk) 07:30, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that renaming the drafts in not going to unprotect them so that you can edit them. You're going to need to request that at WP:RPP or discuss things with the administrator who protected them. I suggest you try the latter before doing anything else. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:51, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Tag user on Talk page

What is a simple (& polite) way to tag a user on a Talk page, e.g. someone who made a particular edit, or whom I know to be knowlegeable, to ask (tactfully!) for help improving the edit? I tried the common '@' sign but it didn't seem to do anything. See Talk:Hoxton.

I know I can post a message on a User's Talk page, but that seems like overkill in this case, and hypothetically I may want to tag several editors. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 01:33, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi D A Patriarche. There are a variety of WP:PING templates that can be used to do such a thing; you could, however, just post a simple message on the other editor's user talk page to ask as well. One thing about the "Ping" templates is that they have to be properly formatted to work and you need to make sure to sign your post as well. Simply adding "@" before someone's name indicates to anyone reading the thread you're addressing, but the Wikipedia software just treats it like any other inputted character not as a "Ping" template. One thing about "pinging" is that some editors don't like it and will ignore it; so, if you try it once and don't get a response in a reasonable amount of time, you might want to follow up on the editor's user talk page if it's really important. Over "pinging" someone would be the equivalent to repeatedly hit the bell/buzzer at the reception desk of a hotel or office until someone appeared. You might find the response to not be very friendly if you do that kind of thing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:58, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, that looks exactly what I needed. {{User|NameToPing}} seems like the least intrusive. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 02:21, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Wrong sources

Hello all, I was wondering how you guys would go about removing a few "sourced" lines in a biographical article. The person has specified that this piece of information about them is not true using social media. When other editors removed the content it was very quickly put back with the reason removing sourced content.

So how do you deal with fake sources and sources that have a few lines un true on wikipedia. Thanks Idan (talk) 05:11, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@Zvikorn: It depends. Can you provide the details please? Preferably, the discussion should be at the article's talk page for reference by future editors to the page. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 05:54, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Zvikorn. Article content should really only reflect what's found in reliable sources, but this doesn't always mean what's written is 100% correct. So, in cases where, multiple reliable sources provide conflicting accounts of a certain subject, figuring which source or sources are "more" correct can be pretty hard to do and often what is done is to somehow try add content about this "conflict" to the article. In this case, what seems to be happening is a disagreement over content between the subject of the article and sources reporting on the subject. Subjects of articles are considered to be primary sources per WP:ABOUTSELF and WP:BLPSELFPUB. Wikipedia doesn't totally discount a primary source may say and primary sources can be considered to be reliable in some contexts, but at the same time Wikipedia also doesn't just blindly accept everything a primary source says at face value. So, the best the might be able to be done in a case like this would be to present content about both sides; for example, "according to XYZ News, Person A did such and such; this, however, was denied by Person A later on social media" or something like that. Of course, if Person A was some how able to get XYZ News to publish/release a retraction of some kind, then this could also be included in the article. Similarly, if other reliable sources are covering the dispute between Person A and XYZ News from a news standpoint, then content about this could also probably be added to the article.

Just for reference, Person A is not totally without recourse when it comes to Wikipedia as explained in Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Dealing with articles about yourself, but Wikipedia isn't going to remove article content about Person A just because they want it removed or don't like it. If the content in question has been repeatedly removed only to be subsequently restored, then would at least seem to be some sort of rough consensus that it is in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. The then to do them would be try and further discuss whether that's really the case on the article's corresponding talk page or at a noticeboard like Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:30, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

How to Move Sandbox Article

Hello,

I already have an article in my sandbox, if i want to create a new article should i move the article to another location or should i keep it that way. Kindly let me know, Thank-You Arjunsingh5478 (talk) 06:45, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

I see that the current content of your sandbox is a draft of an article which you recently created. You can therefore just replace those sandbox contents by whatever you want your new sandbox contents to be; the history will still be there if you want to go back to it, and you've placed the article separately at Jasmin Shojai. An alternative is to start your new userspace draft at User:Arjunsingh5478/whatever your new title is rather than at User:Arjunsingh5478/sandbox. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:31, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank- you, for guiding me!Arjunsingh5478 (talk) 10:01, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Trying to say Thank you

To experienced people Nick Moyes and Clovermoss, but I can't work out how to add to their Talk pages. (I have also forgotten all I learnt yesterday about adding names properly, sorry.) But Nick Moyes and Clovermoss, if you see this, thanks for the helpful posts, it really is appreciated. Could you please tell me how to add to a Talk, if there isn't a button saying: "Click here to add"(or some such)?

Cheers! Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 23:11, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, Maryanne Cunningham, and thank you for those kind words. You are most welcome. In this sentence I am going to alert User:Clovermoss to your message, too. She will receive a red alert notification at the top of the next page she views, and I've managed to do that by doing two things in one edit: Firstly, I've included her name in the format 'User:Clovermoss' between double square brackets AND in the same edit I have signed my post with four keyboard tilde characters. This works from any page I edit on, so I could be editing my own talk page, or yours, or even an article talk page, and provided I've used the right formatting, she'll be notified. I'll sign now, then I'll answer your question in a follow up post, which I shall further indent (using two colons, instead of just one which this post has used). Nick Moyes (talk) 23:40, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Maryanne Cunningham: I'd also like to thank you for your kind words, it's very much appreciated. As for editing talk pages, there's 'New section' for starting a new discussion, but you can also click 'Edit source' next to a subheading (such as Wikipedia:Teahouse#Trying to say Thank you, which is this thread). Usually replies are indented by using the colon - the start of my reply is an example of what that looks like. In the future, a good way to find someone's talk page is by clicking on the link in their signature, or by typing in the search bar User talk:Clovermoss (without the brackets and by replacing my username with the editor that you would like to contact). Clovermoss (talk) 23:55, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Clovermoss Clovermoss (talk · contribs) (can I also use square brackets to link to you?). As I said to Nick Moyes (talk · contribs), I can find people's talk pages alright, I just can't find the 'Add topic' tab. Never mind, I shall persevere. Later.

(edit conflict) Right, Maryanne Cunningham, back again! You'll see I'm a lot more verbose than Clovermoss, who had clearly been alerted and got here before me. OK, so why don't you give the next bit a try out? Look at my signature at the end of my post. It gives my name which is blue-linked to my userpage, then '(talk)' - a link to my user talk page. That's where you want to go to communicate on my own page, as we don't encourage people to edit on other people's Userpages. Click the link and then, assuming you aren't editing in mobile phone view, you should see a long table of contents - different conversation thread. We always put the latest discussion at the bottom , just as we do here at the Teahouse. So, now, simply click the tab marked 'Add topic' you'll a simple edit window will open up, with space for a subject header and, below it, you type your message to me. Again, please sign at the end with those four keyboard tildes, which automatically inserts a timestamps as well as your username. Just as here, at the bottom of the page you can first 'Preview' your post before hitting the big blue 'Publish changes' button. Because you've posted on my own user page, I automatically get an alert notification - so you don't need to include my name or use any fancy formatting.

Here are some very quick Dos and Don'ts Wikipedia:Talk dos and don'ts, and when you have time, you might like to read through our much longer Talk page guidelines. I could also point out that there are various other ways to notify or 'ping' another editor so that they know you've mentioned them. Don't worry about all this straight off, but sometime you might want to look at Help:Notifications for more ways to alert people.

Finally, a little tip: It's so easy to be told of some useful page, only to forget how to find it later when you need it. You could, if you wished, add a section to your userpage to paste in titles of any potentially useful help pages you encounter and want to remember. I've done that on my own user page in a specially collapsed section so it doesn't fill the page up with tons of links. I could start you off by adding a few for you. But, as it's 'bad form' for one editor to alter another editor's userpage without permission, I would only do that if gave me the go ahead. Why don't you try giving me a 'yes' or 'no' on my own talk page. I'll help you out if you get stuck. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:07, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks again Nick. User:Nick Moyes. I can get to your talk page ok, but I can't find the 'Add topic' tab. (I may be staring straight at it and not able to see it...). I would LOVE you to add a bit to my userpage with useful links (can you also tell me where to find it?). Cheers! Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 08:26, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Maryanne Cunningham, at the talkpage (in this case User talk:Nick Moyes), if you are on a laptop, click "New section" near the top of the page. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:04, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Maryanne Cunningham Actually, you already know your userpage as you've edited it yourself here. As well as having two different ways to edit and make changes to Wikipedia, we also have two different ways to view it. These are:

• Desktop View Every page url in your browser will begin: https://en.wikipedia.org/....
• Mobile View Every page url in your browser will begin: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/.... (note the extra 'm')

Mobile view is designed for basic reading of Wikipedia, and none of the instructions we ever give here (unless explicitly stated) will refer to Mobile View. Although I edit on a mobile phone a lot, I virtually never do so in Mobile View, but simply switch to desktop view on my tiny iPhone 5. To do so, go to the very bottom of any page and look for the link to switch between Desktop View and Mobile View. Make sure you are in Desktop View.

Now go follow my signature to my Talk Page. Above the big, bold title which says User talk:Nick Moyes there are a line of Tabs. These are:

• User page
• Talk (this is the one you should then be on)
• Read
• Edit source
• Add topic (or New Section) - you want this one
• View History
• a heart symbol (for sending thanks to someone - known as Wikilove)
• a star symbol (Watchlist)
• More
• Wikipedia Search Box

My thanks to Gråbergs Gråa Sång for pointing out there are two different wordings on the same Tab at the top of the user page: either 'Add Topic' or 'New Section'. I've just had to fire up my rarely used (and legitimate) alternative account to send myself a test message to remind myself of this. Sorry for any earlier confusion. I will now pop over to your user page and add a new section for you, as discussed. (In return, could you pop round and help me with my brand new oven? I've just spent 20 minutes trying (and failing) to follow the simple(?) instructions on how to set the time delay to cook a chicken later tonight. I think those instructions were also written by men! Nick Moyes (talk) 10:56, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Contributing a critique to an existing Wikipedia page

Hello I set up an account based on my e-mail number but when I tried to log in , it wouldn't let me Can you help me to get started as a new editor please ? Many thanks Raymond Marshall — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.69.7.88 (talk) 09:24, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I assume that by "email number" that you requested an account through WP:ACC? What is the message that comes up when you attempt to log in to your account? Make sure your login information is typed in exactly correct. 331dot (talk) 10:56, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Also, you could be blocked from creating an account if you have previously registered an account already using the same IP or is sharing the same IP. Darwin Naz (talk) 12:50, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Updates not possible in Visual Editor

Hi - I would like to make updates to the page SWIFT message types I understand the current version uses HTML markup. Is this the reason Visual Editor is not available? It seemed like the previous table was done in HTML markup and I therefore converted it to a Wiki markup (hope this was done correctly?). Without the VE, I find it quite challenging to make significant updates. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Florian2410 (talk • contribs) 19:42, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello Florian2410, VisualEditor works fine for me on that page. Does VisualEditor open if you open this link? If not, do you get an error or something else? If the problem was that you couldn't switch to VisualEditor, you might be interested in turning on Preferences>Editing>Editing mode>Show me both editor tabs. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:00, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, the link worked and after changing the settings it works for the other pages as well now. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Florian2410 (talk • contribs) 20:28, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Florian2410. Upon testing, the Visual Editor was also working on my end for that page. I am, however, curious about the change you made to the settings (if different from the suggestion made by Thjarkur). Maybe it could help other editors if they encounter the same problem. Regards, Darwin Naz (talk) 13:19, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

How to edit the colours on a map?

