Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1112

Archive 1105

←

Archive 1110

Archive 1111

Archive 1112

Archive 1113

Archive 1114

Archive 1115

Draft:Jubilee (Japanese Breakfast album) - advice for handling

Hello! I'm reaching out because I'm asking for advice on how to handle a situation.

So, there currently exists a draft, created a few months ago, for an album that was recently released (June 4) - Draft:Jubilee (Japanese Breakfast album). It failed AfC twice as it didn't meet WP:NALBUM, but both of those reviews happened well before the album was released, and therefore, the reviews were doomed to fail as the album didn't have sufficient press coverage yet. With that said, the album now appears to meet WP:NALBUM guidelines and appears be ready to be moved to articlespace. At the same time, there was already an created independently of the draft (see here) - that was blanked out to a redirect pending the draft approval.

This feels to me to be a case of WP:NOTBURO - if the only thing holding back the draft is previous failures of WP:NALBUM, and it now meets those guidelines - I'm tempted to WP:BEBOLD and bypass AfC and move it myself. It might take several weeks before another review of the draft comes, and that appears to be the only thing holding this article back.

With that said, I'd also like advice on how to handle this edit - just because a draft exists, doesn't mean that another article on the same topic can't exist in articlespace, if that article meets all the other guidelines to be an article. I disagree with the premise that we now have to wait for the AfC to be approved on the draft before an article can be made in articlespace. That just feels incorrect to me. The draft is, in my opinion, much more put together and more complete than the previous article in articlespace, but any good edits from the draft can be merged into the article later. I don't think the draft being "more complete" should override the article in articlespace.

Thanks for the help, and if you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them. JCBird1012 (talk) 14:26, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@JCBird1012: if you think a draft should be moved to article-space, there is no requirement to go through AfC. Go ahead and move it. Elli (talk | contribs) 14:44, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@Elli: Any suggestions on going about that? So long as the redirect exists in article-space, the draft can’t be cleanly moved. I would merge, but then the draft would lose edit history, and I’m not a big fan of that idea. I could request the redirect in article-space be deleted, and then make the move from draft-space, but that also seems complex. Should I request a history merge per WP: Parallel histories? Thanks again for the help! JCBird1012 (talk) 15:18, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@JCBird1012: as I'm a page-mover, I can swap the existing redirect with the draft. I'll do that now. Elli (talk | contribs) 15:34, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@JCBird1012: just an FYI for the future, the proper way to request a move be performed that you cannot carry out is WP:RM/TR. Elli (talk | contribs) 15:38, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@Elli: Thanks for the help. This was a situation I had never encountered before and I wanted to be absolutely sure I was doing the right thing. Thanks again.

Are any wikipedia editors paid employees

One editor answered this when I asked "There are NO paid Wikipedia employees here or anywhere else on Wikipedia!". I am wondering if this really is the case? Are non of these 450 staff paid moderators or editors? "As of 2021, the foundation employs over 450 staff and contractors" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation ChrisCalif (talk) 10:50, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Paid staff do not edit in their capacity as such unless they are WiR or due to exigent circumstances. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 10:59, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, ChrisCalif. Paid staff are not employed by Wikipedia, but rather by the Wikimedia Foundation which provides hosting services and technical support to hundreds of Wikipedia projects. English Wikipedia itself, which is the largest, has no paid staff and is entirely run by volunteers. Paid staff have a negligible presence here, although a few of them volunteer with separate accounts in their off hours. Paid staff involvement is limited to highly unusual situations with legal implications. Moderators, called administrators here, are 100% volunteers. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:59, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Dubious References

Hi guys, I have a question about reliable sources. On the protected wikipedia page of a public figure, I see a rather malicious entry. I checked the references provided and they are questionable opinions rather than news reports. How do I get someone to look into it? Manatpeace (talk) 16:30, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Use the Talk page of the article and be specific about your concern. Or post in this thread and someone will look into it. Just make sure you tell us which article by linking to the page! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:50, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

I published the Skip Search $O(n/m)$ pattern recognition algorithm at CPM98 (Combinatorial Pattern Matching 1998 conference, butchered algorithm by lecroq). I would like to include Skip Search on the String Matching page. Can someone help me with the reference details? I think the paper was "skip search, an O($N$/$M$) pattern matching algorithm, even on binary alphabets, with pattern size M and test size N. Golden eagle level zero (talk) 17:26, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Edit reverted with no discussion or justification other than "POV edit"

Hello everyone, I just made my first edit to Wikipedia. I added some sources and citations for some randomized trials and systematic reviews to an article that contained only low-quality evidence. It was immediately reverted with no explanation other than "POV edit". What does that even mean? It's this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feldenkrais_Method

Can anyone help me understand what happened? It is because I made a visual edit? Thanks.

I put some effort into accumulating some relevant evidence to put on the page and it's unfortunate that it was reverted without explanation. Edinburghpotsdam (talk) 00:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Medical/health articles have a standard of allowed evidence described at WP:MEDRS. Content referenced by individual clinical trials is not allowed. If, in your opinion, there is valid content to add to the article, start a discussion on the Talk page of the article and invite the editor who reverted you changes, to a discussion. David notMD (talk) 00:36, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

David notMD Thank you I appreciate your time. So I should summarise the RCTs in my own words? And what about systematic reviews which was what I led with? Also do you think this is what is meant by "POV edit"?

The RCTs cannot be mentioned at all! In looking more carefully at your proposed changes, your first reference was to a Wikipedia article. This is not allowed. On a much more serious note, you deleted large swathes of referenced content that was critical of the Feldenkrais Method. This is not allowed. The meta-analysis can be added, but do not over-do the conclusions. Within that journal article, only a limited amount of the analysis was true meta-analysis of multiple trials. The other evidence was from individual trials with different populations and outcomes. David notMD (talk) 00:45, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Actually, I disagree - Hindawi is a known predatory publisher of journal articles which has virtually no peer review process that makes it reliable. See the CITEWATCH entry for it under its doi of 10.1155 and related. While yes, that's a "systematic review", it's really not even more reliable than if I start a website and publish something myself under the words "systematic review". The edit also removed quite a few references to published books and government sources. Some of the information that was removed was cited to other less-than-perfect sources, but replacing all of the governmental health agency sources with a non-reputable article is why it was considered pushing a specific POV. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 00:52, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

David notMD (User/say hi!) I thank you both for the information. I can see the publishing practices on Wikipedia are far removed from common practice in peer-reviewed scientific research, at least as far as literature review goes. But, I will try again.

Thanks to Berchanhimez for identifying predatory journala as not a reliable source. To Edinburghpotsdam - yes, MEDRS is a shock to people used to medical writing. David notMD (talk) 01:26, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Edinburghpotsdam. Though more importantly, the underlying issues are discussed above, regarding your original and follow-up inquiries for the meaning of "POV", it is short for Point Of View, and when used, is usually intended to invoke the neutral point of view policy (which has shortcut names at "WP:POV" and "WP:NPOV"). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:24, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Reference

 Courtesy link: Draft:WuShuangPu

I am new here and looking for references for my page to get a real page on Wikipedia approved. I have tried Wikipedia pages for reference in my first try, but pages from Wikipedia as reference is not aloud. Now I have search for other reference and did found only two books as reference (with ISBN), I have made a chapter Reference and placed those two books in that part. Further I have placed some useful links to Universities, Libraries and Museums in a second chapter (named: See also). Would that be enough? Are the people here only looking at the chapter Reference or also to the other chapters to approve? Arno Jacobs (talk) 18:00, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Arno Jacobs, Hi and welcome to the teahouse. I went to your article and added one source and removed some items that weren't sources but rather were simply republications of the book. What you need for sources are reputable publications (academic journal articles, books) that discuss Wu Shuang Pu. I assume that most sources out there would be in Chinese, but I don't speak Chinese. If you know of any good Chinese-language sources (academic journal articles, books) that discuss Wu Shuang Pu, I'd encourage you to add them. I think that the sources existing in the article will likely be enough for the article to be approved, but it is definitely a close call. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:50, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Receiving warnings

I received a level 3 warning template from an IP editor after reverting two of their edits due to them citing YouTube. I feel like this is unjust, but it might look bad if I casually remove warning templates from my talk page. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 20:09, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Qwerfjkl Hello. You are permitted to remove posts from your own user talk page in most cases; be aware that doing so is considered an acknowledgement that the removed posts were read. See WP:BLANKING. In this case I don't think you'll have a problem. 331dot (talk) 20:12, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

@331dot Personally I prefer to strike out sections instead of removing them, to retain a copy. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 20:14, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Qwerfjkl That's certainly a valid option. You don't have to remove them, but you are permitted to. 331dot (talk) 20:15, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Qwerfjkl. Removing posts from one's own talk page is a very ordinary practice, and as already noted, is merely taken to mean one has read them. (All edits are not only retained in the page history, but many regular users archive their talk pages.) Strikeouts are something usually done to one's own edits, mostly because they are faitly seen as an alteration of the original edits, rather than some external comment on them, and we generally don't alter other people's posts. Moreover, they usually are meant to indicate invalidity, such as that the original post was incorrect/you've changed your mind based on new evidence, etc. When rarely done to another person's edits, it is almost always also meant to mark them as invalid (e.g., crossing out a person's second vote by a sockpuppet at an Afd). All this is to say, there are places where striking another person's edits may be warranted, but I think the advice above could be taken as advising this practice as a mere ministerial and alternate way to mark a post as read/log it to be retained, when it is anything but. I am not saying don't so this, nor that it might not even be warranted here, but I thought you should be aware of how striking the post might appear – especially since your original post is about a concern with appearances vis-à-vis these edits. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:06, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification! ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 19:41, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

The 'Paris is the Capital of France' issue here

The Sovereign Military Order of Malta are not involved in jazz. That would be an uncontroversial statement which would not need citation I think. There exists a claim that in 1988 they awarded a knighthood to Miles Davis which cannot be true. Instead it was probably a prank. I have slightly altered the wording in the Davis article to say that there were 'reports' of this happening based on the objective fact that it is not possible. Otherwise, readers following the the link to the Order of Malta's article may be somewhat puzzled. It's an interesting edit conundrum and not without some dissent. Any comment would be valuable. Thelisteninghand (talk) 19:51, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Thelisteninghand. I don't see why this would be impossible. It's common to give honorary titles to people in culture. The New York Times wrote it in 1992.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 23:24, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks PrimeHunter especially for your citation which is from four years after the event - and which establishes just how vague this is. There is no reference from the period - try any search. I am saying the Knights of Malta are not involved in jazz. ie Paris is not the capital of Russia. Honours for the arts come from sovereign nations not sovereign Catholic military orders. This was a prank - if you know about the order and Miles Davis, it's funny. If anyone has a moment here's the website https://www.orderofmalta.int - the idea of this Catholic organisation even listening, for example to Bitches Brew, is highly amusing.Thelisteninghand (talk) 22:54, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

@Thelisteninghand: His 1990 autobiography says "I was knighted and inducted into The Knights of Malta". PrimeHunter (talk) 00:19, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

[Edit Conflict] Thelisteninghand, your assertion that the Knights of Malta do not acknowledge cultural achievements appears to be purely your own assumption: it may be so, but can you cite a Reliable source that confirms it? In any case, his admission to such an order (knighthoods are not "awarded", they are a membership) may not have been specifically for playing jazz, but for other matters such as charitable donations or activities.

You also appear to assume that Catholics must automatically disapprove of jazz. This seems to me to be another unsupported assumption: for what it's worth, I am familiar with (and if you wish can provide a link to) a Franciscan friar who is a great fan of Heavy metal and conducts erudite analyses of its structure and lyrics on his YouTube Channel. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.121.163.176 (talk) 00:32, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Thelisteninghand. In Miles Davis: The Definitive Biography, on page 496, it says: "On 13 November, at Alhambra Palace, Granada , Miles Davis, along with three African doctors and a Portuguese doctor, was inducted into what he describes as the 'Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of Saint John of Jerusalem, of Rhodes and of Malta'." Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:16, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

OK Thanks everyone. Let me outline a few problems with this as I see them. Alhambra Palace is Islamic in origin and not listed here List of Knights Hospitaller sites. Also Miles Davis is not listed here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Knights_of_Malta. There are two articles for the Order on WP Sovereign Military Order of Malta and Knights Hospitaller neither mention honours for any jazz musician. There are no results for any searches containing 'Knights of Malta' and 'Jazz'. I am aware of the few later references to the knighthood - the autobiography, NY Times 1992, UK Independent 2014. No words quoted from Knights of Malta ANYWHERE - you might think they'd shout about knighting a jazz legend. I await a published statement from SMOM, might take a while!Thelisteninghand (talk) 18:19, 6 June 2021 (UTC) Addendum: Order pro Merito Melitensi is the order of merit from the SMOM and the only honour they have that does not require religious commitment. From this, Cullen328 (-and thank you, I just ordered it!) you can see that if Miles Davis was a Knight of Malta he'd have sworn an oath of obedience to the Pope. I would love to hear just one voice that will recognise that as problematic. It's also very important.

To IP address - I certainly do not assume that! And thanks, that's a wonderful story.Thelisteninghand (talk) 21:57, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Thelisteninghand, several published sources say that he received the award and here we have you, an anonymous Wikipedia editor, using your own perception of things to say that it never happened. In effect, you are accusing Davis of lying. Well, perhaps you are right and Davis made it all up. But we summarize what published reliable sources say, and an individual editor's original research is disallowed by policy. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:08, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Also, the fact that something is not mentioned in various Wikipedia articles is evidence of nothing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:11, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

It is conceivable that Miles Davis made it up or misremembered it but multiple reliable sources have stated it and none have refuted it so it satisfies Wikipedia:Verifiability. There were few websites in 1988. Lots of things from that time are not found by Google and the order doesn't appear to have a public list of knights. Considereing you find it impossible, you may think it falls under Wikipedia:Verifiability#Exceptional claims require exceptional sources, but others don't find it exceptional. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:33, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Sir Miles. Fantastic. -Roxy . wooF 14:38, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Cullen328 Thanks. I do appreciate your point of course and it's why I bring the discussion here and have not edited. I have said I consider it a prank - it happened so there are accounts. I made no claims of lies. Trying to prove a negative is tough work. Roxy the dog -thanks- considers it 'fantastic' and I agree. Davis was made a member of the French Legion of Honour in 1991 - the real reason he is 'Sir' Miles. The claim that Miles Davis swore an oath of obedience to the Pope made me fall off my chair, and quite clearly is a 'surprising or important claim not covered by multiple mainstream sources'. So yes it's certainly a case of Wikipedia:Verifiability#Exceptional claims require exceptional sources. One from the Knights I would have thought.

Of course I'm not alone in finding it funny by the way https://groups.google.com/g/rec.music.bluenote/c/71NQxmlWaA0 Thelisteninghand (talk) 19:28, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

The full quote from the Miles autobiography is this: ".. or to use their formal name, The Knights of the Grand Cross in and for the Sovereign Military Hospitaler (sic) Order of St. John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and of Malta" There is no such organisation. It's a wonderful invented hybrid title. Knights of the Grand Cross are not Knights of Malta. Prank exposedThelisteninghand (talk) 20:07, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Why can't I file a dispute?

Why can't I file a dispute? Mark19651965 (talk) 08:25, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello Mark19651965. I'm assuming this is about your edits here: [2]. The first step in any WP dispute, is to attempt to talk to the editors you're having a dispute with, at the article's (Talk:Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth) or the editor's talkpages. See WP:BRD, WP:Communication is required and WP:DR. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:36, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Bonadea Courtesy ping. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:39, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. They won't address the substantive issues, they merely say I am in violation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark19651965 (talk • contribs) 08:53, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Noone has edited the article talkpage since 2020. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:56, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, Gråberg. @Mark19651965: The reason you have been receiving multiple warnings is that you have been edit warring; once you stop doing that and instead go to the article talk page and bring up your arguments there, the actual content can be discussed. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 09:01, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth do not "promote" or give publicity.  They "advocate", that is, they publicly support or recommend a particular cause.

They are 3,338 professionals in their relevant field.  And they do not proffer a "conspiracy theory".  They advocate an "educated hypothesis" -- a hypothesis that is now factually based.  Supporting this is the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) study concluding that Bldg. 7 did not fall due to fire, thus profoundly contradicting official reports.  This is not an insignificant conclusion by an irrelevant institution, and it is worthy of entrance.  Accordingly, A&E deserve proper rhetorical respect and consideration.

University Report on 9/11 Building Collapse Contradicts Official Conclusions https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/university-report-on-911-building-collapse-contradicts-official-conclusions-301029854.html Allow the good faith, well-reasoned changes, otherwise address the issues directly, as I somehow cannot file a dispute: "Error: Unknown result from API." Mark19651965 (talk) 08:31, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Mark19651965 Please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections. As noted above, you need to discuss this with the other editors involved, on the article talk page, Talk:Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Please note that Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state; if those sources generally refer to something as a conspiracy theory, then we do as well. If you have sources demonstrating that in general a different term is used, or that what you call a hypothesis is more generally accepted by the scientific or architectural communities, please offer them there. 331dot (talk) 08:57, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

I will further add that PR Newswire simply republishes press releases, which aren't generally acceptable as they are primary sources. 331dot (talk) 09:01, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

(Mark19651965 now blocked) ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 20:43, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Help submit draft for review

I need to submit a draft for review and I'm not seeing the option. Please advise. HollyBells (talk) 20:23, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@HollyBells Please can you link to the page. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 20:39, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

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

@Qwerfjkl: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:John_Rainey_Adkins

I've added the submit template for you. Theroadislong (talk) 20:46, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: I don't know what happened. I didn't have a problem submitting with my last two. Thank you for the help!

Hello, HollyBells. Draft:Wiregrass Blues Society was created from the beginning with the {{AFC draft}} template in it: I'm guessing it was created using WP:AFC. You created Draft:John Rainey Adkins without that template, presumably by creating it directly and not through AFC. That is the difference. --ColinFine (talk) 21:02, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@HollyBells: I just fixed a few references in that article, hope that helps. Anton.bersh (talk) 21:13, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@Anton.bersh: Thank you! I need all the help I can get. Appreciate it.

Attempting to add references to Crimes against Humanity

I have attempted to add two documents to the references to the phrase Crimes against Humanity. These references are important because they predate the previously cited first use of the phrase. But I am getting error messages that I have been unable to resolve. Also, what is supposed to be a footnote is being inserted into the test.

Can someone take a look and try to figure out what I did wrong?

Aunt Astrid Aunt Astrid (talk) 14:12, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@Aunt Astrid:.  Done. I fixed the errors, where you had not put the citation between <ref></ref> tags and had used the wrong format for the access-date, making it appear to be next month rather than today. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:31, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Perfect. Thank you.

Just to complete the picture, Aunt Astrid I then noticed you had repeated the full URL as the website name (as publisher). As you will see in the citation now, the name of the website is just the part after the https://www. and before the first /. Also, you had left space between the citation and the punctuation preceding it, which needed to be removed. Don't forget to sign on Talk pages with four tildes ~~~~. You must have got that right the first time but not the second! Enjoy your editing: more info at WP:REFBEGIN. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:52, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Using the button above to ask a new question inserts a signature at the end. Doesn't carry on to subsequent comments, though. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:40, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

User page help: separate pages and talk page archive

Title.

Surely everyone knows what I mean by "talk page archive"; I'm specifically looking for one I can sort by year or whatever, or maybe one I can just add older entries to over time.

As for the "separate pages" stuff, I mean things like, say, User:Guy Macon/Yes. We are biased. or User:Beyond My Ken/Thoughts, where you just have a separate page to put whatever.

