Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1075

Archive 1070

←

Archive 1073

Archive 1074

Archive 1075

Archive 1076

Archive 1077

→

Archive 1080

how is the Article ?

below is my Article "Draft:CloudEnd Platform" Cheeku009 (talk) 06:15, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Cheeku009: I've left a note on the draft. You added three identical sources (even down to the part of the URL after the domain) that are nothing but regurgiation of a press release, and two of them are dead, not that it matters, as a press release does nothing to resolve the notability problem for which the draft was previously declined. There has been no other change to the draft since then. If someone would explain how to withdraw your request for review, I'd suggest you do that. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:35, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: . hi Alan, Thank you for the comment. I didnt know the same articles cannot be used. I have removed the dead links and repeated Articles. Any other recommendations ? Thanks in Advance.—[Cheeku009 (talk)]— —Preceding undated comment added 19:28, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Red links

Why do names appear with red underline links in articles when there is no article about them? Why not just have their name? 314WPlay (talk) 18:45, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

You'll find an explanation at WP:Red link. Those links are where an editor believes that an article might reasonably exist in the future. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:53, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: Thank you. This was one of the things I had always wondered about Wikipedia but was too afraid to ask. Also thanks for the teahouse talkback template! 314WPlay (talk) 19:31, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Essays

Hello I am User:HelloImAStudent again, and is there a site here to post essays? Maybe on WikiBooks or something? —Preceding undated comment added 15:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@HelloImAStudent, Hello & welcome, by essay I presume you mean theoretical work related to school activity right? If yes, then no, posting essays here are fundamentally what we call WP:OR, which isn’t permitted here. Celestina007 15:35, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, HelloImAStudent; I guess from your mention of Wikibooks that you're not asking just about Wikipedia, but the whole Wikimedia stable of wikis. Wikibooks would be the closest, but unless your essay is somethign that might reasonably form part of a textbook, I don't it's a fit there either: see b:WB:Welcome. If your essay might be part of a suite of teaching materials, it might fit in Wikiversity. But otherwise, I don't think there's a place for it. Perhaps you could create a blog: see Category:Blog hosting services? --ColinFine (talk) 17:04, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Celestina007 and ColinFine. These have been helpful.

And Colin, I left a message on your Talk Page! HelloImAStudent (talk) 19:50, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Create An About Me page

Please, I will also like to ask, how do I create an about me page. ShimoriBrown (talk) 15:02, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi ShimoriBrown see the User Page guideline which explains what you can do with your user page. In short you can place content that is about your interests and activities as a Wikipedia editor, it is not meant to be used as a general autobiography or resumé. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:09, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@ShimoriBrown: Please keep in mind that we are here to build this encyclopedia. User pages are supposed to be a small part of what goes on here, to make it a little more personal. Wikipedia is not a social media platform (see that link for more about this). Some people are here for years, with many thousands of edits, and have little to nothing on their user pages. While mine is fairly full, that's happened over a long time – of my ~5,000 edits this year, 20 were to my user page. When a brand new user seems to care only about their user page, instead of working on articles that are unrelated to them or their business, they risk looking as though they are not here to achieve the goals of the project. Thanks for understanding. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:37, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

I requested an article, should I just have written it?

Hi! I requested an article because after reading what it takes to write an article, it seemed like a lot were in the queue (so posting would take a long time) and I've never written one before, so the formatting a research seemed time consuming/daunting. How long after I post the article request do you estimate it will be written? Or is it worth it to write it myself? 24.247.77.254 (talk) 15:11, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Requested Articles has a backlog of tens of thousands of requests, and some may never be seen as a result. If you want to see an article created, you are welcome to use Articles for creation to submit a draft article for review. 331dot (talk) 15:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

IP 24.247.77.254: As you said, though, the research is a difficult and important task. Without the right sources, you have nothing on which to base the article. Do take note of WP:COI if you have any relation to the subject about which you want to write. As far as the formatting, the easiest way to get that right is by working on existing articles and seeing how they are put together. Depending on your experience and field of knowledge, the syntax learning curve can vary widely, but there are a lot of examples to work with in the existing article base, as well as a decent amount of documentation and volunteers to answer questions here and at the help desk. I do recommend creating an account, which will let you set some preferences, give you access to helpful gadgets, and facilitate communication with others. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:55, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Citation Troubles

Hello!

I cannot find any websites that support the final paragraph on this page. However, I can't find any sources that suggest otherwise. Is it acceptable for this paragraph to be left without citations? Swadge3 (talk) 01:07, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Swadge3: Welcome to the teahouse. Yes, there should be sources on that final paragraph. Looking around, I could not find any new sources for the article. I have nominated it for deletion as I do not think it meets our notability standards. You can see the discussion here.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:59, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I need the help of your expert editors for my Wikipedia. Thanks

 Kohlivinay (talk) 21:42, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Kohlivinay. I'm afraid that my expert advice on User:Kohlivinay/sandbox is to stop trying to create an autobiography on Wikipedia. That is not what it is for. Please read WP:Autobiography for more information. --ColinFine (talk) 21:47, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Kohlivinay: Just a note on terminology: "Wikipedia" is the term for this entire project – all 6 million "articles" plus additional support "pages" (like this one). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:20, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

two basic tools for wikipedia

I am drafting an article for Wikipedia. What is the difference between Talk and Sandbox? WStlw 22:51, 1 September 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by WilliamSell (talk • contribs)

User talk pages are a place to communicate with a particular user. Article (or other ) talk pages are a place to discuss a particular page. A sandbox is a place to test editing functions. If you are drafting an article then you may use your own sandbox (not the main Wikipedia sandbox) but a sub page of your user page would be better. If you wish to have other editors contribute to the draft you can work on it in Draft space. Meters (talk) 22:56, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Please use ~~~~ to autosign your posts. Meters (talk) 23:01, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@WilliamSell: Some links to the pages described above:

• Your (user) talk page is at User talk:WilliamSell (or Special:MyTalk) ;
• Your sandbox is User:WilliamSell/sandbox ;
• A new article called "My new topic" can be drafted at User:WilliamSell/My new topic or, if you want others to contribute to it, Draft:My new topic.

There are links to your talk and sandbox pages at the very top of pages on the desktop site. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:30, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Scientific

Are the "language family" section in the English language article, and "parent systems" in the Latin script, and the "scientific classification" in the Human article all based of the same concept of showing the ancestral lineage of things? 47.150.227.254 (talk) 23:39, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

IP 47.150.227.254: I suggest asking at the Reference desk. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:31, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

A Question About Table

Is it possible to align header or caption to left or right? If it's possible, how can I do such thing? 59.0.101.19 (talk) 00:54, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

IP 59.0.101.19: Yes, but it's not usually appropriate. Look at this with the source editor:

This is a left-aligned caption

Left header	Centered header	Right header
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx	xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx	xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

—[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:40, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Article Declined

Hi there! I'm looking for some help as I enjoy making edits on Wikipedia and have enjoyed doing so. When I was making some edits I noticed that someone had tried to create a page on me as an actress but was unsuccessful so I decided to start a page as I would be accurate in putting the correct information about myself and just got a message back to say declined. Do I need to get someone else to create a page other than myself, say from a producer from one of the television shows I am known for as its extremely hard navigating this and feel that there is a obvious need to have a page that has correct information on mysyself as an actress. Look forward to hearing from you. Laura Laura Amy Meakin (talk) 02:09, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Laura Amy Meakin. Writing an autobiography is strongly discouraged. Your attempt was unreferenced other than a link to another Wikipedia article, which is not acceptable. Please read and study Your first article before proceeding. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:16, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Laura Amy Meakin: as Cullen says, autobiographies are strongly discouraged. The best thing to do is to wait for someone else to create the page, as it will be neutral. In the meantime, if you feel there is an obvious need to have a page that has correct information on you, then starting your won personal web site is the obvious answer.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:19, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Laura Amy Meakin: You might also want to read the essay An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Subjects of articles in this encyclopedia have practically no direct control over its content. If there is a clear, undisputable, factual error, you can request a correction (just as with a newspaper article), but independent editors will choose what sources to use and how to best reflect them based on our principles. With your own website or social media page, you have creative control and can choose what to present and how, which seems to be a far better solution. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:55, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Isaiah age when

 92.49.73.232 (talk) 03:23, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

IP 92.49.73.232: If you have a question about editing or using Wikipedia, please ask it. If you want to know some piece of information that may be in Wikipedia, I suggest searching for it (click on the link) or asking clearly at the reference desk. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:58, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Please Help! an article containing Anti Hindu post has been locked!

This article which describes a Hindu help and service group is being portrayed in the wrong manner as a "militant group" which it is NOT. Please help as I don't know what to do in this case as the article is locked and I am not an administrator also.

article link: Bajrang_Dal Superbsic (talk) 05:47, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Superbsic. Any proposals you have for changes to this controversial article should be made at Talk:Bajrang Dal, with a view toward developing consensus. You must propose changes that comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and you must furnish references to reliable sources that back up the changes you hope to make. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:55, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Running the auto-archival bot.

I thought I had seen an auto-archival bot that goes through references and generates an archive link (on archive.org, iirc). Not able to find the instructions to run that bot on a page / set of pages. I was going through an article today that was created over the years, and had suffered from quite a few dead-links. Seems like that article would have benefited from this bot. Any leads? Ktin (talk) 03:00, 1 September 2020 (UTC) Ktin (talk) 03:00, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ktin: From the article's History page, near the top, there's a line of External tools, including a link to "Fix dead links". The last time I used it, though, it failed to sense that some dead links were actually dead. I ended up checking the "Add archives to all non-dead references" option so it would add archive URLs for all refs and then I went through them and manually marked the ones that were dead (by changing/adding |url-status=dead to the cites). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:56, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1, Thanks a ton! Let me go check it out now. Ktin (talk) 03:59, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1 -- worked like a charm! Thanks. Ktin (talk) 04:32, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

You can also manually add {{Dead link}} tags to the references that are dead but the bot doesn't realize are dead before clicking "fix dead links". I do that periodically. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:25, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Pppery, Awesome! Will try that next. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 05:12, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Pppery: Thanks – that's preferable to adding all the live ones. Do you know if the failure to recognize the dead ones has been reported as a bug? I'm sure I've seen it even when the URL clearly returned a 404 error. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:59, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

It's deliberate, not a bug. To avoid falsely declaring URLs that suffered from some transient error as dead, the bot will only see a link as dead if it's seen it dead 3 times, 3 days apart. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:22, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Pppery: It would be nice if that behavior were optional when run manually. Normally, if I try to visit a cite and find it dead (and reasonably so, like a re-org'd site), I just manually find the archive and add it to the cite. If I see that the article has a lot of cites that are over about 10 years old, and I check some more and find them dead, that's when I want to run the tool instead of checking/recovering them all by hand. In this case, I'd like to be able to tell it to mark them dead if they're dead now, since I don't think there's much harm in it if there's a live archive in this case (i.e., where the cites are old and it's reasonable for them to be dead). Regardless, it's helpful to know that I can just run it again twice a day apart to avoid having to go through and check each cite by hand. Thanks! —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:40, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Is there a deadline for actions that can be reported to ANI?

I’m thinking of reporting a user at ANI for disruptively removing content that at least 2 other users have said to be acceptable, calling those he disagrees with incorrect, refusing to discuss on the article talk page outside of repeated arguments that have been disputed by multiple users, personal attacks, assumptions of bad faith, aspersions, and uncivil behavior. However, the disruptive editing from this user on this page only occurs roughly once a month, with the last time they edited disruptively being a week ago, the last assumptions of bad faith and aspersions were also a week ago, and the last personal attack towards me was a month ago (before I even made an account, but it was directed towards my IP address). I was considering reporting them at ANI if they disruptively edited at any time again, but I was also thinking that by that point the personal attacks, aspersions, and assumptions of bad faith would have been at least a month prior based on the disruptive editing pattern. Am I allowed to report actions from that long ago at ANI? I decided not to report at ANI at that time due to already reporting at DRN, resulting in uncivil behavior from both me and the other user, and me following advice to slow down on the matter and focus on other pages. However, this user’s disruptive and uncivil behavior still concerns me, but I don’t know if I’m allowed to report it until they disruptively edit during or after an RFC that was started on the article talk page 5 days ago, after any signs of uncivil or disruptive behavior so far, and after their concerns of the content breaking WP:V and WP:OR have been handled. I don’t know if I can trust this editor, but it’s either I don’t give the other user a fair chance to redeem themselves, or I report uncivil behavior from at least a month prior. Unnamed anon (talk) 23:55, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Unnamed anon: There is no "bright line" deadline, no. I haven't looked into what precisely is going on, but just based on what you've said you've already reported it and were told to step back from said article, correct? That, combined with it being a month old, probably means it's okay for you not to report it. If the editor's actions are that bad, someone else will report them. -- a lad insane (channel two) 01:27, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Unnamed anon, there are various forms of dispute resolution that should be tried first to deal with chronic behavioral problems. Unless the situation is an emergency, ANI should be a last resort. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:33, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Cullen328, I actually did try the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard before, and that resulted in uncivil behavior from both me and the other user, with both of us criticizing each other instead of focusing on the content. However, I am worried that their disruptive editing will continue despite their concern of content breaking WP:OR being addressed and handled. I have removed what I considered bloat before, and they still disruptively resorted to mass removal while refusing to discuss on the matter outside of edit summaries that included accusations of bad faith, then proceeded to tell me that claims of them ghosting me were nothing more than aspersions, and that I was wrong to disagree with their claims, as well as an unaddressed personal attack from when I was editing with just my IP, and feeling as if they are twisting statements from other users and lying in order to get their preferred version. I feel very uncomfortable with this editor‘s disruptive and uncivil behavior, but the worst of it has been quite some time ago, which is why I initially asked this question. Thank you A lad insane and Cullen328 for giving your explanations. Unnamed anon (talk) 03:24, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Unnamed anon, you admit in your comment above that you engaged in uncivil behavior during dispute resolution. If you file a report at ANI, your own behavior is likely to come under intense scrutiny as well as the behavior of anyone you report to ANI. So, I suggest that you spend a very long time editing without any uncivil or disruptive behavior before setting out to criticize the behavior of other editors. You are now in a very weak position to call for sanctions on other editors, based on what you wrote above. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:09, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Getting my tone right

I'm new to wikipedia and decided after my retirement that I wanted to contribute to a few articles. I've edited a few existing pages but am having trouble with my first attempt at publishing a new article Draft:Ian_Charles_(Scientist). This gets rejected due to tone. I've read the guidance notes on tone to be used and tried resubmitting after adjusting the text but still it gets rejected. It would be great if someone could give me a few examples of how to improve this article so it stands a chance of being accepted. LittleA65 (talk) 08:40, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

LittleA65, here are a few notes of concern about the draft:

• The article seems to be more about what the scientist studies, and not who he is.
• The article sounds a lot like a press release, all praise, and only describing his accomplishments
• The lede does not accurately summarise the contents of the article (read WP:LEDE), for example:
  • Professor Ian Charles' research explores infectious diseases, is the first sentence in the article. This should instead be along the lines of: Professor Ian Charles (born [DATE]) is a British epidemiologist and founder of the Quadram Institute as an example.
• All the article's citations are in one section?
• Per WP:EXTERNAL, there should not be links to other websites outside of Wikipedia in the body of the article.

I suggest reading WP:MFA for more info. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 08:50, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Berrely. It would have been useful to get his kind of feedback during the review rather than a simple terse rejection. I will go off and attempt to improve the article again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LittleA65 (talk • contribs) 08:56, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

How can i make notability in wiki content

 CMS:112 (talk) 09:17, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

CMS:112, what do you mean? Please provide some context. Wikipedia's notability guidelines are here. If you are referencing ABES Engineering College, an article that is tagged with {{Notability}}, it has been tagged with the template as most of the sources are self-published and unreliable, which may mean the article is not notable enough for a mainspace article. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 09:21, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

How to get more attention to a question?

Hi again, so I asked a question about an article on its talk page a long while ago. There was no response. Is there a way to post it to a wider audience than just those Wikipedia editors who happen to see the talk page, so that I might be answered? I'm thinking it might have interest to people in the field if there is a group for such things. 314WPlay (talk) 19:49, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

If the article talk page has a link to relevant WikiProjects, they might be useful places to contact folk interested in that type of subject. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:55, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: Ah yes I’ll try there. Thank you! 314WPlay (talk) 11:01, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Can someone explain and help please?

A user want't to delete the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirk_Monteux

This person states "sources are all unreliable or not useful in establishing notability."

What does this suggest? That this article is a fraud?

Do you need a proof of the actual existence of a person like a birth certificate?

What other proof can a music composer provide than countless publishings on all major music market places?

Isn't being a artist and a member of a family with great musicians thru four generations noticeable? Mediapals (talk) 10:50, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Mediapals: No, sorry, Notability (as Wikipedia defines it) is not inherited from someone's parents or relatives. They must be notable in their own right. See WP:NARTIST and WP:NMUSIC for our criteria on creative professionals. Basically, we need to see that the world has taken notice of that person, not that they've just existed and done their job. (Otherwise, there could be 7 billion articles about people here). Wikipedia doesn't care what a person writes about themselves. It's not that we don't believe they exist (and a birth certificate proves only that). We need to see Reliable, independent sources that have written in detail and in depth about that person. Books, magazines, news media etc are ideal, but not personal websites or social media accounts. Just performance listings, discogs etc are quite insufficient. And, no, it's not suggesting that the article is a hoax - just that the sources used at this time to no show the person merits an article. Anyone can, at any time, put forward any article with poor sources for sa deletion discussion, although we expect them to due some checking beforehand in case those sources have been simply missed, but are readily findable (see WP:BEFORE). Hope this helps. (Oh, and do see this guidance about Conflicts of Interest, should you happen to have a connection with the person through work, friendship or relationship). Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:29, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Mediapals: I have just looked online, and it seems probable that you created this page about yourself. If my assumption is correct, you must 100% definitely declare your connection and not edit the article until you have done so. We strongly discourage anyone attempting to promote themselves on Wikipedia. See WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. I notice the article has been given a PROD notice. Although anyone can remnove that if they contest its removal, I would expect it then to be put forward for a deletion discussion at Articles for Deletion. Anyone wanting to save it would need to find detailed independent sources that talk about Kirk Monteux. Regards Nick Moyes (talk) 11:29, 2 September 2020 (UTC)  

Mediapals, while people may choose to add suitable sources (a useful shorthand is to read WP:42 to learn what is required) the onus is on the person wishing to save the article to prove notability, something that is precisely as it ought to be. Is the gentleman notable in his own right? Fiddle Faddle 11:44, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't aware that writing about my self makes a conflict of interest — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mediapals (talk • contribs) 11:52, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Could be those sources helpful?

http://www.artandpopularculture.com/Berlin_School_of_electronic_music

http://d-nb.info/gnd/138939594 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mediapals (talk • contribs) 12:00, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Mediapals, The first is or appears to be user generated content using mediawiki software, the second is pure fact, but insufficient to verify notability.

For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this article suitable for inclusion (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. Fiddle Faddle 12:04, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

If you examine https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1743486 you will see many simple facts confirmed. These are not able to show that Notability is verified. They are linked to already at the foot of the article Fiddle Faddle 12:09, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is incredibly slow and flat out doesn't work at times. No its not my internet.

Hello, over the past few weeks Wikipedia has been incredibly slow for me. Pages take minutes to load, my edits don't go through sometimes giving me the error,'The server did not respond within the expected time'. File uploads are also very slow despite the files themselves being only a few kilobytes in size. My internet is fine since every other website works perfectly and the issue seems to be isolated to Wikipedia. This issue has made editing Wikipedia an incredibly tedious task and I hope it can be resolved. Prolix 💬 10:57, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Prolix: I did about 900 edits last month, at various times of day, and don't recall any unusual slowness; certainly no more than 5 seconds to load or edit a huge article. My edits are all on enwiki. Are the problems with other wikis? I wonder if it depends on location (no idea what the infrastructure looks like). I'm in southern California. The toolserver and other external stuff is a different story – timeouts and failure not uncommon there. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:16, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: I don't use any other wikis except maybe the occasional commons upload. I doubt its an infrastructure issue either since Wikipedia was fine a few months ago and I'm not experiencing such issues on any other site. Prolix 💬 17:40, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Prolix, have you restarted your device since this problem occurred ? Often this kind of patterns are either local problems, or problems with your local ISP (in that case other devices on the same network likely share the problem). —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:21, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@TheDJ: I've restarted both my desktop and the router multiple times, doesn't seem to solve the issue. If the problem was on the ISP's side why would it be exclusive to Wikipedia? Prolix 💬 17:40, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Prolix: What I meant was that I don't know if you and I are connecting to the same physical web server cluster. I suggest mentioning it at WP:VPT, where the people familiar with server operations are more likely to see it. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:15, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: Alright, I'll put up a request there, thanks for your help! Prolix 💬 13:09, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

I'd like to see an article about Zac Brown Band's "Free / Into the Mystic," and it's relationship with "Into the Mystic."

 69.126.12.110 (talk) 12:48, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

If you would like to create an article, either do it yourself by reading through and following WP:Your first article, or by requesting it at WP:Requested articles. In both instances, please be sure to read the whole page to make sure your article in suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Regards, Giraffer (munch) 12:52, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@69.126.12.110:. And if you wanted to create it yourself, make sure you have reliable sources. Wikipedia needs verifiable content which can be read here and also from reliable sources . Be sure to have secondary sources. Drilling into primary sources is a problem too. I have experienced this too. For reliable sources, Reliable sources and its noticeboard where you ask questions about reliable sources. Regards.Nihaal The Wikipedian (talk) 13:26, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Classics of Western Spirituality (draft)

I've been working on Draft:Classics of Western Spirituality and added {{WikiProject Philosophy and religion}} to the Talk page to improve its odds of a faster review. When someone has a moment, would you mind checking that I've done so correctly? Thanks. BikrBoy (talk) 13:56, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello BikrBoy, and welcome to the Teahouse! That template doesn't exist, so instead I added two separate ones - one for philosophy and one for religion. Regards, Giraffer (munch) 14:20, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Creating a Wiki Article

Is it possible for two people to write a Wikipedia Article together? My brother lives in Georgia, and I'm in California. He's been helping me, but now he has to return to school (he's a teacher). I want to continue the work we've been doing - we're very close to being finished. Kilitzianf (talk) 12:32, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hey Kilitzianf, that's awesome that you two are collaborating together. You can work together in you're sandbox (located here) until your ready to publish. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 12:45, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Kilitzianf, and welcome to the Teahouse. It is fine, indeed encouraged, that tow, or even more, people should work together on a draft or article. I take it that this is Draft:Rotea Gilford, is that correct? The best and most usual way is for each of you to have a Wikipedia account. Do note that Wikipedia accounts are each to be for a single person, and should never be shared.) each person can edit the draft, seeing via the history tab what the other has done.

I do see some problems with the current draft. 1) Other Wikipedia articles are not considered to be reliable sources and may not be cited as reference sources. First of all, such articles might at any given point be affected by vandalism or inaccurate editing. Secondly, it raises the issue of circular sourcing, where article A cites article B, and B cites A. 2) dats uses in citation templates must match one of a limited number of formats. The YYYY/MM/DD format is not6 acceptable. YYYY-MM-DD is, as is MMMM DD, YYYY and DD MMMM YYYY. See MOS:DATES for more details. I just did a quick look, and have not done a through review. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:18, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Kilitzianf I have made a couple of edits to the draft, one to fix a date format, and one to replace two citations to Wikipedia with citations to the newspaper articles already cited in the referenced Wikipedia articles. Similar changes should be made throughout the draft. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:33, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Problems updating new version of Image

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ethiopian_Region_Map_with_Capitals_and_Flags.png

I'm having trouble updating a file I uploaded in March to Wikimedia Commons. Recently, in Ethiopia, they added the new region of Sidama, and so I wish to update my map to reflect that. However, I keep getting renderings of the old file when I view it in smaller sizes. When I click on one of the smaller resolutions, I get an error message. Only when I click on the original 2000x2000 do I see the new image. Any idea what's going on and how I fix it? AvRand (talk) 14:29, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Avrand6: It sometimes can take some time until the server has regenerated the lower resolution subimages. See Help:Purge for urgent cases. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:48, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia page on Sushant Singh Rajput regarding manner of death.

 82.69.118.113 (talk) 16:42, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP, welcome to Wikipedia and to the Teahouse. There are multiple discussions regarding this issue at Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput. If you'd like to discuss changes, or ask questions regarding an article, its talk page is the best place to do so. Many thanks, Ed talk! 16:48, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Who runs Wikipedia

 Dexdunkers (talk) 18:11, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

It is owned and operated by the Wikimedia Foundation: Wikipedia:Administration#Wikimedia_Foundation, but most of the day-to-day stuff is handled by volunteers at each language's Wikipedia which are all seperate projects with their own rules and guidelines. RudolfRed (talk) 18:25, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Why was the Evoque Data Center Solutions page deleted?

Hi folks, We have tried to make the page as factual as possible, and it pertains to a specific company. Please let us know how we can edit the entry to make it conform with Wikipedia's standards. Thanks. StevePR104 (talk) 19:36, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello StevePR104! If you check this page: [1] you'll see who deleted it and why, in the red field. WP:COI and WP:PAID may be of help to you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:44, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@StevePR104, hello and welcome. First I’d like to ask you what you mean by “we” ? Does this mean there are multiple people editing with your account? If yes, then please cease immediately as shared use is not allowed in this collaborative project. Now to answer your question, The Evoque Data Center Solutions page article was speedy deleted because it was very promotional & Wikipedia isn’t a website or platform used to promote anything as such your article qualified to be speedy deleted per WP:CSD#G11 & it was. You might want to read WP:PAID, WP:PROMO & WP:COI. Furthermore an article on an organization is considered notable and worthy of inclusion into the encyclopedia if it satisfies WP:ORGCRIT. To aid you in creating a non promotional article you should read WP:NPOV. Celestina007 19:53, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Please note I have also advised the user on my talk page. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 20:42, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Is there a template for ref. name =

It is easy to do a <ref> but when I am doing a <ref. name = > I always have to look to see where someone else has done that. Is there a template or something of the sort, for when you want to name your reference and the refer to it again. Truth Is King 24 (talk) 19:22, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Truth Is King 24. The "Wiki markup" toolbar includes an entry for <ref name="" />. If you use the Ref toolbar to insert citations, you can fill in the "Ref name" field and it will add a name parameter to the new citation. If you want to add an existing, already named cite in a new place, use the "named reference" button right next to the Templates button. If you use the visual editor, i think these are all available under the cite menu. But is it really so very hard to remember "name=" for a fully manual cite? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:52, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Truth Is King 24: I don't know if it's any easier to remember, but you can use {{R|MyRefName}} instead of <ref name="MyRefName" /> for the additional uses of an existing named reference. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:17, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!Truth Is King 24 (talk) 20:46, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

How to tell how often a page is visited

I've noticed in the discussion concerning a bio page, on the rfc section, that someone commented on the number of times the page has been visited. How does one get this sort of information?Truth Is King 24 (talk) 19:19, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Truth Is King 24 (talk) 19:19, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Truth Is King 24, Welcome! Check Help:Referencing_for_beginners#RefToolbar. The "infowindow" has a field for that. On your above question: Click "View history", then "Pageviews". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:40, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!Truth Is King 24 (talk) 20:47, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

About Wikipedia Donations

Hello, my name is Sir Flemeington, and recently Wikipedia’s has been asking me to donate. Now I love wikipedia and sometimes use it research, and would love to donate but there’s one problem, I’m too young. As a young teen I don’t have a paypal or bank account ect. and since I do love this site, is there any other way I can support Wikipedia? SirFlemeingtonz (talk) 20:38, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello SirFlemeingtonz. The best way for you to support Wikipedia is to learn about its policies and guidelines, and improve the encyclopedia by editing it. To be frank, the Wikimedia Foundation has large cash reserves, and a small financial donation is not necessary. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:43, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

SirFlemeingtonz Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Could a parent or guardian make a donation for you? If they see that it is important to you and worthwhile, they may do so. But I do agree with Cullen328 above; it isn't necessary for you to worry about this right now. 331dot (talk) 20:48, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the answers guys, and my parents do sometimes donate to Wikipedia. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SirFlemeingtonz (talk • contribs) 21:06, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Moving barnstars from talk page to user page (Question)

So I am trying to format my user page and I am wanting to move the 2 barnstars I have to it. I tried a copy/paste of the message in the talk page and it didn't work. What is the correct format/template to do that? Elijahandskip (talk) 18:28, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Elijahandskip (talk) 18:28, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Elijahandskip, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I copy barnstars from my user talk page to my main user page routinely. I do so by copy&paste. The last time I did so was in this edit. Be sure you copy the entire barnstar message. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:51, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

For some Barnstars, Userboxes are available. See my User page for examples. David notMD (talk) 21:23, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Help with clean up needed

I'm unable to clean up an article on an Author with a cited bibliography of his works with ISBNs, because the gate keepers of the article would prefer to defame the author with less relevant political opinions. How can I contribute in such a political environment?

This is my addition: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=G._Edward_Griffin&type=revision&diff=976230771&oldid=976190547 Jzio (talk) 21:19, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Jzio. Irrespective of whether you are right or wrong, you need to stop edit warring right away, and discuss the issue on the article's talk page with other interested editors. If you cannot reach consensus, dispute resolution tells you the next steps to follow. --ColinFine (talk) 22:00, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the response... I'm a new user and people from the outside world are using this false information posted wikipedia funded by an outside political group Media Matters. The referenced source does not even discuss the book, so I'm certainly not wrong to revert the line. Not sure how to move forward based on the principal of honesty and my strong belief against disinformation and fake news. , Jzio

Queer reflections on Baron Wilhelm von Gloeden: a creative reconsideration of pose, gaze and technique. by Xavier Radić BFA ISBN: 978-3-8473-1695-4

Hello, Please can someone help me, I need to know how to reference the above published academic book written by myself. Xavier Radic Zavija 21:36, 2 September 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artium.elegantium (talk • contribs)

Artium.elegantium, your draft, Nudus Calendarium, seems to consist of your original research, and thus is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. Please take a look at WP:Your first article. Thanks.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:20, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Reproducing an ONDB entry

Hello - I'm very new to editing Wikipedia. I wanted to start with something I knew about - the entry for John Pinney

I realise that the ONDB has a very good entry on him. Is there any reason why this can't be reproduced as it stands? Or do I need to write something 'original' using that content? Ruthhenrietta (talk) 13:34, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ruthhenrietta; welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. Unfortunately not directly, for two reasons: first, the ODNB is copyright, and we cannot accept copyright material unless it has been released under a suitable licence. Secondly, it is a tertiary source, and Wikipedia articles should be based on secondary sources. It may be that it cites useful sources.