Hi!, hope you're doing nice. You know, I want to change the color of a map, in 2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis, the map shows Argentina as "No Statement", in light gray, but the government (the new one) switched from recognizing Juan Guaidó to recognize the National Assembly of Guaidó, therefore switching from deep-blue to light-blue. Is that changeable? Have a great day! --CoryGlee (talk) 13:25, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@CoryGlee: The file is stored at Wikimedia Commons and available at c:File:Venezuela president recognition map 2019.svg. One would have to download the most recent version of the SVG file from the File History section there, modify the colour of appropriate polygon part inside the SVG file and upload back the modified version. --CiaPan (talk) 13:33, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

CiaPan, thank you!, I will try but not assure anything, I'm rather inept with these things lol. :-) --CoryGlee (talk) 13:47, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@CoryGlee: You may also contact User:ZiaLater who keeps updating the map – but before you do, you might want to check their contribution here at enwiki: Special:Contributions/ZiaLater, for example at Talk:Responses to the Venezuelan presidential crisis#Argentina no longer recognizes Guaidó. --CiaPan (talk) 13:49, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

CiaPan. many thanks :-) !!!! --CoryGlee (talk) 14:08, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Following categories

Is there a way to watch a category, like you would watch an article? I'd like to know if an article is added to or removed from a particular category. Thanks. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 14:36, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

See Help:Category#Watching_category_additions_and_removals - X201 (talk) 14:45, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

X201, Exactly what I wanted. Thanks! -- Slugger O'Toole (talk) 14:51, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to Request for factual corrections

Many thanks for this. I'm not competent to navigate around Wikipedia editing procedures, and hope this reply reaches the appropriate people.

It seems that I am being asked to prove my innocence; is this Wikipedia's practice? I thought that, in general, it is assumed that someone is innocent until proven guilty.

Adding 'according to Hutton' seems to fall short of a solution; if adopted as a general principle, it would still leave it open to people to secure widespread publicity for misleading assertions.

Please advise me!

Yours sincerely Jonathan Clark — Preceding unsigned comment added by HJ2B=! (talk • contribs) 09:01, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

• This is not a case of you being asked to prove your innocence, it is more that people are often discouraged from editing an article about themselves and are encouraged to find sources. I'd recommend talking about it on Talk:J. C. D. Clark with other editors who can possibly help. ^{[Username Needed]} 10:07, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Mr. Clark, there seems to be extensive discussion already on the talk page on the veracity of Hutton as a source. Your efforts would be best directed there, as explained above. Note that content in any article must come from reliable published sources that are independent of the article's subject. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:29, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

How can I rename pages?

Hello, I just made an automatic translation on a page in Wikipedia in Romanian. I wanna say how can I rename pages? I don't know since my native language is Romanian, I contribute into the Romanian Wikipedia. Can someone please tell me how can I rename pages? Thank you. The Japanese Toilet 🚽 | Talk With Me 💬 | My Edits ✏ 14:21, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello JapaneseToilet. On English Wikipedia, the operation is WP:move. I presume it's similar in rowiki. --ColinFine (talk) 15:42, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

The Romanian equivalent of WP:Move is ro:Ajutor:Redenumirea unei pagini. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:14, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! I will do it anytime if I write the wrong title. The Japanese Toilet 🚽 | Talk With Me 💬 | My Edits ✏ 16:16, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Notable or not?

Below is an article that I wrote about a friend I knew quite well but I don't know if being the youngest bass singer etc is enough for a wWiki article; an you help?

Collapsing extended content
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Duncan Perkins (1945 – 2014) Duncan Perkins was born in Norwich on the 26/7/1945 but spent his formative years in Eltham, in south east London. He attended the local primary school in Roper Street and sang in the choir of St John's church. Entering Dulwich College in 1956, he proved a mainstay of the madrigal group and other choirs, and performed as a soloist at the age of 14 in the annual school concert at the Royal Festival Hall, being the youngest bass soloist in the history of that great venue. It was also around this time that Duncan developed his lifelong passion for Charlton Athletic FC, and like a true fan he never wavered in his support, no matter what the team's fortunes. From Dulwich, he won a Choral Exhibition to Corpus Christi College Cambridge where he read French with Norwegian as his subsidiary language. Supervisions with one piano-playing don were generally spent singing Schubert lieder rather than in studying the more demanding aspects of irregular verbs. Duncan was a keen sportsman at university, and captained the college hockey team, playing in goal. He also took part in the university music society and was in the chorus for one of the earliest performances of Benjamin Britten's War Requiem in Ely Cathedral. As part of his course, he had to spend a year teaching in France, at Arpajon south of Paris. Although this was an experience he did not particularly enjoy, he loved France and its culture and people all his life, visiting it countless times and counting many of its natives among his fast friends. In 1968, he joined the staff of Kent College, at the time a Direct Grant Grammar boarding and day school for boys. He was an often unforgettably eccentric teacher, conveying his love of French in lively and enthusiastic style. He rose to be Head of Department in later years before turning part time in 2000 and then taking early retirement in 2006. He played a full part both on the boarding side where he was an assistant housemaster and in the sporting life of the school as a skilful and conscientious coach of school hockey and cricket, as well as being a highly qualified referee and umpire. He also founded a madrigal group which became a formidably accomplished ensemble, especially once girls were admitted from 1975 onwards, making many tours to the Lake District and then, as confidence and repertoire grew, to Germany (especially Wuerzburg), France and Italy. Probably the highlight of Duncan's conducting career was the singing of High Mass in St Mark's Basilica in Venice. In 1974; he began deputising in Canterbury Cathedral Choir, becoming a full-time Lay clerk the following year. During his 40 years as the bedrock of the bass line, he saw the enthronement of five archbishops, the reigns of four deans, and the visit of Pope John Paul II. He became Senior Lay Clerk in 1999, and always took a paternal interest in the development and careers of the ever-changing choir personnel. Duncan much enjoyed the challenge posed by his role of shop steward for the choir in negotiations with the dean and chapter over pay and conditions, negotiations always conducted with Trollopean guile while never being less than gentlemanly. He had an active musical life outside his two “day jobs”, in his youth being a member of several semi-pro choirs including that attached to the Academy of St Martin's in the Fields. He always regretted turning down the chance to join an up-and-coming group of the late 70s called The Sixteen. Duncan was in great demand as a soloist throughout Kent and the wider south-east, and he could fill the largest spaces with glorious bass sound, although certain roles required the judicious adaptation of the musical range to avoid anything above a top D, which Duncan always claimed was a region proper to tenors rather than basses. He was a founding member of Canterbury Garden Opera, which performed Mozart operas in support of the cathedral restoration fund over the four years from 2010 to 2013. He relished dramatic and musical challenges such as Leporello in Don Giovanni and Osmin in The Abduction from the Seraglio, as well as himself regularly translating the libretti into more up-to-date English. Duncan's illness from cancer was bravely borne, as he grimly held on long enough to be assured that his funeral (which he had meticulously planned) would be held at a time when the full cathedral choir would be back in harness. It took place on September 3rd in the Quire and was an unforgettable occasion, with a touching and affectionate address from the Dean, and glorious music by Bach, Mozart (trans. D Perkins), and William Harris, climaxing in Stanford's incomparable Nunc Dimittis in A as the coffin was reverently borne down the Quire through the massed ranks of the mourners. But his friends will remember even more vividly his enormous hospitality, for Duncan enjoyed entertaining probably more than anything else. His cooking and his parties were legendary, and his house was invariably full of good food, good wine, and good company. We offer our deepest condolences to his brother Bruce and share with him in the sad loss of a uniquely kind, humane and civilised man. [1] [2] [3] Canterbury Cathedral Dulwich College J.S.Williams

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark Lorman (talk • contribs) 16:56, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@Mark Lorman: I have collapsed the full article content, it is still readable but it avoids the wall of text on this page. It's actually not easy to assess someone's notability from just a description of their life, as notability is based on what other people have written about them. So, what would be more useful than posting that text would be to post the three best sources you have about this individual. They should be independent, reliable secondary sources that cover Duncan in some detail. Newspaper articles and books etc are best. Blogs, personal websites etc are not suitable. See WP:RS for more info on the type of sources you would require. Hug^syrup 17:04, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Dhaka Subway

Hi,

My article on Dhaka Subway has been accepted as a Start-Class article. Which is fine, thank you.

But if I search for Dhaka Subway, it still redirects me to Dhaka Metro Rail (which also seems to be only a Start-Class article), which WP seems to have accepted is a separate and distinct system to Dhaka Subway.

If Dhaka Subway is an article in its own right, should it not be found directly by any search on the topic?