Not sure how I'd go about doing either of these. Any help? How-to pages, or something? Thanks in advance. AdoTang (talk) 23:00, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi AdoTang. Regarding archiving, try WP:ARCHIVE; regarding creating user subpages, try WP:UPYES and WP:UP#Creating a subpage. — Marchjuly (talk) 23:16, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Inappropriate comment in an article. Please remove

Hi there can someone change the Wikipedia article ‘Refugees in New Zealand’. Under sub heading famous refugees in NZ there is a Lic Miass. There is no Lic Miass from Yale that is and African Tadpole tamer. 49.224.242.85 (talk) 00:09, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. It looks like you've already removed it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:16, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Harassed

A group of people instrumental in having a page taken down on my sisters murder are online here sending me messages cyberbullying me. Is there away to block them? Cha20raca (talk) 17:20, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Cha20raca Thanks for coming to the Teahouse, I'm sorry about what happened, I'm assuming that you are referring to the redacted edits from your contributions page on the Nicholas L. Bissell Jr. article. The editor that edit warred is currently involved in a sock puppet investigation, if the editor is found guilty of sock puppetry, they will be banned. If not, generally an editor needs to ignore a level 4 warning to be banned, but depending on the contents of the redacted messages, it might justify an immediate ban. Justiyaya (talk) 17:42, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Also, remember to be civil when communicating with another editor even when they are not being civil, thanks. Justiyaya (talk) 17:46, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Cha20raca. I have blocked an account clearly set up to harass you. I have also blocked you from editing the single article Nicholas L. Bissell Jr., because you have a conflict of interest and are repeatedly adding inappropriate content. You must gain consensus for any changes you want to make by discussing the matter at Talk: Nicholas L. Bissell Jr.. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:50, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

I blocked another harassment only account. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:29, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

There is one more. I am so sorry to bother you guys. The name is Jilleelean - this is one of the people cyberbullying my child. I believe they are writing to me now. I am again so sorry to bother you guys. Cha20raca (talk) 20:28, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Cha20raca, I do not see an account named "Jilleelean". Can you please double check the spelling? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:39, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi and thank you again. It is JilleeLean

The person has been stalking my daughter for 3 years. Articles have been written on this. It is extremely scary and frustrating. Like tonight. This person has emailed me 60 times at my gmail account. It is alot to emotionally handle. Cha20raca (talk) 01:53, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Cha20raca. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is part of the WP:REALWORLD and there are some people who will try to use Wikipedia to fight real world disputes. There's not much anyone here can do if you're being harassed outside of Wikipedia except perhaps to suggest that you take a look at this. Real world problems typically require a real world solution; many social media platforms as well as many communties have taken steps to help people who are the victims of cyberbulling, which in some cases include criminal penalties or revocation of accounts. Problems taking place on Wikipedia can be dealt with as explained here, but you should seek outside assistance asap to help with problems outside of Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:32, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Cha20raca, I have already blocked User:JilleeLean. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:13, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

• @Cullen328: See the ANI thread (diff of my edit). @MarioSuperstar77: Hope you don't fuss too much about me removing your comments, they were in response to obvious harassment and I have zero tolerance for harassment. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:46, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

  I appreciate everything you did. No worries. Cha20raca (talk) 00:52, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Account details

How do I quickly find my Wikipedia account details? Like account age, amount of edits, etc. The Tips of Apmh (talk) 03:11, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I usually use Xtools for that. You can also find the basics (date registered, number of edits) by clicking the preferences link at the very top of the page. --- Possibly (talk) 03:51, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Want to create a page for a well known journalist, what to do?

Want to create a new page for a well known Journalist, M.A. Shaikh. AskariTube (talk) 17:50, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@AskariTube: Welcome to the Teahouse. It seems you already started a draft on the subject. I'll point out that while it hasn't been submitted for review yet, it wouldn't stand on its own as an article as there are no good references. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:28, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, AskariTube, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please read your first article. Writing even a single word of an article before finding the independent reliable sources that discuss the subject at length is like building a house without building any foundations or even surveying the site: your house is likely to fall down and your work be wasted. Besides the lack of independent sources, your draft has several peacock words: no Wikipedia article should ever describe anything or anybody as "sweet" (unless it is something with an objectively sweet taste, like sugar) or "renowned" in Wikipedia's voice. --ColinFine (talk) 20:47, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I have a question, AskariTube. Shaikh is said to have started a charitable foundation, "Albiron Foundation", for the education of the needy, when he was around 15 years old. I only found mention of it on Shaikh's LinkedIn page. You will need a source to cite for this foundation of his.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:24, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Query about. "unconstructive editing"

 Courtesy link: 4th Panzer Army

Hello, I am new to Wikipedia editing. I made some minor changes to the article titled "4th Panzer Army". Almost immediately afterwards I got a message from user gummycow stating that changes I had made were undone because they did not appear constructive. But (text below) there is no difference between the article after my edit and now? Since there is no reference to exactly what it is that "appears" to be wrong with the edit, how can I respond? The only action suggested was to use my sandbox;but what's the point of that if you want to edit an actual article ?

>>> (General note: Unconstructive editing on 4th Panzer Army.) Tag: Twinkle

(No difference) <<< Felimy419 (talk) 23:45, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

As best I can discern, you made seven edits to 4th Panzer Army. User:Gummycow left a note at User talk:Felimy419 that your edits were undone for cause, but actually did no such thing. I suggest ignoring what was left on your Talk page. David notMD (talk) 02:18, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Digging deeper, Gummycow has left Warnings on several editors' Talk pages about edits being undone, whereas no such act took place, or else there was an edit undone by an editor other than Gummycow. This is not good behavior. David notMD (talk) 02:28, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I was not really used to using twinkle. I will refrain from such behavior onward.Gummycow ^moo_milk 04:30, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

I will now read about edit filters to avoid such a mistake in the future.Gummycow ^moo_milk 04:42, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Sorting table with empty cells at bottom

I'm trying to make a table where when I sort alphabetically (A->Z), the empty cells should remain at the bottom, while cells with content should go to the top. The only solution I could find is inserting data-sort-value="𐲁"| in each empty line. The problem with this is that when I try to change an empty cell in the visual editor, the sorting preference doesn't go away (and also, it takes too much effort to add it in each empty cell). Is there a better solution to this? Thanks! Krmarci (talk) 07:12, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Deleting a Draft: Randy Bishop

I would like to re-do the Randy Bishop entry that has been disputed by you. I've now been given multiple citations and sources that I believe will make the entry valid. Can you please let me know how I can delete the current "Randy Bishop" draft and start over? Thanks. Mmpm123 (talk) 15:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Mmpm123, just edit the existing draft, Draft:Randy Bishop. Remove what you can't cite, add only stuff supported by a cited WP:RS, and read WP:BLP carefully. When you are done to your satisfaction, submit the draft and find out if you've done it to WP:s satisfaction. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:28, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply! How do I actually access the document and put it into edit mode? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmpm123 (talk • contribs) 15:41, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@Mmpm123: You should be able to just click the "Edit" link near the top of the page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:58, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

If you need a general guide on editing, WP:TUTORIAL can help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:23, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I only see an "Edit Source" option. Is this what I use?

@Mmpm123:Yes, that is the button that will let you edit :) CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 17:08, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@Mmpm123: Now if you want to use the visual editor, you can go to your Special:Preferences/preferences, navigate to the Editing tab, and uncheck the box next to "Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta". It'll only work in certain namespaces, like mainspace (where articles are). (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.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:25, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@Mmpm123 @Tenryuu You can use User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/VisualEditorEverywhere, a User script, if you want to use VisualEditor in all namespaces. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 19:55, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Oh my, this is an amazing script! —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:35, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I've re-submitted the article for review and hopefully, publication. 19:24, 7 June 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmpm123 (talk • contribs)

Mmpm123 No. Or to be clearer, Hell, no. Your first attempt had four references. Your revision has 80+ non-references. See WP:Referencing for beginners for how to insert references into the body of the article so that they show up as a reference list. David notMD (talk) 21:28, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Dear "David," I really don't understand the need to be rude. A simple explanation of what is missing or incorrect in my article would suffice. Mmpm123 (talk) 21:33, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

The draft has no references in an approved reference format. David notMD (talk) 21:42, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Theroadislong pointed out that IMBd and other websites are not considered valid references. I added a Submit button for when you are ready to submit. David notMD (talk) 21:48, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

To add to what has been said, I have took a look at the references, few of them are currently verifyable.

For internet sources: Please provide at least a Deep URL to the content referenced, the title and the date you last accessed & verfied the source

For newspapers / journals: Please provide at least Newspaper name, Edition name, article author (where available) and the page number.

For books: Please provide the ISBN (where known), author, title, publisher and page number.

In general, please be advised that neither Wikipedia nor IMDB nor Discogs are reliable sources. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 08:03, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Changing my username

Changing my username So first of all, I'm making plans to change my username (I'm honestly not the biggest fan of it). I've already found a user that can do it; I'm narrowing down my options of what I'm changing it to. Will the edits I've made as HelenDegenerate show up as my new username? Thanks, 🐍Helen🐍 (let’s talk) 22:41, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes. Any rename will also change the attribution of any edits made under the old name. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 22:43, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Jéské Couriano And I'll still have my rollback rights? 🐍Helen🐍 (let’s talk) 22:47, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@HelenDegenerate: It's like a woman getting married: your name may change, but not who you are. Your 'rights' here won't alter either. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:22, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

That also applies to a man who changes his name after marriage. (I realise that this is still not particularly common in some parts of the world, but it is still true :-) ) --bonadea contributions talk 08:38, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Will the signature for posts signed before the username change be retrospectively altered? Stanstaple (talk) 06:10, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

No, I don't think so, but the links in those signatures should still link to your account because it's technically still the same. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:00, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

If your account is renamed, the edits you made from your original username will be reattributed to your new username in edit histories and other similar logs, but signatures you placed on pages will not be changed. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello everyone

Constantly targeting the page Hello everyone,

I've recently started contributing to wikipedia. I am trying to learn wikipedia's policies, as much as possible.

I recently created a wikipedia page for an author Nicholas Conn. Since the beginning this user TheWikiholic is trying to created obstacle. They didn't suggest any solid issue or guided me to improve anything. They claimed that I have COI and UDP without any evidence. And now they have nominated the page for deletion even though it qualifies the WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV.

I don't get it, is this normal for other users to attact the pages constantly or any I doing something wrong. I am new and confused with the situation here. Any suggestion are helpful.

Thank you everyone.. Sushant1432 (talk) 08:23, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Sushant1432 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I see that another editor has raised some legitimate concerns, based on your edits. You haven't done anything wrong per se, other editors discussing an article and its validity are a normal part of the process. You stated on the article talk page that you have been in communication with the organization owned by the person you wrote about- that is indeed a conflict of interest. You also claimed that you took the image placed in the article- which would also suggest a conflict of interest and often indicates that someone is being paid for their contributions. If you are being paid, it's best to be honest about it because declaring paid editing is a Terms of Use requirement. If you are not paid in any way(not just money), okay, but then you will need to address the issues raised and demonstrate in the deletion discussion specifically how the individual meets GNG. 331dot (talk) 09:03, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

References

My impression is that you are enthusiastic about Nicholas Conn and his book Draft:The Thin White Line (Nicholas Conn), but not paid nor having a true conflict-of-interest. The beginner's error that triggered suspicion is that for both the article about Conn and for the article about his (self-published?) book, you by-passed creating drafts, instead creating very preliminary articles which you have since labored to backfill. The evaluation at AfD will be on the merits of the article, not any past questions about your connection to the person. While at AfD, you can continue to attempt to improve the article, and comment to this effect at AfD. However, in the end, the decision will rest with an Administrator, who may agree that the references do not establish notability. David notMD (talk) 10:19, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Naming people charged in juvenile court

Hello all.

I have found a section in an article that lists the names of some youths charged with rape at a school (not sure I should link to it yet).

They were initially charged as adults and as such their names were reported in the reference. However, they were then moved to juvenile court and as the article states "As a result, the outcome of the case and what punishment, if any, the rapists faced is unknown". The article also refers to them as "perpetrators".

I'm not sure they should be named in the article as they are juveniles, even if it was already reported.

Do we have any guides for this?

Princess Persnickety (talk) 17:53, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

PrincessPersnickety, there is an essay (not formally adopted by the community and may be a minority view) about this at Wikipedia:Minors and persons judged incompetent. We also have WP:BLPNAME. I think this is probably something best handled in a talk page discussion at the specific article in question, and it may depend on how widely the minors' names were published in the first instance. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:54, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@PrincessPersnickety: Being charged is not the same as being found guilty. If the story is highly relevant to the article, then a talk page discussion mght be wise. But if its an article about a school, then naming names in one minor section on Controversies is way out of order, and should be removed. Too much detail on any such single incident is WP:UNDUE. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:32, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both for your help Calliopejen1 and Nick Moyes. I will have a read of those links. Princess Persnickety (talk) 10:29, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Expanding an existing article

Dear friends, I recently visited this "stub article": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonin_Honig It invited readers to expand it by adding more information. As I knew personally the subject of the article (now dead), I added some biographical details. However, each time I tried to add this detail, it was removed again by someone or something within 24h. I don't wish to have an argument as it's not very important, but can you advise me - have I overlooked some aspect of Wiki protocol here?

Honza Giles. Honza Giles (talk) 11:14, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello Honza Giles, welcome to Teahouse. Whenever you have a disagreement with another editor, you can discuss it on the article's talk pages. In this case, it is Talk:Antonín_Honig. Are there any reliable sources that would verify the information which you are adding? If you know the subject of the article personally, then you have a conflict of interest, so please familiarize yourself with disclosure process. Anton.bersh (talk) 11:22, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Honza Giles: - I've reverted your additions as you did not provide a reliable source to verify the information you have added. For example, what is the source for their year of birth being in 1906? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 11:25, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Honza Giles: One example was where you claimed to be "correcting" the spelling, but your edit contradicted the cited reference. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:29, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Honza Giles: I looked into one of your edits and you changed the subject's name spelling from Hönig to Honig (with a simple o). From my experience, spelling non-English names in plain English is hard. Such letter simplification can come from technical limitations (encoding, typeset limitation) or lazy implementers. Are you sure this is intentional and not accidental? Anton.bersh (talk) 11:41, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Query on bullying deleted from Teahouse?

Hi I cant find the discussion on the query I posted on 31st May on Wiki policy on Bullying and Disruptive editors? Could someone help me find it? or tell what could have happened it, I xant find it in the archives. Shatbhisha6 (talk) 02:41, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Threads are archived after a certain time. You opened the thread. It was replied to. You saw and responded to the reply [3], and the thread was archived to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1111#wikipedia_policy_on_bullying_and_disruptive_editorssome time after June 2, after a period of no further posts.

Next time you need to find something you posted in the archive I suggest that you search on your username. Meters (talk) 02:58, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a ton, I searched for it in the archives but somehow I couldnt find it. I am new and learning wiki ways. Thanks again Shatbhisha6 (talk) 11:49, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

formating article export

Hi, can I set the page format for article export (PDF, Book and/or print)? If so, how/where? Simple stuff like font size, position/aspect ratio of tables and frame of the pages, would be cool to set. Can't find it. Thank you Hennk von Muspelsheim (talk) 09:16, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Hennk von Muspelsheim: I'm pretty sure that there are no options for exporting article except as a pre-formed .pdf or doing a page print to whatever your PC supports for output. However, you may get a better answer if you ask at WP:Village pump (technical), where the IT experts hang out. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:50, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Changing a picture

How do I change a picture on a Wikipedia page? KeYhMonneY (talk) 09:05, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Are you talking about the image at Jamhuri Day?- X201 (talk) 09:42, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello KeYhMonneY, and welcome to the Teahouse! It's annoying, but copyright rules and regs limit what can be used on WP. For example, we can't use pics just because they're on Google/FB/Instagram. The basic assumption is that any random pic you find on Google can't be used because copyright, unless proved otherwise.

You indicate here the image you want to use. Now, acaict, that image's [4] copyright belongs to the Kenya Defence Forces, and unless they clearly state somewhere that it is "free", WP can't use it. Hope this helps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:43, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

If you want, you can try to ask for help with finding a better image here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Africa or here Commons:Help desk. Commons is a sister-project where free images are hosted for easy on-WP use. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:50, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@KeYhMonneY: Sometimes you can look in Wikipedia Commons for other freely-licensed photos in the same category as the one you want to change. In this case, they are held at commons:Category:Military of Kenya. In general, if you click on an image in an article, it should take you to an expanded version and an option (bottom right) to see "more details" which will in turn take you to the page on Commons where the image is stored. Most images are categorised so readers can find related images easily. In this particular case, I didn't see a suitable alternative for the article within Commons and, as already mentioned, you can't upload anything new unless it has a suitable free license. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:01, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft:AK-xolotl

Hello I am EthanTheVee, my draft --) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:AK-xolotl is about a indie game, and there is no reliable source to support my sayings in my article. I personnaly know the dev of the game, and I have permisson to post this article, with confirmed true facts. I am quite new in wikipedia, can someone help me? EthanTheVee (talk) 11:01, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello EthanTheVee, and welcome to the Teahouse! In short, write about the game somewhere else. Without WP:RS that satisfies WP:GNG, WP will not have an article about this game. Perhaps such sources will appear in the future. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:13, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, EthanTheVee, welcome to Teahouse! The draft does not have any in-depth independent sources which would be considered reliable. As noted above, it's unlikely that a recently released indie game would have a sufficient number of sources to qualify for a Wikipedia article. Also, the fact that you know the developer personally and edit Wikipedia as a personal favor, constitutes conflict of interest. It's possible to perform COI edits, but there are special procedures for this. Please familiarize yourself with disclosure procedures. If you have any questions about the draft itself, feel free to ask here or ping me anywhere else. Anton.bersh (talk) 11:17, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@EthanTheVee: It seems like this may be a case of being too soon. You might be able to get something going at FANDOM/Gamepedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:54, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

How do I know who reviewed a page?

I wanted to draftify a page but it's already reviewed and wanted to discuss with the reviewer first. How do I know who reviewed the page? The page in question is BB5 (film). The sources aren't sufficient but it might become notable in future when it has received more coverage and reviews. So incubating in draft space might be more appropriate. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 12:48, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure that info is kept in public logs. But I don't know, perhaps someone else does. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:54, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Nomadicghumakkad. The creator is autopatrolled so there was no review. If there was a review then it could be seen after clicking the "View history" tab, "View logs for this page" at the top, "Review log" and "Patrol log" under "Show additional logs", and finally "Show". The article was created in 2017 when the film was released. It would be odd to draftify it four years later in wait of reviews. People review films when they are released. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:12, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks PrimeHunter, I didn't notice the date really. My bad. I reached here after seeing a recently created article of the lead actor and hence assumed that this was a new film. I will apply your feedback on some other articles to see if I am able to do it or not and get back with more questions if any. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 13:15, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Unsure whether to maintain COI declaration

Out of an abundance of caution, when I recently created the article St. Mary's-in-Tuxedo I decided to declare a COI, since I have lately been informally volunteering at this church (working mainly on historical projects). I have tried to be scrupulous with my choice of sources, using only those that any member of the public could theoretically access. Since I am not formally affiliated with this organization, should I keep my COI declaration, or should I perhaps disclose my association in another way, by posting in the article talk page for example? firvales73 (talk) 02:21, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, firvales73! I recommend keeping the COI as-is. The reasoning behind needing to declare a COI isn't so much how formally affiliated you are with a subject, but whether your view on the subject could possibly be non-neutral (even if not intended). For example, I previously volunteered for Brainly and still have a COI userbox on my userpage due to my opinions and knowledge about the subject. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 02:25, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Firvales73 Your declaration of a COI probably won't matter as long as you try and ensure your edits are in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines; if you start making edits which start attracting attention because they are not in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines, then you going to find yourself having problems regardless of what you've declared. You can err on the side of caution here and leave the declaration and follow WP:COIADVICE, you can ask for additional input at WP:COIN, or you can remove the declaration. Either way, people are going be looking at the quality of your edits and a COI is only really a problem when it starts to effect that quality. For reference, COI editing is highly discoouraged because it can lead to serious problems, but it's not expressly prohibitted. The only thing you need to make sure of is undisclosed paid editing because that is against the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use and will result in your account being blocked if detected no matter how good your edits are. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:34, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both, I appreciate the clarity! firvales73 (talk) 13:29, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations

 Courtesy link: Draft:Exeon Analytics

Hi! Can someone please explain to me what does this mean- The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. My latest submission was declined because of that, and I am not sure what it means since I have a lot of footnotes for article not that long. If that even applies on the number of footnotes. Thank you in advance! POffice1 (talk) 14:19, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Exeon Analytics has no inline citations at all. The feedback on the draft (and on your user talk page) has a link to Help:Referencing for beginners. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:24, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

POffice1, I urge you to glance at WP:GA, pick a topic that might be related to what you are writing about and see how that article looks compared to your draft. For example Arena (web browser). Among other things, notice how the footnotes are formatted. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:36, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, NOT how references are done at Wikipedia. Refs are placed in the body of the article. The ref program automatically numbers those and shows the ref under ==References==. Instead, you have hyperlinks in the text (with superscripted number) and a number list of URLs under References that does not correspond to the numbers in the article. Lastly, except for simple facts, the company' own website cannot be a reference. David notMD (talk) 14:57, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't think we need to be bitey here, but yeah, that's correct. @POffice1: I recommend you have a look at the source/wikitext behind some more popular articles and see how the citations are formatted there. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 15:17, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Appropriate way to update a logo of a company on an article?

What is the proper way to go about changing the logo for a company or TV network? Spectrum News 1 NC and a few other SN related articles are using outdated logos, and I want to know if mentioning it on the talk page, or directly changing it is the appropriate way. I'm playing it safe, and I've mentioned it on the talk page of the article already, but would it be acceptable to directly change the logo on the page? Jkrosado (talk) 15:05, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Jkrosado, go to Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard pick "upload non-free", follow instructions, choose "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use." then "This is a logo of an organization, company, brand, etc." Then boldly change, explaining why in the edit summary. That should work. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:13, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I have done that, what I meant was the proper way to update the article itself. Would it be acceptable to change it, or add to talk page first? Jkrosado (talk) 16:23, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

WP:BEBOLD, I say. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

List of Hindi comedy shows should be deleted/rewritten?

Question is about List of Hindi comedy shows. All of the serials' have there own separate article and the article is not well written and possibly not notable. Should that article be deleted/rewritten? ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 15:34, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

ExclusiveEditor, hi and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, I think that is a very poor-quality article. I don't know that it needs to be deleted but at a minimum I would recommend that it be rewritten to have a format more like List of American television programs. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:17, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Expanding an existing article (cont.)