But if you are new to Wikipedia, I really really advise you not to try plunging straight into the most difficult task there is for an inexperienced editor: creating a new article. We have six million articles, most of which could really do with some improvement (and tens of thousands of which are seriously substandard, and should either be improved or deleted as unsalvageable). I'd suggest looking at the community portal for ideas of where to work - or, of course, choose an area of interest to you and find some articles that need improvement. When you are ready to embark on the Big Project, then read your first article to get an idea how to begin. You might also find WP:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/DNB, people prominent in ODNB of interest. --ColinFine (talk) 13:46, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine - that's really helpful. I'll go back to plan A which is to edit the original page using my own sources. (Hope I've managed to put your name in correctly - I'm on a very steep learning curve!)

Hi, Ruthhenrietta. I see that in my answer I missed that you were proposing to work on an existing article, which made much of my answer irrelevant - apologies. As for pinging me: you got it right, except that pinging another editor doesn't work unless you sign your post: I see you signed your original post, but not your reply. --ColinFine (talk) 16:00, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks again ColinFine - having spent the afternoon writing - another question - it is ok to quote from ONDB if I can't find another source of the information (in this case the date of a marraige and the number of children someone had)? Testing my signature! Ruthhenrietta (talk) 16:59, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, Ruthhenrietta: that worked! Yes, you can certainly source uncontroversial factual data like that from a tertiary source. I would be more cautious of any kind of evaluative material from it. --ColinFine (talk) 22:35, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Need help expanding an article

Hi,

I would like to request help in expanding my article - Draft:Atif Afzal (music composer). I have created the article minimally and have kept it very factual but have found more WP:RS and WP:SIGCOV sources that can be used for expanding it further. If I write any more details, it may come across as a conflict of interest. Could someone please add more data, if possible, from the below references:

• https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/marathi/music/Atif-Afzal-sings-for-Shreyas/articleshow/45533555.cms
• https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/videos/entertainment/regional/marathi/Shreyas-Talpade-goes-gaga-over-Baji-music-director-AtifAfzal/videoshow/46004295.cms
• http://www.radioandmusic.com/entertainment/editorial/news/atif-afzal-lends-his-vocals-first-marathi-track-141215
• https://www.adgully.com/videos/5OdgUpLmtyM
• https://www.indiaglitz.com/music-director-atif-afzal-is-stuned-by-the-response-he-is-getting-for-baji-telugu_amp-news-125429
• https://www.newindianexpress.com/entertainment/review/2015/jan/24/Chinmayi-croons-for-Marathi-flick-Baaji-709048.html
• http://www.zeetalkies.com/celebs-speak/baji-will-offer-a-different-superhero-in-marathi-suhrud-and-nikhil.html
• https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Atif-Afzal/movies?from=mdr
• https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/archive/features/article-34696
• https://urbanasian.com/featured/2015/02/abhijeet-sawant-joins-hands-with-bollywood-music-director-atif-afzal-for-baji/
• https://www.pressreader.com/india/the-asian-age/20150217/283381945363783
• https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Atif-Afzal/news?from=mdr - birth date

Thank you.

AAComposer (talk) 21:35, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, AAComposer. I guess from your words that you are Atif Afzal. Thank you for being open about your conflict of interest; but autobiography is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. If you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability then eventually someboduy will get round to writing an article about you.

Speaking purely for myself, I have no interest in spending any of my volunteer time helping somebody use Wikipedia to promote themselves. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 22:43, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

My Biography

This is my Biography, i did not start it or write it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Woodmore ( I can conclusively prove this is me) the amount of untruths and incorrect information in it is staggering, i have tried to correct it but this has resulted in me getting warings for vandalism and threats of being barred.

All I want to do is make sure a page about me is factual, how can I do that? Stevewoodmore (talk) 13:51, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Stevewoodmore, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm really sorry to learn you've been frustrated by what you've seen about you on Wikipedia. I know it can be confusing when you try to make changes , only to have them reverted. I'll try and point out a few key things which might help. Perhaps the most important thing to say is that everything in an article about a living person should have an inline citation to a Reliable Source which allows anyone to confirm it is correct. (But by 'correct' I mean that it has been properly published somewhere, such as in a newspaper, books or reliable news outlet, and not that it is necessarily 'true'.) Try to see Wikipedia as an aggregation of what has been already written and published about a topic by independent sources, and forgot what you know to be true about yourself, but can't demonstrate to be true via published sources. Nothing in your article should be so 'false' and uncited as to cause you offence - you are entitled to remove that immediately. But it is better to let a non-involved person make the edits to the article about you.

So, how to do that? First, would you kindly declare on your userpage that you are the person named in your account, following the advice here: WP:COI? Then, on the article's talk page, could you list in separate sentences each of the things you find are wrong, and would like corrected, but ensure you include a hyperlink or a reference to the relevant published source (not your own website or social media posts as we don't accept those, apart from for a few trivial bits of information. If you would ckindly suggest the precise form of words you think should be used, then an editor can assess how best to incorporate that information (having confirmed in the sources you've given that is can be verified)

If there are things that are stated, but unsupported with a reference, please list each sentence separately and say it's untrue and seek their removal from the article.

Having done all that, you should add one of our 'edit requests' to the page and this will flag it up for attention in due course by another editor. You could either come back here and ask for help with that step, or see WP:EDITREQUEST for help on placing the edit request on that page. I hope this quick breakdown is helpful, but please understand that we ask editors not to try to make changes to articles about themselves as this is often seen as a 'conflict of interest', which we try to avoid whenever we can. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Stevewoodmore: Accounts named after real, notable people can be blocked to prevent damaging impersonation. My advice is to first email info-en@wikimedia.org to prove that you are Steve Woodmore. Once satisfactory proof of your identity has been received, then I would go through the guide entitled Problems in an article about you. Other than that, Nick Moyes has already given you lots of good advice above, so I won't repeat it. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:18, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I have submitted both my UK driving licence and Passport which should prove that I am me. However both of these are in my birth name which is slightly different to what's on wiki, another correction I want made.

However as per one of the corrections I want made, I am quite seriously ill and even doing that is a struggle for me.Stevewoodmore (talk) 14:26, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Stevewoodmore: OK, thank you. I am really sorry to hear your are unwell. I realise this is probably a faff that you could well do without, so please accept my apologies that we really do have to make sure things are done correctly and legitimately. (We have lots of trolls and mischief-makers trying to alter articles for their own ends which we have to guard against) Perhaps you would care to let me know the statement you find of concern? I or another editor here will take a look at it for you and its supporting reference, and then we might amend it if it is appropriate for us to do. I could probably throw Wikipedia policies at you until the cows come home, but WP:COMMONNAME is guidance on how we name articles, based on how that subject is commonly known by, rather than how that person either was once called, or wants to be called from hereon in. But I'm sure we can sort things for you, one way or another. Best wishes Nick Moyes (talk) 14:46, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

I see two main corrections in the edits you made. One is to add a mention of your current medical condition; this would need a source to go in but a small mention in a newspaper would probably do. The other is to correct the article to say that you still hold the Guinness world record; that would require a more serious source but when I go to the Guinness site at https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/358936-fastest-talker it says the current hold has been Sean Shannon with 655wpm since 1995. If you think the Guinness team made a mistake you should bring it up with them, not us. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:13, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes:

1: In the info box my birth name is Stephen NOT Steven. I am known as Steve Woodmore. I do not work I am medically retired.

2: "as the world's fastest talker, a title which he held for five years" I have held the title continuously since 1993, the only proof I have is a negative, IE no-one has broken it since 1993. If tyou contact the GBOWR either by email or phone they will confirm that the record is no longer published ijn the book but that I am in fact on their database as the correct world record holder.

3: Personal life I want to add important and relevant information as follows.

Diagnosed with cancer (Follicular Lymphoma) Dec 2013, subsequent radiotherapy and chemotherapy have damaged Woodmore's saliva glands to the point he can no longer talk at record speeds Jan 2018 after 12 months Chemotherapy declared in complete remission. March 2020 the Lymphoma returned and currently undergoing chemotherapy.

4: I live in Chislehurst, Not Orpington and attempted to add this URL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chislehurst

5: I would like to be added to this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:People_from_Chislehurst

My driving licence submitted shows that I live in Chislehurst

By nature I am a private person and have deliberately kept away from the media since 2000 which is why the incorrect information and incorrect articles published about me have gone unchallenged.

My cancer is important because it affects what I am notable for. of course I understand there are trolls and general mischief makers about, there are even people who pretend they have cancer to get a bit of sympathy, tjhat's not me though, I can prove this with my medical records should I need to.

@Stevewoodmore: I'm sorry about your health. I did some research and the Guinness official web site published a source that states Sean Shannon took the title from you in 1995, and it was retired with him.[2]. Absent other sourcing contradicting that info, it will have to stay. After looking this up, I went to the talk page and saw that others already addressed this with the same source. As far as other content, the part about you having to teach yourself to slow down is cited to a program that I don't have access too, but it seems odd. This should all be discussed on the talk page. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:17, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

And yert there I am listed in the 1999 Guiness Book of Records as the Worlds fastest talker, typical Wiki research, poor at best — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.7.250.88 (talk) 19:29, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Stevewoodmore: Assuming the above comment was made by you, that's not how to get volunteer editors to want to help you. Did you see/read the story from 2018 linked above:[3]? While you're at it, it's confirmed by this 2011 story from GWR as well:[4]. Perhaps someone with a physical copy of the relevant books can help (maybe at the reference desk). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:03, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Please feel free to check page 17 of the UK edition of the guinness book of record 2001. when you do you see it, it makes Guinnesss publishing out to be less than accurate about what they are telling people. Ask yourself if they retired it in 1995 then why am I listed in 2001 book? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevewoodmore (talk • contribs) 20:07, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Stevewoodmore and Timtempleton: Google Books search for "fastest talker" AND "sean shannon" AND "woodmore" —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:50, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you AlanM1, I have now updated my talk page after being moaned at yet again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevewoodmore (talk • contribs) 21:03, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Stevewoodmore: Rather than being so quick to denigrate unpaid volunteers who are simply trying to improve the encyclopedia, have you considered asking Guinness to update the article on their web site if indeed it is incorrect? The person who wrote it is no longer there, but surely the current editors will want to correct any inaccuracies. Here is a link to a form to request an update of the info.[[5]] You should include the URL of their article in the form so they know how to find it. That will be much easier than asking Wikipedia editors to ignore sources. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:38, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

I just tried to correct something that was wrong and for my efforts I get accused of vandalism, that's really not a nice thing to say to someone. My attitude stems from that.

Suffice to say I have asked Guinness repeatedly to correct their errors and they have repeatedly refused, but not because they are wrong but because if they admit they are wrong then people might start to question other records in the book as well.

In 1993 Guiness themselves held a contest broadcast live on American TV to prove once and for all who was the World's fastest talker, they've conveienantly forgot that this contest generated a world recortds and until just recently proof this contest ever happened could not be found. But here it is https://www.jobienam.co.uk/#/fasttalk/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevewoodmore (talk • contribs) 22:52, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Stevewoodmore: There's already a lengthy discussion at the article talk page Talk:Steve Woodmore#Inaccurate biography, so I suggest any further discussion go there. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:58, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Stevewoodmore: Sorry to come back so late after your last post. I agree that discussions are best held on the article talk page. But I reckon you could really help yourself a bit here with some of the minor stuff you're concerned about, simply by updating your own online presence. According to your LinkedIn page you live in Bromley, not in nearby Chiselhurst, and you make no mention there of your birth name. Wikipedia doesn't really care whether you were born Stephen or Steven (unless published sources have used one of them), so why not fix that minor issue yourself and make your birthname and abode quite clear, and then we can follow that. It's so trivial as I doubt any editor would require some formal online citation - your own account would probably suffice. Apart from our OTRS Team for confirming identity, our editors cannot offer to look at birth certificates or other private documents, or make phone calls to third parties - it really would be totally impracticable for our volunteers to do, as we probably have hundreds of thousands of articles about living people here, and can only rely on what published sources have written - that's our actual modus operandi, love it or hate it. I've not looked at every link you've given, but my impression is that if Guinness Book of Records has made a mistake, that's an issue for them to deal with, not us. That said, if the printed 2001 GBoRecords states a different 'fact' than their online website, it's OK for us to neutrally report both of the differing statements in the claims as to who currently holds a particular record. But I do think it quite unfair of you to blame us, the volunteer Wikipedia editors, for any confusion or errors in your article, when the confusion seems to have resulted from other sites and published books. Likewise, we would never deem it appropriate to report on illnesses of a living person if they were not reported in mainstream media. Your wish for us to do that seems quite unusual. I do appreciate why it is relevant to your speed-talking claim, but I think it would need reports in mainsteam news media for us to include such personal detail about a person. Let me know if I have missed any key element of your concerns. I'll end by saying that I feel you are blaming Wikipedia volunteers for these discrepancies, when it is really not our fault. If we can fix some of them, we will! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:09, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Barnstar query

What exactly is a "barnstar"? I completed the Wikipedia adventure and then I received one of these. Thanks. Decentname (talk) 22:16, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Decentname. It's simply a friendly way of saying 'well done!'. See WP:BARNSTAR for more information. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:11, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Cite papers from Google Scholar, showing # of cites

I am helping a new editor with a draft about an esteemed scientist. Notability has been "approved" by an (Admin) reviewer, but they have requested: "List his most cited papers in full bibliographic format (Google Scholar is the simplest way) with the number of citations". I don't know how to do this. I can find the papers on Google Scholar, with the "Cited by" numbers. I have tried to use the Cite Journal format, but can't find a "slot" for Cited By #xxx. (I may be missing something, here.) Can someone advise me? Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 08:41, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Tribe of Tiger: There's not one, AFAIK. Just make a table like:

{| class="wikitable"
! {{Abbr|No.|Number of citations}}
! Citation
|-
|  92 || {{Cite journal |...}}
|-
|  76 || {{Cite journal |...}}
|-
|  23 || {{Cite journal |...}}
...
|}

Of course, it might be more useful to break out the dates into a column, too; I don't know whether the reviewer wants it for review purposes only or as part of the article. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:15, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Based on the comments, it is most definitely requested as part of the article. This is very helpful. I kept searching for some sort of specific template, and had no joy. Thanks so very much! Will give it a try...Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 09:36, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Asking to include the number of citations for each paper is a bit quirky, but a table might be the best way of doing it. In which case, it would be best to specify that these are citations according to Google Scholar as there are other services (eg: Crossref, Dimension, etc) that will give different counts. Richard Nevell (talk) 09:23, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that's why I was trying to find a template, thought this was a regular sort of thing. Thanks for the advice, re Google Scholar vs other services. An important point....Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 09:43, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Also, User:AlanM1 comments about the dates seems important, as the number of times cited would change over time, I would think? Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 09:50, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I thought it was odd, too, which is why I thought it might not be for the finished article. The table caption should probably be something like "Notable citations as of dd mmmm yyyy" with a ref citing Google Scholar as the source of the data, along with the date retrieved. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:03, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: and @Richard Nevell: Well, poo. Some wiser editor will have to add the top publications/scientific papers at Draft:Atsuhiro Osuka. I have no idea how I managed to so easily add just the bare journal cite for the first, most cited paper. Now, I can't seem to add the journal cite for the second-most cited paper, at all!. Let alone add number of times the paper was cited. WTF, arrrgh. Perhaps I need to relist here as a major problem? Discouraged tiny tiger trudges back to cave. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 04:26, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Tribe of Tiger: I've set up a few below. It looks like most of Atsuhiro Osuka's publications have a DOI, which helps. To speed up adding the information, in wikicode editing mode I clicked on the cite button, and chose cite journal from the template drop down menu. In the pop-up form that appears there's a field for DOI with a magnifying glass; if you put the DOI in there and click on the magnifying glass it should fill in the rest of the fields. It's not perfect, and it would be worth checking the list of authors. For example, for the 2001 paper Akihiko Tsuda was missed out as an author though they are clearly listed on the article if you follow the link.

It will appear as a reference, so you'd need to delete <ref></ref> which tells the software to put it at the bottom of the article. Are you happy giving that a try? Richard Nevell (talk) 08:58, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Number of citations in Google Scholar	Year of publication	Work
434	1997	Osuka, Atsuhiro; Shimidzu, Hitoshi (3 February 1997). "meso, meso-Linked Porphyrin Arrays". Angewandte Chemie International Edition in English. 36 (12): 135–137. doi:10.1002/anie.199701351.
855	2001	Tsuda, A. (6 July 2001). "Fully Conjugated Porphyrin Tapes with Electronic Absorption Bands That Reach into Infrared". Science. 293 (5527): 79–82. doi:10.1126/science.1059552.
438	2004	Kim, Dongho; Osuka, Atsuhiro (October 2004). "Directly Linked Porphyrin Arrays with Tunable Excitonic Interactions". Accounts of Chemical Research. 37 (10): 735–745. doi:10.1021/ar030242e.
384	2000	Aratani, Naoki; Osuka, Atsuhiro; Kim, Yong Hee; Jeong, Dae Hong; Kim, Dongho (2000). "Extremely Long, Discrete meso – meso-Coupled Porphyrin Arrays". Angewandte Chemie International Edition. 39 (8): 1458–1462. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1521-3773(20000417)39:8<1458::AID-ANIE1458>3.0.CO;2-E.

@Richard Nevell: Oh my, this is absolutely wonderful! Thank you so very much! I will place this in the article, with a note on the talk, giving you credit! I have also copied to my messy sandbox, so that I can try your instructions, for myself. My sincere thanks for your assistance. Best wishes, Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 01:01, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Peri Explications

Source: Spanish Mouji — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fandom987 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Fandom987, do you have a question about editing or using Wikipedia?--Quisqualis (talk) 01:08, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Monster Girl Doctor

Excuse me but my edit to Monster Girl Doctor was in fact constructive as I was correcting misspellings by changing to the official localization meaning the rollback itself that was not constructive. Please undo CLCStudent's rollback and make sure any further revisions actually based on said official localization. 2600:4040:40A3:A800:755A:3F6F:45FB:9EA2 (talk) 01:14, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy Monster Girl Doctor. Issue is English spelling character names. Either take to Talk page of the reverting editor or the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 01:42, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Delete Article

How can I retrieve my deleted article on Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Torhile (talk • contribs) 07:13, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Torhile. Do you remember the name of the article? I looked at your user talk page and see that a couple of files you uploaded and a draft you created were deleted, but I don't see any notification for an article being deleted. Your user page has also been deleted a couple of times as well. Are you by chance referring to any of those other pages? -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:21, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Torhile I can examine your deleted contributions; you had no deleted articles, but I assume you are talking about the draft that you wrote in 2016, likely about yourself. You may follow the instructions at this link to retrieve the draft. Please note that Wikipedia strongly discourages(though does not absolutely forbid) autobiographical edits, please see the autobiography policy. If your draft is retrieved, you may submit it using Articles for Creation. 331dot (talk) 07:33, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

My Article

Hello! I just want to ask why was my article deleted once I saved it and then went onto another webpage? It's annoying and already has happened 3 times! It's just so so annoying; i hate it. HybridIsAPerson (talk) 08:42, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

ItsYoBoyHybrid Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your edit history shows no deleted contributions in terms of edits saved to Wikipedia. Are you certain that you are clicking "publish changes"(which should be understood to mean simply "save changes")? If you did not click that, and then went to another page, your content might be lost(sometimes clicking the Back button on your browser will bring the content back, but it depends). 331dot (talk) 08:53, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Submission declined?

Dear Teahouse,

I am trying to get a page for our school live. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:ELC_International_Schools_Bangkok In my opinion all information is correct and I also added some quality sources in it as well. What can I do to get approval?

Thanks for your help. Charlotte Charlottebooks (talk) 02:06, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Charlottebooks: There's been no change to the article since it was declined at 23:54 UTC (~2 hours ago). The article has four references. Ref 1, at the Bangkok Post, is just a directory entry, with no prose at all (like a phone book listing). Ref 2, at isat.or.th, is an invalid page. Ref 3, at CIS, is another directory entry. Ref 4 is the school's contact page at their own website. None of these can be used to demonstrate notability. Please see the links in the decline notice at the top of the draft to understand what constitutes "significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 02:45, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Also, you wrote "our school". Are you a student? Employee? Either way, you need to comply with WP:COI, and if the latter, WP:PAID. David notMD (talk) 10:57, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Saveena Bedi Sachar article rejected

Article name - Saveena Bedi Aachar Draft article name: Saveena Bedi Sachar

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Saveena_Bedi_Sachar Xenderdom (talk) 09:47, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Maybe dont copy stuff from elsewhere next time? Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 11:01, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Article in 1 or 2 lines

How to write article in 1 or 2 line. Looplips (talk) 11:23, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Draft:World Coconut Day was declined not so much as too short, as because the creating organization not perceived by the reviewer as a valid national or world organization. David notMD (talk) 13:26, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)probbably don't as you usally can't establish the notability of that topic for Wikipedia's sence of the word in one or two sentences. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:29, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

You could argue that as the organization - Asian and Pacific Coconut Community - has its own Wikipedia article, the "Day" is valid. You could also add information about the "Day" to that article. David notMD (talk) 13:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

which resources are most accepted

Hello! I am new here and trying to help build wikipedia, can you please tell me which sources are considered reliable for creating a biography page and why do articles submitted got declined even if they have a lot of citations and sources pointing to the person whose biography is being created. PassivMusic (talk) 13:42, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

There is no 100% guranteed response for what sources are considered reliable, but there are sources that are frequentely discussed. As for articles, what was originally at User:PassivMusic/sanbox is not an encyclopedic article. If you want to create an encyclopedic article, please see User:Ian.thomson/Howto and WP:CSMN along with, in this case, WP:AUTOBIO. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:50, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

References -- What am I Doing wrong?

I am trying to determine where my references are not sufficient. They seems to all point to primary sources, to me, but i see a "caret" at the beginning of each line (which I assume is the circular reference that @DESSiegel refers to). I am not sure how to fix that.

In general, my citations are to very old papers, books, articles, etc and as such I am reliant on caches and crawlers that have held on to some small bits of metadata that should corroborate the reference. Much of the reference material was authored in a pre-Wikipedia, pre-Internet world, and that is proving challenging to cite beyond these means and methods.

I understand now that the 'In Review' status is to be taken on face value, as it is stated in the page, thanks for clarifying that Victor Schmidt - it seemed obvious but then again it was not so obvious.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Akram_Hamid_Begzadeh_Jaff Kosarjaff (talk) 14:45, 3 September 2020 (UTC):

@Kosarjaff: It is currently resubmitted and awaiting review, as you can tell by the text "This draft has been resubmitted and is currently awaiting re-review." which replaced the submit button.Courtesy ping: @Dan arndt: Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:05, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Kosarjaff, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Draft:Akram Hamid Begzadeh Jaff was declined earlier today. Since then you have made several changes, and another editor has made a couple, and you have resubmited. Note that there are over 3,300 drafts now waiting for review, and not so many active reviewers. A review might take a while. You are free to further improve the draft while yu wait, and to work on other drafts o9r articles. A few points:

• It seems that two of the four sources currently cited are by you. Citing one's own work is usually frowned on, as it can appear to be a form of self-promotion.
• The Fractured Economy Of Kurdistan looks like a book or monograph, but does not list any ISBN or other identifier to make it easier to find. Also, if this is a book or other long source, p-lease list the page number or numbers where the source supports the statements in the draft.
• Do not link to an Amazon page about a source, please, nor to any other commercial bookseller.
• I don't know about Who's Who in the Arab World. Most versions of Who's who are not considered to be reliable sources, because the information is supplied by the subjects themselves. Independent published reliable sources which provide significant coverage of the subject are needed, usually at least three good sources. I don't think the currently cited sources are sufficient.

I hope this is helpful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:20, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Dan DESiegel, I am not sure I follow why you think 2 of the references are by me? I did not intend it that way. Could you please help me figure out what I am doing wrong? all citations and references are to other sources. Maybe it is a mistake in how I filled out that pop up form that comes up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kosarjaff (talk • contribs) 15:23, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Kosarjaff that was my error. I now realize they are by the subject of the draft, Akram Begzadeh Hamid Jaff. (Or am i mistaken, and they are by a different Akram Jaff?) My apologies. However, that raises another problem. Nothing written by the subject can possibly be independent. Wikipedia needs, not more citations to things that Akram Jaff wrote, but to things that others wrote about him. That is how notability is normally established.

Please try to find several things that others have written and published about your subject Akram Jaff, discussing him in some detail. This would be people who were not affiliates or employers of his, please.

Please include in citations enough info that a reader could find the work in a library, if possible. If the work has an ISBN, please give it. If Worldcat has a listing, please give the OCLC number. and if the work is paginated, please give the relevant page number or numbers. Three are template fields for all of these.

I hope that helps. If it doesn't, or iof you have more questions please ask here again and I or others here will try to provide further help. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:11, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Question about page curation

Hi, I'm an autoconfirmed user and I'm relatively new. I want to start being more active on Wikipedia by reviewing other pages. I have added the Page Curation link in my Toolbar but when I go the new pages feed the review button that should be there is missing. I thought autoconfirmed users could review pages. When I go to any pages on the feed, there's nothing there to give me a review option. I was wondering if anyone can tell me if I'm doing something wrong, or should I add something somewhere. I really appreciate the help. Thank you Soli. S. (talk) 15:36, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Infojunkie8675: I'm pretty sure thaat that tool is resticted to a stricter user group, but I'm unsure hwat that is. You don't need that tool realy, it yust makes things easier. With Twinkle, which can be enables here. You can do most of the things, including tagging pages for problems and/or (speedy-)deletion and reverting multiple consecutive vandal edits. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:46, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

That's wonderful. I'll check it out. Thank you so much for replying so fast.Soli. S. (talk) 16:02, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Infojunkie8675, there's also Wikipedia:New pages patrol/School, but they recommend you have around 500 edits before starting training. —valereee (talk) 16:13, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

That really helps. Thank you so much! Soli. S. (talk) 16:15, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The Page Curation tool is available only to members of the Wikipedia:New pages patrol, Infojunkie8675 (and to admins). You might want to read that page. But as Victor Schmidt said, much of the functionality is available though Twinkle. The RedWarn tool is also available, although some functions are restricted until an editor has reached extended-confirmed status. The WikiLoop DoubleCheck is also available. With any of these tools, one must be careful. An editor is responsible for the actions taken using the tool, just as if they had been done manually. If an editor does not understand what a tool will do, that editor should not use that tool without first learning more. This is true even for Twinkle. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:22, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much!! I'll make sure to read all these resources before I touch anything on any pages for review. Infojunkie8675 (talk) 16:40, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I should be replying to a question I asked myself but I just found this page Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants in case anyone who reads this has the same problem as I do. Please delete this if it shouldn't be here. Infojunkie8675 (talk) 17:06, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Translation of articles

Dear Teahouse, I am working with the translation of this article from Ukrainian Wikipedia:https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B8_%D0%AE%D0%B4%D1%96%D0%BD%D0%B8 - original ukrainian article

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Yudin_Brothers&oldid=975039852 - translation

How can I link them between themselves? Because for Wikipedia community doesn't accept the second article, but I want that were visible that it's just a translation of the article that yet is accepted on another version. Poet8Player (talk) 13:32, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Poet8Player: once the draft is in mainpsace, they will be linked using Wikidata. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:46, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Poet8Player. Unfortunately, the fact that it is accepted on another edition of Wikipedia is of absolutely no relevance. Each language edition has its own rules, and something may be acceptable on one, and not on another. If an article on the subject is accepted on English Wikipedia, then it can and should be linked to the article on uk-wiki. But if it is not accepted on en-wiki, then the fact that somebody has tried to make a translation is of no consequence, and nothing should be linked. --ColinFine (talk) 17:33, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Withdraw an item from the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard?

I posted an item to the dispute resolution noticeboard, but it is not getting a response. I would like to do an RfC instead, but first I would like to close out the DRN, because you are only supposed to do one at a time. How do I do this?Truth Is King 24 (talk) 14:43, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I suggested that this user come here to get some general advice and coaching given this. Its not dispute resolution and with zero support I doubt its RfC material but some assistance is needed -----Snowded ^TALK 16:41, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I've closed the request at DRN and marked it as withdrawn. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 18:27, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I was actually just asking how to do it. Since I posted here, I've learned that it is OK to do an RfC after you have started a DRN.Truth Is King 24 (talk) 19:30, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Actually "We cannot accept disputes that are already under discussion at other content or conduct dispute resolution forums or in decision-making processes such as Requests for comments, Articles for deletion, or Requested moves." You cannot have a DRN and an RFC open at the same time. But you are welcome to open a new DRN if the RFC does not garner a sufficient response. Nightenbelle (talk) 19:37, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

How To Create Userpage?