Thanks and regards,

Martin Ewan Thomas — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martin Ewan Thomas (talk • contribs) 14:43, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

The Wikipedia search works fine, but Google doesn't seem to have caught up yet. We have no control over the mysteries of Google algorithms. Give their web crawlers a chance to catch up before complaining to them. Dbfirs 15:02, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Are you sure it's been accepted? Because it has a great big Submission Declined notice on the top of it from User:Robert McClenon - X201 (talk) 16:35, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

X201, yeah, it was accepted. The cleanup seems to have been partly undone later on. I have fixed some and tagged for other issues. Category tags are recommended to be placed at the bottom, btw. Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:05, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

User:X201 - I have tried to reproduce your result. Have you had your image of the page in view for more than a day? You may be looking at an old version of the page, before I accepted it. Try refreshing or purging the page. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:19, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

I accepted the page a little more than twelve hours ago. If you are seeing a declined version of the page, you may be looking at an old image. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:19, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

By the way, I wouldn't worry about the fact that both articles are Start-Class. When I accept an article, I normally assess it at Start-Class, unless either it is longer and gets C-Class or is a stub but satisfies a special notability guide. (I don't think that I have ever accepted an article as B-Class, because articles have to grow to get there. I only accept a stub if it satisfies a special notability guide with a source.) I have never known of an article to be deleted because it was Start-Class. Many articles will never get above Start-Class, and the encyclopedia needs Start-Class articles and stubs and Good Articles. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:38, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, AFCH cleanup was undone in this edit. The OP was likely editing the stale version. I cleaned it up again after the comment by X201. Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:39, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

User:Usedtobecool - Thank you for the technical explanation. It appears that the problem was not that the OP was viewing a stale version but that the OP was editing a stale version, and so, as you said, managed to undo AFCH cleanup. Weird things can happen due to viewing or editing stale versions. Anyway, it is fixed. There may be a lesson, which may be that it doesn't hurt to refresh a page before editing it. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:56, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Minor / Major Change While Editing

I was editing the page on the Centaurus star system and one of the subtitles was repeated, but I'm not sure if removing it is a minor or major change because it says on the page about minor / major changes that removing content is a major change but I'm not sure I'm a repeated subtitle counts as content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astrobot3000 (talk • contribs) 15:57, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello Astrobot3000, there is no obligation to mark any edit as minor. When in doubt, do not mark it as minor. Alternatively, you can mention minor or just "m" in the edit summary without ticking the box to indicate that you think the edit is minor even if you can't be sure that it is completely uncontroversial. More at WP:ME. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:10, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Oh, and in this particular case, it was a maintenance edit which didn't change the meaning of anything in the article, so the edit is minor. Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:13, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Whether an edit is minor is a case where, if you aren't sure, don't mark it minor. Minor edits should be unquestionably minor. This is sort of like the rule about tagging pages for speedy deletion. If you aren't sure, it shouldn't be speedy-tagged. If you only think that the edit is minor, it doesn't do any harm to leave it untagged. Occasionally there is an editor who makes hundreds of edits all tagged as minor. Either this is an editor whose interface is stuck with the checkmark on (which is a good-faith error that can be fixed), or an editor who is trying to fly under the radar (which is not so good). Robert McClenon (talk) 18:01, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

These like things on user pages that say "this user"

Well, I think that they're pretty cool so I'd like if someone explained how to acquire one please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ridiculus69420 (talk • contribs) 13:52, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

​Those are called userboxes, you can find them under Wikipedia:Userboxes/Galleries. For example, if you like hamburgers you would go under "Food" and then add the text {{User:Feureau/UserBox/LovesHamburger}} to your userpage. – Thjarkur (talk) 14:03, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@Ridiculus69420: You may also want to learn using the template {{Babel}}, which helps to organize userboxes. --CiaPan (talk) 19:12, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Subject Notability

Hi,

I am Vanessa from Anatomage Italy and I am writing because we are interested in publish a new article about our main product: Anatomage Table. Before starting we would like to ask a question with regard to the notability of the subject to be sure that the article will be accepted for publication.

As well as on the company website, Anatomage Table has been described by several Universities website and in a Ted Talk, for example.

Moreover, the Table is already mentioned in the Wikipedia article of the Visible Human Project, where in the "Applications using the data" some educational applications are described. So, starting from that quote we could create an internal link.

I look forward to hearing from you, Vanessa — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anatomage (talk • contribs) 15:07, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello Anatomage! Thanks for asking, there are unfortunately several problems. In short, I don't think you can make such an article that "sticks", but I also know nothing about your product.

• First, read WP:GNG. If you conclude, yes, I have those sources, no problem, then proceed. If not, give up.
• Username. You need a new one, see WP:ISU (for example "Vanessa at Anatomage" is ok). Simplest is to abandon your current account and just register a new one.
• Next, read WP:PAID and WP:COI carefully. If you still think this may work, move on to HELP:YFA. WP:PROMOTION will also be relevant. Good luck. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:24, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Vanessa. As well as what Gråbergs Gråa Sång told you, bear in mind that notability can only be established by sources completely independent of the subject. Nothing on your website can contribute to the product's notability. Nor can the TED talk, as Choi says he was part of the group that developed Anatomage. The universities' websites you mention may help, but it depends what they say. If they just mention your product in passing, no. If they repeat information from your publications, no. We require substantial, independent, material to establish notability. --ColinFine (talk) 15:40, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

That said, that was a REALLY cool product and I wouldn't be surprised if some good independent sourcing turns up. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:36, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

I've asked for a second opinion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine#You'll_all_want_one. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:00, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Duplicate uploaded image

Hi,

I uploaded an image file for the Mars Global Remote Sensing Orbiter and Small Rover; unfortunately I hit the upload button before completing the fair-use question boxes. I then uploaded the same file again with all the requisite claims for the fair-use of a (likely copyrighted image; however, the second upload is now listed as a duplicate image in the file library.

My question is this: how do I delete the first uploaded image (without the complete fair use claims) and replace it with the second (duplicate) image which has the complete fair use claim?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spotty's Friend (talk • contribs) 22:02, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

You won't be able to delete it yourself. You can ask at WP:FFD RudolfRed (talk) 22:12, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

WP:FFD is "files for discussion", if you expect different opinions. For uncontroversional deletions you can pick a WP:SPEEDY template and add it at the top of the file page, e.g., {{db-f1}} "redundant" (file is a dupe), or {{db-g7}} "author request". Put "deletion request" in the edit summary and wikilink the correct image as [[:File:…]] . –84.46.52.210 (talk) 09:05, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the responses by User:RudolfRed and by User:84.46.52.210. I've already used the speedy deletion tag for redundant image files to ask for the deletion of the referenced files yesterday and they apparently have already been deleted. Thanks again. Spotty's Friend (talk) 20:53, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Patrick McLeod to Create Wikipedia Profile

I would like to find a Wikipedia Editor/Expert to create Wikipedia History for Athletes and Professionals and Musicians.

Best regards,

Patrick McLeod — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatricklloydMcleod (talk • contribs) 20:23, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Patrick, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that you have a (very common) misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. It is not a kind of site which contains profiles: not one. What it contains is articles about notable subjects, which are neutral summaries of what independent published sources have said about the subject. If you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability (which are not quite the same as the everyday meaning of the word) then Wikipedia could have an article about you. It would not be your article, it would not necessarily say what you wanted it to say, and you and anybody associated with you would be discouraged from creating it, or editing it directly.

If after reading the link above, and An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing, you decide that sufficient sources exist to establish your notability and you want somebody to go ahead, then please make a request at requested articles. In honesty, though, the take-up there isn't very high. Wikipedia is a volunteer project, and people work on what they choose. If you can find, and cite, some really top-class sources (places where somebody with no connection to you has chosen to publish an article about you not based on information from you or your associates ) then that may make your request more attractive to somebody.

But basically, getting an article about yourself isn't what Wikipedia is here for, so there is no reliable method of doing so. --ColinFine (talk) 21:45, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Line spacing - poetry

I'm trying to insert a quote from a poem, but if I hit 'enter' once, it doesn't move the text to a new line at all, and if I hit it twice, it moves it down two lines. Eg, either

"I wandered lonely as a cloud, that floats on high o'er vales and hills"

or

"I wandered lonely as a cloud,

that floats on high o'er vales and hills'

How do I get the text to just go onto the next line? Grateful for any assistance, thanks! Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 22:24, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Maryanne Cunningham. I think you want <poem></poem>, producing:

"I wandered lonely as a cloud,
that floats on high o'er vales and hills"

Help:Wikitext#Retaining newlines and spaces has more information on this. Eman235/talk 23:01, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Fab, thanks Eman235 Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 23:27, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Add Business to Wikipedia

Hello All, I'm new here. I've been in the moving industry for over 16 years and recently franchised my moving company. I wanted to see what the rules are about posting a page with business information which would be strictly informative. Thank you Josh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshmora (talk • contribs) 23:19, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Joshmora Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You seem to have a common misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is. This is an encyclopedia, not a business directory and not for merely providing information. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia has articles about subjects shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources to meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability(in this case, the definition of a notable business). Wikipedia is not interested in what an article subject wants to say about itself. Your business would only merit an article here if it has significant coverage in the news or other reliable sources independent of your company, sources with a reputation of editorial control and fact checking that have chosen on their own to give your business coverage. If this is not the case, it would not merit an article here at this time.

Even if it did merit an article, you shouldn't be the one to write it. You have what we call a conflict of interest and would be considered a paid editor. Wikipedia much prefers that independent editors write about article subjects. If you truly feel that your business meets the special definition of a notable business that we have, and have sources to support it, you can visit Requested Articles to request that others write about your business, but that process is severely backlogged and it will not be done quickly. If you just want to tell the world about your business, you should use social media, your own website, or an alternative forum where what you want to do is permitted.