Thank you anton.berg, david biddulph and lugnuts, for your helpful replies to my earlier query. My "reliable source" for the biographical details was in fact a relative of the subject of the article. However, following your advice, I shall try to obtain some written sources. Would a personal document such as the scan of a passport or death certificate be acceptable evidence - and if so, how does one refer to a source like that in a Wiki article?

Honza Giles. Honza Giles (talk) 16:59, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Honza Giles, No, unfortunately these sorts of sources are not acceptable. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so it summarizes knowledge that has already been published elsewhere in reliable sources. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources. I would recommend looking for old newspaper articles to see if any contain this biographical information. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:21, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Publication

How to move a page from draft to publication ? and what if the sources for some certain information is not available but that information is accepted by general public! are we allowed to publish it? Bamboo69 (talk) 17:00, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Bamboo69, hi and welcome to the Teahouse. You can type {{subst:submit}} in the code editor of your draft to submit it for review for publication. What do you mean by "not available" for the second question? As a general matter, you should have a source for any fact you include in an article. By the way, have you had another account before? Judging by your editing pattern, you are not a new user. If you are a paid editor, you have to disclose that on your userpage. See WP:PAID. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:25, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for guiding, No i am not a paid editor, and i am aware about the guidelines for paid editing, i have had an account back in 2015 for just a few days for an academic project.

Link

I reverted this edit because it looked like it came from an unreliable source (Wiktionary). Would you agree, as it's part of the Wikimedia platform? Thanks. Seahawks4Life^{TALK—CONTRIBS} 14:13, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Also, it looks like it's from a non-English Wiktionary, so reverting it was necessary. But I would like to know for the future if the Wikimedia platform is a reliable source. Thanks in advance. Seahawks4Life^{TALK—CONTRIBS} 14:17, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't think that great chunk of untranslated Greek text is of any use either. Princess Persnickety (talk) 14:55, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, but that doesn't answer my question. Seahawks4Life^{TALK—CONTRIBS} 16:21, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Seahawks4Life, I agree that Wiktionary is not a reliable source. See WP:UGC. It is also not appropriate to include inline links in the body of an article. I wouldn't describe Wiktionary as the "source" for the statement, though -- I would usually think of the "source" as the article in which the subject was described as "πούττος". In any event, I think the edit was a bad one for a number of reasons, and you were correct to revert it. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:29, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice; it is a pleasure. Seahawks4Life^{TALK—CONTRIBS} 17:31, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

creating an article

how long does it take a new editor to qualify to create an article? JaneAtawa (talk) 18:02, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@JaneAtawa: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you're asking about when users are autoconfirmed, an account needs to have made at least 10 edits and be 4 days old. That being said, the lack of said status doesn't prevent new users from going through the Articles for Creation process, which is highly recommended, as it allows more experienced users to check the draft and ensure that it is appropriate for Wikipedia, as creating an article is one of the hardest things you can do on here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:22, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, JaneAtawa, and welcome to the Teahouse! Your account must be autoconfirmed—the account must be at least 4 days old and have 10 edits—to create articles directly in the mainspace. However, any user can submit an article to Articles for Creation and have it be reviewed by an experienced editor. For more information, please see WP:YFA. --Aknell4 (talk • contribs) 18:24, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, JaneAtawa. Editors who try the challenging task of creating a new article before they have spent a few months improving some of our six million existing articles and learning how things work in Wikipedia, often have a gruelling and frustrating experience. Signing this comment (belatedly): --ColinFine (talk) 17:33, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft submission declined: Fairline Yachts Ltd help with understanding why?

Hello

I have had an AfC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Fairline_Yachts_Ltd submission declined because of (lack of?) Corporate Notability. Please could I be advised on how I can improve the page to avoid this happening? I do not understand why the Fairline Boats page is still on Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairline_Boats when this company ceased to exist in 2015. Also it is confusing that there is a link to a non-existent Wiki page for the new company (the one that I drafted an AfC for) on the Fairline Boats page but this link does not actually go anywhere. Any help would be much appreciated.

Thanks Cobalt6789 (talk) 16:10, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

The reviewer stated that the article was from the company's viewpoint. It needs independent reliable sources. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 16:55, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

In answer to your question about Fairline Boats: this is an encyclopaedia, not a business directory. If Fairline Boats met Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then it does so for all time, whether it is current or historical. If Fairline Yachts does not meet those criteria, then there cannot at present be an article about it, though it may later come to meet the criteria, and an article could then be written. (I do not know whether either of the companies meet those criteria: I haven't checked. I wanted to make the general point). --ColinFine (talk) 17:41, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Why don't we create a page for rapper Dax

 Sandiey X (talk) 05:56, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

@Sandiey X: Welcome to the Teahouse. Is Dax notable by Wikipedia's standards, particularly for musicians? If Dax isn't, then it's likely an article about him isn't likely to be made. Are you sure you aren't talking about Dax (Rapper)? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:01, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Sandiey X, why don't you make a page for the mentioned rapper your self? Please check WP:1st before you do so, and make sure the rapper meets the notability criteria. General notability guidelines are a great place to start. Justiyaya (talk) 06:04, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Dax (rapper) appears to be protected from creation, so I've submitted a technical move request as the page I mentioned earlier doesn't conform to standard disambiguation style. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:06, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

I think that if you have a Wikipedia account, you can make it yourself, or collaborate with others. L1RMEYEDU (talk) 17:52, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

A little further explanation for Sandiey X: You don't follow Justiyaya's (qualified) suggestion, no matter how well-intended it was, because you can't. And you can't because after the article on "Dax (rapper)" was deleted after discussion, various attempts were made to ignore this discussion, which wasted people's time. If you believe that Dax now meets WP:GNG, then you might start by persuading RL0919 of this (on User talk:RL0919). (It was RL0919 who closed the discussion with a decision to delete.) Provide convincing evidence, of course. (Normally I'd point you to Callanecc, as the user who "salted" the article, but they're not around these days.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:14, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Yea Hoary you're right, I didn't realize that the article is salted. -- Justiyaya (talk) 09:50, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

@Hoary: I can't view what the deleted article used to be, but are you able to check if the page I mentioned, Dax (Rapper), is the same one that slipped through the cracks? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:15, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Note: Dax (Rapper) now redirects to Dax (rapper). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:49, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Grammar

Hello, I am DantzK I Have something very important when it comes to an article when it comes to grammar why are you not fixing the grammar? You need to make it simple, for other readers. DantzK (talk) 17:51, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, DantzK. Go ahead and fix it yourself. If the article is protected, then make an Edit request on the article's talk page. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:59, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

How can I edit more to then create my wiki?

 Theshowishere (talk) 18:27, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Theshowishere: A Wiki is a type of website, Wikipedia is one example of. If you want to create a new Wikipedia article, you can in theory start that proccess right now by starting to read WP:YFA. Please be advised that creating a new article is one of the harder tasks around here, so if you want to gain a bit (or much) more practive in editing here, thats not a problem. The Task Center has ideas. Maybe you also want to ask a WikiProject in your topic for ideas. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:51, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Theshowishere, and welcome to the Teahouse. I agree with what Victor has said: for almost all new editors, they can add much more value to Wikipedia by improving some of our six million existing articles than by plunging straight into the extremely difficult task of creating a new article; and also save themself a lot of frustration and misery. One more point: if by "my wiki" you mean "A Wikipedia article about myself", then please read autobiography to discover why that is a very very bad idea even when you are more experienced. --ColinFine (talk) 21:42, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Admin rules

Hello! I just started here at Wikipedia, and I was wondering how long it takes to get admin rights. Thanks!

L1RMEYEDU L1RMEYEDU (talk) 17:48, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, L1RMEYEDU. There are no formal minimum requirements, but as a practical matter, an editor is expected to have well over a year of service, thousands of productive edits, good content creation, and a strong record of assisting with the administration of Wikipedia behind the scenes. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:57, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @L1RMEYEDU: Admins are very experienced users who are only appointed after a successful request for adminship (there are currently 2 right now). It usually takes a few years and many thousands of edits to become an administrator, and they have to show a clear understanding of policy, as well as a need for the tools. As you have only been here a few days and have made around 11 edits, you don't meet the requirements right now. — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 17:57, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

cool. i did see that to edit the semi-protected articles you needed like 4 days and 10 edits, but i was wondering how long it would take 2b admin, since i saw a few. thanks! L1RMEYEDU (talk) 18:00, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

L1RMEYEDU, quite simply, it will take you a long time. — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 18:01, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, L1RMEYEDU, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. One of the questions that will come up if you put yourself forward to be an admin is "What exactly is it that you want to do for Wikipedia that you need admin rights for?" I have been an editor for sixteen years, and made 19 thousand edits, and I have never applied to be an admin, because there's nothing that I want to do for Wikipedia that I can't do. --ColinFine (talk) 20:56, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@L1RMEYEDU I believe I saw somewhere that 2% of editors become admins. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 21:48, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Is my article notable?

I am an intern for a breakfast brunch and lunch restaurant with 20 locations. What qualifies us to be notable, and what are the steps I can take to create an article for my business? Berrichetti (talk) 19:13, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

For information on notability, read WP:Notability. Given your role, you need to read about conflict of interest and you must make the mandatory declaration of paid editing. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:16, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

As mentioned above, a subject requres multiple in-depth independent references to be notable. Also, please note that Wikipedia articles should not promote their subjects. For reference, this page has some articles about restaurants. Given your COI, I'd recommend disclosing your relationship with the subject and creating your article in Draft space. That way you can ask some experienced users for feedback and it won't be deleted as spam). Anton.bersh (talk) 21:27, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

One thing to realize, Berrichetti, is that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. Only if you can find such independent sources will an article be possible (that is basically what the notability criterion is about). Also bear in mind that if you succeed in getting an article about your business accepted, the article will not belong to you, will not be controlled by you, and will not necessarily say what you want it to say. See An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. --ColinFine (talk) 21:48, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Pessi (social media)

Hello. I made this draft. I just want some opinion; with the sources on this draft, do you think WP:GNG can be met? I'm not even sure I will move this to mainspace anytime soon but before I start putting a lot of effort into this I would like to know if it has a chance to meet GNG (or not) or whether it already does. Paul Vaurie (talk) 20:22, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse, Paul Vaurie. Most of the sources are in French, so I can't evaluate their quality. However, I see that 7 sources are just dropped into the article after word "Here" without explanation. Do you plan to add more content summarizing these sources or using these sources elsewhere in the article? Also, this article seems to mostly focus on harassment, so I would recommend reading Wikipedia:Harassment. To be clear: Wikipedia does have articles on tough topics like harassment, crimes, disasters, deaths, and many others, but authors of these articles have to handle the topics with due diligence. Anton.bersh (talk) 21:39, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, the sources with "here" is because I found several sources but I just didn't incorporate them into the article as I didn't continue improving it. Paul Vaurie (talk) 21:52, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Renault Sport and Renault Formula One have been merged and re-branded as Alpine. Help me do the same with the respective Wikipedia pages?

Hi. Renault just moved its Renault Sport and Formula One team under its Alpine business unit (the result of its 1971 acquisition of Automobiles Alpine), effectively glomming them together and re-branding both them. That leaves a lot of clean-up and disambiguation to be done on Wikipedia.

Some references:

• Renault Sport has changed its name to Alpine
• Renault will rename its Formula 1 team after its Alpine brand for the 2021 season
• Starting from the 2021 season, Groupe Renault’s team becomes Alpine F1 Team
• Renault Sport becomes Alpine Cars as a major step in Renault Group’s reorganization
• From 2021 onwards, the Renault F1 Team will go through as the AlpineF1 Team

There's already an up-to-date Wikipedia article on the Alpine F1 Team, which might usefully reference the newly-created sibling "Alpine Cars" group, or the parent "Alpine business unit" of Renault.

There's an article on Renault in Formula One to which I've just added some references and clarified the transition a little, but it doesn't mention the organizational structure under which the team exists, nor the relationship with the Alpine business unit.

There's an article on Renault Sport which should be moved to Alpine Cars with a referral.

There's an article on Automobiles Alpine which mentions the merger.

There's also a press release from Renault which goes into some detail about all of this, and uses the names "Alpine cars, Renault Sport Cars (RSC) and Renault Sport Racing (RSR)" to describe the entities. On the one hand, those could be considered canonical; on the other hand, they might change again tomorrow.

The one time I tried to move a page before, I screwed it up and had to be bailed out. Does someone want to either talk me through this so I don't screw it up, or take this on? Thanks.  Bill Woodcock (talk) 22:47, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Highlighted topics.

I lost the capability to get an expanded explanation when I hovered my cursor over a highlighted subject. Nothing happens now when I hover.... is there a remedy, I miss that option

}} 104.228.16.56 (talk) 22:37, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

104.228.16.56, in your Preferences, under Gadgets, select Navigation popups--Quisqualis (talk) 23:09, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Unregistered users can't enable gadgets, so I doubt that's the reason. Kleinpecan (talk) 23:26, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Did you perhaps disable them accidentally? At the very bottom of a page, on the line with links to the privacy policy, "About Wikipedia", disclaimers etc., there is an "Edit preview settings" link. Kleinpecan (talk) 23:26, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Editing pages

hi. I was looking at this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Android_games . I cannot find my own game on there, so I wanted to add it. But I can't edit the page. Am I missing a way to edit the table on the page? Androiddev-sff (talk) 23:06, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Androiddev-sff: Welcome to the Teahouse. List articles host articles about games that are notable by Wikipedia's standards. If your game is notable enough to warrant its article, then it can go on the page, but that's something that should be determined first. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:35, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Notability

How do I tell if a subject is notable or not? Like, there have been articles written about it but it's mostly reviews, does that count? Stevenruidigao (talk) 15:37, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

To learn about notability, please read WP:Notability. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:38, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

If you're more specific, we can also answer in specific about that particular case. I'm not sure what type of "reviews" you mean. If it's a film or television show and the review is in a national, well-read, non-tabloid newspaper—yes, that's exactly what we're looking for. If it's a review from a tabloid or a user-generated source (like an Amazon review of a product) then that's not a reliable source. When evaluating if a source is reliable, think to yourself: what makes me certain that the person writing this knows what they're talking about, and how could I prove that to somebody else? — Bilorv (talk) 15:54, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

I mean like Forbes and Tom's Hardware. Does that count? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevenruidigao (talk • contribs) 00:37, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Why was my edit reversed and with no explanation

I have read a whole bunch of documentation to be an informed user and made a careful edit to Jung Hye-in. It was reversed without any explanation, just “ Restored revision 1027470998 by Aoowassana (talk) undo Tags: Undo Twinkle”. The whole article had only one sentence before my edit. I was going to work on making it much better with more edits like this, but it looks like there’s no point. 108.29.132.185 (talk) 16:08, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

If you're talking about this edit, it was reverted because her role in Sisyphus: The Myth is already included in § Television series. Kleinpecan (talk) 16:19, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for replying. I am sorry but that is not an explanation I can take much from. It doesn't tell me why the reversal was made without explanation. Also b/c it didn't have an explanation, aren't you guessing the person's reason? How do you know that was the reason? If it is right I don't think it is legitimate. My edit has a lot of information the cell doesn't have. My edit is in writing and is not a chart cell. My edit has a better reference. I looked at many other articles on actresses and they says things in detail about the shows and the characters in the writing and also have a chart of the listing in cells. Both. They aren't the same things. So I will not write any more. But I was going to make it good.-108.29.132.185 (talk) 17:51, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

"Aren't you guessing the person's reason?"—well, yeah, kinda. Let's ping Paper9oll (who reverted your edits) and ask them. Kleinpecan (talk) 18:15, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Kleinpecan: Yes, what you are saying is correct. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 00:35, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Kleinpecan: I have further improved the lead section with minor details, if that is what IP is looking for. What IP included is overly detailed for lead section, maybe IP was referring to career section of other K-actress/actor article. So ya ... that's the answer. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 01:36, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello. Just made my first article about Roy F Guzmán a Composer from Puerto Rico

About my article

I would like to make my article pass the test of examination in order to publish it. I am having trouble and I would like some help because it seems I correctly filled all the available information and I have seen articles that have less reinforcement information than mine in Wikipedia. Royguzrod (talk) 21:18, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Roy F. Guzmán

Welcome to Teahouse, Royguzrod. Please always link pages that you are talking about so that others can find them easily. All articel subjects are evaluated for WP:Notability separately. The fact that one page exists or does not mean that another should or should not (here are details). If you think an article does not meet notability standard, you can nominate it for deletion (and please do because Wikipedia is run by volunteers who can't check every single article). I agree with the assesment of the reviewer that right now the draft has "zero independent sources". All sources appear to be published directly by the subject of the article. (And there are no in-line citations). Anton.bersh (talk) 21:49, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

e/c You have not submitted your draft for review yet, but it has zero independent sources, so zero chance of being accepted. A Wikipedia article should summarize only what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, showing how (in this case) it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Theroadislong (talk) 21:49, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Also, Royguzrod, your username gives the impression that you are Guzmán: if so, you should read why autobiography is very strongly discouraged in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. Most people find it very hard to forget what they know about themselves, and write based only on what people who don't know them have published about them. --ColinFine (talk) 21:55, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Royguzrod: In addition to the above, Wikipedia takes copyright vary seriously. Doubly so, given that a substantial portion of the article's content is a direct copy from the biography page of the subject's own web site. I have tagged the article for speedy deletion for the copyright issues, but given the lack of independent sourcing, that's hardly the only problem with the article. --Finngall ^talk 23:33, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

After the expected Speedy deletion, which means all of the draft will disappear, any attempt at a new draft should not have any quotes by Guzman. David notMD (talk) 01:41, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Draft:Virtue Clan

Hi Wikipedians! Earlier, I have been told that this article could be re-created or speedy deleted. As the article's Draft is totally messed up, I think this article Virtue Clan could be speedy deleted so that I could create a new draft. So kindly help me out on how to suppose this Draft:Virtue Clan to speedy deletion. Thanks in advance!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 06:12, 8 June 2021 (UTC) Jocelin Andrea (talk) 06:12, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Jocelin Andrea You made three edits to the draft on 11 May and have not touched it since. I strongly recommend you work on the existing draft, removing bad content, adding good content, but leaving in place the history of the two Declined. Given that the draft was initially suspected of being the product of undeclared paid editing, are you being paid for your attempt to rescue this draft? David notMD (talk) 10:53, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi (talk), I would like to let you know that I am not being Paid to create/edit this article. While reading random articles on Digital Journal, I found an article on the subject and that's it. Also, I would like to create a new article coz the article's Draft has been already messed up totally to be honest. So recommending it to be speedy deleted would be great. Thanks in advance!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 11:15, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Which criterion in WP:CSD do you believe applies? Because the content of the draft is a mixture of content from you and from the previous contributor, I would feel that neither G5 nor G7 applies. I would therefore endorse the advice from David notMD. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:21, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @David Biddulph, I will recreate the article from the same. Anyways, can we remove the "Paid" mark in the article? That is not a big deal, but just asking if we could do that. Also I would like to know that can we use other language references (Norwegian in here) for the article? Jocelin Andrea (talk) 11:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

By "we", are you working on this with other people? Wikipedia requires that each account is for one person. Or by "we", were you referring to Wikipedia editors who can decide about removing the 'Paid' tag? On that point, given that you have declared (above) not being Paid, then if you can revise the draft to qualify becoming an article, the Reviewer can decide at that time. Non-English citations are allowed. David notMD (talk) 14:48, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi again @David notMD, I am the only person editing the Draft:Virtue Clan. It is my habit to text or type usually in plural form, that is the reason why I used "we" instead of "I". Also thanks for letting me know that other language's references can be used. Jocelin Andrea (talk) 01:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Where is the place to trade article nominations?

Hello, I have a GAN and I want to trade it by reviewing another GAN from another user. Where is the proper forum to do that?

@Jeromi Mikhael: I recommend asking at Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations RudolfRed (talk) 04:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Need to know the Difference between Secondary and Primary Sources.

Hi Wikipedians!! So, I have got my Draft Virtue Clan reviewed. But I have been said that the article only has primary resources. I have read the links, but I am not clear with what that does mean. Please do help me with this. Thanks in advance!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 05:17, 9 June 2021 (UTC) Jocelin Andrea (talk) 05:17, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Jocelin Andrea: There's more information at WP:PRIMARY (and by extension, WP:SECONDARY). Reliable sources you use should be independent from the subject, and shouldn't have any conflicts of interest that would undermine their reliability. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:24, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Jocelin Andrea:, you reference a GQ article, but the article does not actually mention your subject. The Market Watch citation is just an un-edited reprint of your press release. The podcast is, arguably, a secondary source, as it's an interview with your principal, but it's a single source. Search engines don't really reveal any secondary sources; only your LinkedIn page, your press release, and your own web site; all primary sources. Bill Woodcock (talk) 07:55, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Getting twinkle

Hello, I've read the Wikipedia:Twinkle page, but I'm not understanding how to get it. Can you please show me the steps Shabib (talk)

Hello Shabib20, welcome to the Teahouse, to install twinkle, you need to go to this page and use command/ctrl f to find the checkbox for twinkle, then simply check the box and twinkle should be installed for you. -Justiyaya (talk) 08:09, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Also, after checking the box you have to click "Save" at the bottom of the browser window, otherwise the changes won't take – I tend to forget to do that, and just go back to the previous page, and then I have to do it all over again. --bonadea contributions talk 08:21, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Question about page merge

Hi, I've been going over the Application Security and Web Application Security pages. They were full of outdated information and some information that I assume to be mostly of commercial nature (I teach this topic at an University in Vienna, Austria and hope that i do know enough of this topic, hopefully thats true).