Hi There! Iam Muhammad Husayn. I Want To Create Userpage. I Am New To WP. Please Tell Me How To Make Userpage And How To Get Userboxes Which Suits Us. ItsMuhammadHusayn (talk) 17:07, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello ItsMuhammadHusayn. To start your userpage, just click on the red link that is part of your signature, write a description of you as a Wikipedia editor, and click the blue "Publish changes" button. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:57, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

To see available userboxes, take a look at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Galleries. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:00, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

User Page Formatting question

So on my User page, I listed 2 articles that were ITN and 2 barnstars. After the first ITN post I did, the formatting for the rest of the talk page shifted like a "tab". Anyone know how to fix that? Thanks for the help in advance. Elijahandskip (talk) 18:53, 3 September 2020 (UTC) Elijahandskip (talk) 18:53, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I mucked around for a while and just made it worse, so returned to where I started. David notMD (talk) 19:37, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Elijahandskip and David notMD: Moving the {{ivmbox}} template to its own line seem to do the trick. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 21:56, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Categories

Hi!, I created this article but I don't know how to put categories because I don't know how to make the DEFAULTSORT given he has "chemist" apart of the surname, hope to have been clear, thank you.  CoryGlee (talk) 22:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

{{DEFAULTSORT:Tsuchiya, Masami}} (yes, ignore the "chemist" disambiguation). Your addition of categories, too, needn't be affected by the disambiguation. -- Hoary (talk) 23:34, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

best way to re-submit article that has been deleted

What is the best/easiest way to re-submit an article for wiki consideration after it has been removed. I submitted a couple of times and was in the process of attmepting to address the issues for its decline and then life happened and 6-8 months passed. we got a notice saying that the article had been removed. would it be easiest to start over or request an undeletion?

Here is the link that was sent with the message regarding the deletion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SchoolsForChiapas?markasread=195933535&markasreadwiki=enwiki#Your_draft_article,_Draft:Escuelas_para_Chiapas. Kimberlyelirosa (talk) 04:04, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Kimberlyelirosa, There's a little guide here about requesting undeletion of a draft article Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/G13 Pi (Talk to me!) 04:47, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your response, but after looking at the instructions to request undeletion, i want to revise my question. i'm assuming once a page has been deleted, i can start a new one the topic i submitted before, yes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.198.58.105 (talk) 23:32, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Kimberlyelirosa. Yes, you can begin a new article if you truly believe that the topic is notable as Wikipedia defines that term. I recommend that you follow the good advice at Your first article as you proceed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:10, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

How to get Google to bring up a new article in search results

Hello all, I just completed my first full article a couple of months ago. I'm proud of it, and I'd like for people to be able to find it using Google Search. But the only thing that comes up is the "Talk" page, which is quite disorienting for the casual Wikipedia user. Any suggestions as to how to help Google "find" the actual article? TYIA Btbky (talk) 17:28, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Btbky, and welcome to the Teahouse! Unfortunately we cannot control how Google indexes search results. There is a period of time between when the article is published and when it comes up in search engines, however considering that your article was created on May 27th, that time should have passed. I'm no expert on how Google presents search results, but making sure the article stays relevant and goes into a decent level of detail will improve the page ranking. Finally, talk pages coming up before articles when Googled is not an uncommon thing, (although somewhat of a phenomenon to me). Hope this helps. Regards, Giraffer (munch) 17:35, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: The Iris Network Giraffer (munch) 17:35, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

The article was moved to mainspace on June 8, when the AFC submission was accepted, less than three months ago. I thought an accepted AFC submission is immediately considered patrolled for indexing purposes, but that may not be the case. Also, I've seen scattered reports that articles aren't being indexed automatically after three months - it seems to have slipped closer to four months, so we may still be in the pre-index timeframe. But it's odd that the draft talk page shows up in the Google results, which redirects to the live talk page. That may be a Google glitch. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:32, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

• • I moved the draft back to draftspace as it fails WP:CORPDEPTH, and as an aside, the editor is not in compliance with WP:PAID. Template on draft talk us incomplete. John from Idegon (talk) 01:15, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Seeking Suggestions/Approval for Content

I've edited the Richard Haskayne article and this is what I've come up with. I've focused my editing on creating sequence in the content and better sentence formation. Please review and let me know if I can replace this content with the existing one in Richard Haskayne page. I've posted the same in the article's talk page few days ago but unfortunately got no review. So, now I'm posting it here for a quick review and improvement. My edited version of Richard Haskayne article is given below:

Extended content

Richard Haskayne OC ACE is a Canadian businessman and philanthropist. He was born on December 18, 1934 to Robert and Bertha Haskayne. He was raised in Gleichen, Alberta by his parents who were English immigrants and ran butcher shops in Gleichen and Bassano. He did Bachelor of Commerce from the University of Alberta in 1956. Then, he moved to Calgary and married Lee Murray in 1958. In 1959, he became Chartered Accountant. He became President at Hudson's Bay Oil and Gas in 1980. He served as president and chief executive officer of Interhome Energy, Home Oil Company and Interprovincial Pipe Line Limited. He also remained member of 18 company boards. He worked as a chairman of board of Trans Alta Utilities, Mac Millan Bloedell and Nova Corporation. Dick lost his wife due to ALS in 1993. His marriage with Lois Heard (second wife) in 1995, combining children from the previous family, gave them five children and eleven grandchildren. In 2001, the University of Calgary acknowledged Dick's leadership by creating the Richard F. Haskayne Chair in Accounting. The following year, the school's Faculty of Management was renamed as Haskayne School of Business. He was also honored with Woodrow Wilson Award for corporate citizenship in 2004. He spent more than twenty years with Hudson's Bay Oil and Gas becoming president in 1980. He was chairman, president and chief executive officer of Interhome Energy Inc. From 1992 to 1998, he was chairman of NOVA Corporation when the company merged with TransCanada Pipelines Limited. From 1990 to 1996, he was the chairman of the board of governors of the University of Calgary and is currently board chair emeritus. From 1996 to 1998, he was chairman of TransAlta Corporation. From 1996 to 1999, he was chairman of the board of MacMillan Bloedel Limited when it was acquired by Weyerhaeuser. In 1997, he was made an Officer of the Order of Canada for "his high ethical business standards" and for having "helped lead fund-raising campaigns for several organizations such as the University of Calgary and the United Way." He retired from TransCanada Pipelines in 2005.He is a Fellow of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (F.C.A.). He was inducted into the Canadian Business Hall of Fame, the Calgary Business Hall of Fame, and the Canadian Petroleum Hall of Fame. He is also a member of the Advisory Council of the Order of Canada. He sits on the board of directors for the Alberta Bone and Joint Health Institute. and a member of the Community and Partners Advisory Committee of the Libin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta. In 2006, he received the Alberta Order of Excellence. Haskayne's memoir "Northern Tigers: Building Ethical Canadian Corporate Champions" was published on March 28, 2007 by Key Porter Books.

Editingwork8 (talk) 06:07, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you got no reaction to your (perfectly legitimate) suggestions on the article's talk page. The current version of the article Richard Haskayne is almost unreferenced and therefore is unsatisfactory. But your version is utterly unreferenced and therefore more unsatisfactory. -- Hoary (talk) 06:21, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Hoary How about if I add the current version references in the article? Will that make it somewhat satisfactory? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 06:27, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Editingwork8, I suggest that you start by adding references to what is already there. (If you doubt the veracity of anything, you can append "{{Cn|date=2020}}" to it; this will result in "Citation needed".) Then add your new material, incrementally. Specify the source(s) for each increment. If rearrangement would be beneficial, go ahead and rearrange; but again, incrementally where possible. This doesn't contradict the advice to "be bold". Your series of edits may be very bold indeed; but they're more likely to "stick" if done stage by stage, with edit summaries. -- Hoary (talk) 06:55, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Hoary But here's a thing that if I rearrange the content, I can't do it bit by bit because the edited paragraph might hold stances of the content in another paragraph. Please suggest how can I get over it. And if I'm unable to find reliable references for the edited content, then how can I still get the edit approval and ask for citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 07:03, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't understand "stances" (and can't guess what it might have been a typo for). If there's something that's unsourced but seems plausible, add "{{Cn|date=2020}}" immediately after it. If something's unsourced and implausible, just remove it, noting its implausibility in an edit summary. As an illustration, during June 2017 I tinkered with what was already in the article Morris Bishop, and removed some of it; from July to January I added to it. Unless you have reason to fear that your edits could be controversial, you don't need advance approval for them; just go ahead and make them. -- Hoary (talk) 07:46, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

The burden is on you to find and add references as you add content. Just appending "citation needed" at the ends of sentence or paragraphs is not enough. A major problem for biographies is that content may be true, but without references, not valid. Clearly, the existing version and your rewrite have facts galore - what are the sources? David notMD (talk) 11:03, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I created section titles in the existing article. This may help in your adding content. I am hazarding a guess that the source of much of the content in the article and your proposed changes comes from Haskayne's own published memoir. That cannot be used to establish his notability. You need references for what other people have written about him. David notMD (talk) 11:11, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

The comment by David notMD suggests to me that I explained myself poorly. I'll try again. I suggest a two-stage process. First, go through the article as it now is, adding references for material that's now unreferenced, using the "citation needed" template where you can't reference something that's likely to be true, and deleting anything that may well not be true. Then the second stage: add your own material. This new material should all be satisfactorily referenced. (So it would never be appropriate to add material together with "citation needed" templates.) And yes, as David notMD says, the sources (both for material already in the article and for what you want to add) must be independent of the biographee (as well as reliable and published). -- Hoary (talk) 01:22, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

1965 Castrol Drive

4 days ago I added the above article via my username on Wikipedia Commons. It did not come up as an article when I did a Wiki Search today and it doesn't come up when I search in Google. How can I improve the visibility of the article so it does show in Wiki and Google searches. Thanks, Chris Farmer Chris 1944 (talk) 01:11, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Farmer Chris 1944. There's no record of you making any edits with this account other than your post here at the Teahouse. Moreover, this is no record of an article titled 1965 Castrol Drive having ever been created. Now it does appear that you uploaded some files to Commons and that you also created a sandbox (which looks like a draft) at c:User:Farmer Chris 1944/sandbox, but that's not a Wikipedia article so to speak. Commons, more specifically, is for hosting files which can be used in Wikipedia articles; it's not a place to create a draft for a Wikiepdia article.

So, if you'd like to try and create a draft about this subject; please look at WP:DRAFTS and follow the instructions given there. I also suggest you look at Help:Your first article, Help:Referencing for beginners, Wikipedia:Notability (events) and Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything for reference as well. After reading those pages, if you still decide you'd like to create an article about this subject, I suggest you work on a draft and then submit the draft to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review ehen you think it's ready.

Finally, regarding the files you uploaded, you seem to be claiming them as your "own work". As explained in c:Commons:Licensing, this typically means that you are claiming to be the person who actually took the photos themselves; it doesn't mean found photos (perhaps online) taken by someone else and then uploaded them to Commons. Did you take these photos yourself? If you did, please review c:Commons:OTRS#Licensing images: when do I contact OTRS? and see if it applies to you. If you didn't, please look at c:Commons:OTRS#If you are NOT the copyright holder and follow the instructions given there. If you didn't take the photos yourself, then you're most likely not the copyright holder of them and Commons probably won't be able to keep the photo without the WP:CONSENT of the copyright holder. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:26, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Pretty much had it already

I have tried for years now to update the name of a page which is incorrect. I was told that the page was not for "our entity" but rather all public schools in the county. So finally I created a page for our district specifically, which was promptly denied. You can't have it both ways. Either "XYZ County Public Schools" refers to all public schools in XYZ County (not all of which are part of our district) or it refers to our school district specifically. If they are two separate entities, then do not deny the page I created. If it refers to our district, then it needs to be titled "XYZ Public Schools" as that has been the name of our school district (due to a renaming) for nearly 10 years now. I don't give a whit which it is within the wiki community, but clarify it for me, and let me move on, please. "XYZ" of course is not the name of our county, for clarification :P Slcsb (talk) 15:52, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Slcsb, and welcome to the Teahouse. I can understnd your frustration, and i would like to help, but there are problems.

I take it that the existing article is St. Lucie County Public Schools and the draft is Draft:St. Lucie Public Schools. (By the way it is almost never helpful here to describe the issue but not actually name the articles or drafts involved.) At the moment, the article seems to include all the information in the draft, plus listing a few additional schools, which I take it are in the county but not part of the same district. Both have a very brief intro and are otherwise just a list of schools with essentially no info about them beyond age/grade range. Neither has any independent sources cited. At the moment the draft is essentially a subset of the article, with nothing additional.

In fact if it wasn't that there is a consensus to treat schools more laxly than most organizations, this would probably get deleted as not demonstrating notability, if not expanded with additional sources.

What do you want to do with either one? My thought would be to drop the draft and expand the article, by providing additional info about some or all of the schools, or about the district. I don't see that mentioning a few non-district schools hurts anything, but if you really want it to be a district-only article, that might be accomplished. I don't know who told you it had to be about all schools in the county, in district or not, but there is no such rule, and there is no discussion on the article talk page reaching such a consensus. What is your wish here? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:28, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Just for clarity; the only sourcing is for the SLPS, and no other entity. If we want to include other schools against this entity then this article should have included all school boards. Instead it is probably better for any schools that are not part of this entity to be removed or flagged appropriately (they appear to be Charter Schools under their own organisation so should be flagged in their own subsection imo). Koncorde (talk) 21:03, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel,I want for the name of St. Lucie County Public Schools to be updated to the correct name, if it is going to represent our district. If it is going to represent the county, then I want someone to approve the separate district page. I will then revert some of the changes that I made to the county page (removing the colleges and other non-district schools that were previously listed). And add more information to both. Should I just develop both as I wish to see them and submit them? Is that how it works? Maybe that's what I had wrong. I was trying to establish the page first and then expand on it. Slcsb (talk) 16:51, 1 September 2020 (UTC) Great, now somebody reverted the fixes to the address and name AGAIN. What am I supposed to use as a source to verify that we are at the address we are at, and not an address that is now four years out of date?Slcsb (talk) 20:32, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Use the article talk page, place edit summaries explaining what you are doing, and provide sources. In the end the editor reverting is likely seeing unsupported changes rather than being directed to what is incorrect. @TryKid and Materialscientist:. Koncorde (talk) 20:38, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Just at a glance, the article needs a move request to St. Lucie Public Schools, and then the address and lede updating. This doesn't seem particularly controversial. Koncorde (talk) 20:41, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't know if there's a particular naming convention that is used for schools, but my opinion is that the article specifically about the entity named "St. Lucie Public Schools" should be at that title. It's actually convenient for disambiguation purposes that "County" was removed from the name. An article about schools in that county in general could be named "Public schools in St. Lucie County" or "St. Lucie County public schools" (note the capitalization). No comment about notability of either. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:13, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Yeah I didn't even get into notability. I know for many English articles there are often local authority articles, then education services article, and then even a list of schools within the authority such as those at Category:Lists of schools in North West England. Koncorde (talk) 01:25, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

There's really no need to dig in to notability. A US school district is notable per WP:GEOLAND. There's no logical reason to have a list of either school districts or schools by county. With only a couple exceptions (and Florida isn't one), county government has nothing whatsoever to do with schools. And there is nothing confining a school district to a single county. The existing article should be moved to reflect the school district's actual name and content from the draft should be added to it. After which, the draft should be deleted. John from Idegon (talk) 00:58, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

School page has been moved to St. Lucie Public Schools, and I put the duplicate draft Draft:St. Lucie Public Schools up for WP:G6 Meters (talk) 01:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

For some reason an admin has decided that the mistaken duplicate draft Draft:St. Lucie Public Schools should be redirected to the original article rather than being deleted. Meters (talk) 02:49, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Why does chembox break?

When I edit the chembox{{Chembox}}, it breaks. I type the correct code like {{Chembox Properties}} and it breaks. User:Nihaal The Wikipedian Discuss in more detail

@Nihaal The Wikipedian: (I removed some stray markup from your post above) I expect you mean "when you try to transclude the {{Chembox}} template"? You'll have to be more specific, like put the code you're trying to use in your sandbox so we can see what you're trying to do. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:06, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: {{Chembox}} {{Chembox Properties |Molecular formula = C5S2O |Molar mass = 108 g/mol.l}}

The thing above is just an example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nihaal The Wikipedian (talk • contribs) 06:33, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Nihaal The Wikipedian: So, you're trying to transclude {{Chembox Properties}} as a parameter for a transclusion of {{Chembox}} in an article? In the example above, you have a couple of problems.

The {{Chembox Properties}} template has no |Molecular formula= parameter, but there is a |Formula= parameter: |Formula={{Chem2|C5S2O}}, or you can specify the individual elements with: |C=5 |S=2 |O=1.

There is also no |Molar mass=; you want |MolarMass=. Also, the units are wrong. You want either |MolarMass=108{{Nbsp}}g&middot;mol<sup>−1</sup> or |MolarMass=108{{Nbsp}}g/mol

So, for this example, you would use:

{{Chembox
|Section1={{Chembox Properties
 |Formula={{Chem2|C5S2O}}
 |MolarMass=108{{Nbsp}}g/mol
 }}
}}

which produces:

Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1075

Properties
Chemical formula	C5S2O
Molar mass	108 g/mol
Except where otherwise noted, data are given for materials in their standard state (at 25 °C [77 °F], 100 kPa). Infobox references

Perhaps you can look at the article you created Methyl hexanoate for a working sample? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:11, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1 I have multiple problems though I have a desire to create another Draft. The problem is discussed here where This person said to slow my AfC.I will post the link in your talk page when it is created. Regards Nihaal The Wikipedian (talk) 14:22, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

{{Chembox}} has some samples you can copy-and-paste. Or you can copy from an existing article that has the types of details that you want. You have to be very careful to use the exact name of every field (including spaces and capitalization) and proper punctuation (curly-braces, equals-signs, vertical-bars, etc.). It's better to use the "specify the individual elements" method instead of |Formula= and |MolarMass=, as that automatically calculates the molar mass for you (with a standardized number of decimal places and standardized units). DMacks (talk) 22:26, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@DMacks: I didn't realize that the individual elements option did the molar mass calculation. That's kind of cool (assuming it was done in a way that doesn't violate WP:OR). (Pinging Nihaal The Wikipedian.) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 04:10, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

It's basic arithmetic using the passed numbers of each element and the atomic values listed and cited at {{Chem molar mass}}. DMacks (talk) 04:19, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Formatting Wikipedia ("VisualEditor"?)

I simply cannot comprehend the formatting of Wikipedia. It is like trying to understand code - or a clandestine language of a secret society. :) I would like to find some sort of way to present it as it is in WORD. The Microsoft Office Word Add-in for MediaWiki didn't work with 2019 Office. A Google search brought no programs or add ins that might covert the WORD document to a Wikipedia formatting. Pandoc seems to use DOS cmd to work, which is way over my head.

I tried to copy and paste for a test and it came up with the footnotes. I enabled in something called "VisualEditor" (albeit I'm not sure what it is but it appears to do the formatting). I went through to the "wizard" > "practice in the community sandbox"> "edit page visually"> and then I "published" in the sandbox. It looked fine ..but how do I then submit it?

Any suggestions? Thanks in advance!  AndreaSG50 (talk) 03:59, 3 September 2020 (UTC) AndreaSG50 (talk) 04:01, 3 September 2020 (UTC) AndreaSG50 (talk) 04:03, 3 September 2020 (UTC) AndreaSG50 (talk) 04:07, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Don't use the visual editor. Don't even think of using MS Word. Avoid anything claiming to be "visual" or "WYSIWYG" or similar. Instead, edit the code directly. Use the "Show preview" option before hitting "Publish changes". Do not attempt to create the draft of a new article until you have practised improving articles that already exist, and have thereby picked up a familiarity with how to get italics, boldface, references, etc. Wikipedia:Sandbox is for anyone's use: I am qualified to overwrite your work with mine (and you are to overwrite my work with yours). User:AndreaSG50/sandbox is for your use: when you are "ready to request an experienced editor review [its content] for possible inclusion in Wikipedia" (tip: you are not), then click the option "Submit your draft for review!" Meanwhile, one formatting tip: Do not start a new line with one or more spaces. -- Hoary (talk) 05:22, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

-- Hoary (talk) 05:22, 3 September 2020 (UTC)-- So there is now way around submitting to Wikipedia until one knows the "code"? That is impossible for me. It is like translating martian. I'd hire a service if I could - to translate into this arcane language, but there doesn't appear to be one.

There must be a way to translate a WORD document (or HTML version). The HTML2Wiki Converter https://magnustools.toolforge.org/html2wiki.php doesn't work. I've spent all day trying out all suggestions here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:WordToWiki. This is so frustrating...I'have spent days trying to figure this out. I can't be the only one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndreaSG50 (talk • contribs) 05:54, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Hoary, I disagree. I would change your wording-- minimise use of VisualEditor. I use the VisualEditor, in fact, that's the reason why I stay on Wikipedia. Wikipedia should not be only for tech nerds. I use the VisualEditor and the source editor, to make sure I got everything right, instead. Don't expect newcomers to directly understand the markup. Let them learn and grow on this platform, and they'll be able to use the source editor. There's good to everything that you may not know. GeraldWL 06:01, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

You don't have to be a "tech nerd" to use the source editor. Instead of "[spending] days" (unsuccessfully) with conversion tools and the like, spend minutes editing existing articles, making liberal use of the "Show preview" facility. -- Hoary (talk) 06:15, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Well I think they're the same thing. "Show preview" is also a visual look, similar to when looking at someone's change, you can choose to view it visually. I think the VisualEdtior is quite subjective: it's not something everyone will find suitable. Over months editing Wikipedia, VE has helped me a lot. If I were you, I would simply advise our fellow newcomer here to also use the source editor, as there are limitations of the VE. GeraldWL 06:22, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

AndreaSG50, if yoiu do choose to use thwe source editor, Help:Cheatsheet, Help:Wikitext, and Help:Editing may be useful, as well as the pages linked from those, particularly from those, especially from Help:Wikitext. I myself prefer the source editor, and the visual editor still has some limitations. Still many people use and like the Visual Editor and find it easier. A converter from MS-word would not be simple to write, and I don't know of a currently working one. If there are specific things that give you problems, please ask here and someone will try to help. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:57, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Again, I'm just not cut out for formatting using Wikipedia's arcane language. Are there alternatives, services or programs? If not why??

It's somewhat hard to sympathize, AndreaSG50. I advised you not to start a line with one or more spaces; in your very next edit, you did precisely that. (I fixed it.) I suggested that you edit existing articles; you haven't done so. You started off by referring to "a clandestine language of a secret society"; now it's an "arcane language". After various suggestions, you ask "Are there alternatives?" Yes, as has been stated, there's Visual Editor (which some swear by) as well as editing "source". Why are there no alternative alternatives that you like? Because nobody's created them; and a likely factor in this is that, given the options of editing the source and using the Visual Editor, few people have thought such development necessary. Your interest here is in "a New Zealand/US artist whose art practice includes sculpture, installation, public art and video with an emphasis (since the 1990’s) on 3D digital media". Suggestion: think of somebody whose work or life has similarities. Read the article that Wikipedia has on this person. Think of improvements. Make these. Use italics, where appropriate. Then tinker with and add references, where appropriate. (Don't attempt to tinker with or add tables.) You will thereby become accustomed to editing Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 23:55, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

-- Hoary (talk) 23:55, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Sorry to cause offence, I was joking about the secret society. A bad joke. Sorry.

I was simply hoping that there were services or programs that would make the translation from common word processing software to this difficult wiki language in order to to avoid a huge learning curve - like the program Dreamweaver (in the day), or those web formatting templates that exist now. Few people know HTML code. Fewer know Wikipedia code. I wrote the article with a friend, a former art director. It is complete and quite coherent in WORD with 24 notable footnotes. It will make a good Wikipedia article. Now that I know that no options other than VisualEditor exist, one of us will do the work of learning the Wiki language and grasping the Visual Editor. Thanks for your input! BTW, I'm not sure if I'm writing this correctly so forgive me as newbie if I make a mistake or typo.

update...I enabled "VisualEditor", went through the "wizard" > "practice in the community sandbox", then... "edit page visually"> and then I "published" in the sandbox. It looked fine ..but how does one then submit this bit in the sandbox when it is ready, or change it to see if the code is correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.173.191 (talk) 06:07, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Why numbers are not showing on Wikipedia pages With latest Firefox Beta 81.0b5?

Why numbers are not showing on Wikipedia pages With latest Firefox Beta 81.0b5? With Microsoft Edge works fine. Taking out all Firefox add-ons doesn't help, clearing everything with Ctrl+Shift+Del doesn't work. What's so special about your numbers? I can see the numbers on All other webpages, except Wikipedia Legittalk (talk) 11:00, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Legittalk: You mean all numbers on all pages, including this one? What do you see instead of the numbers? A space or what? For example, here are the numbers zero through nine between quotes: "0123456789". And here they are in a different font: "0123456789". What do you see between the quotes? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:07, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Which "numbers" are you talking about, Legittalk? Any kind of number characters? (Such as: 1-"one", 2-"two", etc.) Numbers are part of the ASCII character set, so it would be incredibly unlikely that a new version of Firefox breaks them specifically on Wikipedia.

Maybe you are talking about mathematical formulae on math/physics/etc. pages? Here is "one plus one equal two": $1+1=2$. Those are rendered as SVG images unless you select special options in your preferences (see Help:Displaying a formula). It would be unlikely that Firefox broke SVG support, too.

Could you maybe share screenshot(s) of the same page with Firefox vs. with Edge? Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:12, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

This is a horrible way to Communicate, you need a normal forum like http://createaforum.com Screenshot of what I see: https://i.postimg.cc/FzLrhYMX/Untitled.png I've set Firefox to let webpages have their own fonts, so I don't know what's the problem. I see a blank space instead of numbers. No, all numbers are gone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Legittalk (talk • contribs) 11:34, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Legittalk: I'll note, in your screenshot, that the numbers appear in the heading, which uses the "Georgia" font on my machine, but is coded to use the first available of "Linux Libertine, Georgia, Times, default serif". The numbers appear in the second group I wrote, which uses the browser default monospace font. THe missing numbers, I think, use the browser's default font. What is it set to (at Tools→Options, under Language and Appearance)? I'm using Microsoft NeoGothic with a size of 17, FWIW. What is yours set to? Try setting it to something else.

Another thing I see is that you may be using the "Use a black background with green text" scheme, which is enabled at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets under Appearance? If so, try disabling that.

Which skin are you using (at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering)? If not Vector, try switching to Vector.

Does it happen if you log out (or use a private session that isn't logged in)? I assume it didn't happen with the previous (perhaps non-beta) Firefox version? Did it start today (Wiki software updates happen on WP:THURSDAY)? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 12:04, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I figured out before reading your post, but your help was very good.

[SOLVED]: The Firefox installer comes with a font 'TwemojiMozilla.ttf' missing the numbers, don't use it, I thought it'd better 'coz mozilla, but the font viewer let me know of my mistake. Used Windows 8.1 64-bit Font Viewer to check the font, changed to Tahoma and now everything it's OK. I use an add-on Wikipedia Dark Theme just for wikipedia, for the other web-pages I use Dark Reader to back all backgrounds dark.

Thanks for your assistance, sorry for the waste of time, but at least now you know of this potential problem. My default is Sans Serif and is directed to Tahoma — Preceding unsigned comment added by Legittalk (talk • contribs) 12:56, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Legittalk: The key appears to be that that font, named 'Twemoji Mozilla', which is the lone font provided with Firefox for some reason, has a full-width blank glyph in the place of the numbers (0-9), star (*), and pound (#). At Mozilla support, it says Twemoji Mozilla is a font for displaying emoticons as you can see by the pref name and should only be used for that case and shouldn't be used to display text, so you will have to check why Firefox is using this font instead of a normal font.. It's unclear why Firefox allows you to pick it for use as a general-purpose font, when it doesn't allow picking other special fonts (e.g., Wingdings) that don't correctly support at least the basic ASCII character set. It's not clear why it almost supports normal text, unlike the other special-purpose fonts; I think there's some kind of disconnect. Oddly, there's no reference to this specific issue other than the general one I referenced. Anyway, I'm glad it's resolved. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:09, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm glad too. Maybe is because I was able to install 'Twemoji Mozilla' without any problem, it's a legit .ttf font and has letters in it, but ues on principle Mozilla shouldn't.

References

How to add a picture on a article

pictures

how do add a picture on a page/article because some of then lack pictures of people and I have some of them then how do I add them I have asked many people but I did not get a response so whoever seems to be reading this please give me an answer Alisha rains (talk) 14:54, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Do you have the image already uploaded? (here or on our sister project Wikimedia Commons)? If not, you can follow one of the two links above, which will help you with the upload process. Free files should generally go to Wikimedia Commons, while non-free (fair use) images must be kept here. After that, please tell us the upload name of the image, or simply come back and ask for how to include it in an article, and we will have a look. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:35, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Alisha rains, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for wanting to help improve Wikipedia. I have a question to ask, that may avoid some frustration and wasted effort later: did you take this pictures yourself? If you did, then you can upload them to Wikimedia Commons, and license them appropriately as you do so. If you did not, Wikipedia may not be able to accept them: in particular, most images you find on the Internet cannot be used, because Wikipedia is very careful about copyright. Many articles lack a photo not because nobody can be bothered, but because nobody has been able to find a photo with suitable licensing. The whole story is at WP:Image use policy. --ColinFine (talk) 16:18, 2 September 2020 (UTC

Ok I am new so can you please explain to me about this wiki commons thing because I don't know what that is and I don't understand when you say did I upload the picture can you please explain and thank you for replying quickly

OK, Alisha rains, I'll give it a go.

• The software that runs Wikipedia will not display an image that is linked to externally: all images must first be uploaded to a Wikimedia server, and then they can be inserted into an article.
• It is possible to upload an image to English Wikipedia itself; but if you do that the image will not be accessible from other language Wikipedias, or from Wiktionary, Wikisource, Wikiquote, Wikinews etc. So the Wikimedia Foundation has a separate wiki, called Wikimedia Commons, which all those wikis can access. So where possible, it's best to upload to Commons. The upload wizard within Wikipedia can upload to either Wikipedia or to Commons, whichever you tell it to.
• Now we get to Copyright. Commons, by policy, will only accept media which it is legal for anybody to reuse or alter for any purpose. commercial or not, without having to pay or get permission (there may be a requirement to give attribution). There are two main classes of media that meet that requirement: the first is public domain material, which is usually either very old ("out of copyright"), or published by a body such as the US government which chooses to make many of the works published in its name public domain. Most images less than 100 years old, (and in particular, most images you find on the Internet) are not in the public domain. The second is images which the copyright holder (usually the person who made the image, such as the photographer, though not always) has chosen to release under a permissive licence such as CC-BY-SA, which makes them free to reuse in the sense that Commons requires. If you upload pictures that you took yourself, you can license them as you upload them; but if they are anybody else's, then you may not unless the copyright owner has explicitly licensed them. See donating copyright materials.
• Because those rules so tightly limit the images which can be used in Wikipedia, Wikipedia chooses to relax them a certain amount, but not very far. If an image, and the way it is to be used on Wikipedia, meet all the criteria in the non-free content criteria, then it is permissible to upload the image to Wikipedia (not to Commons), and use it in an article. Those criteria are quite restrictive, and almost never apply to images of living people (because there is usually a possibility of somebody going and taking another image which they can release).