In addition, a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. There are good reasons to not want one- even if it might seem to be good for your business. Wikipedia has no interest in enhancing search results for your business. I am sorry that this may be not what you want to hear, but if you are interested in being a general Wikipedia contributor, feel free to look around and learn more about Wikipedia. There is a new user tutorial you may use. 331dot (talk) 23:29, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed response and I understand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshmora (talk • contribs) 00:11, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Querying Wikipedia logs from Special:Logs

Hi all, is there an API / database way to query Special:Logs? Thank you!

xinbenlv ^{Talk, Remember to "ping" me} 21:07, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: GMG^talk 23:32, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

mw:API:Logevents can be used to access logs via the API. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:19, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Help

I need editing help. Possibly adoption. Skoudco101 (talk) 23:09, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Sure, you can check out Wikipedia:Adoption --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 23:11, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

@Skoudco101: for a basic guide on how to edit, see Help:Editing. Cheers, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 23:35, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

@Thegooduser: Adoption really isn't the solution for brand new editors seeking assistance. It's a much longer term commitment by both parties. The Teahouse is a far better way to give immediate support. @Skoudco101: what help do you seek, please? You might find Help:Getting started of some use. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 02:17, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

I just want to edit but have no idea what about? Skoudco101 (talk) 00:39, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

If you have no idea what to edit about, think of a topic that you enjoy, find an article on that topic or something relating to it, find reliable sources that aren't in the article, and then paraphrase the information in the source. ^{[Username Needed]} 18:53, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

@Skoudco101 Try just ... reading ... Wikipedia pages until you find something that interests you and/or that you know something about and/or you find an error... Then fix it :). No article is *perfect* (nothing ever is) but some are in need of more help than others... I suggest reading Wikipedia:Template_messages to see the huge list of templates that articles can be tagged with. - especially the "Cleanup" section ... then, if you click on the "links" link (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:copy_edit&limit=500 for the articles that are tagged for copy editing, as just one example)... You might find something there that interests you that you can improve :) Jewell D D (talk) 02:42, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Help with draft

I have created an article "Mahatma Gandhi Central University protest" yesterday. At the beginning it was accepted as the article for creation but after few hours it was declined by mentioning " Article us not written in neutral point if view". In December 2019, the same page was deleted by wikipedia due to copy right issue but I have removed all the copied text and write it in my own words. So please help me out. Draft:Mahatma Gandhi Central University protest --Rohitmishra01 (talk) 05:45, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

• I have not checked the previous version but the current version contains Vice-Chancellor (Arvind Agarwal) had falsified his academic details and had misreported his marks to become MGCU's first Vice-Chancellor, stating a significantly-damaging accusation as fact, sourced to this article which says complaints were received but does not ascertain the truth of the accusation. This alone is enough to reject the article because of WP:BLP.

I believe there is a notable incident worthy to be written about here, but you really must stick with what the third-party sources say and not inject your own interpretation of the sources. For a good example of writing in such cases, see Hurricane Dorian–Alabama controversy, which does in my opinion a fairly good job at sticking close to the facts despite 99.9% of online content pertaining to the incident involving partisan rhetoric. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 14:54, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

[Jan 10]: I have created an article in December 2019, which is now listed as Draft Draft:List_of_Malayalam_films_of_2020 with reason "Article does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published". I have now included the details of films released in January 2020 with links. Please help me out to approve this article, so that others can also contribute to list of malayalam movies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justink87 (talk • contribs) 03:47, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Can someone explain me why my personal user sandbox was rejected?

They told me to ask here in the Teahouse for help in my personal user sandbox, since I found it hard to ask the "Article of creation help desk". Please help me improve on it.MannyPC (talk) 06:51, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

You tried to submit it as a Wikipedia article, but it is nothing but a bit of personal info about yourself. As the reviewer wrote, "This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia." Meters (talk) 06:55, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Articles are written about notable subjects and must be supported by verifiable independent sources. The post on your talk page said to ask about the submission at Articles for creation help desk. The Teahouse link was for "any other questions about your editing experience". Meters (talk) 06:58, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, there's nothing wrong with your user page (sandbox). It tells us a bit about yourself, and that's fine. I wonder if you accidentally submitted it to be converted into a Wikipedia article? Happy editing. Dbfirs 07:15, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

@MannyPC: I'd suggest just cut/pasting the content (without the {{AFC submission}} line) from your sandbox (User:MannyPC/sandbox) to your "user page" (User:MannyPC), which is the appropriate place for it. Note that if you were trying to make it appear in a Google search, there is no way to do this, since Wikipedia is not a webhost or social media platform. User pages are not "profiles"; they are for use only in identifying yourself to other Wikipedians. I hope this helps. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 07:42, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

article got declined every time.

Hello, i'm trying to make an article on the name of "Sunil prem vyas". he is indian film director but this article continuously got declined. i had made some changes as well. last month i had received a notification i can merge this article with another article name "Take it easy (movie 2015)" this movie was directed by sunil prem vyas. so i want to know how do i merge this two articles & how do both articles will appear on the internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jay1Rudra1 (talk • contribs) 06:59, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Jay1Rudra1. You can find out how to merge one article into another at WP:MERGE; however, since you actually talking about merging content from a draft into an article, you don't really need to perform a merge. You should be able to just be WP:BOLD and add content from the draft to the other article. What you shouldn't really try to do, however, is simply copy-and-paste all of the content in the draft into the other article; in other words, you shouldn't try to create a mini-article about this particular person within the article about the film. You can probably mention him by name if properly supported by reliable sources, but you shouldn't try to add a biography about him to the film's article unless it actually make encyclopedic sense to do so and doesn't disrupt the overall balance of the film's article, particularly since Draft:Sunil Prem Vyas has been declined multiple times by AfC reveiwers. You might want to first propose what you want to add to the article first at Take It Easy (2015 film) or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force just to see what some others think. Perhaps some other editors might be able to suggest a way to incorporate some content about the director into the article about the film. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:17, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation Question for Two Individuals with Same Name in Same Line of Work

Hello,

We are curious what is the preferred degree of disambiguation for two individuals with the same name in the same line of work. We have a submission for a chef named John Shields, of which there are two. We've renamed drafts to add the middle initial, which should help.

Thank you! Joey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jziemniak (talk • contribs) 21:43, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Joey, and welcome to the Teahouse. That should work. The relevant policy is explained at WP:ATDAB. --ColinFine (talk) 21:50, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@Jziemniak: Are you being paid to create this submission? Your use of the term "we" not only suggests that more than one person is using your account, but that you could be working for some sort of public relations or marketing agency, acting on behalf of clients. I might be wrong, of course, but if either, or both of these things is true, then you need to read and follow our policies carefully. If you are being paid directly or indirectly, you must cease editing straight away until such time as you have made a formal declaration of your Conflict of Interest on your Userpage, and/or on the articles you are writing. To do this, please read and follow the instructions at this link: Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. As we do not permit more than one person to use one account name (see WP:NOSHARING), it would anyway be helpful if you could clarify whether 'we' refers to two or more people using your account - and change it so that only one person can use it from now on. Of course, if you are acquainted with, or have some sort of kinship with the people you are creating an article about, you will definitely need to make a WP:COI declaration as just explained. Sorry to be a party-pooper, but Wikipedia isn't here to help people promote themselves, either directly or indirectly, and so these questions have to be asked. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:52, 10 January 2020 (UTC)  

Reviewer Input Request

I reviewed Draft:John Shields (chef) and declined it because we already have an article John Shields (chef). I noted that there was information in the draft that is not in the article, and information in the article that is not in the draft, and advised the author to update the article. The author then advised me that the subject of the draft and the subject of the article are two different people with the same first name and last name and occupation. This is an interesting disambiguation case because (as occasionally happens) there needs to be multiple disambiguation. I have renamed the draft to Draft:John B. Shields (chef), but am wondering what advice other experienced editors have about the best way to handle this. There is a disambiguation page, John Shields, also known as John Shields (disambiguation). I would appreciate advice on two issues from other experienced editors. First, should the draft be accepted? If it should not, because its subject is not notable, then the other issue is avoided. Second, if the draft should be accepted, either as is or with minor changes, how should the two people be disambiguated? Robert McClenon (talk) 00:24, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm collapsing my post below to this effect. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:24, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Should the draft be accepted? What should be done to the article if anything? Robert McClenon (talk) 00:27, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: See my question to the contributor, above. It's very relevant. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:54, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Putting aside for one moment my possible COI / PAID editing concerns: If I encountered these two articles, and assuming both met our WP:GNG/WP:NBIO criteria for notabilty, I would do the following:

• Add an entry for John B. Shields (chef) at the DAB page, John Shields;
• Add a WP:HATNOTE to John Shields (chef) as below:

Robert McClenon, the best option would be to rename both articles as "John Shields (chef, born [Insert year here])". Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:30, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

This page is about the American chef, writer and TV host. For the Chicago restaurateur, see John B. Shields (chef).

and then a mirror one for John B. Shields (chef):

This page is about the Chicago restaurateur. For the American chef, writer and TV host, see John Shields (chef).

I've only glanced at the article and at the titles of the references cited, but I do actually question whether Draft:John B. Shields (chef) is really more about the restaurant, Smyth (Chicago restaurant), than about a notable person. Are the sources really in-depth about the person? If not, then I might decline the article on notability grounds, possibly creating a redirect to one of the two restaurants he appears to co-own. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:14, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Another question for you: I think there's an error in your decline rationale of 15 December. You said: This draft contains information that is not in the article. Please review the article and add any additional information to the article Surely you meant something like: "This draft contains information that is not in the references. Please review the article and add any additional citations to support the article"? Nick Moyes (talk) 02:01, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

No, User:Nick Moyes, what I wrote was what I meant to write. I meant that the draft contained information that was not in the article. The draft was the page in draft space, with Draft before its title. The article was the page in article space. As an AFC reviewer, I often read a draft that has the same subject as an existing article. Often the two are the same or almost the same, typically because they are both by the same editor. In that case, the article can be left unchanged. In this case, the draft contained different information than the article, so that I thought that they should be compared and merged into a more complete article. However, it turns out that the draft and the article were different because they were about different people with the same name in the same line of work. I understand that you thought I had miswritten. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:20, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Ah, silly me. The dis-benefit of hindsight, I guess. I'm glad I didn't unilaterally try to change it! Nick Moyes (talk) 02:24, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Relevance of an article

I'm toying with the idea to write a list article about Beatles museums worldwide. E.g. Liverpool, Halle, Siegen, Alkmaar, Dunedin, Stanardsville etc. The list would contain an introduction why these museums exist, the name, location, opening year and 'specialty' (short description) of the different museums.

• Would this kind of article have a chance to be accepted?
• If yes, what should be the title? (List of Beatles Museums? List of Beatles Museums worldwide? List of Museums related to The Beatles? ...)
• Would it make sense also to include special locations (e.g. houses where the individual members lived which are now accessible to the publich or bear an official plate citing that state?

I appreciate rather more information about my plan than too little. Thanx. Pte. Salt (talk) 17:06, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm writing inbased on my general knoeldgeof how to buld up sections in WP; this is not really my field: we seem to have articles on only 3: Egri Road Beatles Múzeum in Eger, Hungary , Beatlemania Hamburg, and The Beatles Story in Liverpool. I would suggest the first step is adding some information on the others, not at first in separate articles, but as brief mentions within the "museums" section of the various cities so the information can be at least visible. What to do from there depends upon how much information you have. If there are multiple excellent sources showing the museums are known not just in the surrounding area, it will be possible to make an article for each. If not, ad whatever you do have to the relevant sections.