Now when looking at Application Security and Web Application Security, they are highly redundant. Esp. the Web Application Security Page has some semi-relevant content that is already included in the linked OWASP page.

What I'd do is to remove the Web Application Security page, move most of the non-redundant content into a "Web Application Security" section in the "Application Security" page (and redirect to that). I'd throw away the existing "Best practices recommendation" and "Security standards" sections as the benefit is not clear and they are redundant to better content in "Application Security". "Security Technology" and "See Also" would be merged with the corresponding sections in "Application Security", this will remove approx. 50-75% of that content as it is already described in more detail within the other page.

Is this too excessive? I just went through the whole "information security" parts of the wiki, that parts might need some editorial work (which I can do from time to time). I do not have that much experience with wikipedia-editing, so I wanted to get some feedback first (to prevent cleanup work after mine) Andreashappe (talk) 07:22, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

• @Andreashappe: While I am in no way an expert on the topic, your suggestion to merge Web application security into Application security seems very reasonable to me.

The main option would be to just go through with your changes and see if someone objects. This is the recommended course of action whenever you intend a change that is not likely to be controversial, and what I would do. (Do ask another question if you are unsure about the technicalities of how to do redirects etc.)

You could also formally propose a merge. There are templates to fill etc. but just leaving a note on the talk pages of both articles would already be a good step for that. However, there is a substantial risk that nobody will comment on the proposal, considering that it is a fairly technical topic, which is why I would recommend just doing it. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 09:35, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I waded in to do a little copyediting, and the quicksand appears to have reached my bellybutton...

So, I picked this article pretty much at random from the list of those that needed copyediting, figuring I'd just do a little cleaning up.

But of course, it's more complicated than that. Nominally, the article is about a building. A residence. Which has changed hands many times; at a dizzying pace, lately, in fact. The British register of historical buildings thinks it's notable, and it's been cataloged in excruciating detail, which is reproduced in the article verbatim, copied-and-pasted from an un-cited source, which I surmise to be an un-published monograph, referencing nonexistent figures, etc. Lots of

South-east façade, symmetrical with central entrance; 5 bay with fenestration 2:1:1:1:2. South-west façade, also symmetrical with 5 bays and fenestration 2:2:1:2:2. Hipped Welsh slate roof with rendered stacks. Devonian limestone ashlar with pilasters carrying entablature and parapet, plain 1st floor band. Architraved sash windows with glazing bars.

ad nauseam. So, I set about boiling all that down a bit, to just the more pertinent bits.

Then I got to the second half of the article, which is a britophile heraldic litany just as bad as the preceding drone of architectural minutia. Also undoubtedly copied-and-pasted from some dusty tome.

So, which is it? Is this article about a building which is notable for its architecture (which is admittedly a hodge-podge of only-moderately-thought-out renovations), or is it notable for its inhabitants (who were, many of them, sufficiently notable to be included in indexes of British landholders, but not, by and large, sufficiently notable to be otherwise much mentioned, beyond the son of the founder of the Singer sewing machine company, who was, himself, merely notable for being an early example of a modern failson. (Oh, wait! Edited to add the salacious detail that his non-bio-mom had his dad arrested for bigamy!) Or should the whole darned thing be marked for deletion, as not meeting GNG? I note that there's not an SNG for architecture.

I'm kinda lost on what direction to take this clean-up, or whether to, well... When I was a kid, I'd sometimes pick up a rock on the beach or wherever, and ask my dad (who enjoyed geology) what it was, and often as not, he'd say "It's leaverite. Leave 'er right there where you found 'er." Is this leaverite? Bill Woodcock (talk) 23:53, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

WP:TNT? CanadianOtaku ^{Talk Page} 00:05, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, maybe? I mean, one could propose a deletion, and see if anyone cares enough to come out of the woodwork. Or I could re-write the darned thing from scratch, though I honestly don't care enough about the topic to do a worthy job (I care a lot about architecture, but this particular pile of, uh, "Devonian limestone ashlar and Welsh slate" seems profoundly uninteresting), and the principal question would remain: if this building is notable, is it notable in and of itself, or notable because of the people who've inhabited it? The conundrum being that, to me, it seems clearly not notable on either account, yet the British register of historic buildings disagrees, and clearly a whole pile of fanboys have disagreed over many centuries. Bill Woodcock (talk) 00:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Burn it. Not clear if the purported notability is for the estate, the building, or the people who lived there. He history of the article appears to have been started with the people, then different editor added all the building description. David notMD (talk) 02:08, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

The article is purportedly about a house. I've removed most of its content, as not being about the house. I think there's scope for plenty more removal of content. Maproom (talk) 08:04, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I've just whacked out a bunch more, and then added internal links to the pages of the historical notable owners. Good enough for now? Bill Woodcock (talk) 08:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

MUCH better. And given that the original creator is indef blocked, and the other major contributor stopped contributing in 2017, unlikely that there will be any champions for massive reverts. Now, find articles that need improvement and get more than five views per day. David notMD (talk) 10:04, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

How did I get here?

Listen, man. I don't know how I got here. All I did was type some mumbo-jumbo on Google and click some blue words. Now I'm here. From what I gather, this is like a hidden page for Wikipedia editors or something? I've been going from page to page for an hour and it's just so cool-- seeing all these things that I feel like I shouldn't be able to see. Anyways, I'm probably just out of my mind right now 2601:482:1:28B0:3960:AB75:228A:186F (talk) 03:06, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP user! This is a forum for new Wikipedia users to ask questions about editing here – it's definitely not hidden! Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 03:20, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Every article has behind-the-scene stuff. Just click on Talk or View history. For the latter, clicking on the date for any of the list items shows what the article looked like on that date. David notMD (talk) 10:07, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Request to review draft article

Greeting Wikipedia family, I have submitted my article through the AFC process. I am here seeking your kind support to check and review my article if there anything I should improve.
Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Khmer_Beverages Lorheng (talk) 10:06, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I rewrote the lead to delete brand names. In my opinion, the content and refs do not establish that the company meets Wikipedia's concept of corporate notability. See Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). David notMD (talk) 10:28, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm (almost) at edit war with Asoftchsolutions

For a few edits now, Asoftchsolutions and 103.163.58.98 have been adding links to asoftechsolutionsllc.com which I was reverting because I do not consider these additions valid. To me, these additions appeared aimed at promoting the company (describing the company as "Best website and app development company" coupled with the similarity of the user name and the domain name). I left two messages for this user (on Talk:Outline of web design and web development and User talk:Asoftchsolutions), but so far did not receive a reply. I read WP:DISPUTE, but frankly, I'm not sure how I can resolve a dispute with someone who does not engage in discussion and just pushes their own edits. Anton.bersh (talk) 23:04, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Anton.bersh, thanks for noticing that account. WP:DISPUTE is aimed primarily at conflicts where both parties are editing in good faith but just disagree. When an account is clearly operating in bad faith and WP:NOT HERE to help us build an encyclopedia, such as here with an account inserting spam links, a different set of rules apply. For these accounts, the typical response is to give them a warning on their talk page, as was done by @Quisqualis, and to then report the account to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism if they persist, which Quisqualis also did. The only thing left to do now is wait until an administrator comes along to block them, which should happen shortly. You can revert any further edits they make without worry, as the normal restrictions against edit warring don't apply when combatting spam accounts.

If you're interested in helping more with combatting vandalism, you may want to check out the counter-vandalism unit or try out the WikiLoop DoubleCheck tool. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 01:45, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Asoftchsolutions now blocked. 103.163.58.98 (possibly Asoftchsolutions, not signed in) has been warned. David notMD (talk) 01:47, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanations. Outline of web design and web development still gets a bunch of non-constructive edits from fresh accounts, but they are being reverted by other long-time editors. The level of vandalism right now probably does not need any special attention, but thanks for the tips. Anton.bersh (talk) 10:44, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Separate pages for Japanese Breakfast and Michelle Zauner

In Talk:Japanese Breakfast, multiple users have brought up that Michelle Zauner should have a separate page due to Japanese Breakfast being more of a band now than a solo project, as well as Michelle's previous/current membership in other music projects, and her careers in both music video directing and as an author, all of which are separate from Japanese Breakfast the band.

There is a draft for an individual article at Draft:Michelle Zauner, however it did not pass AfC due to some of the information in it overlapping with the page for Japanese Breakfast. The reason there is overlapping info is because it would be irresponsible to remove this information specific to Zauner from the band page until this article is approved.

How should I go about this? Memories of (talk) 10:31, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Memories of. If there is enough independent published material about Zauner specifically to establish that she meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then there can be an article on her, based on those sources - whether or not some of the material is duplicated in the article on the band is irrelevant. If there are not sources that establish that she meets those criteria, then she is not (yet) notable for her solo career, and there cannot be a separate article on her. --ColinFine (talk) 12:34, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

What is solid policy on Wiki respecting different language and culture?

I was wondering this for a long time, what policy Wiki follows on different language writing styles and cultural values? For example, I have seen there is a warning that appears when you try to edit a British language version, while there are also some warning that appears when editing an old article that is culturally believed, for example, calling something in a specific way, editing that triggers the warning and is reverted back to the previous form. However, I have also seen many articles which require prefix or postfix but they are not allowed. So I would like to ask what is a solid policy that we can tag or cite during these edits? Sir Ubaid Ur Rehman (talk) 07:36, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Sir Ubaid Ur Rehman Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I think the policy you are referring to with regards to honorifics or titles is described here in part, at least. Regarding which version of the English language(i.e. British, American, Australian, Indian) to use in an article, please see this policy; in general, it depends on the topic. 331dot (talk) 07:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

There is also the broader MOS:HONORIFIC. Regarding "respecting", WP:CODI can be related. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:26, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I have some examples that come in the same policy shared above Ram Singh Kuka where it says Guru Gobind Singh Ji where "Guru" and "Ji" are both honorifics, or take an example of Guru Tegh Bahadur There are many references in this article with "Guru" "Shahi" "Ji" and many others all of it are honorifics, there are other millions of example which can be easily found on Wiki, either an organization has solid single policy for everyone or it allows everyone isn't it true?

Single policies usually cannot be applied rigidly in isolation. We also have a policy of using, as article titles, the name by which subjects are most commonly known by English speakers globally (since this is the English-language Wikipedia), even if they are not the official or even strictly accurate names. If (for example) a person is most commonly known by a name that includes one or more honorifics, that is the form of the name we should use. Determining whether this is so or not is something that has to be discussed and decided on a case-by-case basis. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.121.163.176 (talk) 14:20, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Then is there a way to discuss honorifics? for a different area of the wiki do we have to use specific talk pages or there any bigger pages, like teahouse where it can be discussed globally?

deleting text box

Can someone advise me please how to delete the text box at the top of the article I have edited that has now addressed all the concerns about references and citing sources? The instruction page mentions deleting the relevant codes but I cannot see any when I go into the edit action. Trish TrishLudgate (talk) 10:25, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

The article does not have properly formatted inline citations. Please read Help:Referencing for beginners. - David Biddulph (talk) 10:28, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

If you look back to the version prior to your edits this month you will see that the references were correctly cited, but you have removed those citations. - David Biddulph (talk) 10:34, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Roger Woodward has been more than tripled in length. Paragraph after paragraph contain unreferenced details. TrishLudgate has a deep knowledge of Woodward's career, but has not addressed whether this is because of a personal or professional connection, i.e., WP:COI or WP:PAID. The "Selected" lists of accomplishments appear to list every performance, recording, interview, publication, etc. Throughout, there is a lot of name-dropping. In my opinion the article would be better for having its current length halved. David notMD (talk) 10:37, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Much of the material appears to be sourced to "National Library Australia, Roger Woodward Collection MS 10379". I am guessing that this is the collected papers of Roger Woodward, in the collection of the National Library Australia. As such, that would all be unpublished material, not suitable for use as a reference. David notMD (talk) 14:22, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

As a more trivial observation, it might be useful to expand the lede paragraph somewhat with some details summarised from the main text. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.121.163.176 (talk) 14:25, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Translation Pages

I am bilingual. I want to translate a few pages from Spanish to English. Do I have to make a brand new page? How do I do that? How do I keep the image/border formats? Thanks. Heuristically (talk) 14:25, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Heuristically: Welcome to the Teahouse. There's more information on how to do so at WP:TRANSLATE. Just be aware that policies differ between Wikipedias of different languages and not everything is going to make it over. Image and border formats should remain unchanged if you bring the code over as well (remembering to attribute it to the other Wikipedia). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Also, English Wikipedia and Spanish Wikipedia do not have the same criteria for what defines a reliable source reference, so an article existing in Sp-W may be Declined if submitted as a draft to Articles for Creation, or else nominated to Articles for Deletion if created as an article. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources to get an idea of what is required. David notMD (talk) 15:19, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Protected Page

Hello, I want to edit a protected page. I have the references, but I am not sure of my language. If I edit, can someone review it to be neutral and acceptable on Wikipedia? GONvsKillua (talk) 14:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@GONvsKillua: What is the page you want to edit, and what do you want to add to it? 106.201.110.52 (talk) 14:55, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi GONvsKillua, welcome to the Teahouse, if the page is protected, and you cannot edit the page, you can submit an edit request, basically using the talk page (by clicking on a button that says "talk" next to the article button that is next to the wikipedia logo) to propose an edit. If you can edit the page, be bold with your edits and don't be afraid of making mistakes. Feel free to link the article and type the proposed change here, and we'll add it for you if that's what you prefer. Justiyaya (talk) 15:11, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Your query here at Teahouse appears to be your very first edit ever, so you will not yet be able to edit a protected article. David notMD (talk) 15:21, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

SVGs

Anyone know of any users that are good at making vector graphics? Looking for someone to make an SVG of File:OK Kosher logo.jpg. JediMasterMacaroni (Talk) 03:24, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, JediMasterMacaroni! I've marked the image page with {{Should be SVG|logo}}, so hopefully someone might come across it there. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 03:27, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome, JediMasterMacaroni. I just re-drew it for you (it's at File:OK_Kosher_logo.svg) and replaced the instance on the OK Kosher Certification page. Note that I matched the color of the jpeg, so if that wasn't accurate, it may need some fine-tuning. Which I'm happy to do, if you (or Shlomke) want to do a little detective work; I can take that as a PMS number or an RGB value. Bill Woodcock (talk) 07:39, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@JediMasterMacaroni: For future reference, WP:GL is where such queries usually go. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 09:52, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Bwoodcock for drawing it, and Tigraan for the info. JediMasterMacaroni (Talk) 16:37, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Uploading images(of celebrities) to wikimedia.

Is there a better way where can i find copy righted imaged which i can reuse here. I mean is there a specific source. Siddartha897 (talk) 16:47, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Siddartha897, you can only upload "free" images of people to Wikipedia (images that can be used commercially). Pictures of people don't generally fall under fair use and hence can't be used on Wikipedia. Hope this helps! — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:52, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Can I name a battle?

Hi, I have been improving the article Bairam Khan, who was a prominent military leader of the Mughal Empire. He participated in several named battles, but the battle that took place when he rebelled against the Mughal Empire has not been named anywhere. Interestingly, I have found three reliable sources mentioning the battle, two of which gave many details as well. We know the name of the village and city near which the battle was fought, so would it be appropriate to name it on the village or the city? The battle was an important event and has been described in considerable detail. Uchiha Madara 17 (talk) 10:47, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Uchiha Madara 17: You shouldn't give it a proper name. For proper names, we rely on reliable sources; if no RSes give a proper name then you should refrain from making one up. However, you can refer to it as the battle near XYZ, or something like that. 106.201.110.52 (talk) 12:17, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Ok, then I shall call it 'Battle near Gunecur' (the named village near which it was fought). Uchiha Madara 17 (talk) 17:04, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

This sounds like a cool discovery. Might I suggest reaching out to a military historian/a historian of the Mughal Empire, and asking if they know of a name for that battle? They might be able to point you to a source where it has been given a name. If not, they might decide to give it a name themselves (or adopt whatever name you've chosen) and then use that name in a reliable source, in which case you can use it on Wikipedia! - Astrophobe (talk) 17:21, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia profile

GoodDay! How does one go about getting a profile of work on Wikipedia, who has worked with many other people with Wikipedia profiles already? Thankyou (redacted) 2600:1700:2D60:53F0:55F5:9FE3:F605:E18 (talk) 17:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. One would have to be notable by Wikipedia's standards, and understand that Wikipedia is not a site to post resumes and CVs. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:01, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello. Wikipedia does not include "profiles". We have encyclopedia articles. Please read Your first article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:05, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Copy and paste

Don'r let the title fool you, I know about copyright and all that. I was wondering if for large repitive tasks involving articles could you use a base template and fill it in with the nessaccary information. For example if I took the article Andrew J. Widick and wanted to make the article Francis A. Wilson could you take whats written in Andrew J. Widick and swap the required info. Is this allowed or frowned upon. Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 12:39, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

You could use the layout of one article as a guide for another. You could use a template such as an infobox found in one article in a similar fashion in another article. There's no problem in doing such a thing. However, you might want to read Wikipedia:Other stuff exists and Wikipedia:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability because even though you format an article exactly the same way as another article, the subject will still need to be Wikipedia notable for the article to survive a deletion challenge. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:24, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Pinging Gandalf the Groovy for the message above. GeraldWL 14:24, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I believe that in practice editors not infrequently do this. However, to avoid problems while working on the partially-altered draft, it might be a good idea to copy the exemplum article into an off-Wiki text reader on your own device, and make all the alterations there, before copying the result back into an on-Wikipedia draft. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.121.163.176 (talk) 14:31, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

The trouble with that approach, Gandalf the Groovy, is that I don't believe this is a repetitive task. What goes in an article depends on what the sources say, not on what an article about a different subject happens to say. I'm sure the headings are often worth copying, but the content? Also, if you're contemplating doing this, make sure you follow the practices in copying within Wikipedia: the licence conditions apply even if you're then going to rework what you copied. --ColinFine (talk) 15:13, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Gandalf the Groovy, There is a template designed for this type of task {{Biography}} S Philbrick(Talk) 18:12, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Request for edits timelines

How to request other editors to edit a protected article, element, template? is there a list of editors available somewhere or you just have to request on the talk page and editors will automatically be notified? Sir Ubaid Ur Rehman (talk) 14:22, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Sir Ubaid Ur Rehman, you may find Template:Edit semi-protected useful. GeraldWL 14:26, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Sir Ubaid Ur Rehman: for a slightly easier route, the edit request wizard fills in some of the fiddly stuff for you Nosebagbear (talk) 18:43, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Page of my own

FYI

 – added header Maresa63 ^Talk 19:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello can anyone tell me how to do a page of my own? is this possible? Cheers Mate Bluebellthecat2905 Bluebellthecat2905 (talk) 19:08, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Bluebellthecat2905 Do you mean creating a User page or an Autobiography? ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 19:29, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Bluebellthecat2905, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, as previously asked by Qwerfjkl, do you intend for a Wikipedia article on yourself? If yes, then unfortunately we strongly advise against such. See WP:COI and WP:AUTO.Celestina007 (talk) 20:40, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Looking for editors to create a page about myself

Could someone help me creat a page about myself ? and have my LinkedIn account page as a reference to my Wikipedia , given any additional information needed . TyseanS99 (talk) 22:01, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

TyseanS99 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would correct you in that Wikipedia has articles, not mere "pages" about subjects. You may make a request at Requested Articles- but leaving aside the severe backlog there(almost rendering RA useless)- you seem to want an article to enhance your internet presence or search results for you. Wikipedia is not concerned with those things- they may be a side benefit, but that's not our goal. A LinkedIn profile is not acceptable as a source. A Wikipedia article should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about you, showing how you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. If you truly feel that you meet that definition, you should allow independent editors to take note of your career or life and choose on their own to write about you, forcing the issue doesn't usually work.

Please also understand that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. There are good reasons to not want one. You cannot lock a Wikipedia article to the text that you might prefer, or prevent others unaffiliated with you from editing it. Any information about you, good and bad, can be in an article about you as long as it appears in an independent reliable source and is not defamatory. 331dot (talk) 22:08, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Was this image removal appropriate?