Does this make things clearer? --ColinFine (talk) 22:31, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok thank you so much you have helped me a lot I will try doing what you said thank you and I also wanted to ask is there a place where you can chat to someone personally or not

He, Alisha rains. Please sign your posts on talk and discussion pages. As for talking personally: it depends what you mean. Every user has a "User talk" page on which you can start a discussion; but like everything else on Wikipedia, that is publicly visible (though not usually found by search engines). There is also IRC for online chatting, but I have never used that, so I don't know what it is like. Finally, many users enable email, which means that you can send them an email from Wikipedia (go to their user or user talk page, and if they have enabled it, there will be an "Email this user" in the toolbox down the side - I'm talking about using Wikipedia through a browser: I don't think this is available from the mobile app). But it is part of the collaborative nature of Wikipedia that discussions should be held in public unless there is a good reason not to. --ColinFine (talk) 17:16, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Because I would like to speak to you personally on your talk page please you seem like a very nice person ❤️ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alisha rains (talk • contribs) 18:11, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Back to your original question - how do you have these pictures? Do you mean you took them with a camera? As to you last comment, clicking on "Talk" in a person's signature takes you to their talk page, where you can leave a comment. Anyone else can go to that Talk page and see it. David notMD (talk) 18:31, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

No I did not take a use a camera to take the pictures but I took I took them from the internet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alisha rains (talk • contribs) 19:01, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Alisha rains All of those pictures are copyright by someone else and you are not permitted to add them to Wikipedia or Wikipedia Commons. David notMD (talk) 02:25, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok thank you for helping me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alisha rains (talk • contribs) 08:04, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Help creating a Wikipedia page for an actor

Help creating a Wikipedia page for an actor

Can anyone help me create a Wikipedia page for an actor? 108.89.82.111 (talk) 08:11, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not have "pages for actors"; it has articles about actors. Please review the special Wikipedia definition of a notable actor; if this actor meets at least one aspect of that definition, and has significant coverage(not just brief mentions) in independent reliable sources, an article may be possible. Be advised that successfully writing a new article is the absolute hardest thing to do on Wikipedia, and I would suggest taking some time to learn more about Wikipedia first. It's best to do this by spending time editing existing articles first, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. At a minimum you should review Your First Article, and possibly use the new user tutorial(though you need an account to do that). You can then use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft for review by another editor before it is formally placed in the encyclopedia, so you find out any problems first. 331dot (talk) 09:15, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Adding images

I am trying to update images on a page International Bomber Command Centre. I own the rights to all the images but nothing seems to upload. I get a message saying I don't own the images, but I do and they are stored on the PC from which I am working on Wiki. How do i get over this? The images that are currently shown are out of date and of very poor quality Nicky at IBCC (talk) 09:05, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Nicky at IBCC Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You will need to review the conflict of interest and paid editing policies as you have formal disclosures you are required to make. You cannot upload images to Wikipedia itself until you are autoconfirmed(your account is four days old with 10 edits or more). You can upload them to Commons, a link can be found at Files For Upload(which you also use to get assistance with direct uploads). 331dot (talk) 09:19, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Page fixed

Note: I fixed two bare ref tags (with nowiki tags) in #Is there a template for ref. name = that was causing the next several sections of this page to disappear. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:09, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that AlanM1, but for future reference you can just explain what you did either in an edit summary or in the original discussion thread per WP:TPG#Fixing format errors. Pretty much all experienced TH hosts will understand what you did; so, there's no need to start a new discussion thread to explain why. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I'm aware (if you look at the history of the page, I do a lot of quiet work). I felt it important in this case because a non-regular had posted a duplicate section because their original one disappeared. Others might be wondering why sections disappeared and want to know that they should refresh the page and look for it again. It was an unusual, subtle, and tough to find problem. Or maybe I was just fishing for a thank you. I don't know. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:48, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Question

Can I use Grammarly on pages to fix it? I'm just wondering Littlemonkeyjoe5337 (talk) 16:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Littlemonkeyjoe5337, and welcome to the Teahouse. You may use any tool you find helpful. I do not know how well Grammarly works in the Wiki editing window. It may be better to copy into a notepad or word processor window, run Grammarly on it, and copy the resuolt back. In any case you are responsible for the edits you make, with or without a tool, so check the results before clicking "publish". DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:31, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I have Grammarly's Chrome extension installed and it works when I'm in Source Editing mode, but it doesn't work for Visual Editing as far as I know. Hope this helps.Infojunkie8675 (talk) 16:42, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Littlemonkeyjoe5337: Any tool, no matter how good, is only effective if it is used in the right way, and with care. It is perhaps unfortunate that some of your first edits here were not seen as being as helpful as you might have wished. Personally, I would only ever rely on the spelling tools, not the grammar ones, and I would need to be very careful never to change one acceptable spelling for another, just because the tool suggested it was wrong. A classic example would be colour and color. To me, one of them is very wrong and the other fine, but I need to appreciate that both US and British spellings are correct in the right contexts (see WP:ENGVAR). If you do decide to come out of retirement after your first 24 hour's experience here, I suggest you just stick to fixing really obvious spelling errors. (There are plenty of them!) Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:23, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

To add some more detail to what Nick Moyes said, after having reviewed those problematic edits made by the user (and fixed some more of them), Grammarly seems incapable (unsurprisingly) of knowing how to handle some things (assuming they were done by the tool or at its suggestion, not the user alone):

• It insists on serial commas instead of deciding what the article uses and sticking to it.
• It may insist on a particular spelling convention (British or American) instead of deciding what the article uses and sticking to it.
• It likes to insert indefinite articles in front of words where I don't think it's necessary, e.g., "It is sometimes prepared without a sauce". (Formal grammatical clarity on this is welcome)
• It wants to capitalize words that are sometimes used as proper nouns, regardless of context, e.g., pizza Bianca (white pizza; which should not be capitalized), as opposed to Bianca Jagger, which should be.
• Other word removals that are just awkward, e.g., removing "own" from: "... due to people who had grown up eating grandma pizza finally being able to open up their own pizzerias."

In the hands of someone who has read more than an article or book or two, has written something more formal than a tweet, and is adept at copy-editing, these false suggestions are just an annoyance that they would know to ignore. However, in the hands of someone without such experience, whose first language is not English or, is "not old enough to get a job" (in this case), such tools do more harm than good. I think that if someone needs to ask whether it's OK to use, they probably shouldn't use it. Not everyone can or should copy-edit, despite the slogan. My opinion, of course. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

The general issue of any guidance needed for new editors on error-checking tools is probably worth moving to our Talk page. But I have just added this to WP:SPELLCHECK. In this instance, I agree with AlanM1's assessment and think an error-checking tool was being innocently used in a way that caused a few minor problems that needed reverting. Sadly, I suspect they felt rather bitten by the firm but reasonable request on their talk page not to use Grammarly in that way, which probably curtailed their desire to continue here. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:05, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Cant Add pictures

Hello! I want to inquire about how can i add pictures to an article here? like i have my own non copyrighted pictures which i want to upload, but the uploader isnt allowing me, sorry for this childish question but i am new to editing Wikipedia. Ematchkay (talk) 08:28, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Ematchkay, was it Wikimedia Commons where you tried to upload them? There's no account in your name there. Also, what do you mean by "own non copyrighted"? Did you take the pictures yourself? Or are they public domain for some reason? Maproom (talk) 09:59, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Maproom, i just clicked on the on insert>image and media> upload, but it says "Failed to load the configuration for file uploads to the foreign file repository."

@Ematchkay: try using WP:FUW to upload images. If thy are under a free license such as CC-BY-SA (not yust found on the internet), you can also use c:Special:UploadWizard. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 11:26, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

pre-Columbus period?

Why not rename this period "pre-Indian removal" period, calling it for what really happened ."pre-Columbus" period is not telling the real events that put America where it is today. And yet those same Columbus people are still in control and why is it so hard to start the healing with the truth? 2600:6C55:6800:1B22:1DE0:64DB:E2A4:67B3 (talk) 15:04, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state, and that generally includes article titles. Wikipedia will use the most common name for a topic, see WP:COMMONNAME, and will not push any sort of agenda to right great wrongs of history. If you can make a case that most independent reliable sources use the terminology you propose, you should do that on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 15:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The term "pre-Columbian" is very commonly used in histories to indicate the period prior to the first voyage of Columbus in 1492, or more generally the period before Europeans came to the Americas. In such matters, Wikipedia does not invent or popularize new terms, it follows existing practice, particularly scholarly practice. Also, this term refers to a very specific and dated event, whereas "pre-Indian removal" would be significantly more vague, IMO. But that is a side isasue, the main issue is tht we use the terms our sources use. If reliable sources start to use "pre-Indian removal" then Wikipedia should also, and not otherwise. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:22, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Draft:GIG Logistics

Hi All, will any reviewer be kind enough and willing to have a look at this draft? I made the initial submission on 1 July (over 9 weeks ago) and the instructions left in the comment on the first review from Lapablo (23 July) were followed, and then a second/follow-up instructions left by Lapablo on 1 August have been addressed as well. I am yet to get another review or comment since then. Kindly review at your convenience. Many thanks. Jidara (talk) 11:46, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Jidara Hello and welcome. You have submitted the draft for review, it will be seen by another reviewer in due course, please be patient. As noted, "This may take 2 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,384 pending submissions waiting for review." All drafts are reviewed at random in no particular order, so personal appeals for a review have a low chance of success, as it is seen as an effort to "jump the line". 331dot (talk) 11:53, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jidara Hello & welcome, As already stated by 331dot, personal appeals do indeed have a low success rate. Whilst we are at it reading WP:COI & WP:PAID might be important for you at this juncture. Celestina007 12:05, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Jidara had declared paid for GIG Logistics on own Talk page. I copied it to Jidara's User page. As Jidara mentioned above, submitted twice, declined twice. From the history of the article, no edits have been done after either of the Declined except to submit the draft again. David notMD (talk) 12:28, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for moving it from their TP to the appropriate place.

Now, @Jidara I can’t say I understand the pressure a paid editor (who is yet to deliver) is made to tolerate because I haven’t been in such situation but I do imagine it to be very much frustrating, however as rightly stated by David notMD, you do not seem to have addressed any issue since your article was declined twice by Lapablo whose initial reason for declining the draft was connected to UPE concerns. Courtesy ping to Lapablo who may want to comment about this or take another look at the article. Celestina007 13:00, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm confused, as the author may be. The comment left by the reviewer below the pink decline box asked for declaration of the paid editing. However, the decline box itself complains that the subject is not notable – a whole different problem. The second decline box looks like the first, with no mention of the PAID issue (though the article author put the declaration in the wrong place), but the real problem appears to still be notability, about which nothing was done (possibly because of the talk page communication being only about PAID). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1, I think possibly @Lapablo intended to include the addendum “also fails GNG” to his UPE concerns in the pink decline box as to why he declined the article but perhaps due to normal everyday errors (which we all make) most likely forgot to include that. Can’t say for sure though, just a plausible theory. Celestina007 15:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

How To Change Username?

Hello! Iam Muhammad Husayn. I Want To Ask Question: How To Change Username In Wikipedia Account? ItsMuhammadHusayn (talk) 16:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @ItsMuhammadHusayn, welcome to the Teahouse. For more information and instructions on how to change your username, see Wikipedia:Changing username Ed talk! 16:24, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

The OP is evading a block. 331dot (talk) 16:25, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

How to change wrong Wiki photo popping up at Google search?

If one googles for "Aeolic order", the wrong, Ionic (!) capital image appears along with the Wiki article's lead. This wrong photo used to be at the top of the article. I've replaced it with a better suited photo, but Google didn't react. Can that be modified? Or is it a case of wait and it'll happen? Anyhow, there's no "short description" tag at the top, that I know about, but not about photos. Who knows what to do? Thanks, Arminden (talk) 16:39, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Arminden: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Google and Wikipdia are separate entities; Wikipedia has no control over how Google presents search information. Try contacting Google. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:44, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Arminden Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It takes time for Google to index articles and update. If it is pulling the image from Wikipedia, it will eventually update. It may also be something on Google's end that we here have no control over, in which case you will need to contact Google. 331dot (talk) 16:45, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

There's a feedback button at the bottom of all Google Knowledge Graphs, Arminden. You could use that to report the issue. See here for more info. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:50, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Article Rejected

 Mdahmedqamer (talk) 17:20, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Mdahmedqamer and welcome to the Teahouse. Is this about User:Mdahmedqamer/sandbox. That was rejected and then deleted largely for being promotional. It was also insufficiently sourced, and not in a proper format for a Wikipedia article, but those issues could be dealt with. It was also signed, which articles and drafts should never be. But promotion was the main problem. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:40, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Board deciding notability

Hi. I saw there is a board where people post sources and users discuss if it's considered reliable or not. Is there something similar where you post a person and people discuss if they're notable? Or can I just ask here? Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 09:21, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Julia Domna Ba'al Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not aware of a central board that discusses preclearing topics for notability. You are welcome to ask here; you may wish to review the general notability guideline first(there are more specific criteria for certain subjects). 331dot (talk) 09:28, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

331dot I read that and I'm not sure. The person is called Emily Schrader. She was a director at StandWithUs, responsible for its rise online. Research fellow at the Tel Aviv Institute. She wrote columns on Jerusalem post, the forward, and others. the most sources on her are her own articles or interviews. I tried to find sources talking about her (independent) and found this, written by a haaretz editor, and another article written by electronic intifada (small time magazine). Is this enough to make an article? Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 09:34, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Julia Domna Ba'al You would need to have multiple independent reliable sources to establish notability. Interviews are not independent sources. In my opinion this person would not meet the definition of a notable person. 331dot (talk) 09:41, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks.Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 09:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Julia Domna Ba'al There is the Reliable Source Noticeboard where editors discuss whether particular sources should be considered reliable, either in general, or for specific uses in specific articles or drafts. However, this is advisory, not any sort of "clearance" and it does not usually discuss the notability of an entire topic. Indeed, when the notability of a topic is considered at an deletion discussion, which is the primary place to discuss that, it is generally in connection with the particular sources cited in the article or presented in the discussion. It is much harder to determine the notability of a topic without searching for sources, except in obvious cases. (A newly elected national legislator is clearly notable, as per WP:NPOL; a high-shool student with no non-local coverage is pretty clearly not notable.) DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:10, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel do you think she is notable? Just your personal opinion. She was mentioned in some articles, like ynetnews, JP, and a French news agency. Is this enough? They are just passing mentions but consider her an expert in online advocacy. I think she's a rising star. Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 16:11, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Julia Domna Ba'al based on those sources, no, not even close. I haven't done a general search for other sources, so there might be several out there, but none of the sources you link to constitutes significant coverage from an Independent and reliable source. The 972 Magazine piece is almost totally a reprint of Schrader's own statements, so it is not independent, and there is no need to even get into whether it is a RS. The ynetnews piece simply has a short quote from here and contains nothing about her. The Jerusalem Post piece has a somewhat longer quote from her, but again nothing about her. The decotidien piece, if my college French is to be trusted, is much the same. Normally, multiple independent reliable sources are needed, each of which having significant coverage. There are none here.

Reporters are often hard to establish notability for, unless they win a major award such as a Pulitzer or its equivalent, because they are seldom written about. It is possible, but hard, to establish notability for a person as an "often consulted expert" but this requires showing that a wide variety of notable publications treat the person as among their top experts to analyze or comment in a particular field. I have only been involved in one case in my years on Wikipedia where that route was successful. If she is in fact a rising star. then quite possibly WP:TOOSOON applies. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC) Julia Domna Ba'al DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:48, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel thank you, I get it now. I think it's "too soon" then. Will get back to it in a few years when multiple independent sources show significant coverage, and when she does something notable enough. Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 19:19, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Article stealing

Hello, some one stole a page by changing the name of the to a completely another state. It was Bharatiya Janata Party, Rajastan before with data of rajastan and now it is Bharatiya Janata Party, Tamil Nadu with tamil nadu data. What to do? Aaravan (talk) 19:00, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Aaravan: thanks for pointing this out. It has been resolved and the article on the BJP Rajastan is back where it belongs. Nthep (talk) 19:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hebrew money compared to USA money

I was wondering if anyone can tell me where to find (or do you know) what value a gerah or a shekel of Hebrew money is in relation to United States money. Is there some way to make a comparison?

gerah - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerah

shekel - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shekel

BibleGateway.com (NIV) - Exodus 30:13 - "Each one who crosses over to those already counted is to give a half shekel, according to the sanctuary shekel, which weighs twenty gerahs. This half shekel is an offering to the Lord."

What is the value of a gerah or shekel compared to US money?

Thanks for any help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elteral3 (talk • contribs) 19:56, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Elteral3 The Reference desk might be able to give a better answer to this kind of question. But I doubt that any accurate comparison can be made to biblical accounts of sums of money, as opposed to current money in Israel or other countries. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:58, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Per DESiegal above, but a basic google search reveals $0.30 to 1 Israeli New Shekel, or 3.37 Shekel to the Dollar. Currently. But this is OR and isn't accounting for inflation or true gold value etc given the dollar didn't exist in Biblical times so we are comparing two FIAT currencies. Koncorde (talk) 21:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

to publish my new article

Hey , It's my first time to publish an article on Wikipedia. but it' seems difficult to me. it a bibliography article. I finished to write it but when publish it I can't find it when I make a search. I would like to know if it tooks days to be available on the internet.tahnks Tnt05 (talk) 16:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to The Teahouse, you have not submitted your draft for review yet, but I strongly suggest you do not, it will be rejected as it gives no indication that the subject is notable. Theroadislong (talk) 16:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Tnt05 (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I think you mean a biographical article, not "bibliography". Is it about yourself? There are special rules about that here if it is. You have not yet submitted your draft for review, but if you did, I think it would be rejected quickly, because it has no independent reliable sources with significant coverage to support its content. Wikipedia is not a place to just tell about someone; it summarizes what independent sources with significant coverage have chosen to say about a subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability.

Successfully writing a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. I would suggest that you read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial. You may also want to spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest you first, to better understand how Wikipedia works and what is expected of article content. 331dot (talk) 16:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Your effort is an unsubmitted draft, and even if revised, submitted, reviewed and approved, there is a lag time before internet searches on the person's name would find the Wikipedia article. David notMD (talk) 21:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Bringing a page up to date

Updating a page, not paid editing So I'm pretty new to editing wikipedia. I follow a bunch a companies in the sports betting space and I noticed a lot of their pages were out of date. I tried to update this page: FanDuel. However, the edit has been reverted as a paid edit. I don't work for them or get paid by them. Any suggestions? Sportsbettor (talk) 13:44, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Sportsbettor Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Are you paid in any capacity related to sports betting? 331dot (talk) 13:48, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

No, I work in sports but not in sports betting or for any of these companies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sportsbettor (talk • contribs) 13:55, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

(this comment is filled in after an edit conflict)Sportsbettor, hello there. The reason why said editor reverted your edit under WP:PAID is because your edits sounds advertising. Lemme quote: "diversified gaming company," "the second largest daily fantasy sports service in the country." The second example is okay if a credible source says so. You also seem to repeatedly change the first sentence, possibly making the editor feel as if you are trying to find the best words to "market" FanDuel.

If you are paid, please disclose it. If you are not, good; I suggest sourcing sources next time and using a more Neutral POV. That's all I can say I guess. Oh and remember to sign your comments with four tildes, like ~~~~. GeraldWL 14:05, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Sportsbettor: Sign your comments on discussion pages, that is, not articles. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:24, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Thanks for clarifying. (has anyone in history signed on an article before?) GeraldWL 14:29, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: Yes. That's why I mentioned it – I try not to nit-pick without a good reason. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:59, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

I also just removed the word "diversified". Good point on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sportsbettor (talk • contribs) 17:36, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Oh, and, to clarify, don't be so hard on WP:NPOV. Many editors are hesitant (based on my observations) to edit a page because they think others will revert it because it sounds like an American medicine advertisement, and crying out on "everyone has a bias!". If you feel it is okay, just publish it-- another editor will hopefully humbly neutralize it. GeraldWL 14:32, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Gerald Waldo Luis, signing an article is a very common error by a new editor, although I think it used to be more common than it seems to be recently. I have no idea why, or even if this informal observation is correct. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:08, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

In response to my question on User talk:scope creep scope creep posted:

Adding the word diversified into the lede along with a press-release reference. I've not done the work, but it certainly look like all the companies that the editor has worked at all in the same company group, indicating he is probably a UPE, or at the very least has a coi. Its moved from being fairly even lede, to be more like a company profile.

That should be taken into account here. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:16, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Sportsbettor Do your job duties involve following sports betting, even if you don't work in the sports betting field? I'm not trying to attack you, I'm just trying to help you help yourself and get this cleared up. 331dot (talk) 15:26, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Sportsbettor (talk) 17:32, 4 September 2020 (UTC)Thanks for the comments. Starting to get it. So I've gone back and neutralized it. I think it is much better now. On the question of my job, honestly pretty much everyone in US sports today is following sports betting, so I guess the answer is yes. I'll try to make sure I use a neutral POV in any edits though. On the tildes is that this page or on the article talk page. I'm putting them here and after just to be sure. :-) Sportsbettor (talk) 17:32, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Sportsbettor Use the tildes to sign your posts on any talk or discussion page such as this, and any article talk page or user talk page, but never in an actual article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:12, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Trouble finding reliable articles for an esoteric subject

Hello! I'm trying to create an article about "Time Out Dolls". These things will sometimes pop up in flea markets and secondhand circles online, and they're usually met with a lot of confusion. So I want to create an article that could help explain things and clear said confusion. While I can find a lot of content about them online, ranging from sewing patterns, to blog posts, to photos, I'm really struggling to find reliable, verifiable resources. What can I do now? Maddielovescolours (talk) 20:46, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Maddielovescolours, and welcxome to the Teahouse. I am afraid that if you cannot find independent published reliable sources about a topic, that cover that topic in some detail, then in most cases Wikipedia cannot have an article about that topic. There are a few cases, such as elected officials above a certain level, and inhabited places, where a single source proving that the topic exists will do, but not for dolls or most other subjects. Sources need not be online -- if you find a book which discuss es such dolls that could be a good source -- but they are needed, and the articles content should largely come from independent sources. Note that fan sites or one-person web sites are generally not considered to be reliable sources. and that personal letters, emails, and phone calls are not published sources. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:04, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

The things definitely exist. You can buy them on Amazon and on Ebay. A Google search shows that people write about them – but not in serious articles that Wikipedia would regard as "reliable". (This is the first time I've ended up feeling that WP's notability standard can give the wrong result.) Maproom (talk) 23:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

https://www.ozy.com/good-sht/whats-with-creepy-time-out-dolls-at-classic-car-shows/88074%7C This article cites an academic collection of essays called "Doll Studies: The Many Meanings of Girls’ Toys and Play", and if I looked through google books I saw that they've been mentioned in Readers Digest a few times. I can't get my hands on a copy right now, but could those potentially work?Maddielovescolours (talk) 23:43, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Lots of things exist, but are trivial variations that no one has written about, Maproom. No doubt there are red-haired, left-handed dolls exactly 6.25 inches tall, but I doubt that we should have an article about them. As for these "time-out dolls" I don't say they aren't notable, only that like most topics, an article about them would need reliable sources, Maddielovescolours. The sources you describe might well work, depending on whether they give these dolls more than a passing mention, and whether they seem to be reliable, and not engaged in selling such dolls. I had never heard of them before, but I don't know everything, so that proves nothing. Reader's Digest usually reprints compressed versions of things that appeared elsewhere, and I would think it was better to cite the original, if that can be found. If the sources can be found, an article is perfectly possible. I am not sure if OZY.COM would be considered an RS or not, it might be. There is a someehat similar story at https://drivetribe.com/p/why-are-creepy-time-out-dolls-a-DY3foVaPTECHf8lCD-VCiA?iid=IBLPkl3dRFWIcurt8JEhQw which might or might not be an RS. I would try for the book, myself. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:59, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Sadas DB - Company description - Feedback request

Hello, I noticed that my previous feedback request has been canceled ( can I know the reason, please). I want to show again my trial page of Sadas company, in order to obtain other important feedback to improve the page and respect Wikipedia guidelines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Giuseppe_Ardolino/sandbox). The page has been already changed thanks to previous feedbacks from Wikipedia contributors. Please, Can you give me other advice before the publication? Thank you for your collaboration Giuseppe Ardolino (talk) 15:48, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Giuseppe Ardolino. Your previous request has not been "canceled": it has been archived, as you were told on your user talk page. You can find it at WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1074#Sadas - Company description - Feedback request. As you can see, nobody chose to reply. There is no obligation on Teahouse hosts to review drafts: as you probably know, there is a formal process for reviewing: to initiate it, paste {{subst:submit}} at the top of your draft. --ColinFine (talk) 16:37, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Giuseppe Ardolino, and welcome to the Teahouse. Some comments about Giuseppe Ardolino/sandbox in no particular order.

• The text could use copy editing from someone fluent in English. For examp0le, in formal english, one does not say that a copany was "born" but rather "founded" or "created". Similarly one does not write "currently, it is led by" but rather "is currently led by" or better "as of 2020, the company is led by". Indeed relative dates such as "currently" should be avoided. Consider how the article might read in five or ten years.
• company status indicators such as "co" "inc", "corp" or "LLC" are generally noit used in Wikipedia, unless they have become an invariable part of the company name. If "s.r.l." is a simialr term from Italian, it should probably be omitted. If it is retained, it should probably be expanded on fist use.
• Please read Referencing for Beginners. Citation templates are not required, but if you choose not to use them, please give most of the same information. This means giving the title of the referenced piece; the name of the containing work (website, newspaper, magazine, or journal or the like) when there is one (note the name, not the domain); the author's name (when known); the date or at least the year of publication; the page number(s) if the source has numbered pages; the language if the source is not in English; the date accessed or retrieved if this is an online source; and the name of the publisher if this is helpful. The object is to allow the reader to find it even if the link goes dead.
• To establish notability and to pass WP:NCORP, there should be multiple independent published reliable sources cited, each of which should include significant coverage of the company. I have not tried to evaluate the sources here.

I hope that is a bit helpful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: FWIW, in my previous life, I came to the conclusion that, outside the U.S., tacking on the JSC, AS, cie, Pty Ltd, Gmbh., etc. is more common, as if to emphasize that a company is a "proper" business. I think sources probably adhere to that. I'm not sure I want to see someone try to spell out GmbH. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:14, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1 MOS:MISCSHORT says (f "Co.") It should only be used in the names of companies (like: "PLC", "LLC", "Inc.", "Ltd.", "GmbH", etc.), and can usually be omitted unless an ambiguity would result. It does not need to be linked. and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (companies) says: The legal status suffix of a company (such as Inc., plc, LLC, and those in other languages such as GmbH, AG, and S.A.) is not normally included in the article title (for example, Microsoft Corporation, Nestlé S.A., Aflac Incorporated, and Deutsche Post AG). ... In some cases, leading articles (usually The) and suffixes (such as Company, International, Group, and so forth) are an integral part of the company name and should be included... As a matter of style, the MOS takes precedence over how names are styled elsewhere, and particularly by the owners if commo9n usage in sources drops the legal status indicators. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:31, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

VisualEditor

I enabled "VisualEditor", went through the "wizard" > "practice in the community sandbox", then... "edit page visually"> and then I "published" in the sandbox. It looked fine ..but how does one then submit this bit in the sandbox when it is ready, or change it to see if the code is correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.173.191 125.237.173.191 (talk) 22:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@125.237.173.191: .Your edit will be reversed now. Try not to do in the sandboxes. Do the true one.Wizard > done trial > I am not connected to the subject and it is done! Nihaal 07:02, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nihaal The Wikipedian: Please see WP:INDENT – if you don't do so, your response gets tacked onto the end of the previous paragraph, making it difficult to see who wrote what. Also note that pings don't work on IPs. Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:39, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Profile Page

This is not about a specific article, I just need help with navigation.On my profile page I want to be able to put one of those boxes that people put on the side of their profile pages or articles. I am not talking about userboxes. I am talking about the informational boxes that have different stuff about the user or the subject of an article. Thank you for your help. JP3205 (talk) 18:51, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

JP3205 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Are you referring to your user page? Wikipedia does not have a single profile. 331dot (talk) 19:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello JP3205. You are probably thinking of Template:Infobox person. Be careful that your userpage does not look like a encyclopedia article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:04, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

I think an infobox was what I was thinking about. Thanks for your help.  JP3205 (talk) 18:51, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@JP3205: There's apparently an infobox specifically designed for user pages: {{Infobox Wikipedia user}}. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:45, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, this helps. I will start working on it soon.  JP3205 (talk) 12:47, September 2020 (UTC)

Donald J Trump Wikipedia Page bias and personal opinions.