There are then two possibiltities: if good sources have been written about the general concept of "Beetles Museums", you can make an article based on those sources, containing a list of the individual ones. If such sources do not yet exist, for the general idea, just make a list. ( Don't use your own original ideas about the nature of the museums, but rely only on the sources. ) Link it to the existing articles for the individual museums, and to the sections of the other articles in which the museums are mentioned. Then build from there. mention your project on the talk page at [[WP: WikiProject The Beatles}}, and I would imagine quite a few others interested will help you.

There are other ways--and Gråbergs Gråa Sång's suggestion should also work well. DGG ( talk ) 23:34, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello Pte. Salt! Maybe doable (not my area, really). I found List of music museums, which has about 7 Beatles Museums on it. Some redlinked, if you want to try to create articles. Consider starting a section for museums at Cultural impact of the Beatles or Tributes to the Beatles. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:55, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Note "museums" should be lower-case, e.g., "List of Beatles museums" or "List of museums dedicated to the Beatles". —[AlanM1(talk)]— 23:48, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

!Thanks so far! I keep searching and have found 13 (more or less) museums; not yet included museums (or exhibitions) which focus on only one of the band members. Cultural impact of the Beatles supplies material for an introduction. Still not decided for the title but "List of museums and xxx dedicated to the Beatles" (xxx will also be "material" like houses etc.) is my favorite.

Follow up question (before I move to WP: WikiProject The Beatles): Where can I find pre-made sortable tables to be used in the article? Pte. Salt (talk) 16:02, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

See Help:Table, at 5:2. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:37, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Perfect! Very helpful! Thanks! Pte. Salt (talk) 09:12, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

{{PD-Cuba}}

Apparently this Licensing template, {{PD-Cuba}}, is no longer valid (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Casa_de_Beneficencia_y_Maternidad_de_La_Habana.jpg), where do I go to find out why it is so and what happens now with all images thare were uploaded via the template. Thank you very much for any info. ovA_165443 (talk) 16:50, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Osvaldo valdes 165443, at the time of deletion, the template had no images on the English Wikipedia using it. Any images that it would apply to should be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, where, as you linked to, the template is still existent.

The deletion of the template here had no effect on Commons, and was just because it wasn't used, and public domain images should be at Commons anyway, so any WMF wiki can use them.

~~ OxonAlex - talk 18:41, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

That's related to your recent question about maps in infoboxes here. Triggered by that I fixed d:Q5687504 for La Alameda de Paula, Havana, you added the coordinates on Wikidata, and the infobox worked as expected.
While at it I also fixed File:Alameda de Paula, Havana. !950s after the 1940s renovation.jpg with edit summary (visible in the history)
  move to commons per File:Alameda de Paula, Havana during ca. 1940s.jpg
and File:Alameda de Paula, Havana during ca. 1940s.jpg with edit summary
  The Template:PD-Cuba deletion debate suggests a move to commons: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 January 18#Template:PD-Cuba
–84.46.52.210 (talk) 11:38, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

File removal: Declaration, Constitution & Common Sense

Hi, I have provided a translation to Polish, for USA civics. There is a problem with some of the files. I need these deleted, but I have been refused.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Deklaracja_Konstytucja_Karta_i_dalej.pdf
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Thomas_Paine_-_Zdrowy_rozs%C4%85dek.pdf

The admin has advised to use the Superseded template, but I actually have not endorsed the files I want removed.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Racconish#File_removal%3A_Declaration%2C_Constitution_%26_Common_Sense

Over the Polish Wikisource I've been treated like a bout of vanity, but there was need for a good translation.
I'll stay to the necessary minimum, on Wiki links and pages.
Links
■ The preamble for the US Constitution would be saying that freedom is to be for the select or kin.
https://photos.state.gov/libraries/adana/30145/publications-other-lang/The_US_Constitution_Polish.pdf
dla zapewnienia nam i naszych potomnym dobrodziejstwa wolności...
Nasi potomni means our children, family or kin. Nam potomni is posterity.
■ Amendment VII
"Once the jury pick and choose as they like about facts, no other legal authority can, except by common law."
fakty ustalone przez ławę przysięgłych nie mogą być ponownie rozstrzygnięte...
Rozstrzygać fakty does not exist in standard Polish use. With a preposition, rozstrzygać means to decide, on when or what is to happen.
■ Washington D.C. should be no bigger than 10 square miles.
http://biblioteka.sejm.gov.pl/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/USA-pol.pdf
■ Amendment XII would "require sheets of paper" in Presidential elections.
http://www.kolousa.wssm.edu.pl/res/konstytucja.pdf
Elektorzy zbierają się w swoich Stanach i głosują za pomocą kartek na Prezydenta i Wiceprezydenta...
Pages
■ McHenry would have been "enemy fort" (USA anthem)
https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hymn_Stan%C3%B3w_Zjednoczonych_Ameryki
Gdzie wroga wyniosły fort w złowrogiej ciszy tkwi...
■ American nation would have been "begotten" by the Founders (Polish Wikiquote)
https://pl.wikiquote.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln
narodowi, poczętemu z wolności...
(not likely to occur about Piłsudski for example, that he "begot" the people).
I hope this shows that vanity is not the matter. I'll be grateful for help or advice. The files I want removed are damaged, which makes them inferior quality and redundant as well, as I have provided the proper files, worked with their proofreading, and they have been approved, all green.--TeresaPelka (talk) 07:08, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi TeresaPelka. Wikimedia Commons and English Wikipedia are part of the same Wikimedia Foundation family so to speak, but they are independent projects with their own respective policies and guidelines. So, there's not really anything that anyone here, even a Wikipedia administrator, can do to delete those two files. In other words, you're going to have to establish a consensus on Wikimedia Commons that they should be deleted. One thing to try and understand is that anytime you upload a file to Commons under one of the licenses it accepts, you're basically agreeing to release that file forever under that license; in other words, you cannot change your mind at later date per c:COM:LRV. So, even though you might not want to use the file any more, others might find it useful and can continue to do so under the specified license, even if the file is deleted from Commons. So, if there's a mistake in the translation you uploaded, then maybe you can upload a new corrected version of it using the "Upload a new version of this file" link found on each file's page. Another option would be to upload the corrected translation as a completely separate file under a different file name, and then replace the wrong version with the correct version in all the articles where the file is used.

In the same way, English Wikipedia and Polish Wikiquote are also separate projects, which means if you're having you're going to have to try and resolve any problems your having on the Polish Wikiquote latter over there. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:01, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: It wasn't me to upload the files I want removed. --TeresaPelka (talk) 09:55, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

If you just want the files removed from whatever pages they are currently being used on, then you're going to have discuss that on the corresponding talk pages for those pages and see if you can establish a consensus among concerned editors to remove them. You don't need to have the files deleted from Commons for them to be removed from another Wikimedia Foundation project. Similarly, if you want to add your own versions of the files to certain page, you're going to need to discuss that on those same talk pages. If you can establish a consensus that your versions are more correct or accurate translations, then your versions will be added to pages. There's not much more you can try to do than that since basically most disagreements about content are generally resolved by discussing things on talk pages and establishing a consensus one way or another. Maybe things work differently on Polish Wikiquote, but as I stated earlier there's not much that anyone here on English Wikipedia can about disputes happening on some other Wikimedia Foundation project; you're going to have to try and resolve things on that project with the members of that project's WP:COMMUNITY. If you want some opinions from Polish speakers on your translations and the translations uploaded to Commons by those other editors, you can try asking someone at Wikipedia:Translators available, or checking pages like pl:Pomoc:Spis treści. Maybe someone who can speak Polish and edits on Polish Wikipedia or Polish Wikiquote will be able to help you sort things out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:54, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Marking something as missing a source

I found an article that presented something as a fact, and didn't list a source for it. (It said that there was oboe in a queen song, and that John Deacon played it). That seemed weird to me, so I googled it and couldn't find anything at all. However, I didn't want to delete it, because I'm assuming that the person who put it there had some reason for it and it's not like there's a lot of other sources either. Is there a way to mark it in some way so that someone else can review it? Mark it as needing a source or something? Thanks. NightSD (talk) 07:45, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi NightSD. You can follow what's written in WP:BURDEN and tag the unsourced content with Template:Citation needed. This will let others know that the content needs a source for verification purposes. Another option would just be to remove the content outright if you think it's possible something too contentious (e.g. content that falls under WP:BLPSOURCES) to leave in the article. Regardless of what you decide to do, you should make sure to leave an edit summary which explains why when you make the edit because this will make it easier for others to understand what you did and why you did it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:06, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

​When this was added to the article back in back in 2006 it said: contains oboe part. This oboe part was bassist John Deacon's idea. Throughout the years this became scrambled into John Deacon being the oboist (this sort of scrambled information is extremely common in our articles). It is possible that at 7:17 the song contains two seconds of an oboe sampler, but I find no realible sources about it so I've removed it from the article. – Thjarkur (talk) 14:56, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Tagging

What to use to tag a copyvio page? Because I don’t know. The4lines (talk) 18:11, 10 January 2020 (UTC)The4lines

• @The4lines: - Wikipedia:Text_Copyright_Violations_101 has the details. In case the whole page is a copyvio and no clean revision exists, WP:G12 applies, so {{db-g12}}. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 18:16, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks The4lines (talk) 18:20, 10 January 2020 (UTC)The4lines

Chinese Air Force (CAF) cadets trained in the US during WW2

In the "Development of Chinese National Air Force, 1937 to 1945" article, under the section of "Foreign Aid, United States", it has the following statement:

"In March 1945 the cadets completing primary training in India were sent to America to train further. By that time the number of cadets dispatched had reached 1224, of whom 384 managed to return to China and participate in combat."

I have been doing research on this topic for over 10 years and would like to have the source of the above statement, especially the number of cadets "had reached 1224"! My late father is one of the 1224 and he is a member of the Chinese Detachment #10. Altogether there were 19 detachments of cadets dispatched between October 1941 and July or August of 1945.

Any help would be appreciated!

Jack — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:45E0:1380:5438:1459:15F6:7B60 (talk) 10:17, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello; you should address your concerns about the article to its talk page, Talk:Development of Chinese Nationalist air force (1937–45). 331dot (talk) 10:21, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

As is hinted at on that talk page, the article was originally uploaded in 2005 as a single chunk, more than twice as long as the version now existing, by an IP editor thought to be Russian and perhaps using a translation of a Russian text whose identity is unknown to us. Although the article has been extensively edited since, and shortened to about 40% of its original size, nearly all of it remains without any cited references, including the particular passage that Jack is asking about.