I removed an image at Pinkfong twice at here and here as it appeared to be promotional due to the logo and the wording of the caption (admire?), but it was reverted yesterday by the person who uploaded the image, and reverted again today. The edit summaries were as follows:

• My first removal: "Removed promotional image"
• First revert: "re-add Wikimedia Commons approved image" (that editor didn't refute my claim, and from what I understand, just because an image is Commons-approved doesn't mean it can sit in any article)
• My second removal: "this image adds nothing encyclopaedic to the article, has a watermark, and is not related to the company's actual industry which is kids' media and not cakes" (I meant logo when I said watermark)
• Second revert: *no edit summary*

I don't want to violate any rules, so can someone explain whether the image removal was appropriate? 45.251.33.134 (talk) 12:52, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP 45.251.33.134. Image use on Wikipedia is supposed to be in accordance with Wikipedia:Image use policy; in particular, images are to be generally only to be used when they're contextually relevant as explained here. The file you've removed is uploaded to Wikimedia Commons under a free license that meets Wikipedia's licensing reqiuirements; so, there no real reason to remove it for copyright concerns. That leaves contexutal concerns and that is where different editors may reasonably disagree. You feel the image is promotion, but the editor who re-added probably doesn't; so, basically what you've got now is sort of an image-related content dispute that you're going to be expected to resolve per Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Continuing to remove the image is most likely only going to lead to it continuing to be re-added and eventually that will lead to you, the other editor or the two of you together being warned or even blocked for edit warning. At some point, somebody is going to need to stop and start discussing; so, my suggestion to you is to follow the dispute resolution process and start a discussion on the article's talk page explaining why you think the image should be removed. Invite the other editor to participate and explain why it shouldn't. If the two of you can't figure out some compromise together (perhaps there's another image that can be used that addresses both of your concerns), then move to the next step of the process and try and get input from others. Edit warring never ends in a win for those who take that route no matter how right they believe they are, but a discussion based upon relevant policies and guidelines may turn out to be a win for Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:11, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

It appears the image was removed by another editor and has also been nominated for deletion on Commons. So, that means there are copyright concerns and the image shouldn't probably be re-added until they're resolved. As for the watermark, you might want to take a look at c:Commons:Watermarks even though that's not a formal Commons policy or guideline. A watermark isn't ideal in most cases, but it's not necessarily a reason for deleting an image and in some cases the watermark can be removed so that it's no longer an issue. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:20, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello Marchjuly, I inadvertently found this discussion, although not given notification of it. Yes, the image is under discussion at Commons, and I agree that adding or deleting the image should be addressed at Talk:Pinkfong. Just let us know which editor needs to initiate it, please. I reverted the image deletion once, then attempted to discuss to avoid edit warring, but found two IP addresses had removed it and was confused where to address it, at 45.251.33.194 or at 45.251.33.134. Thank you,--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 22:57, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Bonnielou2013: Another editor besides the IP removed the image because they had concerns over its use as well, but the place to discuss this would be on the article's talk page. Even if you feel you're right about the image's licensing (which I think you are) and it's context (which might be not be the case), I wouldn't suggest anything that might resemble edit warring over the image. Leaving an edit summary each time you re-add the file is not likely going to be seen as sufficient and an exemption to the three-revert rule by administrators in what is essentially a content dispute. As I stated to the IP above, at some point somebody is going to have to start discussing things to try and resolve whatever the issue may be and that person doesn't automatically need to be the IP. In fact, since you7re one of the people who seems to be in favor of using the image in the article, it could be argued that the WP:ONUS sort of falls upon you and the others who want it used to establish that it should be used. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:12, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Question In regards to updating a Voice Actors page

I am having trouble with editing a Voice Actors wiki page.The Actor in question is Sean Schemmel,who in the past has made Homophobic remarks. I have sources to several articles and and a video from youtube. But my edit keeps getting removed. GBZ93 (talk) 23:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@GBZ93: Your edits keep on getting reverted owing to the fact that YouTube videos are often non-RS. treekangaroos (talk) 23:22, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

GBZ93 (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia content must be sourced to independent reliable sources. YouTube videos do not often qualify. IGN may qualify, depending on the story itself, though a mainstream news organization would be better. Please discuss your proposed edit on the article talk page. Edits about living people are subject to the Biographies of Living Persons policy, and must have very good sourcing, especially for a controversial claim. 331dot (talk) 23:26, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@GBZ93: I agree with 331dot here. BLP articles:

must be written with the greatest care and attention to verifiability, neutrality, and avoidance of original research.

Your edit breaks the many guidelines of WP:MOS, such as MOS:YEAR and MOS:PUNCTUATION. Your edit can also come across as confusing or unclear. treekangaroos (talk) 23:34, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Honest question, how do they come across as unclear? and thank you for your feedback. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GBZ93 (talk • contribs)

Stub

Hi I have been working on expanding this article, at the moment it has 590 words, can I remove the "Stub" template, according to this page it says that one of the criteria to remove the stub template is that the article has more than 500 words, do I have to take into account other criteria to remove the template? Seb { 💬 Talk + 📝 Edits } 00:00, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, JSeb05. I have upgraded the article from "stub" to "start". A stub is defined as "an article deemed too short to provide encyclopedic coverage of a subject." I think the article provides a basic level of encyclopedic coverage, and to me, that is more important than word count. Thanks for working to improve the article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:43, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

COI Question

I am currently being paid to work on an artistic project pertaining to a specific individual. My employer reached out to an art funding organization in order to receive extra funding so that I could work longer than the project budget initially allowed. My employer and I decided, that with the additional time I would be able to work, thanks to the extra funding (not the funding we received for the project), I should research the person the project relates to and potentially write an article here for them. We were never asked to create the article, nor is anyone paying us to (rather we are using money given to us to support the arts), but I want to be sure there's not conflict of interest I should disclose. From what I can tell COI occurs when: I am the person the article is about (I am not), someone has paid me specifically to write an article, or I own the thing the article is written over; so I don't believe there is, but it never hurts to check. JorodHistory (talk) 22:03, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

JorodHistory Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for asking your question. Since your editing falls within the purview of your work, I think that you would be considered a paid editor and you would need to disclose that per WP:PAID. You don't have to be specifically paid to edit Wikipedia to be a paid editor. As for a conflict of interest, it doesn't sound to me as if you have one, if you or your employer are working on this project without the knowledge of the person your work is about. I'm certainly not an expert, though, so feel free to hear other opinions. 331dot (talk) 22:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

JorodHistory I agree with 331dot that you are a paid editor. It seems fairly unambiguous: you are creating a Wikipedia page on someone as part of your employment. See WP:PAID for the proper procedures.--- Possibly (talk) 04:06, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

That makes sense. Quick question: who would the client be in this scenario?

Assistance with refill in regards to page: The Word is Murder

Created the page: “The Word is Murder”. Shortly afterwards it received the notification that it was using bare URLs. Ran the refill tool as suggested and it fixed three of the four bare URLs. It gave an error message for the fourth URL stating that “No title found”. What do I do now? Anastasios999 (talk) 05:06, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Anastasios999: Courtesy link: The Word is Murder fixed. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 05:19, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Official video as source?

Can a video from official YouTube channel be used as a source, for example an official channel of a TV network has released trailer/teaser of its upcoming show, then could that video be used as source? ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 08:56, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

In general, an official YouTube channel of an existing TV network or news paper or other organization is considered as comming from that organization, so it inherits all properties of that organization. So you can use it as a source. However, it is not an independent source on itself. So TV news reporting uploaded to YouTube is probably a reliable source about the news being reported, but the TV channel promoting itself on its YouTube channel is not reliable source on itself. Do you have a specific example? Anton.bersh (talk) 09:15, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Need help in findind pages for editing!

I want to edit but i cant find articles which requires editing and which don't. Is there any way to get info about articles that needed editing. Siddartha897 (talk) 16:38, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Siddartha897, and welcome to Wikipedia. The page WP:Backlog displays current Wikipedia backlogs, which you can help clear. A good backlog to start in is Category:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit. Make sure to remove the tag at the top when done.
Really, most articles need improvement. You can try finding an article that interests you, find reliable sources, and then add content to the article. The introduction is a good place to start on this.
Hope this helps! — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:44, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Siddartha897. I occasionally visit the Wikipedia Task Center to find articles that need copy-editing or similar tasks. I've been able to do a few interesting edits that way. Mike Marchmont (talk) 17:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Siddartha897 You can also try WP:Backlog. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 19:32, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

yep! @Berrely:, @Mike Marchmont:, @Qwerfjkl:. Tqs for the info.Siddartha897 (talk) 10:35, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Help to reset my password

Accidently my account was lodged out (@TewariKamal) and now i don't remember the password to login. Please help me reset my password . 106.195.126.5 (talk) 06:35, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

TewariKamal has not specified an email adress, or it was not confirmed, so a new password cannot be send. Iff you find the confirmation mail in your inbox and its less than 7 days old, you might be able to click the confirm link in order to confirm yoour email, after which you can visit Special:PasswordReset to get a new password sent to your inbox. In all other cases, you unfortunally won't be able to get a new password, which means that you can only create a new account with a different username, stating your previous accounts name and the fact that you have lost your password for that one (and don't forget to confirm your email this time). Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:46, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

To add to the above, if you are not able to retrieve the password, you can just create a new account. If you do, please write on that new account's page that you had edited as TewariKamal in the past to avoid any suspicion of sockpuppetry. Also, consider adding committed identity to your new account as an alternative account recovery method. Anton.bersh (talk) 11:34, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

I need help to add more content to a locked article please

Hello, i hope your doing all great. Im here because i need help to add more content to an actual wiki, content of which is locked. Please Help.. (heres the url ↓) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lujaina_Mohsin_Darwish Danielbrandnitions (talk) 11:53, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Danielbrandnitions Hello and welcome. The article you link to has been protected("locked") due to conflict of interest related issues and sockpuppetry. If you have a conflict of interest, please review the conflict of interest policy. Once you do, you may visit the article talk page, Talk:Lujaina Mohsin Darwish and make a formal edit request(click for instructions) detailing changes you feel are needed, preferably sourced to independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 11:56, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

What exactly constitutes SIGCOV?

Hello hosts! I need clarification on SIGCOV, what exactly amounts to SIGCOV? Because the examples given at WP:GNG leave a gap in the middle for what can be considered SIGCOV and some editors seem to apply it in different ways. So what is the minimum exactly? 1 paragraph? 2? 100 words? 300? Feature length article? Help please. Princess of Ara_(talk) 09:00, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

If in doubt, discuss it on the talk page of the article about which you are concerned. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:05, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for this suggestion. I looked through the archives and found so many perspectives. Princess of Ara_(talk) 13:15, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Unfortunately, that is highly context-dependent, and the gap in the guideline is likely intentional. The criteria given at WP:GNG, "no original research is needed to extract the content", is probably as detailed as you are going to get.

I would like to offer a precision though: the sources used to show notability are not the only ones you can use to write the article. I would say (others might correct me) that the rule of thumb would be whether you can write a useful (if short) article using only what you have in GNG-level sources, and if so, you are then allowed inputs from other sources (provided they are reliable, etc.).

For example, Magnus Carlsen (the current world chess champion) is notable because he has been covered in numerous articles from the general press, but the vast majority of the article is sourced to specialized chess websites that would probably be WP:ROUTINE coverage of tournaments (hence, not GNG-quality).

Do you have a specific article/draft in mind? Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 09:23, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. Your explanation makes and I've had the same Idea at the back of my mind but some editors look for more of the length of the article. The draft in mind is Draft:Uzor Arukwe. Thank you! Princess of Ara_(talk) 09:30, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Princess of Ara, Let the record reflect that I have declined it at AFC. AFAIK, WP:SIGCOV has nothing to do with length of the article in question (correct me if I’m wrong if that isn’t what you were referring to) rather WP:SIGCOV has to do with the sources and not the “length of the article per se” a tip; when using sources, avoidance of sources that point to a WP:TOOSOON might be a good idea. Sources with “10 ten actors to watch out for in 2020” or any sources with the title along those lines might be a good idea. Using WP:OFFLINE sources too is a good idea. Celestina007 (talk) 20:56, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I knew you were going to show up at some point. Thank you for being ever so consistent. The only reference SIGCOV makes to the content is that it addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. It doesn’t say anything about the title pointing to TOOSOON. That aside, I agree that the subject does not exactly have significant coverage and struggles to meet GNG but even TOOSOON says that even in cases where a person might not meet the GNG, the GNG itself is not the final word. Editors are encouraged to also consider the topic-specific notability sub-criteria He meets at least #1 of the SNG for actors having had significant (named) roles in multiple notable movies except you’re saying the GNG is a must. Princess of Ara_(talk) 06:22, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Challenging an entry

There is an entry in the historical description of the G7 that is flat out wrong: "British Queen Elizabeth II was forced to broker a deal to form a minority government after a hung election, creating a situation so unstable that another election the same year had to take place." The British Monarch is apolitical and doesn't have the political authority to "broker" anything; much less the formation of a government. CPN 11:37, 10 June 2021 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by CPNowell (talk • contribs)

CPNowell Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please bring up your concern on the article talk page, Talk:Group of Seven, where the editors that follow that article will see it. 331dot (talk) 11:48, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the guidance CPN 12:03, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Looks like it's been changed now: Special:Diff/1027859962. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:15, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

References

Small Doubt

Where do questions in TEAHOUSE(here) vanish aftersome days. I can't find my previous questions. Siddartha897 (talk) 14:13, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Siddartha897, teahouse questions gets automatically archived 3 days after completion, you can find archived questions by searching for them in the archives section that is right under the table of contents. You can also browse archives by clicking on archive pages individually, like this page Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1112. -- Justiyaya (talk) 14:22, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

False, uncited statement leads to edit war warning

Please see the warning at User talk:Thelisteninghand and my detailed response, as I have had no response from the editor I disagree with. Any editor who could take the time to read this carefully will understand that WP is making a completely false claim on Miles Davis (final years). Davis makes a vague statement in autobiography - editor has made own incorrect interpretation. Thelisteninghand (talk) 13:47, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Already being discussed at Talk:Miles Davis. David notMD (talk) 14:50, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

how do I edit the title on a draft article?

how do I edit the title on a draft article? Palisades1 (talk) 16:00, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Palisades1: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you're autoconfirmed you can do it yourself by moving the page to another title in draftspace; otherwise, don't worry about it too much and drop a message in the associated talk page so that someone who sees it can do it for you. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:06, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I'm hesitant to create a new article because of the long time it takes for review. The page (Joe Whitty) was submitted several weeks ago and Id hate to go to the back of the line. There are several different pages that refer to the same name - can change the name after it has been accepted? Again, thanks.Palisades1 (talk) 17:03, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Palisades1: If the draft's title conflicts with that of any existing article (which I don't see in the case of Draft:Joseph Whitty), whatever reviewer approves it will see to it that the title of the article is suitably disambiguated. If there are non-conflicting overlaps (like that of Joseph Whitty with Lawrence Joseph Whitty), suitable hatnotes can be added to the articles, or a disambiguation page can be created. You don't need to do anything now. Deor (talk) 17:24, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Great. Thanks again. Palisades1 (talk) 17:35, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Moving draft to article

Hello, I have completed my draft of the article "Sennay Ghebreab" and want to move it to article now. But there is no button "Move" as described in the instructions. Can you please help me publish my article? Noaghebreab (talk) 21:13, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Noaghebreab, you need to read the messages on the draft page. Your draft has too few reliable sources to support notability, and you have used inappropriate external links in the body of the draft. Submission right now will guarantee another decline of your draft.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:28, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

STATUS: Draft:Sennay Ghebreab submitted to AfC, Declined, resubmitted on 9 June. In time it will reviewed. While waiting, remove all the hyperlinks and improve the referencing. David notMD (talk) 21:37, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Since I frequently work with academic bios, I was asked to comment. There are two major ways in which the draft is unsatisfactory (1) It is very highly promotional & not written in an objective fashion. It contains far too much material about person life, activities that do not amount to notability , an impressionistic account of his teaching and work, and an account of his university department. A WP article focuses on a person's notability , sp the peripheral material needs to be removed. The style of writing needs to be improved also: the first step will be removing all the adjectives. (2) He is borderline notable according to our standard, WP:PROF Notability in his field of work is judged primarily by showing the scientific work influential, as measured by citation o it in Google Scholar or Scopus, etc. In the biomedical standards , the minimum accepted here is at least 2 papets with well over 100 cites, but Google Scholar shows 123, 98, 65, .... It's not a formal guide, but the results of recent article discussions here makes it clear that this is what people examining such articles at AfD regard as acceptable. Perhaps it should be lower, or higher, or not used as an indicator at all, but it is what is used, and there is no point in accepting a Draft if the article is going to be rejected at WP:AFD. However, he's working in a specialized area, and, it might be one with lower citation density. But there's an objective way to sse how influential he is: compare his citation record with people in the same field whom he cites or who cite his work: .His most cited paper, with 132 cites , cites papers with 551, 430, 328, etc but that's not very indindicative as everyone can & usually does can cite the classic papers in their field, What is indicative is that his papers are cited by papers on very similar subjects with 503, 329, 309, 253. 219. 100, 98, 88 ... .. citations frome one of his better-cited papers, and 339, 219, 124, 92, 72 from another. , which is enough to show he is important in his field bt not one of the most important. On balance, I would accept it if the promotionalism gets fixed, and let it take its chances at AfD. After all, WP:Draft is just meant as a prelinary approval step to get rid of the drafts that are not going to pass. With the promotionalism in, it will not pass, with it removed, it might. I'm copying this to the user talk pa as a record. DGG ( talk ) 17:50, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Looking at the article title and the author name, it seems there might be a conflict of interest to declare. Feline Hymnic (talk) 19:18, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Our water, I saw a post telling me we should stock up on water, terrorist may contaminate our water supply. If this is true, would you be warning us?

 Porchpicker (talk) 17:45, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Porchpicker: Welcome to the Teahouse. We don't answer questions like this here, as it doesn't pertain to editing or using Wikipedia. Perhaps you should contact your municipal office? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:29, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Editor creating drafts of fictional people/albums

I've been watching the edits of the editor Silverwingsband98 from about six months now – what's unusual here is that all their contributions [5] are to create drafts for entirely fictional articles, clearly with no intention of ever publishing them in mainspace (because they are obviously fiction) and keeping them as drafts, presumably for their personal amusement or satisfaction. Attempts to politely ask them on their talk page why they are creating fictional drafts have been reverted without explanation [6]. And when the six-month draft period runs out, they simply ask for undeletion [7], so clearly they plan on keeping the drafts indefinitely.

Should I actually do anything about this? On the one hand, they aren't obviously vandalising or hoaxing Wikipedia by keeping these articles in draftspace, and they wouldn't dare try to publish them in mainspace as they'd get called out as an obvious hoax immediately. On the other... Wikipedia isn't supposed to be someone's personal playground for their fantasies, and to keep drafts forever. But I know that going to ANI seems an extreme response that would just cause a lot of grief and hassle, and maybe I should just let things be and mind my own business. Any advice? Richard3120 (talk) 13:20, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

I have tagged some of them for speedy deletion as blatant hoaxes, there are many more though! Theroadislong (talk) 13:40, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: they are all hoaxes. For example, the two supposed live Queen albums – these were supposedly recorded during tours for the last two Queen albums with Freddie Mercury, but the band never toured these albums, as Mercury was too ill by this point to perform. Mercury's last performance with Queen was in August 1986, five years before his death, and before either of the last two albums were released. You will find no evidence of the existence of these supposed live albums – no chart positions, no reviews, and no evidence that the tours took place, because they didn't. Richard3120 (talk) 13:52, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Well, that escalated quickly... all articles have been tagged for speedy deletion and the editor blocked, although the latter was never my intention. Thanks to everyone for their help. Richard3120 (talk) 14:05, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

The nice thing about Speedy deletions is that not only are the drafts gone from draft space, but in addition, all history of contributions to those drafts have vanished. David notMD (talk) 21:16, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Question

Hi I have a question, what template and set of rules do you uses if you want to request a section in and article be spun off into its own article. BigRed606 (talk) 19:08, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to Teahouse! You are probably looking for Wikipedia:Splitting. That article explains when splitting is appropriate, how to propose a split and how to use templates, including Template:Split. Anton.bersh (talk) 21:31, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Butler Leather Goods Factory

Hi,

It would be great if someone can help getting my draft reviewed and help it published sooner than later. You can access my draft at Draft:Butler Leather Goods Factory

Thanks again!