Hello in the Donald J Trump Wikipedia page I see a lot of clear one sided bias. Misaligned facts concerning his policies. The policies you do have are presented in a half truth form. And the fact checking aspect is also disproportionately displayed as you make him out to be a liar when in truth he’s only been partly wrong borderline taken out of context in a few statements over the past few years. I think it is disputable at best as for example Joe Biden is constantly making deliberate false statements sometimes full on unintelligible but you don’t see anything resembling fairness when comparing the two. Trump didn’t bring about the coronavirus he wasn’t slow at handling it he’s not out to get your editors please take a look at the obvious varieties of favoritism going on. Of all the democratic presidents who has served and have done nothing at all with the time they had or brought about bad policies you don’t see that on there page. You’re talking about fact checking when you don’t even fact check your own work. 2602:306:8BB8:2280:7DF5:8EAF:9FDE:4609 (talk) 09:04, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state about article subjects. Any bias in sources will be reflected in Wikipedia; we present the sources to the reader so they can judge them for themselves as to any bias. Wikipedia does not deal in truth, as truth is in the eye of the beholder, but we do deal in what can be verified. If you have specific concerns about article content, please discuss them on the article talk page.

I don't know anyone who claims Trump brought about the virus. 331dot (talk) 09:08, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Donald Trump has many discussions on the neutral versus non-neutral point of view of the article. David notMD (talk) 09:10, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

(ec) For issues with a particular page, please discuss it on that article's talk page (if the article is Donald J. Trump, the talk page is Talk:Donald J. Trump), where you will reach editors with interest and experience editing that particular article. You'll need to be specific about what you say is wrong (i.e., exact quotes from the article), and provide reliable sources to support your case. It's worth searching through what I imagine is a massive amount of discusion already there, to see if your issue has been covered, and if you have anything new to add, to avoid wasting your time and that of others. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:11, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

For some reason, Donald J. Trump is a redirect to Donald Trump, but Talk:Donald J. Trump is not a redirect to Talk:Donald Trump. Thus, I am recommending discussion at Talk:Donald Trump, not the near-empty Talk:Donald J. Trump. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:15, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, IP editor and welcome to the Teahouse. It sounds like you have quite an opinion and agenda of your own that you want to express here. I'm really sorry, but Wikipedia does not act on broad 'point-of-view' opinions, so the way to influence the content of any article you feel is unbalanced is to cite specific statements included in the article that you are concerned about, then find and challenge them with better, more reliably-regarded sources, and then make your suggestion for alternative wording, and post your detailed recommendation on the article's talk page for other editors to consider. I'm afraid the Teahouse is a help forum for those needing advice on the mechanics of editing. We, here, are not responsible for the content of individual articles. I don't wish to be rude, but when you say the Wikipedia article about Trump "...make[s] him out to be a liar when in truth he’s only been partly wrong borderline taken out of context in a few statements over the past few years" I really do have to wonder what narrow selection of sources and opinions you have been accessing. More advice on what we regard as 'reliable sources' can be found here. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:20, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Question

How to make page about something Uirpor77 (talk) 09:57, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Uipor77, if you would like to create a page, take a look at WP:YFA and follow the guidelines there. Please note that the vast majority of articles that get declined or rejected (they are different things) are due to people not following the guidelines. Also, it appears you have created a promotional draft which was recently rejected at Articles for Creation (and nominated for deletion). I don't know what topic you are intending to write about in your new article, but please do not try to re-create a draft which has been recently rejected, or else it will just waste people's time. If the subject of your article is different, then feel free to read through the linked page and start writing, otherwise I suggest you abstain. Regards, Giraffer (munch) 10:27, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

You have been given useful advice on your user talk page. Try reading that, & follow the links (the words in blue) to further guidance. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:29, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Incorrect facts about 'Kapil Kak'

In the article 'Kapil Kak' it has been wrongly mentioned that he was court martialled which is absolutely incorrect.The retired Air Vice Marshal of Indian Air Force was never court martialled. 120.57.252.240 (talk) 12:33, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

The unsourced addition has been reverted, & the editor warned. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:38, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Article resubmitted

Hi. Salvio giuliano was kind enough to recently undelete a rejected article, at my request. I've added what I believe to be reliable sources, and fleshed it out a bit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jatbula_Trail Does it seem okay now? Is there anything else I need to do after resubmitting the article for review? Thanks Canberranone (talk) 10:56, 5 September 2020 (UTC) @Canberranone:.

One logical thing is that you should expand it during the Time.Nihaal 12:12, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

During the what? Canberranone (talk) 13:31, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

I am guessing Nihaal meant during the time that the article is waiting for a reviewer. David notMD (talk) 14:21, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@Canberranone: That looks pretty good now. I'd be happy to see it in mainspace. You seem to have repeated one or two key links to sources, which isn't necessary (especially the 'website' in the infobox. You should hyperlink Northern Territory in the lead, and include Australia in that line (as I initially guessed it was in Yukon, or somewhere similar!) You've mentioned hazards in the infobox, but these should be cited and only mentioned if they are very real and specific risk(s) to that particular route. (We are not a guidebook, so standard risks applicable to all such trails are quite unnecessary) That said, I would clarify this is a multiday trail, aimed at backpackers, with wildcamping spots at set intervals, or whatever the sources actually say. You could start to think about (but not yet insert) which Categories to add to the article, and which WikiProjects to add to the Talk page. Well done! Nick Moyes (talk) 14:42, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Am I the right person to write this article?

I've recently had a book published about the actor Guy Standeven (1928-1998). Should someone else who isn't as connected to the subject matter write his Wikipedia entry? He currently doesn't have one. I think he fits the criteria with regards nobility as he has an extensive filmography and although I'm the leading authority on the man I was concerned that it wasn't my place to write the article. Marcus J Heslop (talk) 17:21, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

hello, Marcus J Heslop There is nothing wrong with writing an article about a subject you know well. If you have a personal connection, that would be a conflict of interest and you would need to disclose that, and be careful in your writing. If such an article would tend to promote your recent book, that would also be a CoI, and you might in that case want to avoid creating the article. if it can be created with proper citations to sources other than your book, perhaps to sources that you used in writing the book, that would be fine. Sources need not be online as long as they are published and a reader could, by taking some trouble find or buy them.Also, please read WP:NACTOR if you haven't previously done so. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:21, 4 September 2020 (UTC) @Marcus J Heslop: DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:49, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Marcus J Heslop, WP:EXPERT may be of some help. Try using other WP:RS than your book, and if your book is WP:SELFPUBLISHED, don't use it as a source at all. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:21, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

WOW that's a lot of uncredited. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:25, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Helping to Fix Formatting on Discography for Arash DeMaxi (Very easy)

Hi, I hope whoever looking at this is doing well. I am trying to make a Discography for the first time and am having difficulties getting the formatting correct for Arash DeMaxi and I was wondering if someone could help with this? Thank you! Slasher2point1 (talk) 16:09, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@Slasher2point1: Have a look now. There was a table-closing }} instead of row starter |-. I also stripped some unneeded styling to let the browser do "the right thing" for the data and display device. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:21, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Enter Email address after signing up

When I signed up I did not enter an Email address. Is there a way to do so, now? Truth Is King 24 (talk) 17:58, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@Truth Is King 24: Yes, go to the very bottom of this page where you can enter, change or remove your email address. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:15, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok first time here

Hey my name is RuStr12, joined today, do I need to paraphrase every material that I post ? My first edit was a clash with an editor today who insisted that I should not copy paste sentence from material but to paraphrase because of copyrights RuStr12 (talk) 18:15, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, RuStr12. Yes, absolutely, you must re-write factual content in your own words. Both copy/pasting and close paraphrasing of another person's work is not acceptable. Nor is it OK just to change a few words here and there, whilst still keeping the original structure of whatever it was that you're trying to base content on. You need to rephrase in a different manner than the original, without losing its original meaning. See WP:PARAPHRASE for more guidance on this. Just like copying and republishing an image as if it were your own, using someone else's words is copyright theft and we do not tolerate it. When you press 'Publish' here you are releasing the content under a licence that says it is your own work and that you freely release it for re-use. Unless you can show that the original source was published under that same licence (and include a link to clearly demonstrate that fact), we not only have to remove your edit, but then an admin has to go to the trouble of deleting it from your editing history, too, so there's no trace of someone else's work anywhere on Wikipedia. But there's no harm done if you've been advised not to do so, and appreciate how to do things from here onwards. Regards,Nick Moyes (talk) 18:31, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Questions if I may:

Hi I'm RuStr12, joined today on wikipedia, Question : How can I improve my user page (with pictures and so on) I've seen a lot of cool backrounds from other editors RuStr12 RuStr12 (talk) 17:49, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@RuStr12: One simple trick is to find another userpage that you like and copy some of the code (via edit source) and change the relevant bits to suit you own editing interests. Hint: Do preview your edits before publishing them, and please avoid copying so much that you look to be virtually impersonating the userpage of another editor. i.e. you don't want to be including things that say you're an adminstrator, or have been here 10 years when you clearly haven't - people get suspicious when they see that happening! But a cool way is to visit this inactive, but still useful, page for some design and layout ideas: Wikipedia:User page design center. I'm not implying anything, but it's best to avoid spending all your time on your userpage and not on contributing to the encyclopedia itself - new editors who use us just for making fancy userpages tend not to last long here! All the best, and do pop back if you need any further help. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:20, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

“username”

 JabrielAtOmoMusicGroup (talk) 18:39, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, JabrielAtOmoMusicGroup. Do you have a question for us? I can see you've already had a discussion about your username (which looks fine to me). What problem do you need help on? (I might suggest you change your WP:PAID disclosure on your userpage to Draft:Lil Kei, though, so people can find it). Nick Moyes (talk) 19:07, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Not sure of what you mean ? Maybe I made two different articles I was confused I have this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lil_Kei JabrielAtOmoMusicGroup (talk) 19:24, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, JabrielAtOmoMusicGroup. I have moved over your reply which you put on my own userpage (and at the top of the page, not the bottom, which is where we put new posts), so that it appears here. No, those are the same articles - your hyperlink is simply the mobile view to Draft:Lil Kei. It was only that on your userpage the PAID disclosure links to Lil Kei, which doesn't yet exist. I or another Teahouse host here can change it for you so the everything's above board, or you're welcome to fix it yourself. But I am still unclear if you had a specific question you need help with. Just in case it's about our key criteria of meeting 'Notability' - without which no draft article can be accepted - you might want to check out WP:NBIO and WP:NMUSIC. These are our way of writing shortcuts to important help or policy pages (I probably won't reply directly myself as I'm just off to join the rest of my family to watch TV with them) Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:35, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Uploading images

Hi, I just wanted to know what the correct way is to upload a picture from Instagram? Its a page that is open to the public. So is it possible to upload an image from that Instagram page to the Wiki page? Since the owner of the page is a celebrity, I have no way to get their consent. So I am really confused how to upload a picture to their Wiki page from their Instagram page. Please let me know how to proceed. Any help would be much appreciated. BLfan93 (talk) 16:27, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, BLfan93, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please have a look at the long answer I gave another user yesterday, above at #How to add a picture on a article. Note that "open to the public" means nothing, legally. Some pictures on Instagram may have been released under a suitable licence, but you should not assume so without checking their status. --ColinFine (talk) 16:51, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Some time in the next day or so, that answer I pointed to will get archived. If the link doesn't take you anywhere, go to "Most recent archives" just under the contents list at the top, and pick the latest archive - probably 1076. You should be able to find the section by the title "How to add a picture on a article". --ColinFine (talk) 16:54, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

I have tagged the photograph for speedy deletion as a copyright violation. The safest way is only to upload photographs that you yourself have taken. Theroadislong (talk) 17:00, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@BLfan93: Here's a permalink to that section to which ColinFine referred (which will not require digging through the archive): Special:Permalink/976665629#How_to_add_a_picture_on_a_article. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:16, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you and extremely sorry for the inconvenience. I will look into it :) - much love BLfan93

My correction was rejected...

...telling that it is not true. However, it is a fact that Joseph Ferenc’s never was crowned as Hungarian king you can check it in the real history books. 2600:8800:2080:20A:158C:3197:E7B2:23A7 (talk) 20:52, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

You changed content to: The old Hungarian Constitution was restored, and Franz Joseph never was crowned as King of Hungary. It is the reason he was named as “King with Heat.” but you did not provide a reference. Stuff gets reverted even if true if there is no verification. If you can add a reference that Franz Joseph was not crowned, try again - with the reference. Lastly, did you really mean "King with Heat"? David notMD (talk) 20:58, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Copyright

I added content before in wikipedia and one person removed it and said copyright. But recently I found everything in this page -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilica_of_Our_Lady_of_Snows,_Thoothukudi is copied from https://tamilnadu-favtourism.blogspot.com/2016/07/our-lady-of-snows-basilica-thoothukudi.html .I think it is copyright too. So why is it there? 157.46.66.133 (talk) 18:37, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. Thanks for pointing this out. However, if you look at this version from 2016-06-22, you'll see that it appears to be older than the blog you posted, so it looks as if that blog copied the Wikipedia page. (This would be permitted, if it gave attribution, but since it doesn't, it appears to be a copyright infringement. However, only the Wikipedia editors who created the text have standing to pursue that). So it is not Wikipedia that is violating copyright! I will put a template on the article's talk page explaining this. --ColinFine (talk) 18:55, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

User:ColinFine There is also a reference in that revision now it is not available --http://snowschurch.org/about-shrine/history/ but it is available in the website archive.org from 2015, so it is surely copied

Archive.org link - https://web.archive.org/web/20150806040458/http://snowschurch.org/about-shrine/history/ 157.46.86.38 (talk) 19:19, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Could be a copyvio here. The text of the Basilica of Our Lady of Snows, Thoothukudi#History section was added by Meendoctor at Special:Diff/575962020 at 2013-10-06T09:03:03Z. It pre-exists in the earliest archive of the church site at 2013-08-13. Earwig comparison is here. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:40, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

IP user, do you realize that 100% of the entire 6 million plus articles on Wikipedia are created, edited and maintained by volunteers? The are at least 10,000 more copyright violations looking to be found. I'd suggest you register an account and get to work helping find them. John from Idegon (talk) 21:00, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Need your help

Hello admin, I just saw an article have no reliable sources so I was tring to move it on draft but I couldn't successful so can anyone help how to move a article on draft. Article link - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saheb_Chatterjee Bijoyonline30 (talk) 17:36, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello @Bijoyonline30:, and welcome to the Teahouse. Sorry for the long wait for a reply. No, what you tried to do is NOT an acceptable approach for an article that has been here for many years. Moving an article to Draft space is OK for brand new articles (see WP:DRAFTIFY), but quite wrong for older pages, as it could bypass any deletion discussion and simply result in a worthwhile page being deleted without community input. The article does actually have one reference, albeit to IMDB, which we don't accept as reliable. If you think the person is not notable enough, then you should first look for better online sources which show he either does or doesn't meet WP:NBIO or WP:NACTOR and only having failed to find them (we call this process 'WP:BEFORE') should you then consider putting an article up for a deletion discussion at WP:AFD. A lack of sources for a long-established page is never a reason for moving it to draft. Does this help? Regards from the UK Nick Moyes (talk) 19:45, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

There are dozens of "Times of India" references that come up on a Google news search, and I'm in the US. Google searches are regionalized. A search in India should turn up tons of sources. Improving the article should not be hard. Go for it! John from Idegon (talk) 21:07, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello @Nick Moyes: , thanks for your reply. It is really helpful.

Account creator and administrator for Death of Eleanor de Freitas

I would like to find out who created this page and who is the current administrator. I have made edits, which were verifiable and had references attached, which have subsequently been deleted. How can I stop these deletions? RobinEllie (talk) 20:31, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @RobinEllie, you can use the "page history" feature to see who made a page and who has edited it. To answer your query, the page was created by McPhail (talk · contribs), but it looks like an IP user (somebody who wasn't logged in) who is now blocked for disruptive editing removed your edits. I've now restored them, but it's important to keep in mind that anyone can edit Wikipedia, and therefore moderate it. Many thanks, Ed talk! 20:38, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

RobinEllie, Wikipedia articles do not belong to their creators and adminstrators do not decide content as a part of their duties. Content disputes are decided on the article talk page and they are established by CONSENSUS, and administrators do participate in consensus building discussions, but when doing so, they have no more rights or privileges than any other editor, and are specifically barred from using their administrator rights while doing so. John from Idegon (talk) 20:45, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello RobinEllie. Your question implies that you may think that an administrator is assigned to each article. That is not the case. Administrators (like me) are just editors who have been trusted by the community with certain extra tools such as protecting or deleting articles, and blocking disruptive editors. Therefore, the concept of a "current administrator" for an article does not exist. Talk:Death of Eleanor de Freitas is the best place to discuss any concerns about the article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:47, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you all for your very prompt and informative help--RobinEllie (talk) 21:58, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Admiral Halsey's telegram following the battle in Vella Gulf on 8/6-8/7 1943

 2603:9001:5105:845:C139:BAA8:EEB9:A4CA (talk) 16:18, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:26, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

"Do you wanna build a snowman..."-- NO! GeraldWL 16:28, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Answered on his Talk page. David notMD (talk) 02:31, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

locking an arcticle

hey guys the article Ryan Satin over the past few days has repeatedly been vandalized by a Facebook group. is there a way that we can soft lock the article so random people don't vandalize it? w1n5t0n (talk) 03:25, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done Another admin fixed this. Nick Moyes (talk) 05:20, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Delete misspelled AFD

I started an AFD for the page Lloyd Montgomery Garmadon. However, when starting the AFD, I misspelled it as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lloyd Montgomery Garamadon, with an extra a between the r and the m. Is it possible for the misspelled AFD to be deleted? Thanks. Unnamed anon (talk) 02:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done Nick Moyes (talk) 05:36, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

I want to create a Wokipedia Page for an aLUMNI aSSOCIATION

Ifechoice (talk) 21:33, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Ifechoice. I fear it will be highly unlikely that Draft:Egbeoba High School Ikole-Ekiti Alumni Association would ever meet our notability criteria (see WP:NCORP). A brief mention within an existing school/college article might be appropriate, but always base content on what other, reliable sources have written about it. See WP:YFA for further guidance. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:06, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

I've rejected the draft. I've never seen an alumni association for a high school recieve significant coverage. Very few college alumni associations even do. Please understand notability has nothing to do with importance or accomplishment and only a corollary relationship with fame. Notability is established when you've shown that the subject (the alumni assoc.) has gotten significant coverage in multiple reliable independent sources. Coverage must be detailed, as every single fact in the article has to be paraphrased from reliable sources without exception. If it isn't written somewhere else you can source, you cannot put it in a Wikipedia article. Also, for companies and organizations, at least some of the references must be from out of town. Can't speak to your country, but in my country, the newspapers in Chicago don't usually cover even Chicago high school alumni associations, much less those from other cities. Don't feel bad. Few who aren't already Wikipedia editors have any notion of what it takes to get an article here. John from Idegon (talk) 05:53, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Angela Christine Mack and son Thomas Michael Rettew (2002)

https://wreg.com/news/arkansas-missing-child-mom-case-re-opened/amp/

https://bolivarmonews.com/home/woman-unborn-baby-killed-in-car-wreck/article_7f3d3ef3-20a7-57ee-803b-e85e4193c2a3.html

https://www.kait8.com/story/2801350/crime-lab-bones-found-in-fulton-county-well-arent-human/ FultonAR (talk) 23:03, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Is there a question related to these news items? David notMD (talk) 00:31, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, FultonAR - please tell us what this is about. The edit that created this section is the only contribution you've made. There isn't even any basis for us to guess from as to how to help you. John from Idegon (talk) 06:44, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Editing an existing article rejected as 'not constructive'

I tried adding a paragraph to an article about a public figure I know.

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

This was the reply I received.

Hello, I'm Serols. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Graham McIntosh—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Serols (talk) 08:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

I added a paragraph about Graham Mcintosh's sons and their current work, nothing controversial.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Graham%20McIntosh&diff=976988151 Third Way Communications (talk) 08:11, 6 September 2020 (UTC) Third Way Communications (talk) 08:11, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Third Way Communications, in this edit, you must reference a reliable source that says the claim. In this edit, do not add external links to the article, instead, put it at an "external links" section at the very bottom of the article. This edit is so essay-ish and advertising. That's all I can say, maybe. GeraldWL 08:44, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Non-controversial is not the point. None of the information about his sons is relevant to this article, which is about Graham, so all is deleted. David notMD (talk) 09:43, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

I see. Apologies, I just looked at how long the paragraph is and just immediately thought of . GeraldWL 09:57, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Changing page title

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RememberKLMauthausen

Hello

I am new here. Wanted to make a page in memory of my grandfather Stanislaw Proczko. My username is remberKLMauthausen. Unfortunately my username is also the title of the page. And this is wrong. It shouldn’t be this way I do not know how to change this into Stanislaw Proczko. For sure I am overlooking something, but I do not know what. Any help is appreciated. Thanks RememberKLMauthausen (talk) 11:43, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@RememberKLMauthausen: you would move the page. If you don't see the move option, you can use WP:Requested moves. Howewer, the article currently doesnt have any form of source. Therefore, I have moved it to Draft:RememberKLMauthausen for now. More on this on your user talk page. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:55, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, RememberKLMauthausen. I'm sure you have pride and sadness remembering your grandfather; but Wikipedia is not a memorial site . It is an encyclopaedia, which contains neutrally-written articles about notable subjects. Has you grandfather been written about in books from reputable publishers? Have there been articles about him in major newspapers? If not, then I'm afraid that an article about him will not be accepted. Please write about him elsewhere, not here. --ColinFine (talk) 12:46, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

I am a student...

Wikimania 2017 Women in Red presentation. (See 6min 30sec in for a perfect example of the power of Wikipedia as a research tool)

...doing an essay on basically why Wikipedia should be a valid and valuable research tool. If anyone has any input in that it would be awesome. I am doing my own research so I'm not trying to get an essay out of anyone I just think it would be pretty dope if I could put in my essay that I actually asked the community and got feedback. :)

 2605:AD80:30:5091:4198:635B:9C89:A9A0 (talk) 18:20, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. Welcome to the Teahouse, and what an exciting question and a brilliant essay to write! You are clearly able to Google the general topic, so I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting you go off and do that. But, boy, there are so many ways that Wikipedia is a valuable research tool, and to so many different groups of individuals. In fact, there has been a lot of serious academic research done on Wikipedia (some of it listed here, or the social aspects of why people contribute. This Teahouse itself has been the subject of a number of research papers)

But as a 'direct' tool to aid research I can do no better than embed this video which I produced a few years ago. At 6 minutes 30 seconds in you'll find a cut down version of a much longer interview I filmed, showing how Cambridge University's Sanger Institute chose to share research and knowledge on the Human Genome Project on Wikipedia, for the simple reason that it gave free, unrestricted, worldwide access to scientific knowledge which might not otherwise have been available to scientific institutions in some poorer countries. I found that one of the best reasons why Wikipedia should exist!

On a more general level, you might like to look at Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Research, Academic studies about Wikipedia. I'll end of the simplest note of all by saying that Wikipedia never recommends anyone directly use/cite Wikipedia as a Reliable Source. So, you might like to consider reading Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. Yes, Wikipedia is a great starting point and 'look-up' tool, but the oft-overlooked gem in almost every one of our 6,000,000+ articles here is the 'References' section. It's a collation of excellent sources, distilled and presented allow verification of what is in each article, and it enables anyone to go off and do their own in-depth research into almost any topic. Good luck with your essay, and maybe you'll consider joining up and contributing here yourself someday soon. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:00, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

This guy has some thoughts on that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:50, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, IP. When I taught, I would not allow Wikipedia as a source, and still wouldn't. Not due to accuracy issues (in hard science and medicine, studies have shown Wikipedia is far more accurate than other encyclopedias), but due to the dynamic nature of Wikipedia. Ironically, that's the reason for our accuracy in the areas we're most accurate. In any areas where promotion is an issue, we are very weak. Promotional editing is rampant on Wikipedia and under the rules the Wikimedia Foundation forces on us, we're completely ineffective at combating it, despite ridiculous amounts of editor time expended on trying. John from Idegon (talk) 20:56, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@John from Idegon: OK. I give up then. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 04:30, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@John from Idegon: I've been struggling to understand the full logic behind that comment. I guess you're saying that you would have been happy to have encouraged Wikipedia to be used when starting to research into a given topic, but not to directly cite a Wikipedia article, per WP:CITEWIKI? I think even that approach is too broad-brush. Take, for example, a class of 7 to 14 year olds, asked to investigate a topic in school. As a parent (and were I a teacher, too) I would be happy to see those children citing Wikipedias as a source of where they got their information for their essay or homework project. OK, when they move up in years, I would expect them to have been taught to start at places like Google or Wikipedia, but then to follow and read the sources we use to create that article, and then to base their project work on those sources, not on our pages. If, through their research, they found differences in content, or wanted to present evidence to demonstrate an argument about how different social, ethnic or political groups interpret a topic, then, again, it would be fine to cite Wikipedia a source to show where that interpretation came from (and, preferably, to link to the individual version of that article on the date they accessed it). Yes, Wikipedia is a target for individuals, companies and political groups to promote themselves or their pet topic, but that is not the whole of Wikipedia's content base, and certain topic areas need treating more carefully than others. Just as here at the Teahouse, when we say to new editors who ask whether a given publication can be used as aReliable Source, that it all depends upon the context as to whether that source can be regarded as 'reliable' or not, so it also depends upon the context in which it may or may not be appropriate to cite Wikipedia as a source, as well as the age/educational level of the person doing the citing. And if original, reliable sources cited in Wikipedia are only available in print in limited parts of the worlds, are out of print, or are written in another language, I might feel my only recourse would be to cite the interpretations of Wikipedia editors (published within Wikipedia) who have themselves cited that original source, and to do so I would be perfectly confident to cite a given version of Wikipedia as my source of those quoted interpretations. In short: I think your dismissal had some truth to it, but was overly blunt. (And look how you've upset poor AlanM1, too!) Nick Moyes (talk) 13:23, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, your concept was something that occurred to me back when I first started editing. It seemed to me that one could consult the online refs present in various WP articles, and then use them to write an "original" essay, paper, etc. For people who did not have access to libraries, but had internet access, the online sources would be an excellent source of information. No need to "cite WP", (which is an encyclopedia, in any case, as User:John from Idegon seems to note), as a source, when one can read and then cite the original sources, as provided in the Reference sections of various articles. I will read the info you have provided, thanks! Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 07:11, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Slipping in: When doing an essay/research, I use two encyclopedias: Wikipedia and Britannica. I use Britannica first to get a feel, and then Wikipedia. I then go to the sources cited and fact-checks it. If the source has more relevant sources, I go there (if I have time). I then wrote some points on a note, and then wrote about it in the paper or text editor. I see Wikipedia as a landing page, not a "source" in general. GeraldWL 13:33, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

James Cloyce Chadwick, I am new to Wiki.

Hello, My name is James Chadwick. I am new to wikipedia. I created an account named James Cloyce Chadwick, which is the name of my Deceased father. I want to create a page for my father with the same title. As you can see, my fathers name is also the same as mine, we have different middle names, I am not a Jr.

So My first question is... Will the host editors recognize that this is my father and not me, since we have the same name? (this will not a biography of me, which I know are not allowed on wiki).

2nd question... I also know that I need references, Books, Newspaper ect. to verify who the subject is. Is this link to a newspaper article good enough to verify who my father is?

https://www.dailybreeze.com/2016/01/06/90-year-old-former-ucla-running-back-holds-intruder-at-gunpoint-until-hawthorne-police-arrive/

I also have newspaper clipping from the Herald Examiner Newspaper in Los Angeles in 1949 to verify who my father is. I made these clippings into images to upload to wiki with captions to verify that my father played football for UCLA as a running back.

3rd Question... Why am I unable to upload these images of the newspaper articles to you of my father? When I try to upload the images, I get a message that the image is nonconstructive.

4th Question... When I create a sandbox page, Can I use that sandbox page as a draft and send it to you as a finished page to be publish as an official live page for the web?