The quality and detail of the text does seem high, so it would be really useful if someone could identify the original source, but this would probably need someone bilingual in English and Russian with access to relevant texts, likely in a large Russian library, since the ur-source might well not be online. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.208.126 (talk) 21:43, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

New Content

Hello, My name is Andy Bethea and I would like to begin a page about me. I am an actor/author and can be searched on IMDb and my books are available at amazon and most online book stores. I need help because I don't feel comfortable writing about myself but my agent says having a page will help me in my career, on social media and make me more searchable. So my question is, is there anyone willing to write it for me? I would offer my email address to provide any information that cannot be found or information about projects that are ongoing. Sorry, I can't offer any pay for this at the moment. IMDb will provide previous projects for verification.

Thank you in advance

Andy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acbethea (talk • contribs) 21:08, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Acbethea, No.

Wikipedia is not your soapbox, no matter what your agent claims; Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and only covers notable subjects. Paying someone to write for you would lean very heavily on the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of service, and would require following all the rules provided in WP:PAID and is generally no-go territory for good reason. MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 21:15, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

if you are truly a notable subject, an article will be written on you in due time. MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 21:18, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Take a look at WP:NAUTHOR. Do you satisfy the criteria? I did a very quick google search and could not find any significant coverage from reliable sources (IMDb is not a reliable source).--Darth Mike^(talk) 21:17, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

First, thank you for the reply...Second, I asked because I didn't know. Bit much for just a question but again, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acbethea (talk • contribs) 21:50, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

@Acbethea: Just remind your agent that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not social media or an avenue for promotion. RudolfRed (talk) 22:11, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Help and maybe adoption.

I have trying really hard to write a Draft but it has been declined twice. I really would like a more experienced editor to help me with and/or adopt me. Thanks Flalf (talk) 17:12, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

• Hello, Flalf. I do not have the time to look at the sources right now, but the thing you should strive to do is to demonstrate that this person has been talked/written about at length by multiple reliable independent sources. "At length" means that a short quote by him in a newspaper or a biography in a listing of author biographies will not do; "independent" exclude interviews given by the subject.

Also, a minor point: he was arrested by Paul Biya... (1) is strictly speaking wrong (unless Paul Biya personnaly performed the arrest, which I doubt) and (2) really needs an independent source (it does seem a safe bet that the arrest of a political dissenter was made at the dictator's behest, but it still needs a source other than political pamphlet sympathetic to the dissenter). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 17:24, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

There are other sources but most are behind a paywall. Flalf (talk) 20:42, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

If you are able to access the paywalled sources, you may use them. What the article lacks right now is sources which do more than mention Gorji Dinka in passing. An article about the conflict is not as good a source for your article as an article about the man. Also, what has he been doing since the 1980s?--Quisqualis (talk) 22:54, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Clarification please for adding a filmography

Could the Teahouse participants kindly help me to clarify how to add a filmography to an article and what are the requirements for adding specific films? I've had conversation previously about tables vs. lists but in looking at articles in Wikipedia - I see that they are all over the map. Some lists have no Wikilinks and no references and some have a few references and/or Wikilinks and some have all Wikilinks. If a filmmaker has an existing Wikipedia page - is it required that each film entry be proven to be notable, i.e its own page? I also see often in artists' biographies, that lists of exhibitions do not always have references to reviews written about them that support each entry. The references often refer to the gallery websites etc. Specifically, I am referring to the edit request made on the Kent Tate talk page where I have prepared and requested to add a select filmography of this filmmakers films dividing them into experimental films and exhibitions. This list consist of specific films that have been screened or installations that have been presented in Canada or internationally. Your help clarifying the requirements made by the responding editor that each film requires an reliable, independent secondary source. Your clarification on these requirements will be greatly appreciated! It was my understanding that if an artist/filmmaker has been established as notable then a reasonable list of works would be allowed? Thank you! LorriBrown (talk) 18:10, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@LorriBrown: You are correct that there's no hard and fast rule about how to present a filmography. For Tate, I would add a section called Notable works, and put in the films and exhibitions mentioned in the article, with a source after each. Use the <Ref name = XYZ/> code to reuse your refs. See Help:Footnotes#Footnotes: using a source more than once. If there are more, add whatever you can find independent third party sourcing for. If the list gets too long, and you have lots of sources, you can decide to then leave it as is, collapse it or fork it, but it all depends on how much you have and how good the sourcing is. If all there is is what shows now, you'd be fine with that short section called "Notable works". Hope this helps. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:16, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Timtempleton for your reply. The question is that this filmmaker is a producer/director/editor/sound designer of independent, short, experimental films that have been screened and exhibited in Canada and internationally. The filmmaker is distributed by three Canadian distributors, has some of their film previews on Vimeo or IMDb or on the distributors' websites or on their own website. It has been determined as per prior discussions that this person is notable. The films do not have Wikipedia pages. These films have not been widely writen about by independent reviewers - they are experimental short films. It was my understanding that if an individual is noteworthy that a short list of their work would be allowed. I have COI with this person so I've prepared a list and have requested an edit request for this list to be added - and it has been denied because there is no independent third party sourcing available for several of these - only the film festival pages. There is a newspaper article and a third party article for one of the movies that received an award. The confusion for me is that because there is COI with the subject this post is held to a higher standards than a large portion of articles that are in Wikipedia. I see having looked at many artists and filmmakers and have created pages for other artist that have references to gallery websites for exhibitions or have filmography lists with not reference at all. It leads me to believe this requirement may be subjective. Since no other editors (as of yet) have shown interest in adding content to this page and since I can not change the fact that I have a COI - the only way to try to improve the article is to make edit requests. When I see all types of variations of acceptable format on Wikipedia it make me quite frustrated. This list that I've constructed is not an exhaustive list of every movie this filmmaker has ever created. It is a select list of movies that have been selected for screening or exhibition at international festivals - or have been screened or exhibited in video installations in Canada. Please do look at the edit request I am speaking of on the Talk:Kent Tate page - 9 January 2020 request. It seemed reasonable to me but I am the one who created it. Further help requested please & thank you! LorriBrown (talk) 21:49, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Additionally, Timtempleton To hopefully clarify why I am so perplexed by this denial for my edit request - I have created a short list of examples: Kelly Richardson and the following are from the list of Category:Canadian experimental filmmakers which includes: Sarah Abbott, Ken Anderlini, Jack Chambers, Millefiore Clarkes, Denis Cote, Daniel Cockburn, Jonathan Culp, Patricia Gruben, Rick Hancox, Mike Hoolboom, G.B. Jones. This list has more filmmakers but I think there are enough examples here to express the point that these lists do not all have references - or Wikipedia pages for these films. Thank you again!LorriBrown (talk) 22:17, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@LorriBrown: There are one or two things going on here - 1) you stated a COI and 2) because of that or maybe another reason the article is getting attention. Many existing articles were created when there was little oversight, but newer articles are held to a higher standard, so you can't point to other examples of poor articles as reasons to change policy. See WP:OTHERSTUFF. I see that the subject requested deletion so this might be a moot point. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:28, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Timtempleton The reason the subject has requested a deletion is because much of the content was removed from the article prior to its AfC approval and subsequently when I have attempted to make edit request - the responding editor has removed additional content. When I attempt to add content I have been denied. This is not a mute point - it is the point! The article can be improved and should be improved. The WP:OTHERSTUFF argument is really not a good argument. It certainly is hard to argue with but still not a reasonable one from my perspective. If this is true then these articles should also be held to the higher standard as well - and they are not. It feels quite subjective and should be more consistently implemented.LorriBrown (talk) 22:40, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@LorriBrown: there are too many articles and not enough people to fix them - we are all volunteers. If you'd like to see fairness in action, nobody will successfully stop you if you go ahead and delete any promotional and/or unsourced info from any of the other similar articles. If anyone tries while you are correctly following policy, then they are likely connected editors (or hypercommitted fans), and will eventually be blocked. You're welcome to request an article deletion, but I think having better sourced material in a smaller article is better than nothing. Since this is a public encyclopedia, nobody can claim ownership, and anyone can edit if they are following policy and are not being disruptive. If you want to post info that is exactly how you want it and controlled by you only, there are better forums. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:51, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@LorriBrown: My experience with filmographies is limited to Sasha Grey#Film and common sense: Folks don't want to see all her (ca. 200) adult + other films, that would violate several "what wikipedia is not". OTOH no adult film at all, even if it can be wikilinked, would be UNDUE. So many films are only indirectly covered by external links (IMDb etc.), likewise Kent Tate's vimeo account is covered by an external link.
If you suggest a filmography on the talk page—wikilink to your draft, no need to flood the talk page—and there are no serious objections that's it, somebody should copy it to the article, and maybe trim it if they feel that it's too much. Films mentioned explicitly in the article definitely belong into the filmography. The opposite is tricky, can the filmography contain films not mentioned in the article? I think yes to some degree, if it's wikilinked or at least sourced, but not everything, pick what you consider as notable (by the quality of your sources). –84.46.52.210 (talk) 12:18, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

@84.46.52.210: Thank you for your reply. I appreciate your perspective. I constructed a short list of films by this artist - supported by the galleries or film festival sources for films that have been exhibited or have been officially selected or have won an award. This and one prior request have both been recently denied due to the lack of reliable third party sources. My contention was that most of all the filmmakers I have seen that have pages in Wikipedia have unsourced lists (detailed above). This argument is dissuaded by the OtherStuffExists argument. I am not interested in deleting content from these articles as @Timtempleton: mentioned could be done within reason – because I believe that these lists should be allowed, perhaps not excessively long lists. I disagree with the notion of OtherStuffExists. If it was that important to Wikipedians that this OtherStuff does not exist then there would be an entirely different process (I would think) for posting and adding to articles. I have made one final attempt to improve this article. I have additional research about current and prior work that could be added – that has been removed by the current edit request editor that always seems to be the only respondent to my numerous requests. I have reached out to editors directly (don’t recommend doing that) and indirectly. I just wanted to see a short list of this filmmaker’s films added to the article…. as a start to expanding and improving this article.