Regards Mellontikos (talk) 15:37, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello Mellontikos, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft has one reference, the company itself, and on WP, that doesn't work at all. See these links, WP:GNG and WP:NORG, for the sources that are crucially necessary, and if it applies, follow the guidance at WP:COI carefully. You also need to learn how to add inline citations, WP:EASYREFBEGIN has guidance on that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:48, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Also, once submitted, it goes into a pile of about 5,000 drafts waiting for review. Not a queue. Could be days, weeks, or (sadly) months before reviewed. Teahouse hosts are not reviewers. David notMD (talk) 16:28, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Mellontikos, your draft has not yet been submitted for review, so it is not yet in the review queue/pile. I agree with other commenters here that the draft is not ready because it does not have adequate independent reliable sources as references. Once you have improved the referencing and think it is ready to be reviewed, click the submit button to put your draft in the review queue/pile. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:05, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

All content, regardless if true, must be removed unless there are published articles entirely independent from the company that can be used as citations. David notMD (talk) 21:24, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

I recommend the entire Key Role Players section be deleted, with instead a simple sentence in the history section, to wit: The company was founded in 2008 in Chennai, India, by Noorul Islam, with guidance and some funding from Magnus Nystrom, Director of Nystrom Stockholm." David notMD (talk) 21:32, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Article declined

I've just had an article draft declined: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Casper_Esmann I am not affiliated with the subject in any way so I don't really understand comment from the reviewer. All the info in the article is taken from valid sources such as newspapers or tv broadcasts. Flyinglonglegs (talk) 18:59, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Flyinglonglegs. It means that there are lots of sources cited that mention him, but none do so in any depth or detail. We need that depth of independent coverage to meet our Notability criteria for living persons, as he doesn't appear to meet our Criteria for Musicians at this point in time. See also WP:TOOSOON. (Note: this is a general response; I have only skimmed the draft and have not checked all the references. The reviewer would have done that.) Nick Moyes (talk) 21:49, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Requesting help with a large amount of research for "List of Bohemian Club Members"

A lot of people listed in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bohemian_Club_members have their "Living" column blank, and it will require a lot of research to fill in the missing data entries. RandomUser1035763 (talk) 01:00, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, RandomUser1035763. There are way too many redlinks on that list, in my opinion. It makes my eyes glaze over. I notice that Bob Weir is on the list, but what about Mickey Hart and Jimmy Buffett? Aren't they members too? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:50, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

I agree. I didn't create the list, but I just decided to start working on filling it out. It seems like a really daunting task, which is why I asked for help. I'm not sure about the other band members; I'll have a look at the source for Weir and see if there's anything about them. RandomUser1035763 (talk) 22:37, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@RandomUser1035763: That looks like quite a bit of work. I did the first redlink on the list, out of curiosity: Hiram Reynolds Bloomer. Best of luck.--- Possibly (talk) 03:04, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Nice start, Possibly. Well done. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:23, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks RandomUser1035763 (talk) 22:37, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Problem with article title

When people search for T.I. Webb, Jr. but they leave off the final period (after Jr.) they get a "Did You Mean" page. This has been a problem, believe it or not. Would you please do a redirect for T.I. Webb, Jr (no period) to T.I. Webb, Jr. (with period)? It may be that some email links automatically disregard that final period causing an incorrect link. Thank you. Eagledj (talk) 22:07, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Eagledj, hello and welcome, I see you are a regular, have you tried engaging with the article creator or try and seek consensus at the tp of the article? Assuming both have failed then the appropriate venue should be WP:RM. Celestina007 (talk) 22:38, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Eagledj: I turned T.I. Webb, Jr into a redirect. It's also better to request redirects at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects and categories, or just create them yourself. Kleinpecan (talk) 23:13, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Undelete draft

FYI

 – Heading added by Tenryuu.

I am trying to undelete draft and publish it, how can I do this? Draft:Gehad Hamdy Mrjohnaytedvx (talk) 04:02, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Mrjohnaytedvx! There are instructions at WP:REFUND. Let us know if you have any trouble and we can help. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:30, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

New to Wikipedia

Hi there! My name is Emma, i just recently got into editing for a few wiki pages, which were adding information about celebrities on certain articles and i'm overall still new to this. I have a question, in regards to editing articles and such, how do you usually find your sources? (I mean, I'm actually trying to learn about how to research and find credible and reliable information, along with how to write impartially.)

I got a notification from an Alexanderlee, welcoming me to the community, and thank you for that. They also said to refer to this Talk (Teahouse) section if ever I have any questions.

Thank you for your time! Have a nice day! Ggyuwwoo (talk) 03:18, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ggyuwwoo! Which sources are best really depends on the article—e.g. history pages obviously need very different sorts of sources than chemistry articles. We have a detailed policy on what we consider an acceptable sources at WP:Reliable sources, as well as examples at WP:RSP. Those might be good pages to start. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:33, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Ggyuwwoo, For living people, its mostly just googling. Now, you want to make sure your sources are reliable. For well known publications, you can check this list. For less known publications, it takes a bit of practice, but you can get a sense for what is "quality journalism" and "tabloid nonsense" pretty quickly. For living people, we have a set of standards that are higher than the rest of the encyclopedia: WP:BLP. In short, living people have reputations that we could damage (and sue us for!) so anything we say about them has to be from a good quality source, especially if its controversial.

When we say write neutrally, we mean a few things. For one, a neutral point of view. Now, that usually isn't too relevant for mundane stuff. It only really comes into play when there is a controversial topic, usually historical. But neutral also means that we write in the formal style of an encyclopedia. Our writing is stuffy and almost detached. Its factual, without puffery or embellishment. This is important for living people, as we don't want to make them seem more important than they are. That does a disservice to our readers. The finer points of encyclopedic writing take some time to grasp, so don't be afraid to ask for more advice :)CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:36, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

How to create a page that redirects to another page?

How to create a page which when linked in another page do not show a red link? When glyconeogenesis is linked in another page (like glyconeogenesis), it redirects to gluconeogenesis. Glyconeogenesis is not gluconeogenesis. How to create a new page for glyconeogenesis ? Thermoacidophile (talk) 06:18, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Thermoacidophile: Welcome to the Teahouse. You can access the redirect page by searching for glyconeogenesis then clicking on the link in the small text below From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. From there you can delete the redirect, but you may want to consider writing a draft in draftspace first (see Your first article if you haven't made one before) so that it is substantial when it enters mainspace. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:25, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Found it. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thermoacidophile (talk • contribs) 06:44, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

AutoED gets tagged by CosmeticBot

I have Installed WP:AED; I use it pretty frequently on pages I've edited. I also use WP:RFL.

Now, My issue is that Edits using WP:AED often get tagged by WP:COSMETICBOT, and that being the case, shouldn't the Code for WP:AED be updated so as to not trigger WP:COSMETICBOT?
What is the use of WP:AED being a Wikipedia script if it triggers Wikipedia bots?? -- STC1 (talk) 09:32, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Getting a notable person's page published

 Courtesy link: Draft:Donald E Brown

I'm a new editor, but I know this page, Draft:Donald E Brown, is notable and should be published! Right now it says that he is not notable and that the page may be written from a fan's point of view... how can I or someone else fix that? I don't see any fan language, and the sources show he's notable, including a Wiki page about at least one of his companies, Interactive Intelligence. If you search Donald Brown or Don Brown CEO on the Internet, he's kind of a big deal in the tech world... help! Cadams55 (talk) 19:01, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Cadams55, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, allow me begin with correcting a misconception, Wikipedia does not have “pages” on anyone, rather we have articles on encyclopedic notable subjects. As for the {{fanpov}} tag, it means the neutrality of the article is questionable because of the wording, specifically because of promotional wording, reading WP:NPOV should help you get better insight. Lastly, I noticed you used an exclamation mark in your opening statement, specifically in this line above; I know this page, Draft:Donald E Brown, is notable and should be published!, it is generally considered rude, we are all volunteers here and assisting or helping you, requires you to be polite. Celestina007 (talk) 22:03, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

To expand a little, Cadams55: firstly, an article (what you called a "page") is never notable, rather the subject of an article is (hopefully) notable, and the article has to demonstrate that notability.

Secondly, "notable" doesn't mean in Wikipedia what it means in normal speech. Rather, it means "has been written about at some length by persons independent of the subject, in several different pieces published in Reliable sources that are known to practice good editorial control and fact checking." An article should be mostly or entirely a summary of the information contained in such sources, to which it must all be correctly cited – that is how the article demonstrates the subject's notability and verifies the information.

Trivial and uncontrovertial facts (like job titles) can be corroborated by less-than-extensive mentions of the subject, and/or by sources not independent of the subject (like a company web page), but these can't be used to support notability in the Wikipedia sense.

Thirdly, "notability is not inherited" (check the title of the essay – that link to "Notability is inherited" is part of a list of invalid arguments). It may be that a company is notable, (i.e. well documented in independent published reliable sources) but its CEO (for example) is not: the opposite might also be true.

Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.0.58 (talk) 05:15, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Firstly, Celestina007, I apologize if my exclamation points came across to you as impolite. I simply use them frequently online and meant no ill-will toward you or any other Wiki editors/volunteers. Namely, an exclamation point denotes excitement, of which I have for trying to become a volunteer and Wiki contributor myself and for this page. Next, thank you to both users for the further explanations. I will work on some other pages, first. In the meantime, I hope somebody else may be able to improve the page for submission. Cadams55 (talk) 11:24, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

New company

We are a company that has started a new website/business called SG:Indian - is this notable enough to merit a Wikipedia entry/article?  WikiRaja68 (talk) 11:21, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

WikiRaja68 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. New companies rarely merit Wikipedia articles. A company merits a Wikipedia article if it receives significant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to do so(so no press releases or announcements of routine business transactions such as the commencement of operations), showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Wikipedia is not interested in what a company wants to say about itself.

As you seem to be an employee, you must make the required paid editing declaration(per the Terms of Use) and review conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 11:26, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

how to edit my Wikipedia account

 Imranafzalchauhan (talk) 09:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Imranafzalchauhan Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. What is it exactly that you wish to do? I can think of several different ways to answer your question depending on what it is you are trying to do. 331dot (talk) 09:16, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

WP:TUTORIAL could be of help. If you intend to create an article about yourself (in short, don't do that), see WP:AUTO. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:18, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Imranafzalchauhan: just go to your userpage(User:Imranafzalchauhan) and click edit and write whatever u want to tell about urself. That's it!. U still didn't create ur userpage so it's link is in red color.Siddartha897 (talk) 12:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Bots on Wikipedia

How are bots created on wikipeedia. Can everyone have a bot. How they actually work. Siddartha897 (talk) 12:40, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Siddartha897: There is no set pathway for creating a bot on Wikipedia, though it requires both deep knowledge of the Wikipedia language they are supposed to run on, and a programming language such as Phython or Java. In general, bots are created when someone thinks a task is so boring and simple it can be automated. The first step would therefore to determine if a bot can do the tasks and what the exact criteria are. Once this is set, two things are more or less simultaniously: The coding of the bot in the selected programming language, and requesting approval. In theory, yes, everyone can have a bot, iff they have the nessesary knowledge and there is no other bot doing that task (we don't need 50 bots who just archive talkpages). Regarding how they work, thats more or less left to the operator and the task that needs to be done (for example, User:ClueBot NG works different than the already mentioned ClueBot III), however, all bots will use the API (documentation) for HTTP requests. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:00, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Tom Price the artist - is he on Wikipedia?

http://www.tom-price.com/allwork Hi, I'm unable to see Tom Price as an artist on Wikipedia. As a friend, I don't want to start the article, but what exactly is the qualification level for artists to be mentioned?

https://www.chatsworth.org/art-archives/devonshire-collections/furniture/counterpart/ https://unitlondon.com/artists/162-tom-price/ https://www.industrygallery.net/exhibitions/2016/2/21/tom-price-meltdown http://www.tom-price.com/mulberry-installation-aw15 https://www.sightunseen.com/2011/07/tom-price/ 194.127.158.171 (talk) 13:07, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. For an artist to merit an article, they must meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable artist, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 13:10, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Removing a Wikipedia Page from a Google Listing

Hi, Can anyone tell me how you stop a Wikipedia page from showing on my Goole Business Page? RichieRunsRiot (talk) 13:11, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

We have no control over the way Google displays search results, if that's what you mean. You would need to contact Google via their feedback link.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that particular text was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information, but Google's Knowledge Graph has a "Feedback" link where anyone can mark a field as wrong. The same feedback facility is also provided on Bing and some other search engines. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:22, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Can't upload image

Hello,

I am the owner of the artwork and I am trying to upload it to a post though I keep getting told " We could not determine whether this file is suitable for Wikimedia Commons. Please only upload photos that you took yourself with your camera, or see what else is acceptable. See the guide to make sure the file is acceptable and learn how to upload it on Wikimedia Commons."

The file is in good standards, is the correct information, and I own the rights to upload it. Why can't I get this too work>

Also when I clicked on the links this error message gives me it just brings me to a the home page and not the info that I need to look up to fix this issue. I can't even shoe you the message because the nI try to attach it I'm just told the same issue basically

Please help and thank you, Ray JusrtMakingTheWorldBetter (talk) 16:47, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

JusrtMakingTheWorldBetter, let's take a step back. Who created the artwork you are trying to upload? And who took the photo of the artwork you are trying to upload? Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:02, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello

I am the creator of the artwork, my tribe voted on the final piece so it was a group effort of hundreds of people, but I am the one that made the design and the final art.

Thank you

Hello, JusrtMakingTheWorldBetter, and welcome to the Teahouse. Are you talking about c:File:Official Otter Pride Flag by Bearbackgear.jpg? You have succcessfully uploaded that image to Commons, and I can't find any evidence (in your Commons talk page or user log) that you have had any trouble doing so, or that you have tried and failed to upload another image. In any case, problems on Commons are better asked about at c:commons:Village pump than here. --ColinFine (talk) 21:46, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine: the records of the other attempts can be found in the commonswiki abuse log. (For unknown reasons, abuse filter hits only show when you look into the abuse filter log, not on combined log pages). Victor Schmidt (talk) 05:02, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Right. I didn't know about that log, Victor Schmidt. JusrtMakingTheWorldBetter: that's way outside my knowledge (and I suspect for many of the people who frequent here), so I suggest you ask at the Commons Village pump, which I linked above. --ColinFine (talk) 13:26, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

re-visiting a deleted entry with new material and serious updates

Re-visiting a deleted page - notable changes

Hi all, wanted to softly check - whether besides my typical / basic scientific contributions - if leading my country's first ever space mission to the ISS is considered as notable and hence to revisit my original entry and update?

Thanks very much for ur help and guidance .

see https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/malta-to-send-research-capsule-to-international-space-station.872020 and https://foreignandeu.gov.mt/en/Government/Press%20Releases/Pages/Malta-to-send-scientific-experiment-to-the-International-Space-Station.aspx and many more Professor Joseph Borg 22:00, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Joseph Borg (scientist) was created and then deleted in 2018. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Borg (scientist). I am not sure if these new potential references (or any other accomplishments in the interim) would justify trying to create the article again. Borg himself is not going to the space station. All that is going are tissue samples. David notMD (talk) 00:30, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Jbor14, and welcome to the Teahouse. Questions of the form "Is [fill in activity here] considered as notable?" are almost always to be answered in the negative in Wikipedia. It is not what somebody has done, been, said, created, or published on which their notability depends: it is on what has been published about them - in other words, the degree to which they have been noted in independent reliable sources.

I notice that your user name and more particularly this edit suggest that you are Joseph Borg. If you are, please be aware of Wikipedia's strong discouragement of autobiography. --ColinFine (talk) 13:43, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for your comments. I guess this may not be opportune or right moment then. Since as you said, it would pose a great bias / conflict of interest writing on oneself. Re: User:David notMD - I find the comment abit superfluous. Going physically to space is by no means an easy feat (yet) and it is true, I am not going to space myself (for now :) ) However, I would have thought or considered that leading a country's / a nation - first ever space experiment to the ISS would be worth documenting. But - in that respect, I guess in due time - if this is indeed notable, and if it is indeed useful, it ought to be picked up by someone independent, and write about it.

I thank the wiki community for your invaluable comments. My sincere best wishes,

Joseph

Blocking on Wikipedia

If i got blocked on wikimedia. Will i get blocked only there or over all wiki projects(wikipedia,....) Siddartha897 (talk) 12:24, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Siddartha897 Since you posted here, you are not blocked from Wikipedia. I don't know what you were blocked for so I cannot guarantee you won't be blocked here, but it would only be for some major cross-project abuse. 331dot (talk) 12:25, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@331dot: you have heard me wrong. I'm not blocked yet and i'm talking about wikimedia block not wikipedia. Earlier i uploaded some images there and they got deleted due to wrong sources. And i got warnings from WP. Just want clarify whether the block is confined to wikimedia itself or will it effect all other wiki projects.Siddartha897 (talk) 12:35, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Siddartha897: Blocks are, at least in 99% percent of cases, language- and project specific. If, for example, you get indefinitely blocked on Wikimedia Commons, you can still edit the english Wikipedia or The Metawiki. The remaining 1% are global locks, which are only handed out in cases of persistent cross-wiki-abuse. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:50, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes @Victor Schmidt: that is what i wanted.Siddartha897 (talk) 12:58, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Siddartha897: Wikimedia is a name for all Wikimedia projects together. Wikimedia Commons is often just called Commons but not Wikimedia. That's why 331dot didn't know what you meant. Victor Schmidt guessed it when you mentioned images. A global lock is for all Wikimedia projects. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:01, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Thanks for the correction and @331dot: sorry for the errorneous question.Siddartha897 (talk) 14:07, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

References appear below External links

I am editing a page but for some reason my references have come up below External links. There are some original reference above External links, but my new ones appear below External links - how do I fix this please BLG1952 (talk) 09:49, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@BLG1952: I believe you are referring to edit made on Samuel Strang Steel. You need to add {{Reflist}} like so. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 10:00, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you that seems to have worked— Preceding unsigned comment added by BLG1952 (talk • contribs) 10:16, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi BLG1952. You might want to look at WP:GENREF because some of the sources cited in that article are general references and the remaining are inline citations. Inline citations (if formatted correctly) will be added by the software to whatever section the WP:REFLIST template is being used in (this usually the "References" section, but not always), but general references will not and will need to be added manually. If you don't use a reflist template, inline citations will automatically be added to the bottom of the page, which is probably what you were seeing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:19, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Creating an article

I want to learn the process of creating an article. I know the basics such as creating a draft and submitting for review. I want to learn how administrators do when they accept an draft as an article. FizzoXD (talk) 14:05, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

People who accept or reject drafts are not necessary administrators. Ruslik_Zero 14:15, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@FizzoXD: If its your first article you can refer to Wikipedia:Article wizard.Siddartha897 (talk) 14:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi FizzoXD, welcome to the Teahouse. You can read the instructions that reviewers follow here. Not only administrators can review articles. Editors apply to become reviewers and are assessed by admins. You mentioned that you know the basics so you may have already seen the following links but I include them anyway, partly in case they help anyone else who might be reading this: Help:Your first article, Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Let us know if you have other questions › Mortee _talk 14:22, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks!

Update a Page for and Org that Pays Me

Hi! I’ve been successful at having some basic updates to a page for the Direct Selling Association in the past. My bio page discloses I am paid by the organization. I want to ask help from someone who can update basic board of director information for me? I saw in the Wikipedia app my talk page history and I asked those editors for help but I find this whole thing SO Confusing I don’t understand the best way to do anything here. I am honest and I don’t want to violate rules. If someone could help me and maybe explain things to me? I would have a better understanding for the future. Thank you so so much! BradReichard (talk) 11:01, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

BradReichard Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Since you have already declared a paid editing relationship, you are halfway there, really. You simply need to propose any chanegs you feel are needed on the article talk page, Talk:Direct Selling Association, in the form of an edit request(click for instructions). It is possible to do this with the app or mobile version(I find it harder, though others do it successfully), though those do not have the full functionality of the regular desktop version. It may be easier for you to do it with the full desktop version in a browser on your phone; if you scroll to the bottom of any page on Wikipedia in the app, there is an option to switch between versions. 331dot (talk) 11:09, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

331dot Thank you for your response! So I made the edit request here and I was wondering if you could maybe see if I did this correctly... I would love some guidance. I am always so confused by this interface. Thank you! BradReichard (talk) 21:43, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

BradReichard Looks good. If no one replies after a time(a week or so), you can then mark it for attention by adding {{request edit}} to it. 331dot (talk) 22:14, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

331dot ok so what you said means that I go on to the talk page and then simply type that HTML code {{request edit}} with the doubled open and bracketed "request edit" and that flags someone to help me out? Thank you so much BradReichard (talk) 23:51, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, that is correct.(though you would leave off the "nowiki" tags that serve to suppress that function here) 331dot (talk) 23:59, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

331dot, the fully functional desktop site works just fine on current smartphones. I do 99% of my editing that way. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:25, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Cullen328 Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear. That's what I was advising them to do. 331dot (talk) 08:41, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

331dot, my reading comprehension must have been ebbing last night. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 14:16, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Cullen328 No problem. I have days like that. I absolutely could have worded something incorrectly or given the wrong information, so I do indeed appreciate the additional eyes. 331dot (talk) 14:49, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

References

help with review thats been months now

Hello there, I improved my sourcing and would like someone to take a look and offer an opinion on whether it's been improved enough... this draft was already excepted and then was returned to a draft out of the blue. Almost all the sources are huge news websites in Israel and none was paid or is a press relase and this company is traded as well as many people uses its tech. Its been months since the last review and I feel its not fair so I was told to write here, can someone help please? --Shanisun (talk) 07:16, 8 June 2021 (UTC) Shanisun (talk) 07:16, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Shanisun. You might feel that it's unfair that your submission hasn't been reviewed yet, but you're being paid to edit whereas the reviewers, like the vast majority of other editors, are volunteers, so I would say that it's unfair for you to expect them to review your submission to a deadline. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:22, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Yes I was paid when I worked for but now i'm not and I must say I dont expect anything but its been months and not weeks and I waited till i thought its been long enough. Didnt mean anything by it...

• @Shanisun: Right now the article is not in the review queue. You could add it by placing {{subst:submit}} on top of the page, but you would do well to ensure you have addressed the previous criticism before. Are there three reliable, independent sources that discuss the subject at length? If not, the article will not be accepted. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 07:55, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

There are more and most of the sources are from the biggest news and econamy sites in Israel. I feel something in the process of this draft isnt going as it should be and i hope you can help.. by the way, I waited since feb this year since a reviewer told me it is in the queue. Shanisun (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Itamar Medical Theroadislong (talk) 08:00, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

I think it was in the review queue, Tigraan, it's just that the template was at the bottom of the page. Now it has two of them. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:35, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

I removed the newer of the two AfCs, so that it will be clear that the submission was in March. David notMD (talk) 10:06, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello all, I came here for help and now it seems my draft is under attack... I will try to explain again since im in loss of words and understanding of whats going on...