As you can see, I am a green rookie. I truly would appreciate your help and patience. Thank you so much. Best regards, James Chadwick James Cloyce Chadwick (talk) 22:58, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

• James Cloyce Chadwick, welcome to the Teahouse and Wikipedia. I admire your willingness to learn, but if you want to learn how to properly edit Wikipedia solely so you can write a biography of your father, I'm sorry, but that's not a good idea. First, you have an undeniable conflict of interest (FYI, blue words are links you should follow to applicable policies and guidelines). Second, you cannot add anything about your father from personal knowledge. Every single thing that goes into a Wikipedia article must be paraphrased from reliable published sources. It's admirable that you want to write about your father, but a tertiary encyclopedia such as this isn't the place to host your original biography. Everything here is paraphrased from somewhere else. John from Idegon (talk) 06:03, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
• To answer some of your questions, you cannot upload newspaper clips because they are copyrighted and it isn't necessary. You can cite offline sources. Use Template:cite news, Template:cite book etc. (The source editor contains a wizzard for citations that will access the most used ones). However, before your father can have an article here, you'll need to show much more than he existed and had a dust up with a crook once. You have to show he meets one of the guidelines for notability. The main guideline is called WP:GNG, but biographies are mainly discussed at WP:ANYBIO. The clip about the robber mentioned he played football at UCLA. That may be a starting point, as there are some Special Notability Guidelines (WP:SNG) for athletes. If he played in the NFL (or any earlier "big league" leagues like Arena Football, both AFL's and Canadian professional football), he will be considered notable per WP:NGRIDIRON. If he was a consensus All-American in college, he's notable per WP:NCOLLATH. Otherwise, you'll need to produce multiple reliable independent sources that discuss him in detail. The links you've offered here are transactional (ie, about a single event), not detailed, and hence do not speak to notability at all. And as I said above, you, by definition, cannot be a source here. John from Idegon (talk) 06:36, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
• @James Cloyce Chadwick: Though I understand that you probably chose your username thinking this was like social media, where there is no distinct article name that is different from your username, that is not the case here, and we do have a policy against use of the name of a real person by someone who is not that person (see WP:REALNAME). While I might ordinarily suggest you just abandon this username and register a new one because you have no other edits, it might be better to change it instead because it represents a real person's name. Perhaps an admin (like Nick Moyes) can comment. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:53, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

• @James Cloyce Chadwick: I'm just dropping by as I was 'pinged' AlanM1 and asked to comment. It is, indeed, slightly unfortunate that you chose your username to be that of your father, and not simply your own. Had it been the latter, I'd have said not to worry, providing you declared your connection to him. But reading WP:REALNAME, and to avoid all confusion (and assuming you decide it is still appropriate to carry on trying to create an article about him), then I feel the best advice I could give you is simply to abandon this account completely and create a brand new one. You've only made one edit, thus far, so it's no big deal. Just forget the old account password, never log on or edit with it again, and just create a new account with a less confusing name, and use only that one from now on. Then please declare your connection, as detailed in our guidance at this page about having a conflict of interest. I am not convinced from what little you've told us that he would be regarded as notable, but then I know nothing of sports notability, which John has made comments on. I am sorry for the passing of your father in recent years - it would certainly be his sporting achievements (per WP:NSPORT which would dictate his notability here, not that single newspaper account of dealing with an intruder). It is certainly not OK to try to upload a copyrighted image from a newspaper and claim it as your own (which is what you would be doing if you scanned a newspaper article or photo). Just link to it as inline citation. Brand new editors who know nothing of our processes and protocols experience extreme disappointment and lots of wasted effort when they try to create a new article from scratch, directly moving it from their sandbox to our main article space. It can be done, but you are best advised to create any draft via our 'Article Creation Wizard' at this page. If there are problems, you will receive helpful feedback, rather than have all your efforts 'speedily deleted'. Hope this helps. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:43, 6 September 2020 (UTC)  

Wikipedia

When you contribute to Wikipedia where does the money go to Alisha rains (talk) 10:17, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

It goes to the Wikimedia Foundation, a multi-million dollar industry based in San Francisco.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:59, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Then what do you contribute ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alisha rains (talk • contribs) 12:34, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:03, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@Alisha rains: the servers and infrastructure for Wikipedia sites in different languages (including English) are run by the Wikimedia Foundation. Here is how the WMF spends donations. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 14:11, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Editors contribute their time. Donors contribute money to the Foundation to keep the operation going. It is altruistic - people believe in helping others by making information freely available. David notMD (talk) 14:48, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok thank you

“Page help “

How soon will my draft article be published for my client? Also, can anyone help me with more content? I have information I need to add as well for earlier life, ect. Please and thank you Team❗️💙

 JabrielAtOmoMusicGroup (talk) 10:44, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@JabrielAtOmoMusicGroup: Draft:Lil Kei is not submitted for review. As long as it is not submitted for review, noone will make the draft go published. Take as much time as you need, In my experience most attempts to rush the job fail quickly. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:00, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, JabrielAtOmoMusicGroup. You seem to have a common misapprehension that a Wikipedia article about your client is in any way for your client's benefit. If your draft gets accepted and your client gets some benefit from it, that is lucky for him; but Wikipedia has no interest in furthering anybody's career, or complying with anybody's timetable. If your client meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability (Wikipedia's, not yours) then it is possible to write an article; if he doesn't then any effort you put into the draft will be wasted effort. I see that a very experienced editor has added a comment that he probably doesn't meet these criteria: I am not sure why you think it helpful to remove that comment (twice). Rather than adding more information about earlier life, you need to find places where people who have no connection with Lil Kei, and have not been prompted or fed information by him or you, have chosen to write about him at some length and been published in reliable sources. (I am dubious whether the HHR piece is either independent or has sufficiently significant coverage, but in any case, a single source is not enough.) --ColinFine (talk) 12:39, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

If submitted, the review can occur within days, but as long as months. There is a backlog of thousands of drafts. In my opinion, your attempt at a draft is WP:TOOSOON. David notMD (talk) 14:57, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

I am a little more than happy

 2409:4040:419:B289:0:0:1DA1:C8A1 (talk) 14:53, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Do you have a question ?Nihaal 14:58, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Mix 96 - Greatest Hits Radio Update - Unfair

I see you altered the Mix 96 Wikipedia entry. Whilst I think the text deserved an edit - There is third party validation of support for the save Mix 96 campaign in local newspaper articles. Your edit looks more like an attempt at removing details of the Save campaign, local unhappiness at the change ann at ensuring the article represents what Bauer wnat t osay about the brand. Wikipedia should not be used as "Brand promotion" or editiors remove content because its not what the corporate PR team wish to have presented. Please consider you edit and reflect the facxts around the rebrand not just what Bauer say. I am concerned that during the rebranding of stations Bauer has rewritten its own history and updates. MBoltonA (talk) 14:42, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Are you asking about Greatest Hits Radio? Because it is owned by Bauer? Or more specifically, Greatest Hits Radio Bucks, Beds and Herts because that was previously Mix 96? There is no Wikipedia "you". Editors make changes. Other editors can reverse those. Discussions take place on the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 15:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Help about protected article

Hello admin, I searched a page for creating article, but there is showing 'only admin can edit this article' as the article has deleted several time. But I saw a lot of news article of her name on google. So can anyone help me to edit the article ?? I wanna contribute more on Wikipedia. So please anyone help me to teach me how I edit so that I can learn more. Link - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika_Dutta Bijoyonline30 (talk) 16:22, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Bijoyonline30. The article Swastika Dutta was salted after it got deleted for the fourth time. It is possible to create an article that has been deleted and salted, but you need to convince an admin that the subject is notable. I suggest you study NACTOR and GNG very carefully, and find several (at least three) sources that are reliably published, completely unconnected with Dutta (and not based on an interview or press release), and have significant coverage of her. If you cannot find three, then give up. If you can, then I suggest you post the references here, and somebody will look and see if they agree that you can establish notability. If you get agreement that she might be notable, you can make a draft using articles for creation. At that point it would be worth contacting the administrator who protected the title, RHaworth. But the onus is on you to demonstrate that it is worth anybody spending time on the project. --ColinFine (talk) 17:13, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, ColinFine thanks for your reply it really helpful. Once I collect all news sorces I'll update here.

How can I add my name to a list of American Art Dealers?

 Geoffrey D. Forrest (talk) 15:51, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Geoffrey D. Forrest, hi there. Thanks for grabbing a tea here. You will need to have a Wikipedia article about yourself to be put in a notable-people list-- but before your go, don't make a Wikipedia article about yourself just to be included there. Writing an article about you is discouraged, as we are writing a WP:BLP, not an WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. In some instances, you may have a WP:COI on how you present yourself. If you are a very important person, someone will probably write about you, and if they have the initiative, they will put it in the list. The list article is not an indiscriminate list of all American Art Dealers from Manhattan to the Golden Gate. GeraldWL 16:07, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

There is no article List of American art dealers (there is List of art dealers). However, there is a Category:American art dealers. Note that every name is blue, meaning there is an existing Wikipedia article about that person. David notMD (talk) 18:03, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Article gets moved to draft

Hello all, I have created the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mustafa_Science_and_Technology_Foundation2 and have been developing it for some time now. Today It was moved to Drafts because it does not meet the notability guidelines. I was aware of the error regarding notability and used all the credible sources I could find to make the page meet the guidelines. I was wondering if anyone has any tips on how to make this article "notable." Thanks. Zahra Bkh (talk) 16:30, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@Zahra Bkh, hello & welcome, you cannot per se make an article notable, an article is inherently notable or non notable but what you can do is to find reliable sources that proves your article is on a notable topic. Following what you said above “I was aware of the error regarding notability and used all the credible sources I could find to make the page meet the guidelines” I’m sorry to say but it might be too soon for subject of your article to have a stand alone article at this time. Celestina007 17:50, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Celestina007 Thank you for your comment. --Zahra Bkh (talk) 18:21, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

What does the number in red or green next to an edit in the revision history do?

I'm talking about the number that appears in next to edits in the revision history. Is it some kind of rating system for edits, and if so how do you vote on it? Headows of Meaven (talk) 16:40, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@Headows of Meaven: It's not a rating system. It merely indicates how many bytes of data were added to (green) or subtracted from (red) the page in a particular edit. Deor (talk) 16:44, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

How long? Oscarhumpage (talk) 17:05, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@Oscarhumpage: How long for what? RudolfRed (talk) 18:57, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Username

Can a username be named after a politician that you support or a political ticket? This is not for myself, I’m asking about another user. Thank you! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 18:45, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

It depends exactly what you mean, Lima Bean Farmer. Using the name of a real person (other than yourself) is not allowed, for example. The policy is at username policy. Side note: it is usually hard to answer general questions relating to policy. It is much more productive to ask about the specific case. I guess that you have a concern about another user's username, but you're not sure, so you don't want to name them. But either their name is OK, in which case there's no problem, or it isn't, in which case you or somebody is going to require them to change. So why not name them? --ColinFine (talk) 19:02, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine! Someone had a “Trump Pence” username and since this was political, I didn’t want to name which party they were from at the tea house. You have answered my question and they will be reported. Thank you!Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 19:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Trouble with two articles

Header inserted by ColinFine (talk) 19:03, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

I am in the process of creating two Wikipedia articles and am having a bit of trouble with them.

The first is for a company called MRI (Medical Research Institute):

Content of first article

MRI WIKIPEDIA: Medical Research Institute (MRI) was a San Francisco-based nutritional supplement company founded by Ed Byrd in 1996. After creating a new category in sports nutrition with the first commercial release of creatine monohydrate supplement with former company EAS (acquired by North Castle Partners in 1999 for $160 million), Byrd started MRI with $140,000. In four years MRI’s valuation had increased to $125 million. MRI created, popularized and sold its flagship product NO2 (nitric oxide), which quickly became GNC’s best selling product in its 70 year history. NO2 increased exercise performance and enhanced recovery. MRI also produced CE2, a creatine-based muscle building product, ProNOS, a protein powder using NO2 technology, and Black Powder, an energy booster in powder form. MRI began by selling Glucotize™, an alpha lipoic acid product used to rejuvenate cells and reduce oxidative stress in aging individuals. Glucotize™ was also used for blood sugar and liver regeneration in diabetes patients, and was recognized by the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation. Byrd developed a proprietary drug delivery system and partnered with GNC. NO2 sales rocketed to the top of the industry very quickly, with bodybuilders, athletes and the fitness community championing the product. Byrd also wrote and published NO2: The 21 Day Transformation (2002), distributed by GNC, which was distributed by GNC and Byrd to educate NO2 customers and promote the product. NO2 became a blockbuster for GNC, becoming the biggest selling sports nutritional product in the last 50 years and generated 5% of GNC gross revenue and backordered for over 2.5 years. At the time GNC was the largest dietary supplement retailer in the world and was publicly traded on Wall Street. MRI was sold to Natrol in 2007. (edited)

The second article is for Ed Byrd (founder of MRI):

Content of second article

Ed Byrd has transformed the performance sports nutrition and dietary supplement industry over the course of a 40 year career with the introduction of two of the top three supplement categories: Creatine (over 100 million kilograms sold since 1992) and nitric oxide (trademarked NO2). Byrd’s formulations have garnered the attention of major pharmaceutical companies, universities, and Nobel Prize winners, including Bristol Myers Squibb, Elan Pharmaceuticals, the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, UCSF, University of Nottingham, and Baylor University. Byrd has been awarded six patents and is associated with multiple clinical trials. Ed Byrd began his career in 1981 with Don Tyson and Associates, pioneer of crystalline, free-form amino acids and amino acid formulas. He rose to VP of Sales and Marketing at Champion Nutrition, which ultimately became Muscle Milk®. He then founded the California Body Club in 1987, developing a crystalline, free-form amino acid formula with the eight essential amino acids, featuring high levels of leucine. This was sourced from biotech corporation, Ajinomoto. During this time, Byrd enhanced this formulation by adding zinc monomethionine and magnesium aspartate, used widely today for athletic performance and known as ZMA. In 1992, Byrd co-founded Experimental & Applied Sciences (EAS), which commercialized creatine monohydrate for strength athletes, selling over 100 million kilos. 700 million bottles have been sold since 1992. The introduction of creatine generated over 110 clinical studies and is now being tested for its application to neurological diseases. EAS also introduced hydroxymethylbutyrate (HMB) in 1996, used to enhance athletic performance. EAS was acquired by Bill Phillips, author of the bestselling book, “Body for Life”, and founder of Muscle Media 2000. Byrd went on to found the Medical Research Institute (MRI) in 1996, inventing and manufacturing Glucotize™, the first controlled-release alpha-lipoic acid for the treatment of diabetic neuropathies. Byrd licensed Glucotize™ to the doctors-only supplement company Xymogen. Glucotize became their number-one selling product. Most notably, Byrd originated and developed NO2(™), the first nitric oxide agonist to improve athletic performance. NO2 generated the highest sales revenue in the history of GNC’s Sports Nutrition Division (5% of GNC’s gross annual revenue in 2004), thus creating the nitric oxide category industrywide. Byrd’s book NO2: The 21 Day Transformation (Medical Research Institute, 2002), sold over 750,000 copies. In 2003, Byrd began investigating Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (nuclear receptor proteins that serve as transcription factors regulating gene expression) for athletic performance. He contracted a biotech company to synthesize PPAR delta (GW-501-516) at a cost of $10K for one gram for investigational purposes. In 2005, Byrd introduced a PPAR alpha agonist to enhance the NO2 formulation, known as NO2 Platinum(™). (In 2008, the Salk Institute published the first study to turn “couch potato mice into marathon runners” using GW-501-516.) In 2006 MRI introduced Pterostilbene, the methylated version of Resveratrol, to analytics and specialty food ingredient company Chromadex. In 2007 Byrd teamed up with Glanbia to introduce the first eNOS agonist to enhance blood flow, the third generation of NO2, known as the “NO2 Black Label(™).” In 2012, Byrd founded EAB Labs to study exercise signals responsible for mitochondrial biogenesis and epigenetic changes. EAB Labs also engaged in a joint venture with specialty chemical company Evonik on a novel process for the development of pyrroloquinoline quinone (PQQ) that now has GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) approval.

- Eablabs (talk) 18:54, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Eablabs, please don't copy the content of the drafts here. You can link to them with Draft:Medical Research Institute and Draft:Ed Byrd. What is the problem that you want help on? --ColinFine (talk) 19:06, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

OK, having looked at your User talk page, your problem is that you have tried to create articles without any idea of how to do so. The first activity in creating an article is to find several reliable published sources, wholly independent of the subject, and with significant coverage of the subject. It's best to do this before writing a single word, because if you cannot find such sources, then the subject will generally fail to meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and there will be no point in spending any more time on the matter. Please look at CITE and YFA. I also note your user name, and wonder if you have an association with Byrd and with MRI? If you have, you need to be aware of the difficulties of editing with a conflict of interest. --ColinFine (talk) 19:12, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Panaeolus poapilionaceus

I was adding a paper to the page as number 4 in the references and it is not allowing me to correct the refs. When I go to redo it correctly, it does not allow me to see and delete my original errors.

This is the full Reference to number 4 that shows and explains the chemistry of that species which is not a psilocybian fungi.

Allen, John W. 2013[2012]. A Chemical Referral and Reference Guide to the Known Species of Psilocine and/or Psilocybine-containing Mushrooms and Their Published Analysis and Bluing Reactions: An Updated and Revised List. Ethnomycological Journals: Sacred Mushroom Studies vol. IX:130-175. MAPS and Exotic Forays. Santa Cruz, Ca., Bangkok, Th., and Seattle, Wa. ISBN 158-214-396-X.

I made a mistake with the date and the page numbers on the Panaeolus papilionaceus page.

I do not know how to fix this. John W. Allen (talk) 16:12, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

The syntax is shown at {{cite book}}. Each of the two error messages contains a wikilink to specific further advice where the word "help" is shown in blue. The place to correct the errors is in the paragraph where you inserted the new ref. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:26, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@John W. Allen: I think I have fixed it. Have a look.Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 20:31, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Can someone give me some pointers on page editing

I need some editing pointers. I messed something up on Chuck Alkazians page, trying to add a link to AllMusic.com Truth Audit (talk) 19:21, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Truth Audit. You might find Help:Editing and |this guide to adding references of some use. I have also added a welcome message and link to your user talk page. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:37, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Free Speech Search Engines?

Is there a search engine that does not censor or shape search results? Charles Juvon (talk) 20:50, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Charles Juvon Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You may want to ask this question at the Reference Desk, as this board is for asking questions about using Wikipedia. That said, I don't think there is such a thing as a search engine that does not shape results in some manner, as they have to be put in some kind of order. 331dot (talk) 20:54, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Meanwhile, I found https://pal.sri.com/ . Charles Juvon (talk) 23:18, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Does Yapperbot notify users of an RFC long after it started?

On an RFC for Talk:List of My Hero Academia characters, Yapperbot notified several users on August 26, and has not notified any users of it since. Only one user who was notified commented, and they said that since the original header was so long, I would have trouble getting people to comment. The header has since been shortened, but now I’m worried that Yapperbot will not notify anymore users, as it has only done so on one day, when the header was nigh-unreadable. Is Yapperbot able to notify users several weeks after the RFC first started, does it stop notifying if the header is changed, or does it only notify on the same day it was initiated? I’m worried because there has been a content dispute about at least 20 kilobytes going on for a while that I believe an RFC would resolve, but the other user in the dispute hasn’t given any constructive input since January and Yapperbot hasn’t notified anybody since the day the RFC started. Unnamed anon (talk) 18:45, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@Unnamed anon: Yapperbot appears to be a very new notification bot which I had never heard of until you posted here. It was approved for operation in June 2020. I was going to suggest that you are best getting your concerns addressed by repeating your question at the bot's talk page (i.e. at User talk:Yapperbot), as I'm sure the bot's owner would welcome having feedback if it does not appear to be running smoothly. However I notice there is a message at the top of that page, asking you to post directly to the owners talk page (i.e. User talk:Naypta.) Sorry I can't answer in any more detail than that. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:15, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you anyways. Sorry, I assumed Yapperbot was the only notification bot for RFC’s. Unnamed anon (talk) 00:30, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Making a new article about a person

Hello!

I am helping my friend run for Congress and wanted to add a wiki article for her. I looked at other inspiring people's wiki pages to get an idea on format.

I noticed that some of them were getting into trouble due to lack of notability. Based on what I read, it is important to reference as many independent new sources to increase her notability. Is there anything else I should be doing? She has such an inspiring personal story, it would be shame not be able to catalogue it in the Wikipedia.

Thanks a lot in advance for your help! Kb4congress (talk) 21:19, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Kb4congress. Oh dear, where to start? I assume your friend is Kathy Barnette. You username seems promotional to me, and so you would likely be 'softblocked', and we would require you to change it to something else less 'campaigny'. You would then need to read WP:POLITICIAN and WP:PROMOTION to appreciate that simply running for congress is unlikely to give a person Notability on its own. If however, as seems quite probable for such a candidate, there are numerous in-depth, independent and reliable news stories already about her on which one could base an article, then she might stand a chance. But you would be the worst person to create that article. Being a friend you would almost inevitably bring bias and POV into it, perhaps leaving out some of the less pleasant stories about her (should such exist). You would need to declare your Conflict of Interest before trying to use Wikipedia to push he online presence, and you would do best to spend some time learning the basics of how Wikipedia works before trying to do the hardest task here - creating an article from scratch. Having taken the trouble to learn how we operate here, I'd advise you to use our 'article creation wizard' which allows you to draft an article in your own time (based entirely on published news stories), and to submit it when ready and to receive feedback from reviewers who can tell you if anything needs to be addressed before it were to go live. Please read: this important page about article creation. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:34, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Had a long-winded answer drafted but this sums it up nicely. Giraffer (munch) 21:44, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

You folks are so nice, thank you so much to all of you for this valuable information. I love to learn from Wikipedia and the last thing I want to do is corrupt it with any bias! Ha ha I thought using the "4congress" moniker would be more honest! Anyway, I'll read your links to figure out the best way to do this. Thanks again! Hope all is well in the UK btw. @Giraffer: @Nick Moyes:

Kb4congress (talk) 00:06, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Kb4congress. I'm just going to add to what Nick Moyes posted above. A Wikipedia article is written about a subject, not for a subject or on behalf of a subject. Moreover, a Wikipedia article can bascially be edited by anyone anywhere in the world at anytime, and there's nothing the subject can do to prevent such a thing from happening. As long as article content (good or bad) is in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, it's unlikely going to be removed without establishing a consensus to do so. Neither the subject of an article nor anyone connected to them has any sort of final editorial control over article content as explained in WP:OWN; in other words, your friend will have to follow WP:BIOSELF if she has any issues with the article content. So, before you try and create an article about her, you and she might want to take a look at WP:PROUD and WP:LUC because there can be a downside to having a Wikipedia article written about you.

Articles about politicians (particularly national politicans) tend to be quite popular subjects; so, my guess is that if your friend does end up being elected to Congress, then someone unconnected to her who is familiar with how to create a proper Wikipedia article will likely create an article about her. So, you and she just might want to wait until that happens. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:40, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Question

Hello ! MrPusheen (talk) 02:29, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, MrPusheen. Do you have a question about how to edit Wikipedia ? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 02:49, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

How many pages is made in wikipedia in a minute? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrPusheen (talk • contribs) 02:51, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@MrPusheen: In the 8 hours starting at 2020-09-06T18:00Z, there were 205 articles created by humans (i.e., non-automated "bots") in the main article namespace. The rate probably varies significantly. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:01, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Usernames question

I have come across some users who have the term “Nazi” in their user name but they have not edited within the past two weeks. Is this offensive enough to be reported at the username noticeboard or should these users just be ignored if they haven’t edited recently. Thank you! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 03:14, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Lima Bean Farmer I would ignore them. You will see that the instructions at WP:UAA that accounts with no recent edits (and no ort few overall edits) will generally not be acted on and should not be reported. Also depending on how "Nazi" is used, I am not sure that would always constitute a name offensive enough to be blocked. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:28, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you DES! They will be ignored. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 03:37, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Did I add a reference correctly?

I just added a reference for the first time here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/977106588?diffmode=source

Is this a good reference for the claim? Also, is there a better way to link to a specific edit? Cheesycow5 (talk) 00:14, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@Cheesycow5: this appears to be a good reference, and you added it correctly. I do not understand your question about linking to a specific edit, sorry. But what you have done here, at Near Infrared Camera and Multi-Object Spectrometer is just fine, and welcomed! Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 01:57, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@Tribe of Tiger: Thanks for the feedback! My other question was about the link I placed in the original post to a specific edit I made. Just wondering if there's some wiki markup for those types of links or if I should just use the full url like I did. Cheesycow5 (talk) 02:16, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@Cheesycow5: Since you asked: the link you provided is to the mobile version diff view, and is fine (we're happy you posted a link at all, let alone a diff ). Each revision of a page has a sequential number, known as a revid or revisionid. In other links, you might see it as the oldid parameter. It's currently 9 digits, as you can see in the URL you pasted. I like to use [[Special:Diff/977106588]], which produces Special:Diff/977106588. You can also use it as a pipelink, adding "|this diff" after the revid, to produce: this diff. If you just want to link to that version of the page (i.e., after that edit, without displaying the diff), you can use [[Special:Permalink|977106588]], which produces 977106588. There are more of these interesting "special pages" at Special:SpecialPages. Cheers. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 02:51, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: Nice, thanks for the info! Cheesycow5 (talk) 02:55, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) See Help:Diff#Internal links for how to format a diff without using an URL, Cheesycow5, here it would be Special:Diff/977106588 or {{Diff}} could be used. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 02:57, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

(I edit conflicted with User:AlanM1, which means we were trying to post at the same time. Here's my belated answer:)... "@Cheesycow5:, Ah ha, now I understand, sorry! See WP:DIFF, which I believe will answer your perceptive question. Yes, the use of "diffs" is more customary, and the accepted way to point to a specific edit, here on WP. Hope this is helpful. If not, I will signal some editors who can help you"... Now, the funny thing is that if WP:DIFF did not help, AlanM1 was first on my list of helpful editors. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 03:11, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) On the substantive issue, Cheesycow5 your citation was good but could be improved. The source carried a publication date, which I have added to the citeation. In addition, the title included "In depth" whoch was in no way part of the title of teh source articel, jsut a part of its web-site structure. I have removed that. Hint, any time you see {{!}} in the source of a title generated by a citation tool, or a vertical bar in the output, 99 times out of a hundred something has been shoved into the title that either does not belong at all, or belongs in a different parameter. These tools tend to put things they cannot parse properly into the title marked off with a pipe symbol. Always double check the output of any citation tool against the source, they are good but often imperfect. See Special:Diff/977129334 for my changes. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:21, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: Interesting, thank you. Cheesycow5 (talk) 03:47, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Please let me know how to make this company page work on Wikipedia. I'm open for suggestions/improvements.

I've created this AI company's page. I'm open for suggestions and improvements. Please review and let me know how to make it a noteworthy addition to Wikipedia.

Extended content

Webtunix is an Artificial Intelligence company that provides AI based solutions to companies and businesses. The company was started with the aim of solving real-world problems through programming. Webtunix offers real-world solutions to businesses related to multiple sectors like IT, Cyber Security, Healthcare, Telecom, E-Commerce, Sports, Agriculture, Automobile, Oil and Gas and Banking and Finance. People in India were not well aware of AI technology when the company became live in 2015. Webtunix is the first company to spread awareness of AI potential and provide real-world solutions to people using several technologies. The company develops software and programs that provide real-time analysis and solutions to the complex problems. Webtunix use the high-tech tools and frameworks to provide efficient solutions to help businesses run smoothly. Data has become more digitized with the help of Artificial Intelligence which was once unorganized, underutilized and considered somewhat insignificant. AI carries the capability of processing, optimizing and analyzing large amount of data.  Artificial Intelligence has reduced manual work, labor and efforts of businesses along with cutting the production cost and improving profits. AI has been significantly beneficial in the businesses and companies for its boundless capabilities. Webtunix uses these techniques in their projects like Data Science, Machine Learning, Deep Learning, Data Scraping, Data Analytics, Data Visualization, Data Annotation, Recommendation System, Digital Image Processing, Predictive Analytics, Python Development, Speech Processing, Speech Recognition, Text Analysis, Natural Language Processing, Reinforcement Learning and Human and Computer Vision Webtunix deals in providing services related to Video Object Tracking, Human and Computer Vision, Data Reinforcement & Categorization, Natural Language Processing, Chatbot Development , 3D Point Cloud, Bounding Box, Line Annotation, Landmark Annotation, Speech and Audio and Semantic Segmentation. References

Editingwork8 (talk) 04:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

The content is apparently a copy of User talk:Editingwork8/sandbox. Please just post a link in the future instead of copying text. Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Editingwork8. Just a couple of questions.

1. Why do you want to create an article about this company?
2. Are you connected to the company in any way?

Basically, in order for you or anyone else to create a Wikipedia article about this company that doesn't ultimately end up being deleted, it's going to have to be established that the company meets Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies); in other words, the company needs to be deemed to be Wikipedia notable (see also Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything for reference as well) to have an article written about it.

It's not enough for the company to exist and have its own website, its product line or its own whatever because Wikipedia isn't really interested in what the company might have to say about itself and a Wikipedia article isn't intended to be a means of promotion for the company. Wikipedia is really only interested in what reliable sources, independent of the company, are saying (good or bad) about it; so, the way to establish the company's Wikipedia notability is to show that the company has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources as explained here.

What you've written in your sandbox reads more like it's a PR release for the company and wouldn't be considered acceptable for an article per Wikipedia:Neutral point of view; however, the main problem is that you haven't provided any citations to any reliable sources to allow what you've written to be verified. So, if you believe this company is Wikipedia notable and want to try and create an article about it, then I would suggest that you take a look at Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners for reference. You might also want to take a look at this guide created by a Wikipedia administrator nameed Ian.thomson because it contains some helpful suggestions as well. You should create a draft first and then submit the draft to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review when you think it's ready for article status. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:29, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Marchjuly Well, I believe it's notable in Punjab, India as well as in foreign lands. It's spreading awareness among the people, about AI especially in Punjab where people hardly knew what it is and its capabilities. I agree with you too. Thanks for guiding me.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 03:55, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Editingwork8, this is a completely unacceptable draft that uses the vapid and meaningless "real world" buzzword three times, then throwing in "real time". Come on. That is meaningless marketing speak. Can you imagine a notable company saying "we are not real world. We live in fantasy land". Of course not. Start by reading and studying the neutral point of view which is a core content policy. If all you can do is parrot empty marketing slogans, then you cannot possibly be successful on Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:00, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Cullen³²⁸ Ok. I'll keep that in mind. Thank you!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 03:55, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

One thing to realise, Editingwork8 is that in an article about Webtunix, Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything at all that Webtunix says or wants to say about itself, or that its associates say about it. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with Webtunix, and have no been prompted or fed information by Webtunix, have chosen to publish about it, in reliable places. If there are not enough places where independent people have done this, then there is nothing that can go into an article, and no article is possible. --ColinFine (talk) 14:05, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine Well, I've tried to provide information that's genuine and not at all biased. I believe Wikipedia is a platform for information and so I tried adding Webtunix into the list which is also a notable company. But if this company isn't accepted here then on what basis the other AI companies are added on Wikipedia?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 03:55, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I would like to be an administrator on the English Wikipedia

Hi, I am RealPoliceOfficer and I need help becoming an administrator on the English Wikipedia. If you look on my contributions page, you will find my edits. I have not been vandalizing Wikipedia and I have not been sockpuppeting at all. The reason I would like to become an administrator is because I want to stop vandalism on the site.