By the way – this artist requested that the article be deleted and an ongoing conversation is currently underway in this regard so unless anyone contest it and providing that is does not get improved they will likely succeed in getting it erased from Wikipedia.  : - ) LorriBrown (talk) 18:35, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link to ongoing deletion discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kent Tate. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:24, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Incorrect link

On this list

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_places_in_Queensland_by_population

Regarding Cherbourg; this links to the Article about French Cherbourg and not the one in queensland

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherbourg

I just thought I'd try to alert someone to this

K — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:6435:BF00:28EA:86E1:FB2C:B3FF (talk) 00:12, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

 Fixed. You can usually click on the "Edit" button and fix articles. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:51, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Can I add a picture of a person from a different website or not?

I just want to add a picture to a page that is outside of Wikipedia.MannyPC (talk) 00:41, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

​Almost certainly not. Only in rare cases are those images published under an appropriate license. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:48, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, MannyPC and welcome to the Teahouse. Usually not. Yoou can only do this in a few limited cases:

1. If the other site includes a statement releasing the image under a compatible licnese, most often CC-by-SA or CC-BY.
2. Very rarely, you write (email) the owner of the site, and they add a license to the page, or email Wikipedia directly releasing it under such a licnse. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for details.
3. the page is usable unde fair use under Wikipedia's quite strict criteria, see WP:NFCC. An image of a currently living person will almost never qualify.

But 9 times out of 10 or more, images from another site cannot be uploaded to and used on Wikipedia. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:52, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Another rare exception is a low-resolution version of a portrait of a dead person, per WP:NFCI #10, but only if free images of that person are not available. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:54, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Fiction as references

I came across an article about floor-coverings that was using a work of fiction as a reference. It's easy to fix but I couldn't find an Help: page specifically saying not to use fiction as a reference for factual articles. Can someone, A) point to such an Help: page and, B) disclose an easy way to search Help: and Wikipedia: pages for answers? Thanks Mensch (talk) 16:31, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hm, that may be considered so self-explanatory nobody wrote it down. WP:Reliable sources does not mention "fiction". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:42, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

A bit like "but the fridge did not have a warning saying "Do not slam the door into your head 15 times"". Its sad but I suspect we may need to say "fiction is not an RS for real world facts".Slatersteven (talk) 18:51, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@Slatersteven: You know you can sue..? François Robere (talk) 19:53, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Congratulations, Mensch. I've been on WP 10+ years but I can't remember encountering this question before. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:11, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

FWIW - I've commonly seen "In popular fiction" subsections, which I know annoy many editors, but that would be an appropriate use of a fictional work as a source. And of course don't forget the numerous "Blank in fiction" genre articles. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:05, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Here I slightly disagree. Such subsections/articles should be cited to a decent secondary source that noticed that the pop-cult exists. Plot-sections are an exception, and they also annoy many editors. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:20, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

In two minds, yes I see no issue with them, and wp:or means we should not be deciding if something is a cultural reference (say a major plot element vs a bit of scene dressing). But its also all pretty much trivia (which we should not really have). I suppose I err on the side of "it is interesting", and thus would judge each entry on that, is it in fact interesting.Slatersteven (talk) 10:26, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

I think we need to see the context of this question.Slatersteven (talk) 10:26, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Here is the example, "Most U.S. Navy warships removed their linoleum deck coverings following the attack on Pearl Harbor, as they were considered too flammable. (Use of linoleum persisted in U.S. Navy submarines.</ref> Beach, Edward L., Jr. “Run Silent, Run Deep” and “Dust on the Sea”.</ref>)" Found at Linoleum#Use I 'broke' the reference to make it render. I'm familiar with cultural references and while I find them overused I tend to leave those alone. Mensch (talk) 11:53, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Then no, I would say this is not as fiction is not generally regarded as RS for facts.Slatersteven (talk) 12:24, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

• I've WP:BOLDly created Wikipedia:Fiction as references as a redirect back to here (permalinked). ^{[Username Needed]} 12:00, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

• I've also replaced the ref with a {{Citation Needed}}. ^{[Username Needed]} 12:05, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

• This discussion was mentioned at WP:RSN § Interesting question at the Teahouse, so I'll copy over what I said there: The most applicable guideline is Wikipedia:Reliable sources § Context matters (WP:RSCONTEXT). A claim in a work of fiction is not reliable for anything outside of the context of its fictional universe. — Newslinger talk 10:31, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Posting A Page

I'd like to post a Page. Can anyone assist me on where to start? Lots of info how, but nothing on where to start.

Best,

Steven Trop — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steven Trop (talk • contribs) 10:06, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Steven Trop, welcome to the Teahouse. You might find Your First Article of help. It will avoid disappointment if you prepare a new article as a draft via the Article Wizards, so you can get feedback if it doesnt yet meet all our requirements. Creating a new, acceptable article is the hardest thing you can do here. It is best to learn the basics of editing in small steps, and you might find The Wikipedia Adventure worth doing. Hoping this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:02, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Why?

I wonder why most blocks by new users last for 31 hours. Is this the admins' magic number, Iris there some concealed guidelines as for how long a first block should last?tLoM (The Lord of Math) (Message; contribs) 01:20, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

An IP block? Yea I don't know why an IP block is 31 hours either... --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:16, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

The options in a drop-down menu on the block form are: ..., 24 hours, 31 hours, 36 hours, ... It's possible to write a time manually but it's easier to select from the list. 31 hours means they cannot come back the same time next day. It's the default for IP's in Twinkle. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:45, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, PrimeHunter is correct. There is nothing that mandates a 31 hour block but it is believed to be a slightly more effective deterrent than a 24 hour block, since it more affects the vandal's daily disruption pattern. It is more of an entrenched custom enshrined in a pull-down menu than an official policy. Any administrator could set a 29 hour block or a 34 hour block, but that is a bit more work. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:04, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

The Lord of Math You might also want to see User:Magister Mathematicae/31 hours from 2005, which may be the origin of the convention. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 08:45, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

and MediaWiki talk:Ipboptions#31 hour block?, the discussion that lead to 31 hours being a default option. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 13:53, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Dear Administrators,

Is it possible to edit some articles on wikipedia ? also can I produce an article myself ? I am beginning to learn as I just recently joined wikipedia.

Regards

Kajmakcalan (talk) 12:37, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia and to the Teahouse, Kajmakcalan. Most of us here are not administrators, just experienced editors keen to help others, like you. Yes, this is "the encyclopaedia that anyone can edit" - see our five core principles. Please see the answer to the same question about article creation immediately above this one. No article whose subject fails to meet our Notability Criteria is accepted, so it is important to find reliable sources to support all that you want to add. Come back if you have any further questions. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:12, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Don't forget to add WP:Reliable sources for additional information that you add. Dbfirs 14:42, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

need help with the 10 required edits to be auto confirmed

As a first step, I really do not understand what or where to find articles that need editing. Thanks for helping — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pouchcove (talk • contribs) 16:58, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

@Pouchcove: welcome to the Teahouse. Your question is a little difficult to respond to, but the best strategy would be for you to look at articles about subjects that interest you, and work on them. Why do you want to become autoconfirmed? --bonadea contributions talk 17:42, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

​Click here twice and then click on "Edit suggested article". It will point you to an article that has formatting or spelling issues that you can assist with. – Thjarkur (talk) 19:08, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

@Pouchcove: There are always typos and other cleanup that needs to be done. Check out WP:TYPO. That's how I started editing. There are links at the bottom of that page to other similar projects such as grammar and fixing common mistakes. RudolfRed (talk) 20:01, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Draft:The Masked Singer (American season 3)

Me and my friends need help with this page. The Masked Singer season 3 is less than a month away and there’s no page for it so we created a draft but it keeps getting decline. And now it has just been rejected, and we don’t understand why. Can you help us? Rider0101 (talk) UTC 14:46, January 11, 2020 —Preceding undated comment added 14:55, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Rider0101, I see that you have repeatedly tried to create an article on this topic, but each time you have failed to establish that the topic is notable (for what that word means here, click on the blue link). The last time, it was not just declined (as failing that show that the topic is notable), but rejected (meaning that the subject is not notable and you are wasting your time trying to improve it). As the topic is a show which has not yet been broadcast, it's not surprising that its notability can't be established. I suggest you wait until a month or so after it has been broadcast; by then it may be easy to find reviews etc. which establish its notability. Wikipedia has no deadline.   Maproom (talk) 15:04, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

But how can submit it if the only button is ask for advice? Rider0101 (talk) UTC 15:09, January 11, 2020 —Preceding undated comment added 15:13, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Rider0101, a reviewer can resubmit it using the script. I suggest you ask at either wp:AFCHD or here in a few months. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 16:13, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Another of you asked the same question at the AFC Help Desk. Here is my answer from there:

User:Magitroopa, User:Rider0101, User:Heartfox - The draft is being rejected so much now because the draft is being submitted so many times now without addressing the concerns of the reviewers. I and other reviewers said to discuss whether to create a separate article for season 3, which would split the series article]], at the series talk page. There has been no real discussion at the series talk page, only statements that the season is about to start and that there should be an article, but nothing resembling discussion or consensus. I assume that is why User:CatcherStorm Rejected the draft as Not Sufficiently Notable, after repeated requests to discuss notability were ignored with idle resubmissions instead. This does not mean that the topic will not be notable after the season starts. It means that the reviewer did not consider the topic to be notable at this time, and did not think that the draft was likely to be improved by quick editing and resubmission. When the season starts and the season becomes notable, the Rejected draft can be moved out of the way to allow development of a new draft. Until then, continued resubmission is tendentious. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:14, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

I am aware that some future TV shows and other unreleased "stuff" have articles. That doesn't mean that they should have articles, possibly only that no one has tagged them for AFD yet. The usual rule in Wikipedia is that unreleased "stuff" that is still in production (or not yet in production), such as future films and unpublished books, is not notable. If you can obtain a local consensus that the third season of The Masked Singer is notable before it is aired, then the local consensus is sufficient, but I haven't seen a local consensus, or even real discussion.

If you think that a particular upcoming season of a TV show is notable before it is aired, discuss on the series talk page. If you think that upcoming seasons of TV shows in general should have their own articles, discuss at the TV notability talk page. Otherwise, future TV shows can be described in series articles. Maybe User:AngusWOOF and User:JadenFolf, who have reviewed, may also comment. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:14, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Someone undo my 24 edits without a clearly purpose.