Itamar Medical is an Israeli company, its now public and also has offices and employees in the states. I wrote the draft and its written in the formal tone and it was approved. Than, it was removed and placed as a draft again due to sources. now, i have almost 30 sources in the draft, all the Israely websites are the biggest sites in Israel and all articels there were written by journalists and none was paid or is a press realease, i.e: ynet, globes, haaretz, TheMarker, walla. How can this be and the draft isnt approved and now there is a new reason of tone? is there something I should know or is it because its an Israeli company? please explain because i really dont understand whats going on here and its been for months now... Shanisun (talk) 08:06, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

• @Shanisun: Your sources include [8], taken from a site whose main page says "press release distribution service" in large font. The other source I checked is this which is clearly purely an interview, even if quotation marks are missing in some places; interviews are not considered independent coverage because their content is entirely derived from what the subject says about themselves. I could not check much else because I cannot read Hebrew.

If you really want your draft to be accepted, I would suggest a radical change of tactics. You seem to be treating the Wikipedia process like the customer service hotline for something you bought, where bothering whoever is in charge of your file will make it advance sooner (because they want to get rid of you). However, this is a community of internet volunteers, with a pretty strong rule that anybody can stop what they were doing at any point, no questions asked, so bothering will just push people off your file.

Things you should not do:

1. lie about whether press releases are press releases.
2. complain about the duration of the review process. If you think the process is slow in general, you are more than welcome to join Wikipedia volunteers in the thankless job of curating a collaborative encyclopedia. If you think your draft in particular was treated unfairly, bring it forward, but sitting in the review queue for months is nothing unusual, especially for articles with non-English sources.
3. praise the draft for its many sources. The only thing it proves is that it took you a long time and hard work to create the draft, but frankly we do not care. Quantity does not matter, quality does.

There is one thing you can do to speed up the review process. List the three best sources of your draft that you think demonstrate "significant coverage" under Wikipedia's jargon. This decreases the job of a reviewer to looking at three sources. Notice that this will speed up the process, but the result is more or less final, I doubt anyone would agree to to take another look at another set of sources if the draft fails the first time. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 16:02, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Can someone approve my article?

Hey! This is Badassboy, i have recently created an article about an Indian Businessman, vikas oberoi. So can anyone approve it so I can add images? Please do approve. Don't flag it for deletion. I have written in in the most neutral way i can. Here is the link ~ Draft:Vikas_Oberoi  Badassboy 63637 (talk) 12:56, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Badassboy 63637: I have added the draft submission template at the top of the article, once you feel the article is ready, you can click the "Submit draft for review" button. Review process would take 1 day to 5 months or longer. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:02, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Badassboy 63637: Please also see the responses to your two previous threads about this draft: I have made a draft. Can someone please approve and I have updated the draft. Can now someone approve it?. --bonadea contributions talk 13:19, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts are not reviewers. Asking here does not move your draft to a faster review. Current status is submitted, declined 11 June, resubmitted with more refs, Declined again. David notMD (talk) 16:08, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

When is the article I have made visible to the public?

 Courtesy link: Draft:Mason Smith

I am just wondering when an article that you have written is open to the public eye, when I search for "mason smith" the article does not appear. Bruinsfan65 (talk) 22:35, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Bruinsfan65, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, it takes probably 3 to 6 months(I’m unsure) for an article to be indexed by google. Celestina007 (talk) 22:41, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Bruinsfan65: Welcome to the Teahouse. The draft is currently in your userspace, which search engines do not look for. If you'd like, someone can help move it into draftspace where you can work on it before submitting it for review with {{subst:submit}} at the top. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:42, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Bruinsfan65, search engines will not find any userspace pages or draft pages. They also will not find new articles until they have been "patrolled" by a qualified editor or created by trusted editors with the autopatrolled user right. Read Wikipedia:New pages patrol for information about the process. Once a page is marked "patrolled", Google will index it in a matter of minutes. On another matter, please read the notability guideline for hockey players. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:06, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Moving an article into draftspace

How to I move my article from sandbox to draftspace? Bruinsfan65 (talk) 23:18, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Bruinsfan65: You need to be autoconfirmed—your account should be at least four days old and have made at least ten edits—in order to be able to move pages. In the meanwhile, you may request a move at Wikipedia:Requested moves (but I have already moved your article to Draft:Mason Smith, so there is probably no need for that). Kleinpecan (talk) 23:34, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

"I have already moved your article"—nevermind, Celestina007 did it before I could. Kleinpecan (talk) 23:37, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

 Done @Bruinsfan65, see Draft:Mason Smith. Celestina007 (talk) 23:41, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Be aware that now that it is a submitted draft, could be days, weeks, or (sadly) months before it is reviewed, as there is a huge backlog of drafts. Meanwhile, work on improving the draft. You got a comment that the refs are not up to par. David notMD (talk) 00:36, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

OR, be Declined today! Address the comments and resubmit. David notMD (talk) 17:22, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

wiki page of self

I would like to create a wikipedia page of myself. Relevant information about me for those who I connect with on numerous social media platforms.

Thank you, Michael A. Franke Mikefranke11 (talk) 16:02, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Please don't. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a form of social media. I doubt that you are notable enough to warrant an article here, just as most of the 7 billion people on the planet are not. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:12, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

First, Wikipedia advises people not to try an autobiography (WP:AUTO). Second, only if people have been published articles in reliable source newspapers and magazines and websites, would those publications be useable as references for an article about you. What you write about yourself cannot be used as references. Same for any interviews you have given. W has articles, not 'pages'. David notMD (talk) 16:19, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

You can create your own user page at this link: Here. User pages are pages that you can talk about yourself on, but please don't create an article about yourself in mainspace. Thingy_{34|my edits}^12|question? 18:27, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Before considering creating a User page, read that guideline for what can and cannot be put on a User page. David notMD (talk) 19:27, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

1936 Indian National Congress's Faizpur session photograp

1936 session of congress was held in Faizpur village. A image of that session have on a website, can we use this image on Jalgaon district article's history subsection. I think the image is pretty old, and in public domain so we can use it? Huge Earth (talk) 17:47, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, you just have to use Template:PD-India on Commons as it was out of copyright in 1986, before the URAA date of 1996. Zoozaz1 talk 20:09, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Cannot submit draft

I cannot submit a draft, can find no reason why, Ideas? Draft:Charles Louis Seeger, Sr. Vabookwriter (talk) 19:49, 11 June 2021 (UTC) Vabookwriter (talk) 19:49, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Vabookwriter You just need to click the blue "submit your draft for review!" button on the screen. I've fixed the link above. 331dot (talk) 19:52, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

I just get a page with a blank creation box with a few random letters and nothing that indicates submission or accpeted for review. While I was poking around trying to figure thatout before I got a box that said it had not been submitted. I've got nothing now that acknowledges it. Thank you for your help. Vabookwriter (talk) 20:04, 11 June 2021 (UTC) And I see that you added to its formatting, thx. Same result after submit button. Vabookwriter (talk) 20:07, 11 June 2021 (UTC) Finally got it. One more step not easily found.Thank you for your help. Vabookwriter (talk) 20:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Place to request an article be written, especially if there is already a French Wikipedia article?

I was reading a Wikipedia article and there was a link on that subject which invites me to create an article. An article does exist on the French Wikipedia site but my French is laughable. Also I am not sure if one translates an article and copies the citations from the French site.

The article I was reading is "Paris Bourse Crash of 1882" The stub is "l'Union Générale" Union Generale  Slashmark (talk) 17:48, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Please follow the steps listed here NW1223 | Howl at me 18:25, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Slashmark, NW1223 has the correct procedure. I will advise you, however, that most translation requests go years without being answered. :( We simply don't have that many people working as translators on Wikipedia. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:01, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

The Burning Leaves

Can anyone please add articles on the Poem "The Burning Leaves" written by Robert Lawrence Binyon because there is no such site telling the summary and critical analysis of the poem. Tanirika Dandapat (talk) 20:14, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Tanirika Dandapat: Welcome to the Teahouse. You can leave a request at Requested articles, but progress there tends to be very slow. Alternatively, you could start a draft of the article, keeping in mind that Wikipedia does not draw any conclusions from sources, but merely reports what reliable sources say. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:26, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Tanirika Dandapat. The poem is called The Burning of the Leaves. What your request means is "please will a volunteer do the necessary research to find critical sources about this poem, and write a summary of those sources". Some volunteer might be interested enough, but probably not - and if it happens it will likely take weeks or months. If you look at the article Laurence Binyon, that has some references, some of which may be helpful to you. --ColinFine (talk) 21:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Why Ariana Grande article is extended confirmed protected?

So, when I go to Ariana Grande article it is indefinitely extended confirmed protected, while other singers article (e.g. Taylor Swift and among others are semi-protected). So, why Ariana Grande article is extended-confirmed protected indefinitely? Lkas123 (talk) 06:46, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Lkas123. Articles are generally only protected when they are subject to serious disruption, and usually the degree of the protection depend on how many times the page has been protected before as well as how serious the disruption is. If you do to Ariana Grande, click on the edit tab and then look at the top of the page, you see a box that states "Note: This page is protected so that only users with extended confirmed rights can make edits. See Wikipedia:Protection policy#Extended confirmed protection." If you click on "View full long", you'll see exactly how many times the article has been protected over the years. If you want more specific details you can ask the last administrator to protect the page for further clarification. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:57, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Lkas123 I haven't examined the Ariana Grande article yet, but if it is subject to a higher level of protection, it means that the lower level(semi) was ineffective at ending disruption. The most likely explanation is that users were creating accounts, making 10 edits(productive or otherwise) and waiting 4 days to become confirmed, and then engaging in disruption. It's harder to game the system with extended confirmed(500 edits and 30 days). 331dot (talk) 08:55, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Lkas123 The page protection log is complicated, and the page has been protected.multiple times for: vandalism, violation of BLP, edit warring/content dispute, and persistent sockpuppetry. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 21:50, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Can I revoke a warning?

There's an edit-war warning here User talk:Thelisteninghand which I feel is unjustified - the issue is still ongoing and there is genuine lively discussion. Can it be revoked? If I'd known how to give such warnings it could have been me issued it first - we were tweaking different arrangements. I'm still unhappy with the whole issue but this warning is completely out of order, I would say. Thelisteninghand (talk) 21:09, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Thelisteninghand: A warning is just an opinion of the editor who issued it; it doesn't have any sort of "official" status that can be revoked. Users are allowed to remove warnings from their own talk page, so you can just remove or archive it if you feel it's unjustified. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks - that's a relief!Thelisteninghand (talk) 22:33, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Sdkb: Just for future reference, ping won't work if you add it to an already signed post and don't re-sign the post. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:41, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Marchjuly That's why I included their username in my follow-up edit summary ;) {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:44, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

​My apologies. I didn't catch that. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:48, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

​No worries! Hopefully someday we'll fix our ping system so it's not so complicated. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:51, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Red links

I need some help at the Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/Requested Articles. In the Medal of Honor recipients, Civil war, T-Z sections there are the names William Wright and H. Clay Wood in red. They should link to the pages William Wright (Medal of Honor) and Henry Clay Wood but for some reason don't. I'm not very good at source editing so if someone could help that would be very much appreciated. Thanks in advance. Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 16:14, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Gandalf the Groovy, I took care of it for you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:28, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Gandalf the Groovy If you encounter a similar thing in the future and want to handle it yourself, see Help:Redirect. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:53, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Is it possible to put in a request for an experienced contributor to create a new Wikipedia entry?

Hi,

I run a children's science magazine called Whizz Pop Bang that has been published every month since Aug 2015 (we're on Issue 71!). Many other newer magazines with smaller distributions have their own Wiki pages but not this one :(

As someone who has an interest in the magazine and who has never edited a Wiki entry, it doesn't feel right for me to create the page. Is there a mechanism for putting in a request for someone to create a page about the magazine? It has 20,000 loyal and loving subscribers, mostly in the UK but also internationally too.

The website is: https://www.whizzpopbang.com

Thanks for any help and advice you can give. RedFoxMonster (talk) 16:10, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello RedFoxMonster and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for asking first, that will save you time and effort. Yes, there is such a place, WP:REQUEST, but it's very backlogged and you'd have to be quite lucky. However, per WP rules, existing is not enough, see this link: WP:GNG, that is your first hurdle. Do you have 3-5 sources, that are at the same time independent of the magazine (and you, etc), reliably published (no blogs, wikis etc etc) and about the magazine in some detail? Articles about it on BBC, Times etc would be excellent. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:31, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Like this: [9]. Do you have a few more? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:34, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the speedy response! The following sources aren't as high-calibre as the Guardian but would they be enough?...

• https://www.teachwire.net/products/product-review-whizz-pop-bang-magazine
• https://www.rockthecotswolds.com/rockers/all-the-rockers/whizz-pop-bang-magazine/
• https://www.theschoolrun.com/best-educational-magazines-for-children
• https://startups.co.uk/startups-awards/peoples-champion-finalist-2018-whizz-pop-bang/
• https://www.teachwire.net/news/teach-primary-awards-2019-finalists-announced

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedFoxMonster (talk • contribs) 16:50, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

I'll respond at your talkpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:55, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

For the interested, Whizz Pop Bang. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:28, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Bravo, Gråbergs Gråa Sång. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:01, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Change title

Hello, I need to change the title of this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Guille_Scherping I want it to say just the name Guille Scherping, but I can't edit it because i'm not a confirmed user. Thanks in advance. SofiCataCortes (talk) 23:52, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

It does say "Guille Scherping". What are you asking for? RudolfRed (talk) 23:56, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@SofiCataCortes: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you want to get rid of the "Draft:" part, you will need to submit the draft for review. Kleinpecan (talk) 00:06, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@SofiCataCortes: Before you submit the draft for review, I suggest using a more neutral tone: for example, His catalog includes works with some of the greatest exponents of the music industry in Chile could be misconstrued as promotional, which can be a reason for a reviewer to decline it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:14, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Formatting a draft page of a translated article

I'm working on a draft that I translated from PT Wikipedia. It was already submitted once before and rejected due to primary sources (I'd just used whatever sources were in the PT version). I've now beefed up the sources and re-submitted; I just want to make sure that I formatted everything correctly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Antonio_Peticov.

Is there anything I need besides the bit stating that the page was translated from PT Wikipedia?

 Actionactioncut (talk) 17:54, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

The prose seems a bit purplish. Here are just three sentences: In the midst of the travels of the evangelizer André, his wife, Gláucia delivered the couple's second child to the world. No obvious need for "to the world". Actually you could just say "Antonio was born to an itinerant evangelist and his wife", or similar. Throughout his life Antonio witnessed the evangelizing work of his father, preaching the word of God throughout Brazil. He did? There was nothing particularly secret about my own father's (entirely secular) work, but I witnessed virtually none of it; which makes me wonder: Did the son actually attend the meetings? And isn't "preaching the word of [their supposed] God" what professional evangelists do? (Is there a need to say this?) It was the beginning of an awakening that, in truth, would become eternal. (Unsourced.) All men, Socrates and your biographee included, are mortal; thus the "awakening" (vocation?) will not be eternal. -- Hoary (talk) 07:07, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Hoary: The prose is definitely purple at times — it's still very "Portuguese" in style. As I was just translating, I didn't want to make drastic edits to the content, but is it okay to remove unsourced flourishes? -- Actionactioncut (talk) 07:38, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Actionactioncut, if an article at pt:WP is larded with twaddle, I hope that somebody will cut it out and in the meantime I feel sorry for its readers. Please don't inflict this on en:WP readers as well. No, you are under no obligation of fidelity to an original. -- Hoary (talk) 09:07, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Actionactioncut, I would advise you, whenever you're doing translation from another wikipedia to en.wikipedia, that you view the task more as adaptation than translation. Other wikipedias generally have lower standards than here. As you translate, I recommend not translating (simply omitting) any information that is not footnoted to a reliable source. And feel free to fix bad writing, or writing that isn't good style in English. (Translating Spanish Wikipedia to English, which I do periodically, involves a lot of removing of flourishes that read well to Spanish ears but not English ones.) Overall, I think you would have better luck (and a better product) with an article that is 15-25% the length of the current draft. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:08, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Seconding Calliopejen1's comment. Sample: In London, he attended the legendary Isle of Wight Festival, in search of new friends, and witnessed Jimi Hendrix's last performance in England. Let's agree for now that this was Hendrix's last performance in England (though this claim is questionable). And let's suppose that "in London" (which is some distance from the Isle of Wight) is shorthand for "while based in London". The legends that have accrued to the festival may be read up in the long article dedicated to it. Actionactioncut, over half a million people attended this festival. If Peticov was one of them, so? -- Hoary (talk) 23:35, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Calliopejen1: Yeah, I needed to be less precious with the original text. I'll be taking inspiration from your excision of the exhibitions section! -- Actionactioncut (talk) 00:18, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Does this new article seem ready to publish?

Is there a way to get quick initial assessments of whether my new draft article seems appropriate and ready for publication? The article title is Draft:Solar United Neighbors. I have a moderate amount of editing experience and have tried to carefully address Wikipedia guidelines for new articles while writing the article. Thanks for your help! Omygoshogolly (talk) 22:52, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Omygoshogolly I've added the appropriate information to allow you to submit your draft for review, although it likely will not be quick. It's preferable to moving it into the encyclopedia yourself unless you have much experience in article creation. 331dot (talk) 22:58, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

331dot, I presume you mean [...] preferable to not move it into the encyclopedia yourself. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:12, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

"It" refers to submitting it, which is preferable to moving it themselves. 331dot (talk) 00:45, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Ah, my bad; I didn't consider the previous sentence to be an antecedent. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:52, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

331dot, Thanks! Omygoshogolly (talk) 04:31, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Omygoshogolly, that page looks decent. I made a few small style tweaks. The two recommendations I'd make before submitting it for review are (1) adding a copy of your three strongest references to the end of the first sentence, to help make it easy for the reviewer to assess whether or not it meets WP:NORG; and (2) condensing how much space you use to describe the organization's mission, since too much can come off as promotional, and things like the quote from Schoolman would be more appropriate for a news article than an encyclopedic record. I hope that helps! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 23:14, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! Omygoshogolly (talk) 04:31, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

How to get a google knowledge panel

hey I was kindly asking how can I get a google knowledge panel using Wikipedia and wiki data? And what do I need to do. Prophet Dudu J.Comfort (talk) 06:15, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Prophet Dudu J.Comfort: Hello and Welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, we can only deal with questions about using or editing Wikipedia here, we have no control over Google. If something on a Knowledge Panel is inaccurate, you can use the "Feedback" link. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:27, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

You can find out more about the Google Knowledge Panel here. There may be good reasons for not wanting one.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 06:55, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

This is war

 206.255.61.173 (talk) 01:12, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@206.255.61.173:, hi and welcome to the Teahouse. I’m not exactly sure what you mean by “this is war”. Could you please elaborate a bit more? Thanks, Helen (let’s talk) 01:30, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

You made one edit, to Cincinnatus Shryock, which was correctly reverted. Where is this "war"? David notMD (talk) 08:37, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

AFC

I created a draft Draft:Prasanth Nair and submitted it for Approval. User:Ken Tony accepted it and then user:Bonadea changed it to draft again, See this. There are plenty of significant coverage found on Google about Prasanth Nair, 'Collector bro' Prasanth moved out of Kannanthanam's office (OnManorama, 2018), Serving the people makes Prashanth Nair a local hero (Times Kuwait, 2018), 'Collector bro' Prashant Nair hospitalised, diagnosed with sudden hearing loss (NewsMinute, 2018), Superman 'collector bro' of Indian state Kerala (Gulf News, 2016), Kerala govt in a spot as fight between Kozhikode collector, Congress MP escalates (FirstPost, 2016). These sources focus on Nair and include in-depth coverage. Nair appears to be a 'major local political figure who has received significant press coverage,' e.g. Kozhikode IAS officer does it again: Now offers biriyani to clean water body (Indian Express, 2016, "An IAS officer in Kerala, who has often been in the news for his ingenious campaigns to improve public amenities and increase youth engagement, is back with a new formula."), Kozhikode collector promises to give people biryani if they help clean a city pond (Scroll.in, 2016 "IAS officer Prashanth Nair, who was behind the initiative, is known for his out-of-the-box campaigns to improve the state of his constituency."), Kozhikode’s ‘Collector Bro’ Prasanth Nair appointed private secretary to Tourism Minister KJ Alphons (Scroll.in, 2017, "Nair earned public acclaim when he started several initiatives in Kozhikode during his term as the collector, The Indian Express reported. He earned the moniker of “Collector Bro”, and even ran his own Facebook page, which has nearly 2.5 lakh likes."), How an IAS officer in Kerala used Facebook to help flood victims (The Print, 2018, "First, as the district collector of Kozhikode, IAS officer Prasanth Nair won the hearts of his home state, earning the moniker ‘Collector Bro’ for his citizen-friendly and participative approach in governance. Now, a few years later, at a time when Kerala is battling the worst natural calamity it has faced in living memory, Nair has inspired a volunteers’ movement to help the hundreds of thousands in need."), ‘Collector Bro’ Prasanth Nair Is Taking His Debut Film to Cannes (The Quint, 2018, "Considered as one of the most social media savvy IAS officers, Nair commands a large social media following on his official Facebook page due to his work in Kozhikode, as well."), Prasanth Nair's Masterstroke That Arrested Hunger In A Wayanad Tea Estate (Outlook India, 2020).. Kichuz996 (talk) 00:14, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Do you have a question? The draft has been submitted for review. It being accepted, declined or rejected depends on the quality of the writing and the strength of the references. Listing references here has no function, as Teahouse host are not Reviewers, and if what is listed here is valid, then it belongs in the article. David notMD (talk) 01:04, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

To my knowledge, the article perfect for mainspace. Then why the above mentioned user rejected? User:Ken Tony accepted the draft and moved it into mainspace. But the other user moved back that to draft. Is it a good thing to move an article back to draft from mainspace and reject? That is my question. Kichuz996 (talk) 01:14, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Kichuz996 (talk) I would suggest that you contact user:Bonadea and politely discuss your problem with that person. The comment left was: "Four AfD discussions over the past five years, the most recent one two months ago – the various UPE editors/sockpuppets creating them have played around with various titles to make that less obvious."