Many thanks,

RealPoliceOfficer

(PS: I am a real police officer and not an old school kid like other users claim except me). RealPoliceOfficer (talk) 03:20, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, RealPoliceOfficer and welcome to the Teahosue. The minimum standard for even applying for admin status is to be extended-confirmed, that is, at least 500 edits and AN Account at least 30 days old. You have a ways to go. But as a practical matter, no one who has less than two years editing experience in quite a few different areas of Wikipedia, or less than several thousand edits, is likely to be approved. See WP:RFA and Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship for more information on this. The best way to try to be an admin is to first be a good editor, and work in several areas of the project, and consider what you would so with the tools you are not already able to do with them. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:40, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Oh and, RealPoliceOfficer, we don't much care if you are a real police officer or not, as there is no easy way to verify that unless you choose to edit under your real name, and even then it isn't all that easy to verify. We depend on sources, not the knowledge of the editors, so it doesn't matter that much. Please see WP:EXPERT. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:42, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

RealPoliceOfficer, If you would like to stop vandalism, there are many, many ways to do it without being an admin :) See Wikipedia:Cleaning_up_vandalism for a good guide, plus some helpful tools you can use. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:27, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

As a police officer, I'm sure you'll soon realize that stopping vandalism is as much a pipe dream as stopping crime. We welcome all the help we can get to combat it, and there is absolutely nothing in the administrators toolset that makes that any easier. I'm quite effective at it and am not an administrator. John from Idegon (talk) 04:32, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

RealPoliceOfficer, seconded. Take a few years to learn about Wiki, then you can get adminship. You only have 15 edits here, and no offense, but that's not enough. Check out Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia to learn how to start, and once you become autoconfirmed (which you will be in two days), you can start using tools like Twinkle and RedWarn. Cheers and best regards, ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 04:49, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

• As I explain at User:Ian.thomson/Guide: If you have to ask, you're not ready to be an admin. If you're absolutely positive that you're ready to nominate yourself to be an admin, oh God no, you're not. You're probably only ready for WP:Requests for adminship when you know damn well why you shouldn't be an admin but other people insist you'd do a good job for some reason. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:49, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
• Uh, just a note, I done block'd OP and I seem to have forgotten how to unblock users who are most definitely not sockpuppets (as we can tell from them repeatedly saying over and over that they're not a sockpuppet). Anyway, y'all ever seen the Hypothetical Criminal skits on Reno 911!...? Ian.thomson (talk)

Article rejected

My below article was rejected 3 times for copy paste reason. let me know which data need to remove and which data to keep in article. waiting for your reply. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Saveena_Bedi_Sachar Xenderdom (talk) 06:52, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@Xenderdom: The article has been deleted because some or all of the material was copy/pasted from bollyy.com. It's really quite simple. You can't copy material from anywhere. It's a violation of copyright law to do so. You have to summarize the sources using your own words and structure (i.e., you can't just change words to synonyms of those words and keep the same sentence and paragraph structure). Please read and understand WP:YFA. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:37, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

User name

i am having trouble changing my user name i am in desperate need. i have been told to ask the question here. can someone help me please help me. Alvin kipchumba kosgei (talk) 09:04, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Alvin kipchumba kosgei Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure what the nature of your difficulty is; you may make a username change request using either Special:GlobalRenameRequest(if you have an email added to your account preferences) or WP:CHUS(if you don't). 331dot (talk) 09:21, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alvin kipchumba kosgei (talk • contribs) 09:23, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

An Article discrepancy found, I do not edit but would like to report.

There isn't a way I could possibly know what is 100% correct with this issue. A report feels wiser.

wiki article discrepancy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_article/Most_viewed

The Sinking of the RMS Titanic is listed twice with different hit values.

under the 100k hits portion: number 6: Sinking of the RMS Titanic (15 April 2012) with 177,500 hits

number 51: (or 12th from the bottom) Sinking of the RMS Titanic (15 April 2012) with 102,184 hits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_article/Most_viewed

The Sinking fo the RMS Titanic is listed twice with different hit values.

under the 100k hits portion: number 6: Sinking of the RMS Titanic (15 April 2012) with 177,500 hits

number 51: (or 12th from the bottom) Sinking of the RMS Titanic (15 April 2012) with 102,184 hits. 2601:C4:8381:6FB0:F4C9:BE11:9F20:10F7 (talk) 11:40, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Try reading it again, the second one doesn't say "15 April 2012"; it says "15 April 2018". David Biddulph (talk) 11:50, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Please review and suggest improvements

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Editingwork8/sandbox Editingwork8 (talk) 10:53, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

You have two versions there. Delete the first one. David notMD (talk) 11:07, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@David notMD Ok — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 11:21, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Deleted some stuff and created sections. Keep working on it. Why so many words capitalized? David notMD (talk) 13:42, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Article declined

I'm wondering why my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Solving_(company) about the Finnish company Solving got declined.

The article is a translation of the same article from Finnish Wikipedia. Avokadomackan (talk) 10:45, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@Avokadomackan: First, English Wikipedia is a separate project, with its own criteria for notability. An article being present on another Wikipedia is worth no more towards establishing notability than an article on a blog, someone's Facebook page, etc., which is to say, nothing.

This article has been repeatedly declined for various reasons (as it says in all the gray boxes inside the pink boxes stacked at the top of the draft), mostly notability, so I'll stick to that. I looked at the eight sources that are currently present. Four of them are from solving.com or fluid-bag.com, and so are not useful (or even reliable, except for basic facts per WP:PRIMARY). Fonecta.fi appears to be a directory service (it's in our list of yellow pages). Yrittajat.fi is simply a mention of the award, with no WP:DEPTH of coverage. That leaves Manufacturing Today and HSS, both of which have the feel of a paid promotional piece, though I welcome more experienced source reviewers to comment. Even if both were considered independent and reliable, the normal rule of thumb is at least three such sources. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:44, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@Avokadomackan: Also, I've removed the text of the Technology section, which was copied letter-for-letter from the HSS source. Please don't do that. It's against the law. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:48, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I confirmed the copying, and used revision deletion to remove the copyrighted text from the history. Thanks for spotting this, AlanM1. Avokadomackan, please understand that you must not copy directly from other sources unless you are inserting a quotation, which must be properly marked, attributed, and cited. Also, a few changes in wording are not enough, the facts must be recast in an original form of expression -- that is write new and original sentences and paragraphs. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:19, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia Page for David Day, Canadian Writer is redirected

Hello,

The wikipedia page for David Day, Canadian Writer has been redirected to "Reception of J. R. R. Tolkien From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 (Redirected from David Day (Canadian writer))"

Please can you help restore to the original page and prevent this from happening again?

This seems to be part of a continuing campaign on information for David Day. KingoftheWoods (talk) 15:09, 7 September 2020 (UTC) KingoftheWoods (talk) 15:09, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Replied at the help desk. Please dont ask the same question multiple times, it wastes everyone's time. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:10, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I panicked as my page has disappeared to be redirected to a page published by by a fan club.

Please can you help restore.

To assist, I provide my credible sources again.

Current Credible Publishers: Penguin Random House - https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/authors/2142156/david-day Quattro Books - http://quattrobooks.ca/authors/david-day/ Octopus - https://www.octopusbooks.co.uk/contributor/david-day/ Simon and Schuster: https://www.simonandschuster.com/authors/David-Day/141023395 https://www.simonandschuster.ca/search/books/Author-David-Day/Format-Trade-Paperback/Imprint-Thunder-Bay-Press/_/N-1z0zkteZi8xZ1z0zs0c/Ne-pgt?options[sort]=BOOK_ORDER%7C0%7C%7CTITLE%7C1

Current Sales on Amazon - https://www.amazon.com/David-Day/e/B00LX3YZCC%3Fref=dbs_a_mng_rwt_scns_share.

These are not self published but my well known publishers and most have been published in up to 7 languages.

Newspaper/Article Links New Scientist: https://books.google.ca/books?id=EIZI3TDTGTsC&pg=PA44&dq=doomsday+book+of+animal&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj0_Kb2s9frAhWlzlkKHThbB_MQ6AEwAHoECAAQAg#v=onepage&q=doomsday%20book%20of%20animal&f=false BC Book World - https://abcbookworld.com/writer/day-david/ Quill and Quire - https://quillandquire.com/nevermore-a-book-of-hours/ Detroit Free Press - https://freep.newspapers.com/search/#query=David+Day+Tolkien+Encyclopedia https://latimes.newspapers.com/search/#query=david+day+tolkien+illustrated+encyclopedia

TV Links Searching for the Hobbit - https://distribution.arte.tv/fiche/_A_LA_RECHERCHE_DU_HOBBIT_-_EPISODE_1

University https://www.uvic.ca/alumni/impact/home/awards/distinguished/2015-DA-bios/index.php

There are hundreds of reviews of David Day's books easily available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KingoftheWoods (talk • contribs) 16:28, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Please stop posting here, KingoftheWoods. As you were told above, posting in multiple places just wastes people's time. I have replied to you at the Help desk. --ColinFine (talk) 17:17, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Have any Wikipedia editors died of COVID?

I admit this is kind of a weird question but I am curious. Dingleberries Fincter (talk) 17:51, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Dingleberries Fincter, Yes, a few sadly. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 18:03, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

coerced labor - legal forms needed to file a Bonded Labor or Debt Bondage case

legal forms needed to file a Bonded Labor or Debt Bondage case 174.217.1.40 (talk) 17:14, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

This is Wikipedia. We are not a search engine or a government office. If you want those forms, please use google or ask a lawyer. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 18:05, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

John Mock Infobox

Link to page: John Mock

I'm trying to update the instrument list in the Infobox. All of the instruments are appearing in the saved text but aren't appearing in the actual Infobox on the page. Can you please help? Thank you! Bhsas (talk) 22:03, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Bhsas. I've fixed it (more by luck than by judgement, though I can explain how, if you need me to). Please note that the Template instructions make it very clear that "Instruments listed in the infobox should be limited to only those that the artist is primarily known for using. The instruments infobox parameter is not intended as a WP:COATRACK for every instrument the subject has ever used.". So, you will need to cite sources to show that these are the main instruments that they use. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:34, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

The preview as a template, or as a module, or as a JavaScript?

Hi! I just want to ask, if the hover preview function (when you hover on top of a main article, then it shows a preview) exists as a template, a module, or as a JavaScript?

Thanks!
 180.251.144.179 (talk) 00:31, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Articles in italics

How do you make the name of an article be in italics? Josedimaria237 (talk) 17:53, 6 September 2020 (UTC) Josedimaria237 (talk) 17:53, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Template:Italic title if the article meets the criteria. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:57, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Often you don't need the Italics. If you make the boldface with italics like in Finding Dory, it will automatically become italics. GeraldWL 01:26, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: Just for your information, the italic title of the article Finding Dory is caused not by any use of "boldface with italics", but by the use of Template:Infobox film, which automatically italicizes the title of the article. (Some other infoboxes, such as Template:Infobox book, also do this.) Deor (talk) 18:28, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Ah, right. GeraldWL 00:41, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm new and wanting to publish my first page but having trouble citing sources and web pages and news etc.

Hi. My name is Mike I'm trying to create a new page but got rejected, the editor said:

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by KylieTastic were: This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources. This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved. If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:The Liar's Dividend and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:The Liar's Dividend, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit. If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted. If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors. KylieTastic (talk) 19:51, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

• • As a bare minimum I need to cite web: https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/the-liar-s-dividend

and cite news: https://news.abs-cbn.com/overseas/11/25/19/internet-companies-prepare-to-fight-the-deepfake-future

I'm not sure what the rules are on Wikipedia relating to citing social media comments so that is also something I would be interested in taking advice on too...

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:The_Liar%27s_Dividend  Micstusmi (talk) 01:07, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

In the feedback which you received, on the draft & on your user talk page, the words in blue are wikilinks to further advice. Try reading the pages to which the links lead, particularly Help:Referencing for beginners. Also, in quoting the message you added the template {{Db-g7}} to this Teahouse page, thus nominating it for deletion. I have changed your message to link to the template rather than applying it to this page. --David Biddulph (talk) 02:05, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy, the item in question is Draft:The Liar's Dividend. In my opinion, not even close to being acceptable. The entire "...in a sentence" section needs to be deleted, and most of the rest is in the form of an essay, i.e., your original thoughts on the matter, rather than what published sources say. David notMD (talk) 02:31, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Copiague, New York

i live in the town that you took my stuff i wrote out of Uwuman13 (talk) 02:33, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

An editor reverted your edits because they were vandalism (deliberate misspellings, etc.). David notMD (talk) 02:38, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Uwuman13. You added your personal opinion that one neighborhood is better than another and some other nonsense, and you got reverted. Please stop all disruptive editing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:40, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

New Editor for Advice

New Editor for Advice Hi, folks. I have a ton of information about the architecture of the Nassau County, NY town where I'm stuck during lockdown. I'm thinking about contributing it to Wikipedia so that if more information can be generated, the seeds will be sown here. A lot of the information is barren. It would be more of the skeleton of a new branch of wikipedia, based on connections made by meticulously studied government records. It's a bit daunting, requiring links to a lot of other pages, and the creation of a lot of new ones, those linking to photos, ultimately, which I've taken and most of which I probably would add to the public domain here. I'm absolutely confident in my writing style at this point, but I can humbly say I'd be happy for any advice as to strategies or pitfalls to avoid.

Thanks so much! Ambassador.Ryan (talk) 01:55, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ambassador.Ryan. Your first step is to read and study Your first article. I am concerned that the foundation of your work will be "meticulously studied government records". Government records are primary sources which can be used by journalists, historians and other professional researchers. What Wikipedia editors do is summarize the published work of such professionals. But one of our core content policies is that Wikipedia does not publish original research and such content is not allowed in this encyclopedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:30, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

As an alternative, you could consider adding a Significant architecture section to Nassau County, New York. Content should be referenced, as as Cullen328 mentioned, to secondary sources, not primary. David notMD (talk) 02:43, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Did I make an article?

Did I make an article here? If so, did I do it correctly and does anyone have any suggestions? Is it likely to be deleted? Thank you. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 03:46, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, Lima Bean Farmer. Yes that is an article, and at least technically correct in form. Whether the sources are sufficient to pas WP:NORG and so demonstrate Notability, I am not prepared to judge at the moment. I did add a minor clarification that this is a US political group campaigning in a US election, which the article failed to state. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 04:40, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Archives for Talk:Superstition ?

While obiviously Superstition is a subject of perennial disagreement and history of Talk:Superstition seems to begin from 2002 AD then I wonder why previous discussions of the talk page have not been archived or is it a case of archived but not linked? Please can some one look into this and provide suitable support.

Thanks and regards Bookku (talk) 09:27, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

It looks like its just never been archived. And given the massive chronological mess that it's in, it's going to need someone with free time and the patience of a saint to sort out. Or draw a line under it and just archive the old stuff as-is. - X201 (talk) 09:35, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@ User:X201, Thanks I did not realize it. It seems that some users before 2007 did not sign and some previous comments before 2007 deleted. But which edit deleted is not clear. Probably some one while adding bigger comment deleted previous ones so it's not visible in minus edits. Btw how to show dif of First edit I can show of dif of second edit Bookku (talk) 04:29, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

• This 28 April 2007 dif seem to have removed signatures from edits. will need Bookku (talk) 04:57, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
• This 9 Dec 2009 dif deletion from talk page seems doubtful.Bookku (talk) 05:10, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Some issues with sources and article-editing

I tried to edit the article Chandragupta Maurya with information I found recently on reliable sources, particularly books and old encyclopedias, but when I publish it, another user tells me there are not enough sources. However, the sources I use are not online opinions, but rather books and old encyclopedias on print and PDF. Why, still, my article edits keep getting undone by others? MansoBoricua (talk) 04:57, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for asking, MansoBoricua. You and RegentsPark should discuss this at Talk:Chandragupta Maurya. -- Hoary (talk) 05:32, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Sweetpool50 appears to be engaging in "gatekeeping" behaviour.

I was notified that a copyedit I'd made to Beau Brummell had been undone, with the comment "not helpful". Looking at the history of that article, this user has made more undoes to this article than actual substantive edits, undoing nearly every change made to it. On reviewing Special:Contributions/Sweetpool50, this is a more general pattern; user's behaviour seems to fit patterns at WP:OWN. How to proceed? IceKarmaॐ 06:25, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi IceKarma. While I wouldn't have probably left the same edit summary as Sweetpool50 did when they reverted the edit you made, I do tend to agree that your edit, though made in good faith, was probably not an improvement per se. Generally, MOS:DATERANGE advises us to use spaced n-dashes in cases when dates in different years are involved; so, your change to a regular n-dash seems contrary to that. In addition, although bold text is also used for the first mention of names in articles per MOS:BIO#First mention, I think your tweak of the bold syntax for "Beau" was a mistake per MOS:BIO#Pseudonyms, stage names, nicknames, hypocorisms, and common names since your edit made the quote marks also bold, which doesn't seem to be common practice. As for the other change you made, moving the reference inside of the paranthesis could unintentionally change the target of the citation from the everything that precedes the footnote marker to only the date of Brummell's death. That might have been why that part of your edit was also undone.

As for your general comments about gatekeeping, it probably would be a bit more helpful for Sweetpool50 to leave more specific edit summaries which actually reference the policy and guideline reason an edit is being undone; however, lots of editors also don't do as much and it's perfectly OK for you to ask for clarification about the edit on the article's talk page if you like. So, I'm not sure that the edits being made to that article disruptive which is what gamekeeping behavior seems to imply. Some editors are highly vested in certain articles per WP:STEWARDSHIP, which is not automatically a bad thing; however, you should feel free to ask for clarification for any edits that were made on the article's talk page if you think it's needed or you're unable to figure out why they were made. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:54, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Article Publish Problem

what is the problem in my article as i wasnt published... and i am not being able to understand the reason of decline.. here is the link of draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Zillur_Rahman_Khan FahimRahmanKhan (talk) 10:34, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

FahimRahmanKhan, you article isn't acceptable at all in its current form. Wikipedia is not the place to write what you know. Everything you add here is required to be paraphrased from reliable published sources, without exception, and you should cite those sources. You should read WP:Your first article where what is required for any new article is explained. After you read that, feel free to return here if you need help understanding that guide. John from Idegon (talk) 10:58, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

It appears from your name, the subject of the article may be a relative of yours. If so, please also read WP:COI. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 11:00, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Article text should not contain hyperlinks. Nothing should be bold except the first use of the subjects name. You have many red wikilinks on names of organizations that are unlikely to ever be articles. And you have lots of unnecessary capitalizations. Of greater importance than any of this, all of your content is not referenced. David notMD (talk) 12:26, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Added a reference to a scientific study done in 37 countries - Did I do it right?

On Emotional Intelligence - thought it was helpful to see some actual research. Please let me know if done correctly! TruthLover123 (talk) 11:59, 8 September 2020 (UTC) @TruthLover123:

It reads like you reverted the old edit. Good.Nihaal 12:23, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

At Emotional intelligence, too much detail in your description, and you did not comply with standard reference format. Go back and fix. See other website refs for format. David notMD (talk) 12:41, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

You added just a bare URL. In this edit I expanded it to show further detail. David Biddulph (talk) 12:46, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

My article has been moved back to draft after 90 days in mainspace

Hello Teahousers, I asked a question a week or so ago about Google searches, and I was happy to discover on Friday that my article was finally being found by Google. Thank you to those who replied. But this morning when I logged on, I discovered that someone named John from Idegon had moved the entire article back to draftspace, saying it had no sources. But it has books, magazines, and newspapers! How do I reverse this? Is there anyone I can appeal to? I've worked really hard on this, and I'm so disappointed. Btbky (talk) 13:45, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

To anyone reading this, I would suggest moving the responses to User_talk:John_from_Idegon#The_Iris_Network. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:02, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

I did leave a message on John's talk page but he has not responded. Btbky (talk) 14:14, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

shall we delete this page?

yo i was typing gibberish into the wikipedia search bar and found a page on some dude named Eka Santika. It hasn't been updated in a decade. Shall we delete it? Nolanisntfunny (talk) 17:15, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nolanisntfunny: Probably not. Article age or time since last update is not a problem. Is there anything else wrong with it? RudolfRed (talk) 17:21, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

More of what I'm pushing is that it just ends abruptly. Doesn't mention retirement, change of teams, nothing. just stops at 2009-10 Nolanisntfunny (talk) 17:25, 6 September 2020 (UTC)Nolanisntfunny

@Nolanisntfunny, in that case why don’t you try and expand/improve the page? An article being stale is not a valid reason to put it up for deletion. Furthermore what you did here is called vandalism & was quite disruptive please don’t do such again. Celestina007 17:32, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

i did not mean to do that. Nolanisntfunny (talk) 17:38, 6 September 2020 (UTC)nolanisntfunny

aight then. sorta doing what I can... he hasn't seemed to have played a game in 10 years, at least not in the Indonesian SuperLeague, so i'll add former. i'll try and find his stats because as of now his statistics table is blank. another reason why i thought it should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nolanisntfunny (talk • contribs) 17:48, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Nolanisntfunny, we don't delete an article for being out of date or being low-quality. We instead update it and improve it. —valereee (talk) 19:42, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

aight i've done what i could to it... pretty damn impossible to find anything on him. feel like i'm talking to a brick wall when I say it should be deleted... guess i'll stick to hockey. Nolanisntfunny (talk) 19:45, 6 September 2020 (UTC)nolanisntfunny

There is no reason it should be deleted. Notability is not temporary. See WP:N. RudolfRed (talk) 20:25, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, we keep articles for the history that it provides about a person.Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 20:37, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nolanisntfunny: Assuming that the person hasn't played in ten years, why do you think that means it should be deleted? This isn't an "encyclopedia of currently active sports figures". —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:27, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

because, and i'm gonna use a word here, there ain't shit about him anywhere. Nolanisntfunny (talk) 02:50, 7 September 2020 (UTC)nolanisntfunny

Existing articles do not need recent content in order to be valid articles. AfD is the process if you are of the opinion that the article should not exist. An Administrator will then make a decision. David notMD (talk) 18:46, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

There's been no coverage of the last 3 months of Jesus's life for 2000 years. By your extremely faulty logic, we should delete Jesus too? Guess so...you'd better go do that. John from Idegon (talk) 19:31, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@John from Idegon: Hey, could you link me your diff addition about the coverage of Jesus? I want to thank it. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael ^(marhata) 14:25, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Black Squirrels

Do black squirrels have blue eyes??? I have a picture of one with blue eyes is it rare??? 98.22.49.219 (talk) 11:33, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Dunno. Teahouse is not for these questions. User:98.22.49.2.Nihaal 12:31, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Format fixed Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:04, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@98.22.49.219: Probably rare. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael ^(marhata) 14:28, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

This would be a good question for the Wikipedia:Reference desk. Please ask there. Also, @User:Jeromi Mikhael, pings don't work for Ips. Ghinga7 (talk) 15:21, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Rating question

What topics are rated higher than others? How should I go about contributing to a lower rated article?

I am a new editor on Wikipedia Cory C Ccarson2 (talk) 11:56, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ccarson2: You can choose your favourite topic but try going on to improving stubs and try making your own article. Use This,this,This and This For articles..Nihaal 12:27, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

You appear to be a student in a Wikipedia class project. I imagine your instructor can be of some help. In general, at the top of Talk pages for articles, the articles are classified Stub, Start, C-class, B-class, etc. These are quality rankings. As Nihaal pointed out, adding reliably sourced references is a good starting point. A more advanced level of expertise would be replacing bad references. David notMD (talk) 12:35, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia has many feeble articles. Here's one that I discovered just today: Sharman Kadish. At a glance, it looks serious enough, and it has no warning templates. But if you examine it you discover that it has only two sources: (i) the biographee's own website; (ii) the website of an organization headed by the biographee. This is unacceptable. I don't know if the biographee merits an article; but if she does, it should be far better than this. -- Hoary (talk) 13:14, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

One of your school lessons points out the need to comply with WP:MEDRS for any topic that relates to health, medicine, psychology... Not complying means your edits will be reverted (reversed). David notMD (talk) 15:52, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Article Publish Problem (References Added)

Article Publish Problem (References Added)

I have added cite in my article as a proof of references from published newspaper url. Is my article now able to be publish? If its yes then i want to submit it again for review FahimRahmanKhan (talk) 12:54, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@FahimRahmanKhan: To submit an article for review, insert {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page you want to submit for review. Note that you need to copy it as it appears when you view this page, not as it appears in the edit window. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:02, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

The draft has been declined twice, and many of the references are just passing mentions of the person by name rather than having extensive content about him. Also, there are sentences praising him that have no references, and are therefore seen as coming from you - the article creator - rather than independent, published sources. Draft needs more work. David notMD (talk) 15:58, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Where do we discuss the subjects of an Article?

I am not sure I understand, and now I am scared to be banned from Wikipedia.

I made a SINGLE "undo" on a page about Patriot Prayer. I was not aware there was a partisan edit war going on. I then added "talk:" in front of the url and discussed why I made the undo (First, Do No Harm) Then an admin told me: "we don't use talk pages to discuss the subjects of an article, however interesting your question might be"

I am afraid to continue on the talk page, because people are saying things I do not understand, using jargon I have never come across before: "I suggest ANI or ArbEnf on Rian Geldenhuys' repeated NOTHERE behavior, if he isn't blocked or banned before you get to it."

Please help - I am not here to fight - only to build an encyclopedia. I was a television news editor for 22 years and consider myself experienced in avoiding harmful biographies of living persons. I cite the sources accurately and am told it is "contrary to the sources". Rian Geldenhuys (talk) 05:21, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

• Link: Joey Gibson (political activist)

You appear to be talking about something in "Talk:Joey Gibson". Gibson is the founder (I read) of something called "Patriot Prayer" (PP). You take very seriously his description of PP. I'd agree that his description of it is worth a mention; but what matters much more are descriptions of PP from independent, reliable, published sources. There are numerous instances of organizations describing themselves in one way but being generally described in more or less authoritative sources in a way that contradicts this; Wikipedia follows the latter. Wikipedia avoids what's potentially libelous; but as for harm, it avoids harming its readers by whitewashing what's important and verifiable in order not to hurt the feelings of particular people. -- Hoary (talk) 05:51, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Dear Hoary Thank you very much - but with the greatest of respect - could you also try and answer my question: "Where do we discuss the subject of an Article?" That said - let us use the case/example for the sake of gaining clarity. Your point about the harm of whitewashing it taken. But so is the harm of telling one sided stories. I respectfully disagree with your assumption that I "take very seriously his description of Patriot Prayer". You are incorrect to assume that. I worry when my personality is under discussion. In the last 24 hours I have been called a "bot", a "repeated NOTHERE behaviour" person and a stalker and was accused of threatening people with a lawsuit. I am not even in USA, so I can certainly not sue anyone there - neither do I want to. For the record - I do not take him seriously - I take the sources seriously and the sources tell both sides of the story. If I have a POV, it is to report both sides of the story without fail. As I said I have many years of experience and TV News editor at a Public Broadcaster and I do not have a POV on the matter. I notice though that the selective characterisation seems to cause people to shoot each other. I do not take HIM seriously. I take the SOURCES seriously and the sources say that he describes himself as a "Moderate Libertarian". It is my humble submission that the sources are selectively used, and that is not encyclopaedic. I wish for Wikipedia to be encyclopedic - because it is all we got. Rian Geldenhuys (talk) 07:05, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

• @Rian Geldenhuys: Where do we discuss the subject of an article? Nowhere. As such this diff is (slightly) offtopic.

Regarding your main point, it has been explained to you at length already that we do not respect a subject's self-characterization when it goes opposite what reliable sources say. For example, politicians of all party affiliations and all nationalities have a tendency to claim they are the victim of a vast judicial/media conspiracy when they are accused of or condemned for various crimes; it would be absolutely not "balance" or "fairness" to report this self-interested characterization against reliable sources as a "both sides" story, see WP:BALANCE. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 08:07, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Rian Geldenhuys, your edit summary "What a living person SELF IDENTIFIES as is what we write - not what others that do not know him claims he is" shows a misunderstanding of how Wikipedia works. Wikipedia's policy is to base its articles on what is written about the subject in reliable independent published sources. What a subject says about himself is likely to be biased, and should be treated as unreliable – though it may be quoted. Maproom (talk) 07:51, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

True, but one shouldn't attribute a description to a particular source when the description doesn't appear there. And this, I think, is what RG objects to. -- Hoary (talk) 07:59, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

I looked, and I agree that you (Rian Geldenhuys) have a point. And so I've added my two groats on that talk page. (Perhaps I'll be blocked too!) Advice: stay cool and terse. (And don't suggest that you're particularly well qualified to make judgments, even if you are.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:59, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@Hoary: just to clarify, Rian Gildenhuys wrote " I happen to take an interest in why people murder others in the street and I saw a video of this man mourning his friends death in Portland. I am wondering what caused the murder and mayhem. Could it be because of demonisation and symbolisation? Rian Geldenhuys (talk) 6:06 am, Yesterday (UTC+1)" It was that specific comment that I told him wasn't appropriate for the article talk page, not his other comments. The comment about ANI was made by @Hipal/Ronz: who might want to chip in. Doug Weller talk 08:25, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

No objection from me to your objection, Doug Weller, to that comment. (And pinging Hipal, as I believe he is.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:50, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

This is very sweet Jorm. Does that mean you are an Administrator? Should I obey your every whim? Is it time to move a service such as Wikipedia OUT of the USA perhaps? Is the Electronic Frontier at risk? Did Aaron Swartz sacrifice so much for nothing? [6]. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 16:14, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Can only edit source

Hello, I'd like to put references on my draft, but I can only edit the source. I remember from the Dutch wikipedia that I could Edit this Page, without having to mess around with the source code. Why can't I do this on my draft? It is hard referencing in the source code instead of the "front page". All my references are on the Dutch wikipedia page https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariecke_van_der_Linden My draft page is called Mariecke van der Linden. Draft:Mariecke van der Linden) Voortgang (talk) 16:04, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Voortgang. When I pick "Edit" on your draft, there is then a pencil icon at the top right, allowing me to switch between visual editing and source editing. Have you got that? --ColinFine (talk) 16:23, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Help learning wikitext

Hello!