I'm Giangkiefer, Sorry I have to post this, I add a new columns on the article Paty Cantú, on the section albums, and I also create a new columns for singles, with the intent to gain more recognize to the singer, it took me 24 edits, and then user Magnolia677 undo all my 24 edits (as you can see in the article's view history section), that user say it unsourced...I didn't finish my work yet, I will add source when I finish my work, otherwise, that user can add source by herself, just like anyother users, why undo all my 24 edits like that, It took me a whole afternoon to finish those 24 edits. Giangkiefer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giangkiefer (talk • contribs) 15:04, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Giangkiefer: if you add a section to an article, it is your responsibility to add supporting references as you do so, not anyone else's. It you add unreferenced content, you should expect it to be removed. Maproom (talk) 15:08, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Giangkiefer If the edit or edits you want to make will take awhile, you may want to try drafting them in your Sandbox first, then when you are finished you can copy/paste them into the article. You can also mark an article as {{inuse}} while you are working on it. 331dot (talk) 16:03, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Also, your work is not lost. You can undo Magnolia677's deletion and then add the references before hitting publish again. Might be wise to leave a message on M's Talk page, explaining your intent. David notMD (talk) 18:41, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

@Giangkiefer: You wrote with the intent to gain more recognize to the singer. Just a reminder – that's not what the project is about (per WP:NOTPROMOTION). Please also remember to sign your talk page posts by adding a space and four tildes ( ~~~~). Any other sort of manual signature causes problems. Thanks. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 23:11, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

info

Why I can't edit the pages about Republic of Macedonia? How is possible for bulgaro-tatars to write and edit the page about Republic of Macedonia, Macedonians war heroes, the whole history? The information that they put here on Wikipedia are more then a half lies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soniajovan (talk • contribs) 00:50, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello Soniajovan. You didn't read the messages on your Talk page. Your primary mistake, however, is that you are taking your ethnic activism to Wikipedia. What you see in a Wikipedia article is the result of research of reliable sources and, where controversy exists, much discussion (viewable on the article's Talk page). You are not welcome to change Wikipedia content to your preferred picture of the world as it "should be". If you mistake Wikipedia articles for a public forum, you are badly mistaken. Please read the articles in the list posted to your Talk page. They are both relevant and important to your future as a Wikpedia editor.--Quisqualis (talk) 01:45, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Format of Responding in "Request for Comments"

Please refer to this link: Talk:Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019#Request for Comments: Should second line of lead of this article be modified ?

There, you can see the instruction is that the survey should have the vote and the reasons should be given in the Discussion section. One editor has responded in this way, but others have put both the votes and their reasons in the Survey section.

Which is correct ?

Thanks.

Kmoksha (talk) 23:24, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Kmoksha. The "Survey" section is for editors to express their opinion on the specific question and their policy-based reasons for thinking so. The "Threaded discussion" section is for discussion about relevant matters broader than the specific question posed in the RFC. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:07, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Cullen328 Thanks for your response. Can I ask you another question which I asked earlier here but noone answered that. What exactly is a "Mainstream Source" ? Is it strictly according to what the wiki policy WP:Wikipedia is a mainstream encyclopedia says or is it flexible as per what is agreed by means of Consensus in a particular context ?

Kmoksha (talk) 00:48, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, Kmoksha. I have answered this question in the separate section you created below. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:15, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Pauline Quirke DOB

Can any one help me?..administrarors?,I put in her dob and was quickly deleted by ~~ Ninjarobotpirate ~~ ,its her correct dob and it has always been on here,if this is going to happen all dobs should therefore be deleted?Its rather petty as everywhere on the net her dob is this same and always has been,it a few mnths later than my dob why i know its correct,Maybe i should write to Pauline herself? ~~ Drew270 ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drew270 (talk • contribs) 22:36, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Drew270. You added a date of birth, but you didn't add a source that readers can check to see that it's correct, which is why you were reverted. If you want to add a date of birth to the article, you'll need a reliable source you can cite. See WP:VERIFY for more information on this. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:40, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Thankyou Cordless Larry but the/her dob has always been on here from 2001 since i joined the internet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drew270 (talk • contribs) 22:46, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

That's not an excuse to add it back without a source, Drew270. Once something has been removed from an article, it shouldn't be added again without a reliable source. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:50, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

@Drew270: Also see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS – there are 6 million articles here; a lot of them have bad information in them that has never been challenged. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to improve it. Also, Wikipedia is one of the most used sites on the internet. Lots of other sites copy directly from us (some without attribution), while many thousands of others may "borrow" information. A piece of data that's been "here since 2001" has now been copied in thousands of places on the net. That doesn't make it correct. That's why we need a reliable source that has used some kind of human editorial control to verify the information. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 23:42, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

And see also our guideline on dates of birth for living people, Drew270. An artilce about a living person should not contain an exact date of birth, only a year, unles the DOB has already been widely published elsewhere, or published wiuth the apparent consent of the subject, such a son the subject's ,own web site. Franky, ther is in most cases little enecylopedic value to the exact DOB --m the year gives sufficient context to tell hoe the person fints into history, and how old the person was at particular events. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:46, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism templates

The Template:Uw-vandalism1 template says that "one or more of your recent contributions have been undone". How recent does the unconstructive edit have to be to be considered "recent"? 125 Beethoven (talk) 02:50, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, 125 Beethoven and welcome to the Teahouse. There is no hard and fast rule on that. Most often such a template will be placed within a day or so of the act of vandalism, or at least within a day of its discovery. If the vandalism is more than a couple of weeks old, I personally would tend not to use that template, but a different template or hand-compose a message. Or one could "subst" the template and then edit its wording to fit the specific case at hand. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:55, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, 125 Beethoven. I am not aware of a formal definition of "recent" in this context but I am inclined to think that hours or even a day or two qualifies. Be aware that use of escalating templates is recommended most of the time, but not mandatory. You can write a custom crafted warning, or you can modify the language in an existing warning template. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:58, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

s' vs. s's

Is James' correct, or James's? Just to check. Thanks, Thatoneweirdwikier Say hi 06:12, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

@Thatoneweirdwikier: See MOS:POSS. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 07:29, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

And to pull out the relevant bit. Nouns and names should be made possessive with the addition of 's even if they end in S already. So, James's is correct. If that makes them difficult to pronounce (which I don't think James's is) you can try to reorder the phrase. James' is never right except in the unlikely scenario that you are taking about several people called Jame... Hug^syrup 09:43, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Hugsyrup, both are correct. See https://english.stackexchange.com/a/130960/73636 --Danielklein (talk) 05:30, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

I am referring to Wikipedia’s guidance. See MOS:POSS as mentioned above. Hug^syrup 07:08, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

It's not as clear cut as "Wikipedia says". Does Wikipedia use British English or American English? It depends. Is James's or James' correct? It depends. See Apostrophe#Singular nouns ending with an "s" or "z" sound. If an article already used one spelling predominantly I wouldn't edit it to use the other, but I would edit it for internal consistency, making them all the same as the majority. Which should you use on Wikipedia? Lacking any other clear direction, James's is preferred for new articles. That doesn't make James' wrong as you asserted. It's not Wikipedia's place to dictate what correct English is. --Danielklein (talk) 06:20, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Sri Lankan film and actor articles

There is a prolific Sri Lankan Wikipedian who is seemingly creating an article for every single Sri Lankan film, TV show and actor (Special:Contributions/Gihan_Jayaweera). Is every Sri Lankan film, etc. notable enough to be included on Wikipedia? Should they just be limited to the more noteworthy ones? Should the user be encouraged to add more than a cast list and the release date? Obviously we don't want to discourage this user from contributing to Wikipedia, but perhaps their efforts could be refined into higher value work? --Danielklein (talk) 23:06, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Danielklein, I have not reviewed their contributions but only briefly scrolled through their talk page. Another Sri Lankan seems to have granted the user "Sri Lankan Wikipedian of the year" for 2019. So, I am guessing that at least from the Sri Lankan perspective, they are already doing a high value work. You are correct that not all such things are notable, but from my own experience, only a small fraction of such things that are notable in my country and offline can be shown to be notable using online sources alone. (And of course, there is no way to know if they are creating articles indiscriminately. Perhaps they are already picking the more notable ones of the bunch. After all, South Asia can churn out movies like no other region.) So, third world topics get a bit of a leeway when interpreting notability on the basis of available sources. There is nothing wrong with creating stubs per se. The article needs to make clear why the subject is notable either by showing that the subject meets one of the special notability guidelines or the general notability guideline. Other than that, creating short articles is fine. In fact, that is how Wikipedia began: with thousands and thousands of stubs. There are users who value article quality over article quantity, but for the developing world, I would say stubs on notable topics are just as valuable as in-depth coverage of high priority topics. If nothing else, this allows unregistered editors from those countries who are just getting acquainted with the internet or the Wikipedia to get into editing. Finally, since the editor in question is a trusted WP:AUTOPATROLLED user, they are expected to meet minimum quality and notability standards in their creations. After considering the above points, if you are still concerned that many of their articles might not, you could politely raise it with the user at their talk page. Note that I am not pinging the user in question here and therefore kept my response as general as possible, but if we continue to further discuss them, we should ping them to this discussion, or it would be talking behind their backs. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:09, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Gihan_Jayaweera I believe many of your articles are in violation of WP:PLOT. I think overall you are doing fine work on Wikipedia. I would just like to see articles that establish their notability. A list of every Sri Lankan film, TV show, and actor belongs on IMDB, e.g. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1172522/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0, but not every film is automatically notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia. --Danielklein (talk) 00:45, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Danielklein, Thank you all for comments. I need to remind you that, I made those articles on the behalf of Cinema of Sri Lanka, but nothing else. Because, when compare with highly fan based Bollywood, Kollywood and Tollywood movies in my neighbor country, Sri Lanka is starting to develop as one of the critically acclaimed movies in past decade or so. Many Sri Lankan films won international awards and some of them were even included in Top 100 Asian Films. Eg. Gaadi. I also should note you everyone that, I cannot included every bit of sections for an article such as plot, production, reception, awards, etc. I just started it and other Sri Lankan Wikipedians should contribute that article with their efforts by adding a plot or production sections. So I leave this in here. Without criticizing a work, I think it is better to fill those gaps in my articles. That will be a great help for my lovable small island in South Asia. Cheers!!! Gihan Jayaweera talk 06:35, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Let's continue this conversation at your talk page. --Danielklein (talk) 06:26, 12 January 2020 (UTC)