I just created a Wikipedia account, and I would like to know if any experienced Wikipedians would like to teach me the basics of Wikitext editing. I would greatly appreciate it if somebody was willing to guide me through my first couple of days on Wikipedia. My sandbox is at User:Ravenzing/sandbox for reference. Ravenzing (talk) 13:04, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ravenzing: I suggest you have a look at Help:Wikitext, which covers most of the things you need for editing pages on Wikipedia. If you look for something to do, look at the Task Center. Maybe Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user is something for you. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:08, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ravenzing: see also Help:Introduction. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:03, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ravenzing: Keep in mind that you can always view the text of an existing article and use that as a model. This is something I do from time to time. For example, I wanted to add a "citation needed" flag to an article I was editing but didn't know how to do that. So I found an existing article that had that flag, then went into "Edit source", from which I could see the relevant code. This approach shouldn't replace Help:Wikitext or the other help sources mentioned above, but might help supplement your knowledge. Mike Marchmont (talk) 16:39, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

How to report unwanted edits and vandalism

How to report continues edits which include vandalism and not proper edits by specific user. Is there any option to stop his edits in some specific page Rahul Soman^{talk - contribs} 08:33, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Rahulsoman, and welcome to the Teahouse. On Wikipedia, we have a warning system. If an editor makes an unhelpful edit, you can use a template to tell them. Start with the level 1 warning, and work your way up if they do not stop. If after the level 4 warning they have not stopped, report them to WP:ANI, or drop a message on an admin's talk page. If they are a vandal, report them to WP:AIV. That said, please be careful when using the word vandalism, as it has a very specific meaning here. More info is available here.

Please note that you should not use warnings against users you disagree with. They should be used objectively. The warnings are available at WP:WARNINGS. Hope this helps. Regards, Giraffer (munch) 17:42, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your reply Giraffer (munch).

Hi @Rahulsoman, you can easily revert edits by users by using tools such as Wikipedia:Twinkle or Wikipedia:RedWarn, which also warns vandals. These tools also have features built in to report to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism which is where you can report vandals that you have warned. Ed talk! 17:37, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply Ed talk!. Wikipedia:Twinkle I am not much familiar with and dint felt comfortable. I will go through Wikipedia:RedWarn.

Erasing a message from my talk page

How can I erase a response from my talk page? I sent the message that should go to the Wikipedia page in Portuguese to my talk page in English. Lamanix (talk) 18:14, 8 September 2020 (UTC) Lamanix (talk) 18:14, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Lamanix. Simply click 'edit source' for that particular post, select some (or all) of the text, and delete, then Preview, then Publish. If you want to delete the entire thread, inclding the heading, select everything and then deleting it (shortcut method: by pressing Ctrl-A, then Ctrl-X) and then Publish Changes. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:21, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Help with making a project page look beautiful

Hello! I am helping to run a wikipedia project dedicated to creating and improving articles about photographers whose photos are held at the Conway Library at the Courtauld Institute of Art. I have made a very basic project page Wikipedia:WikiProject ConwayLibrary, but I would love some help to make it look fancier (especially as some of our lists of articles to create/ edit/ outcomes are getting rather long). Any pointers (even to existing help pages or 'guides', I have had a look but am not having much success) very happily received! KerstingFan (talk) 17:26, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@KerstingFan: Try, Wikipedia:User page design center. In haste, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:24, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Thank you so much! This is just the sort of info / guide I was looking for! :) KerstingFan (talk) 18:26, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

How to start as a beginner

How do I start as a beginner in creating Wikipedia pages such as bios. 41.190.3.141 (talk) 16:54, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

See WP:YFA But, creating new articles is not an easy task for a beginner. It is better to start by working to improve existing articles instead, to gain experience. Try WP:ADVENTURE, the interactive learning game. RudolfRed (talk) 17:14, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Creating a Wikipedia account for yourself is very helpful.

Working on biographies is very difficult, because they are held to a very high standard per Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, and there are special editing restrictions on them. If you work from reliable, independent sources, you shouldn't go far wrong. WP:RSP and WP:RSN are helpful in determining if a source is reliable. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 18:27, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Question regarding notability?

Hello,

My question is regarding notability. Can I possibly write about a company based within Ontario Canada and its history? 74.15.25.171 (talk) 18:36, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

See WP:Notability. If you want more specifics, you need to provide details here for us to be able to judge the notability of the company. Also, if it is a company you are related to, I strongly suggest that you do not write about it. On Wikipedia, we call this a conflict-of-interest, and many editors will be a lot harsher on drafts written by an editor with a COI as it is generally frowned upon within the community. For more info on COIs, see WP:COI and for more info on how we create articles, see WP:AfC and WP:YFA. Regards, Giraffer (munch) 19:16, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

COMPANY PAGE DELETED

Hi all,

new to this page, but not new to wikipedia. I established a fashion company 17 years ago. Around 15 years ago i posted a wiki page so that anyone interested in finding out the factual basis behind the company could do so. At the time i viewed (and still do) wikipedia as a reliable and factual based resource to discover 'fact' based information on a particular subject. The name of the fashion company is KING APPAREL. The article has existed in place since that time until now, 15+ years, and has now been deleted, based on a 'wiki gnomes' opinion that the article was not notable enough.

The brand is sold globally, online, exists on all major social platforms and without trying to come across as conceited, is one of, if not the foremost streetwear brand certainly in the United Kingdom and recognisable globally.

So i'm seeking some advice from more knowledgeable people from wikipedia, with regards to how i can re-post the brand page on wikipedia without having someone find fault and look to take it down again. Essentially the page is supposed to be a fact based resource article on the brand. That is all.

Incidentally, i do realise that wikipedia may view that i have a conflict of interest with posting a factual based page on a brand i founded and to this end i have declared this openly on my talk page so it is transparent. I would also like to point out that i have been told that this has nothing to do with the removal of the page.

Any tips and advice would be welcome.

many thanks Tim Hoad --Timhoad (talk) 11:50, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

The article was deleted as the result of this discussion (in which you were eligible to participate). The reason given for deletion wasn't that KA wasn't notable (in any normal sense of the word); it was that sources used for the article weren't reliable and didn't establish what Wikipedia terms notability. -- Hoary (talk) 12:22, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Timhoad Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have a common misconception about what Wikipedia is; it is not a place for companies to tell the world about themselves, or as you put it, "posting a factual based page" Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that summarizes only what independent reliable sources with significant coverage (not name drops, brief mentions, press releases, routine business announcements, etc.) have chosen on their own to say about the subject, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organization. Wikipedia has no interest in what a company wants to say about itself. It is usually very difficult for people in your position to write in the manner required; you in essence need to forget everything you know about your company and only write based on the content of independent sources. 331dot (talk) 12:25, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi guys, i am aware of the conversation in 2007 as i was part of that at the time. I also understand the concept of what wikipedia represents. What i find hard to understand is why pages exist for other brands - for example >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifted_Research_Group which are effectively identical as the pre-existing KING APPAREL page, yet wikipedia does not appear to have a problem with these pages?! There appears to be no cohesive consensus in this case. So if LRG can write a page about their brand, i would like to know how we can.

thank you --Timhoad (talk) 13:05, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Timhoad. In the deletion discussion, the article was described as It's blatantly promotional and full of editorialization/puffery.. Having reviewed the deleted text, I must agree. Such text as King has grown through an unwavering work ethic and constantly evolving dynamic:, From this modest beginning King has now grown to present fully comprehensive seasonal collections. KING have utilised their experience and knowledge in headwear development to manufacture their own line of headwear whilst paying homage to the old school, low profile, square bill shape of the original Starter hats and many other such comments ar quite unacceptable in a Wikipedia article. Besides better sourcing, this article needed a major rewrite to achieve neutrality. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Timhoad Using the argument that other poor quality articles exist is not going to help. Theroadislong (talk) 13:13, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Tim, as this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, poor quality articles will get by us, it's just the way it is. You're welcome to assist the thousands of editors in detecting and addressing them if you wish. 331dot (talk) 14:10, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

hi guys, thank you for your input. the copy has been rewritten to exclude the "editorialisation/puffery". I agree that articles should not promote the subject matter, merely provide a factual and informative context. I would appreciate some prior vetting before attempting to get something back up if anyone would be happy to have a look. I would also assume that posting of said article should come via another independent source. I don't want there to be any conflict of interest if i can help it.

many thanks.--Timhoad (talk) 19:39, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

How do you do a autobiography

How would you format an autobiography? Vindem5 (talk) 19:27, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

What do you mean? If you are using one as a reference you'd format it like any other reference and if you are doing it about yourself . . ...... don't. Carptrash (talk) 19:39, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Carptrash's point, perhaps a bit terse, is that Wikipedia tries to dissuade people from crafting an autobiography (see WP:AUTO) because it is difficult to write about oneself with a neutral point of view, and only depend on what can be referenced written by other people. David notMD (talk) 20:20, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

And your draft has been Rejected, which is stronger than Declined. The former means no chance while the latter means needs work. David notMD (talk) 20:24, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

What Is Meant by Contributions Not Being Constructive?

Recently, I made a "contribution" about Pete Conrad, in the "In popular media" section, in regards to him having had a cameo role in 1996 on "Beverly Hill 90210." I submitted, "In 1996, Conrad played himself on the teen drama ""Beverly Hill 90210" on the episode "Nancy's Choice"." However, it was deleted because of it not being constructive... what does that even mean? How many people actually look for Conrad's Wikipedia page, never mind that the information was actually factual? It's no more or less "constructive" than this passage on Conrad's page: "In 1998, Conrad played himself on the CBS sitcom Family Matters, Season 9, episode 21."...? 2601:805:C280:F360:F5A2:C8C2:6382:257A (talk) 18:45, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

TJRC reverted your edit with the summary "unsourced". Anything that is not common knowledge (like the information you added) should be cited to a reliable source to allow other editors and readers to verify it (see those links for details). The best thing to do when you have an issue with an edit (or a reversion) by another editor is to discuss it with them, either on the article talk page (in this case Talk:Pete Conrad) or on the user's talk page (in this case User talk:TJRC). If you use the article's talk page, you should include a ping of the user involved. In this case, you could start your message with {{Re|TJRC}}, which renders as "@TJRC:". You don't have to do this when leaving a message on the user's own talk page, though, since they are notified in that case anyway.

As far as How many people actually look for Conrad's Wikipedia page ..., that sounds like you're saying "nobody looks at this, so it doesn't matter what I write", which is totally the wrong attitude. We're trying to collect and curate information accurately here. There are problems with a lot of it that has slipped through the cracks over the years, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to be better. See WP:OSE. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:49, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Citing a website that contains a searchable database

Hello, first teahouse visit. I have a question on citations.

I would like to cite a scientific society's website, where they provide a searchable database of awards they have made; I'm trying to provide a verifiable source for an award for the person I'm writing about. If the reader would have to go to the website, then type in the name to search, does this constitute an acceptable source? That is, if the reader has to do some work, is that still ok?

Thanks in advance! Gigiandd (talk) 19:14, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Gigiandd, and welcome to the Teahosue.

Databases are a problem for Wikipedia mas sourfes, because if it is a live DB, even with t4eh exact same search, the reader is not guaranteed to get the same result as the editor did. Editors are instructed not to cite web searches for that reason. But in that case it is pretty much always possible to cite the final result page(s) that the search finds. But for a DB record, that is not normally the case.

There is the start of a discussion on this at Wikipedia talk:Citation templates# Citing archival databases but it petered out because the particular DB used as an example is just repeating info from a source citable directly.

We do not have a {{cite DB}} or the like. For an award, i woulds try hard for an announcement of it being made, either from the society or from news coverage. if there was no coverage, it is probably not much of an award anyway. But that coverage existed does not make it easy to find and cite, particularly if this was pre-internet. If the DB has a unique record ID that can always be sued to find the exact same info, i would include that in the citation. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:45, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for these helpful suggestions! Gigiandd (talk) 21:44, 8 September 2020 (UTC)gigiandd

Concerned about Urdu Wikipedia articles' truthiness and neutrality

I don't know Teahouse is the right platform for this issue or not, but I am posting my concern. (Please mention the right platform to address this concern) I auto translated some of the Urdu Wikipedia articles just for curiosity and read, I shocked by the false and propaganda type content on that Urdu Wikipedia. I am posting some of these here, compare it with English Wikipedia (Which is most edited and trustworthy).

• Operation Dwarka English - Urdu

Urdu version claims two Indian officers and 13 salesmen were killed, while English Wikipedia claims no casulties.

• Kargil War English - Urdu

Urdu version claims No country has had a clear victory in this war. But the Pakistani army shot down three Indian fighter jets. In addition, the Indian army lost its balance in the Kargil sector and killed more than 700 soldiers, while English Wikipedia says Decisive Indian victory.

• Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 English - Urdu

Urdu version claims Taking advantage of the Pakistani government's actions, Bengali separatists took advantage of the Mukti Bahini separatist movement in the eastern part of Pakistan, which later turned into a violent guerrilla force. India did not let this golden opportunity go to waste and showed its hypocrisy and took advantage of Pakistan's civil war and Mukti Bahini. it hardly seems neutral!!!

• Kashmir English - Urdu India and Pakistan want to plunder the resources of Kashmir like paradise and US imperialism is taking its interests from both the countries by keeping both the countries in a state of war.
• UN mediation of the Kashmir dispute English - Urdu

The UN resolution of 13 August 1948 stated that Pakistan would first withdraw its troops from Kashmir. Pakistan accepted the demand, but on March 14, 1950, the Security Council passed a resolution stating that the two countries would begin withdrawing troops at the same time. a false claims and propaganda type statements.

Although I stated few lines here, the most part of some articles are neutrality disputed and contains manipulated content. Majority of India-Pakistan related articles are neutrality disputed. I don't know the Urdu language enough to edit those articles. I can only add neutrality tags on it. (All lines I quote here from Urdu Wikipedia are auto translated by google translator.) ❯❯❯Praveg ^A=9.8 10:45, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Pravega, this is English Wikipedia. It's an entirely separate organization with its own policies and procedures from Urdu Wikipedia. You'll need to contact someone at Urdu Wikipedia. John from Idegon (talk) 10:52, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Pravega, as this isn't an English Wikipedia issue, we can't help much. You might want to bring this up on Meta Wiki, or the Urdu Wiki Embassy. There are clear issues here that need to be addressed ASAP. Ed talk! 10:57, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Can anyone post the link of exact platform of Meta Wiki where I can post this issue??❯❯❯Praveg ^A=9.8 11:07, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Pravega, The right place would be through the meta request for comment process. I will note that simply giving a few examples isn't going to convince anyone, as they could easily be mistakes. You will need to show a systemic problem with the wiki. Zoozaz1 (talk) 22:53, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

:Erasing a message from my talk page

@Nick Moyes: Thank you, Nick. Lamanix (talk) 22:39, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@Lamanix: You're most welcome. (You need not have created a separate post to respond to me. It's far better simply to respond below the latest post in your original thread. Just add one extra colon to indent your reply by one step) All the best, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:06, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

For @RegentsPark: Why does my article require some changes, if I did research on books by actual Indian authors?

For @RegentsPark: Why does my article require some changes, if I did research on books by actual Indian authors?

Good evening, RegentsPark! I understand you have concerns about the article on Emperor Chandragupta Maurya and my edits on it. But I did research those books on PDF (dating back to the 19th century and the 1970's) and many of the sources are written by actual Indian and Ceylonese historians, not religious authors. By the way, I found that the date of 312 B. C. was a commentary of an actual Indian historian, K. C. Jain, which I found on the Wikipedia article 'Mauryan Empire'. Also, the three ancient sources found on Paranavithana's 1971 book say the same thing about a princess named Berenice marrying the Emperor of Pataliputra. Yes, I know some of the information is written by Jain and Buddhists authors, but the main source was information given verbally by an East Roman merchant dating back to the 12th Century on a visit to Ceylon (Paranavithana, 1971).

Well, I'm not trying to be rude; I just wanted to share some information I found on old sources. I did read other sources, like the House of Seleucus and The Land of the Elephant Kings. So, I believed all of that information could be relevant to Wikipedia. And no, I would never intend vandalism. I just wanted to add key details I found on these books and sources.

By the way, I also watched the film Samrat Chandragupt, and it's a public domain movie from India. And from what I've learned from other Wikipedia users, the extensive sources on the Greek general Seleucus never mention a Mauryan lady marrying a Macedonian general.

Quite frankly, I don't understand why the links are still unsourced, even if I write their authors' names. These books are actually available on the internet, and are not religious or legendary, but serious historical analysis by actual teachers and historians. I understand you are concerned, and if you're able, please, please let me know why my edit is not sourced.

I promise if there's an error or more, I will surely correct it using Wikipedia's guidelines.

Kind regards! MansoBoricua (talk) 20:52, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy ping: @RegentsPark Ed talk! 21:01, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @MansoBoricua, welcome to Wikipedia, and to the Teahouse. If you want to contact an editor directly, it's best to use their "talk" page. You can do this by either clicking "talk" in their signature, or elsewhere where there username appears. There, you can click "new section" to start writing a message. There's no need to do this in this situation as I have "courtesy pinged" RegentsPark so they have received a notification. You will likely be pinged in the same way when you receive a response. Many thanks, Ed talk! 21:05, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@MansoBoricua: I've explained what's wrong with your edits on the article talk page. You should respond there. Best. --RegentsPark (comment) 22:40, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

("On the article talk page" means here. -- Hoary (talk) 02:32, 9 September 2020 (UTC))

how to change picture

 4.30.53.70 (talk) 22:41, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

hello IP editor. Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you be more specific as to what you want to do? That way we can help you better. For example, do you want to change an image in an existing article? its size and/or position on the page?; do you want to upload a new image to then add into an article?; do you own the image you want to use?; do you want to replace an image on Commons with a slightly different version? Tell us more, and we can reply more effectively. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

User:4.30.53.70. Hi IP editor. You can change picture like here an example. to .See a red link and the file is nonexistent in Wikipedia.Acid Of Carbon 06:20, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

How to increase a Start article to a C article?

How to increase a Start article to a C article? What has to happen to chance a start article into a C article? GeordieNamedPercy (talk) 03:49, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi GeordieNamedPercy. As explained in WP:ASSESSMENT, "Start" and "C" are more unofficial types of assessments based on general concepts and may differ depending upon who is doing the assessing and the WikiProjects whose scope the article falls under. There is no formal review process involved; basically, someone unofficially reviews the article and then upgrades it to a higher grade if they feel it meets the relevant criteria. Sometimes the last assessment of an article happened quite a long time ago; so, the state of the article at that time and the current state of the article might be very different. You didn't name any specific article, but generally you can review and assess an article if you like, and then upgrade it's status if you believe it's been improved enough to do so. If you're not sure you're ready to do that, check the article's talk page for any WikiProject banners and then simply ask someone from that WikiProject to assess the article. In some cases, an article may be covered by multiple WikiProjects and each WikiProject might slightly assess it in a different way. The only real formal review processes are for WP:GA or WP:FA types of articles. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:16, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

One caveat - after I have made changes that I believe improved an article enough to warrant an upgrade (which can include deleting bad stuff, not just adding good stuff), I feel that it is not appropriate for me to also do the actual upgrade. I may leave a note on the Talk page asking that someone else evaluate the article. David notMD (talk) 08:21, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Headings with no content

Hi! I'm looking for the relevant section in the manual of style / other Wikipedia: article about leaving just headings with not contents save for a link on an article. Is that a suitable thing to do if you're not expecting much content to be added any time soon? On the article 5-HT2A receptor, there are three subheadings 1 under the heading Methods to analyse the receptor with no contents, just two links to their main pages. Is there a rule in the guidebook saying this should stay? Thank you, Revanchist317 (talk) 06:20, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

My view is that a section with no content shouldn't have a section header. I've searched WP:MOS and pages it links to, and found nothing to support, or contradict, my view. I've edited 5-HT2A receptor#Methods to analyse the receptor to remove the empty sections and replace the links by standard wikilinks – but I don't feel strongly about it, and won't mind (or even notice) if you revert my edit. Maproom (talk) 07:24, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

@Revanchist317: I tend to agree with Maproom. Just a link to a 'Main article' in an otherwise empty section is not OK in my view, because it needs at least one sentence to put that topic into context. In such cases, I might have either tried to incorporate that topic into the higher level section using a wikilink, or simply placed it in a 'See also' section. That implies the subject is related and/or relevant, but does not imply in what manner. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:53, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you both, I had the same view. Appreciate the edit Revanchist317 (talk) 08:23, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Curiosity

What is a "diff"? I've seen it on a few pages, but could never figure out what it meant. I think it means different, but I'm not sure. Can someone clarify? Also, how do some Wikipedia users make their names multi-colored? That's also something else I've tried to figure out, but have been unable to. This is my first time in the Teahouse, so I apologize if I look like I don't know what I'm doing. TheKingCartii (talk) 19:59, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @TheKingCartii, welcome to the Teahouse. A diff page is short for a "difference page". It shows you the changes made (differences) between two edits (revisions). You can read more about them over at Help:Diff. As for making your signature (where you can make your name multi-coloured), you can read this section of Wikipedia:Signatures. I hope these linked pages help :) Ed talk! 20:08, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Nitpick: diff is a file comparison method. It is not unique to Mediawiki (the software that Wikipedia runs on) and not (originally) an abbreviation of "difference page". Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 08:36, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

@TheKingCartii: By way of an example, if you click this link, you will see the 'diff' which shows your actual timestamped edit. On the left side of the page you see the old version of the page, and on the right the next version of it. Each shows who made the edit, and allows us to undo it, go to the editor's user page, check their contirbutins, or move forwards or backwards by one edit. Lower down the page you see what that page looked like after that edit of yours. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:11, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

WP age matters

Hy RuStr12 again, regarding WP: AGE MATTERS policy does it implies to an old historical letters or documents written between two governments or persons and how old must material be to be considered that is not significant in historical matter RuStr12 (talk) 06:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

• Courtesy link: WP:AGE MATTERS, a subsection of WP:RS. First time in almost 9 years I've seen that, but I avoid science articles like the plauge (actually, bad metaphor. I'm doing pretty well at actually avoiding the plauge, PTL) John from Idegon (talk) 06:17, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks man RuStr12 (talk) 06:20, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@RuStr12: I don't think a general rule is possible for documents written between two governments or persons. It all depends on the subject and the entities involved. If you have a specific case, I'd suggest WP:RSN. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:07, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks man ,this link will be useful for my research RuStr12 (talk) 07:16, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

RuStr12, my understanding is that WP:AGE MATTERS applies to secondary and tertiary sources — as more evidence is found and more examination is done, our understanding of a topic improves. It doesn't apply to primary sources such as letters contemporary with the event. Maproom (talk) 07:47, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks man somehow I understood like that too, the more sources mentioning the material the more is reliable regardless how old it is, but still is a little bit confusing i.e. if I would buy the the book from Lazaro Soranzo a 17th century historian and used it as a source, would it be better to quote newer historians which using him as a source or can I go directly to him. The same question would go for Tacitus who is even older RuStr12 (talk) 08:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Not everyone here is a "man". David notMD (talk) 10:12, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks ,person. RuStr12 (talk) 17:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@RuStr12: What about the dogs? Think about the dogs! —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:15, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Hahahah, good one. RuStr12 (talk) 20:45, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Both {{gender|Maproom}} and {{gender|AlanM1}} return "he" at the time I am writing so I suppose neither of them would object on gender grounds. "Thanks man" might still be a bit informal for people you have never met before. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:09, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@Tigraan: Matt Groening has had a remarkable impact on society. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:46, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Remove my page completely from Wikitia

How can I remove this page completely? Everytime i am typing my name Padmini Dutta Sharma , I see my links on Wikitia. Please help me remove my links from Wikitia. Pdswashington (talk) 18:36, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Pdswashington, and welcome to the Teahouse! Unfortunately, Wikitia is not related to Wikipedia, so we can't help you with that here. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:42, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Sadly, this is a perfect demonstration of why submitting a draft article about yourself is not such a good idea. It means other people can use that information in any way they choose.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:50, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Woodrow Wilson categories need to be changed?

Woodrow Wilson is listed in a category of white supremacist. Is this a joke or what? He was a President and that seems a fairly serious charge without any evidence presented, please remove for me or tell me how to change this? Ty78ejui (talk) 19:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC) Ty78ejui (talk) 19:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Ty78jui, for any questions regarding specifics articles, take them to the article's talk page (in this case Talk:Woodrow Wilson). Giraffer (munch) 19:22, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ty78ejui: the statement in the lead is cited to two recent sources – a NY Times article and a Cambridge University Press-published book (click on the little ^[3] and ^[4] after it). You may want to read a relevant discussion about the treatment of the issue eight months ago at Talk:Woodrow Wilson#Whitewashing the race relations part of the article. and/or start a new section on that page if you have issues with those sources or the way they are interpreted. Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:56, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

I am not interesting in starting a debate on Woodrow Wilson on his talk page. I just feel that category is incorrect. Just having some racist believes does not make someone (a former President) a White Supremacist. Having that makes the article non neutral. I would like to remove him from that category. I also don't want to spend hours researching and debating. The category listing just makes Wikipedia look like it is rewriting history in a bias way. I am not against having evidence on his article, only feel the category listing is unfair. Why not also put both Mark Twain and Lovecraft then under White Supremacist and then change the category to "harbored racist views". To be a White Supremacist person needs to actively worked towards that goal for example Hitler belongs in it.Ty78ejui (talk) 20:56, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ty78ejui: I'm sorry, but this is a general editing help forum. Other editors interested and experienced with that article are found at the article's talk page. It's also the place where people would look for previous discussions about the article, so it's in everyone's best interest that it be in one place. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:05, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

I googled Woodrow Wilson White Supremacist and nothing comes up but a Vox Blog, the idea is Fringe. No major journalists call him a White Supremacist. Putting him in that category is not a neutral view point. But duly noted that Wikipedia is biased. I may later cite this an example of lack of neutrality in Wikipedia. Ty78ejui (talk) 22:55, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

You may believe you are making a valid argument, but it is useless to make it here. Teahouse host are all about how-to, not righting great wrongs. David notMD (talk) 00:09, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

I suggest you read Woodrow Wilson#Race relations and contest (on the talk page) anything that is poorly sourced/unsourced before trying to remove a category just because you don't like it. Also, I hope you realise that "I just googled stuff" is not an argument with much credibility on Wikipedia. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 08:51, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Twinkle and Curation toolbar

Hi! Just wanted to receive more information about using Twinkle and the Curation toolbar. I'd like to use this on my edits but I need more guidance on how to operate them. I've been reading about them in Wikipedia but I want to know where to find and how to incorporate them in pages. Bekkadn (talk) 10:15, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

This has been answered at WP:Help desk. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:04, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

I have no notable sources for my article

I have no notable sources for my article but I am the prime source for my religion and beliefs how can I get published ? Angelo2386 (talk) 11:29, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse Angelo2386 I suggest you read WP:YFA In order to demonstrate the notability of the Church of Asherah, you need to provide multiple references to in-depth articles written about it, in unrelated, independent journals, magazines, books or online. If there are no sources then we can’t have an article about them. we have no interest in what you as their leader want to say about it. Theroadislong (talk) 11:52, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Angelo2386, please do not "piggyback" on an unrelated section—click the big blue 'Ask a question' button at the top of the page.

As Theroadislong says, you can't publish an article if you are the prime and only source. You must have independent, reliable sources to cite. Content that is just your own beliefs or original research will likely be swiftly deleted.--D Anthony Patriarche, BSc (talk) 12:14, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

template

hi. im new to wikipedia and i wanted to know how to create your own teamplates. i wanted to creat one for nba players in drafts that have not won a ring by coloring their box with salmon red and a ° next to their name. this would be a easier way for users to see who has one a ring and who hasn't. i think this would be a great idea but im to inexperienced too make this happen. Nba2021s (talk) 13:58, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Nba2021s Sorry but no templates are available. Try in your sandbox. Type {{ }} And whatever needed between those curly brackets.Acidic Carbon Corrode 14:11, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hi Nba2021s. It sounds like the template you want to create might affect lots of articles, not only current articles but also future articles; so, maybe it’s best to be WP:CAUTIOUS here and seek input from the members of the WikiProject WP:NBA. — Marchjuly (talk) 14:16, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer

what are the requirements of being a pending changes reviewer Alvin kipchumba kosgei (talk) 14:34, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Alvin kipchumba kosgei. You find more details about this at WP:RPC#Becoming a reviewer. — Marchjuly (talk) 14:52, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/185.155.224.200 =

Somebody pls. revert the two vandalistic edits of this IP. Thx. Oalexander (talk) 13:21, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Oalexander See nothing wrong. IP hasn’t edited anything. You may be attacking the IP. User:ClueBot NG May have reverted the edit. Give us the link.Acidic Carbon Corrode 14:09, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Diff. BTW: I already handled a false positive of User:ClueBot NG today. Cheers, Oalexander (talk) 14:50, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

• I agree with the characterization of the edits as vandalism, and have accordingly reverted. @Acid Of Carbon: the title links to the IP contributions, which list two edits to GNK Dinamo Zagreb. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 14:53, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Oalexander (talk)

How to change profile image on Infobox Musical Artist

Hi, please help and tell me a guideline how to change profile images in the Infobox Musical Artist? cause I'm trying to make changes and update someone's profile with their current image/pictorial they had. Thank you in advance. Kchuuu (talk) 16:58, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Kchuuu. Where does the image come from that you want to use? Did you take it yourself? If so, you can upload it to Wikimedia Commons, and use it in the article. Use the Upload Wizard, and at the end it will tell you the magic to use the uploaded image in a Wikipedia article.

If you did not take it yourself, you almost certainly cannot upload it unless whoever owns the copyright (which is likely to be the photographer or an agency rather than the subject) explicitly releases it under a suitable licence: see donating copyright materials.

Incidentally, Wikipedia does not contain "profiles": not one. What it contains is articles. This might seem nitpicking, but a profile is normally for the benefit of, and under the control of, its subject: a Wikipedia article is neither. --ColinFine (talk) 17:23, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Correcting a personal attack on Wikipedia

Recent edits to the page on W&M Athletic Director Samantha Huge are a clear violation of Wikipedia’s guidelines for neutral content and referenced content. It’s an opinionated personal attack. I realize that Wikipedia does not have an editorial board and I’m not an editor. What are the options for correcting this biased content? I am hopeful editors of wikipedia will flag the updates as inappropriate.Samantha_Huge2600:8805:3800:2D6:C13B:ED5C:178:7B56 (talk) 17:38, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

I have rolled the article Samantha_Huge back to an earlier version that did not include the personal attack. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:45, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Pink Stork

 Gopinkstork (talk) 17:48, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, @Gopinkstork:. This is a Wikipedia help forum. Do you have a question for us? Nick Moyes (talk) 18:37, 9 September 2020 (UTC)