You can read what a sock puppet is here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry

If you have never used more than one account on Wikpedia start a conversation with user:Bonadea, and explain that there may have been some misunderstanding.

Nothing was said about your article not having good references, there seems to be a concern about one or more accounts that may be connected to you. Best wishes on resolving the difficulty. Karenthewriter (talk) 02:04, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Kichuz996 has been blocked as yet another sock of the same paid editor who has been trying to use Wikipedia for some time to advertise the subject of the draft. That the draft was not acceptable as an article is not only because it was created by a long-term abuser, but because the subject has repeatedly been found not to be notable, most recently in a community discussion 2 months ago. --bonadea contributions talk 08:44, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

How to change the title

Change the title

Hello teahouse,

The title/name of Kalinchowk Bhagwati Temple is written as Kalinchowk Bhagwati Shrine. There is a difference between temple and a shrine. This temple is famous and I've never heard anyone call it Bhagwati Shrine, it has always been a temple.

How do I change the title?? Sushant1432 (talk) 08:59, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Discuss it on the talk page of the article. At present, the article describes it as a shrine, so you need to get concessous from other to agree. If there is agreement you can move the article title from Kalinchowk Bhagwati Temple to Kalinchowk Bhagwati Shrine. Kalinchowk Bhagwati Temple will then become a redirect. --Bduke (talk) 09:10, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Sushant1432 See also WP:MOVING. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 10:37, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Second opinion

I'm not asking for sanctions against anybody, and apparently, nobody is currently asking for sanctions about me. But we have a budding dispute, and to prevent things from escalating it would be helpful if an admin weighed in on a policy interpretation question. I have fewer than 500 edits. Is it okay for me to open an RFC about Omar's statements about Jewish Americans? The dispute is I have fewer than 500 edits and I need 500 edits to discuss issues related to the Israeli-Arab conflict. However, I don't think her statements about Jewish Americans relate to that. Although it came up in the context of Omar alleging that Jewish Americans and the US do too much nice things for Israel, the US has done a lot of nice things for Israel that have nothing to do with that conflict such as massive, massive economic aid, hosting high tech R&D centers there, and a bunch of cooperation on Iran. Benevolent human (talk) 13:46, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Appears to be an extension of discussion started on Benevolent human's Talk page. David notMD (talk) 13:56, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Why is the no references sign not going out?

I am new to Wikipedia and am designing my own user page(My User Page). I have added 3 references and added them in a level 2 heading at the end with the heading "References". But there is a sign saying that there is no cite reference there even though I have added them. There is no code to remove for removing this sign as it says in the article. The link is User:MoulikChawla Can you help me?  MoulikChawla (talk) 11:24, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@MoulikChawla: Fixed for you, you added the {{References}} instead of {{Reflist}}. The former will display the warning (so-called) which is what you saw, while the latter is the References list which is what you want. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:42, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: Thanks for the fix MoulikChawla (talk) 14:08, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

What route to deal with abuse?

Hello, Editor Elizium23 has lost it completely on Talk:Miles Davis throwing expletive abuse at other editors. Also refers to self in the plural. Should there be any action? Thank you. Thelisteninghand (talk) 18:01, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

I suggest everyone involved WP:DROPIT and go work on something else for awhile. RudolfRed (talk) 18:59, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Best way to add pics to an article for a singer

Hi, where should I look to find copyright free images of a singer? Ddyson99 (talk) 18:15, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Ddyson99, I suggest Flickr. It has filters to find free images. See WP:FLICKR for many helpful links CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 19:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Proteon draft article, looking for advice to improve.

I had noticed that a few articles on WP referenced a non-existent article for pioneering Internet router company Proteon (for example, the Token Ring article), so I personally set off to remedy the situation with Draft:Proteon. My article was rejected for non-notability. I suspect I wasn't clear enough in my description, since I had a number of 3rd party sources including books and journals about Internet history and historical trade publications. The feedback was cursory and perfunctory. I modeled the article after several similar pioneering Internet companies founded in the 1980s, so I was a little surprised at the reject. Any advice on improving would be welcome beyond the canned feedback. I made some changes and resubmitted, but given the long turnaround time, I thought I might seek further advice. Remaker (talk) 08:36, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Remaker Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure which articles you used as a model, but unless they are classified in quality as a "good article", you may have chosen articles as a model that were problematic themselves. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when can, it is possible to get inappropriate articles by us. We can only address what we know about.

The good news is that your draft was only declined, not rejected, meaning that there is at least a chance it can be improved. The main issue seems to be that the sources you offered do not have significant coverage of the subject, and that the article just tells about the company and what it's done. Wikipedia articles must do more than that. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company(please review). Announcements of routine business activities, brief mentions, staff interviews, the company website, and other primary sources do not establish notability. For example, Ford Motor Company does not merit an article because they opened or closed a factory, or released a new car model, but because many people outside of Ford have written extensively about Ford and its effects on the auto industry, manufacturing in general, and society. 331dot (talk) 09:24, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

331dot Thanks for the reply. I have cited journal articles and independent books on the history of the Internet confirming the prominent role played by Proteon in Internet history. They invented foundational technologies that power this very website, though were ultimately dominated by competitors. The mainstream media took little notice of Internet technology at the time, so relying exclusively on traditional mass media seems to be a too-narrow view. Millions of people were impacted by this company's work, especially in developing the OSPF protocol and early LAN technologies. Using your Ford example, Proteon would be more akin to Abbott-Detroit Remaker (talk) 10:08, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Remaker If the sources go into extensive detail about this company, that isn't clear from the text that you submitted. The sources only cite what the company has done, not why it is significant. 331dot (talk) 10:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

331dot It sounds like I should improve my text to expound on why Proteon was important, with the right citations? A key source is Pelkey's history of computer communications, which I cite. While (currently) self-published, it is regarded as an authority by historians, as evidenced by it's citation on the Computer History Museum website. Computer Network Historians regard the company as important. How do I better reflect that in the article? Remaker (talk) 17:54, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Remaker Yes, the article should primarily summarizes what independent sources say is significant about the company, that is what establishes notability. You might also be able to work in what the museum says. 331dot (talk) 19:57, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Difficulty with welcomes

Sometimes when I try to insert the welcome template, I instead insert the entire article Welcome, like here [10]. What am I doing wrong? Benevolent human (talk) 19:47, 12 June 2021 (UTC) Benevolent human (talk) 19:47, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Benevolent human, Boy, without seeing what you wrote, that sure is strange. My suggestion: use Twinkle instead to give folks welcomes, gives you more options for welcomes and is easier to use. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 19:50, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! Benevolent human (talk) 19:56, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Benevolent human: That's strange. I tested it in my sandbox and it seems to be working as intended. Do you remember the exact code that you used? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:57, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for that! Alas, I don't remember what I did. Benevolent human (talk) 19:59, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Benevolent human: Maybe you forget to type the "Template:" part? Kleinpecan (talk) 20:11, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

I didn't include the template part, but that seems okay in my sandbox. Benevolent human (talk) 20:23, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Benevolent human, looks like you typed "{{subst::Welcome}}" instead of "{{subst:Welcome}}". —Kusma (talk) 20:23, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Mystery solved!! Thank you very much!!!!! Benevolent human (talk) 20:30, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Trouble to Access Wikipedia from Google Chrome

One can not properly access Wikipedia via Google Chrome : The resulting page is "torn" 2601:6C0:C201:4F80:5572:389D:C7B3:AF52 (talk) 20:57, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP, I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you mean. To be able to post here, you should be able to access Wikipedia. I'm on Chrome right now and I'm not facing any problems. Could you elaborate on your problem? ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 23:12, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

You'd have to give more information, IP user, but are you perhaps saying that the page's layout (whichever Wikipedia page that may be) is broken? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:30, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Ganbarruby -- While you may not have the problem, I have found that others do :TWO sliders appear at the upper right. . They may or may not work. . Sometimes only the first half or so is visible. . When I access via Microsoft EDGE or via FireFox, this does NOT occur ever. Tenryuu -- Yes, broken.2601:6C0:C201:4F80:5572:389D:C7B3:AF52 (talk) 23:52, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm using Chrome as well and not noticing any problems. Have you tried clearing your browser's cache or checked to see if any extensions you've installed might be causing the problem? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:05, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Hinduphobia Article

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Jihad#:~:text=Love%20Jihad%20(also%20known%20as,to%20invoke%20prejudice%20against%20Muslims. This article clearly is Hinduphobic. Can any1 please remove this page.

Thanks Prashanthr153 (talk) 14:59, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Love Jihad has been in existence for more than ten years. Proper place for discussion of article is on it's Talk page. History there shows deletion has been proposed three times in the past, most recently September 2020 (conclusion was "no consensus"). The topic is clearly contentious, with more than 25 edits in the last 48 hours, including massive cuts and reverts, but deleting the page does not appear to be likely. David notMD (talk) 15:07, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

This is not the first time I've seen complaints about this page, nor is it the first time I've seen complaints from a drive-by user who clearly does not intend to follow up about a topic that gets Indians up in arms en generale. All that twitters is not bold. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 20:36, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

New account editors (P...153 for example), may have valid concerns about an article, and express those here, even though they are not yet prepared to edit directly. David notMD (talk) 02:54, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Do I owe you money?

 47.205.187.73 (talk) 00:20, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not require that people pay, so you might be asking for another website, which is out of our purview. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:53, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi 47.205.187.73, welcome to the tea house. You do not owe Wikipedia/Wikimedia anything for using Wikipedia, and I don’t think you owe me anything... although donations to wikimedia will be greatly appreciated. -Justiyaya (talk) 02:46, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: I think there might be two words missing in Wikipedia require that people pay! --- Possibly (talk) 03:12, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps, "...does not require...? David notMD (talk) 03:39, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Tenryuu's incorrect. Wikipedia is free to use and free to edit. I understand the feeling, skipping words because you mentally outrace yourself. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 03:43, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD:  Self-trout. I corrected myself once and made it even wrong. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:49, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Question

Hi! I was wondering if you guys could maybe have more information on the pay rates of all the job articles you have. 166.181.81.181 (talk) 21:08, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

That would require us to have some knowledge of thousands upon thousands of local economies. Rates vary, sometimes wildly, and thus listing the average pay would be unfeasible. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 21:16, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Basically not worth the effort. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 22:20, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

IF, by any chance, you are asking about how much people are paid to create articles here at Wikipedia, the vast majority were done for no payment, by volunteer editors. There are people who create and submit drafts of articles for pay, but that information is not known to Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 02:59, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Mainly because nine times out of ten, they are either scams or protection rackets. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 03:50, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Replacing low quality images with higher quality images

There is a portrait of Lady Jane Grey in the article Streatham Portrait called the Houghton. I have a better quality and in color photo of it from J. Stephan Edwards "A Queen of a New Invention" - what steps do I need to take to replace it? Dancingtudorqueen (talk) 05:00, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Dancingtudorqueen: Welcome to the Teahouse. There's a guide to upload images, but is the portrait in the public domain, under an acceptable licence, or copyrighted for you (and are willing to release it into the public domain)? There may be reasons as to why a lower quality image is being used; please consult the Image use policy for more details. If you're not sure, it's better to err on the side of caution and not upload the image. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:28, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Updated image on WikiMedia Commons not updating on Wikipedia

Hi I've updated an image in WikiMedia Commons (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gaelic_Football_Inter-County_Championship_Scoring_1910_to_2015.png ) which I've previously used in Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaelic_football ). However, the old image continues to show in Wikipedia when I click on the thumbnail (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaelic_football#/media/File:Gaelic_Football_Inter-County_Championship_Scoring_1910_to_2015.png ). But when I click on 'More details' (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gaelic_Football_Inter-County_Championship_Scoring_1910_to_2015.png ) it shows the updated image.

Can you advise? Many thanks Donncha Kavanagh Donncha77 (talk) 08:02, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Donncha77: Generally it takes time for the updated image to be shown. Right now it is showing the updated image, so the problem is already solved.Siddartha897 (talk) 08:16, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Donncha77, I see the new image in the article Gaelic football. If you are still seeing the old image, could you refresh the page and Wikipedia:Bypass your cache? Perhaps, your browser cached the old version of the small image but then when you opened the larger preview it fetched the new version? Anton.bersh (talk) 08:19, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both. That worked - It seems like the old version was cached in my browser. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donncha77 (talk • contribs)

How I improve my article.. suggest me

 KausikKhamaru (talk) 20:01, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

KausikKhamaru, For the village article, I have accepted it but must say that it is extremely rough. The English is not great. For the High School, I somewhat doubt that it is notable (i.e. suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia), see WP:NSCHOOL. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 20:10, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Mahanad High School (H.S) TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:38, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@KausikKhamaru: As is, the article does not have a single in-depth reliable source not nonnected to the school itself, so the article is very unlikely to get accepted in its current form. Also, when writing a new article, you should first do the proper research and find sources for it, and only then write an article based on these sources. If you are writing about this high school because you or someone you know attended it or employed by it or volunteered there or are connected to it in any way whatsoever, please disclose your connection. Anton.bersh (talk) 11:08, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Lowercase sigmabot III doesn't seem to be working

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics. thanks!--SilverMatsu (talk) 08:33, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

To be clear, the code inserted at the top of the page looks correct, and elsewhere the bot is working.--SilverMatsu (talk) 13:42, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@SilverMatsu: The code looks correct to me as well. As per the history, the last time the bot ran was on June 3, 2021. So which part do you meant by not working, it is suppose to archive certain thread? — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:51, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: Thank you for your reply. For example,Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics#Proposal: Template:infobox theorem. Looking at the date of the latest signature and the code, it seems to be archived but it's not working ...--SilverMatsu (talk) 16:19, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@SilverMatsu: I have tweaked the heading slightly by removing the wikilink from the heading. We have to see if it works when LSB III run the next time. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 16:31, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: Thank you for the fix.--SilverMatsu (talk) 16:39, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: Seems to have been successfully archived. Thank you!--SilverMatsu (talk) 10:50, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@SilverMatsu: Glad to hear that. Even though I can't confirm whether if it is because I removed the wikilink from the section heading or is it because LSB III ran at later hour. If it is doesn't work again, maybe can consider trying the trick again to see if it works. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 11:16, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Illative sense

I came across this short stub Illative Sense in the uncat'd list. I was going to move it to Illative sense (the 'sense' is just a common noun), but there already exists a redir there. It seems the creator (Everarddejong) of the new article has tried to replace the redir with essentially the same stub, but that was reverted by Njd-de (possibly for lack of sources, rather than objecting to the article creation per se) so Everarddejong created it using the title case capitalisation instead. Not sure if I need to open an RfD, or what's the best way to deal with this? Thanks, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:45, 13 June 2021 (UTC) DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:45, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing: Welcome to the Teahouse. Looking at the stub, I don't really see any reason for it to exist as is; the article Grammar of Assent briefly mentions what the term means, while the stub does the same and mentions that it is used in Grammar of Assent. If it were me I'd delete the stub and maybe bold illative sense if only to serve as a redirect term. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:59, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict):Check with the creator if they intend to add more content – as far as I can tell, this is a concept used by one person in one work, so the most obvious course of action is to redirect Illative Sense to Grammar of Assent which is what Illative sense also redirects to. If the creator thinks that sufficient information exists to create a stand-alone article, I agree that that should be at the small-caps "s" title, but if so, they only need to overwrite the redirect again. --bonadea contributions talk 14:03, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The redir is marked 'with possibilities', which in my non-expert opinion seems fair. Of course, what I don't know is whether and how much Everarddejong is planning to expand on the content currently there, but perhaps they can let us know? --DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:07, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

search bar history always has the same 5 entries.

I've noticed that EVERYTIME I use the search bar the same 5 things always show up under it. It is something like; "1444c, map,notice1444,1444" Please help me as I am really frustrated that computers are still soooo primitive!! How can I erase them? 216.16.178.32 (talk) 04:07, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

If this is a general computing query, ask at WP:Reference desk/Computing. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 04:13, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

In my browser (Edge but Chrome should be similar) I can hover over each saved entry in turn and a "trash" icon appears to its right, allowing me to delete the items. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:16, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

creating public figure account

How can i create a public figure account on Wikipedia? Hamzeht1979 (talk) 12:31, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Hamzeht1979 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Do you perhaps mean Wikipedia article instead of account? 331dot (talk) 12:39, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

my wife is an actress i would like to make a page for her on Wikipedia how can i do that ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamzeht1979 (talk • contribs) 12:44, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Try reading about conflict of interest and about notability, then read the advice at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:48, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Hamzeht1979 That's inadvisable. Please review conflict of interest. If your wife receives significant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to write about her, showing how she meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable actress, an independent editor will take note of her career and write about her. For you to succeed in writing about your wife, you would need to set aside everything you know about her and only write based on what others say about her. Most people cannot do that.

Please note that a Wikipedia article (not a mere "page") is not necessarily desirable. There are good reasons to not want one. 331dot (talk) 12:52, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

I totally understand , if i want to post her experiences and shows along with series and movies that's it , not possible ?

Hamzeht1979 That would be more appropriate for a social media site or personal website, not a Wikipedia article. As I said, Wikipedia is interested in what others say about her only. 331dot (talk) 13:03, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

very well noted , thank you for your much appreciated help. regards

Hamzeht1979 The critical difference for what Wikipedia requires, is that listing performances is allowed, often useful, but does not establish notability. Neither do interviews. What is required are published articles about her. If you pursue this, first explain your connection on your User page (I am creating an article about my wife). Keep in mind that what you know to be true cannot be included unless verified by references. Model content after existing articles about her peers. David notMD (talk) 13:18, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Hamzeht1979 Having a Wikipedia article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. If you manage to get an article about yourself or your wife up on Wikipedia, then you should understand that it might change over time as other editors edit it, find other sources and new reliable sources are published. So, for example, if you create an article describing her in a favorable way based on weak sources (like interviews with her) but then someone publishes an unfavorable article in more reliable sources (pretty much anything else), then the unfavorable coverage "wins" and the whole article becomes critical of your wife. Put simply, if your wife is involved in a controversy described in two sources, one interview with her and a gossipy magazine, then the gossip magazine might be deemed more reliable than the interview because it is not influenced by the subject of the article. Anton.bersh (talk) 16:39, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Replacing a rejected page with a translation

I started the page Draft:Permanent_Forest_Contract as a translation of de:Dauerwaldvertrag , which was rejected. I then realised that, rather than just starting a new page, I should have translated the existing page. I have now done this and added the 'Translated page' template. How do I now submit the page such that I can add the correct comment about the page being a translation in the first edit summary? Loris Bennett (talk) 19:53, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Just noting I already answered this here but feel free to add on. Mcguy15 (talk, contribs) 20:08, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Lilian Rea

The Enthusiasts of Port Royal is the title of a book published in 1912. It's a respectable historical work. It's author was Lilian Rea. There is no information about this person available online. No bio, no nothing. Might Wikipedia editors fill this gap? 2603:7000:5040:BF:B496:E6DC:2BE:E1B7 (talk) 21:47, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state about subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. If this book or person meet that definition, they may merit articles. The best person to write it is the person who wants to see it- you- although it is challenging. Please read Your first article. 331dot (talk) 21:58, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Worldcat shows other books published by LR. -- Hoary (talk) 23:46, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Information for references does not have to be online, but it does have to have been published. You may be hard-pressed to find newspaper articles about Rea or about the book. David notMD (talk) 00:04, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Inquiry regarding extended confirmed status

Hello, everyone.

I noticed several hours ago that I have now conducted more than 500 edits ever since I joined this platform one and a half months ago.

I am not quite sure if this is the right page to ask this, but what is the reason for my account not yet having extended confirmed status?

Sincerely, BaxçeyêReş (talk) 01:13, 14 June 2021 (UTC) BaxçeyêReş (talk) 01:13, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@BaxçeyêReş: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have 502 edits on all Wikimedia projects, but only 495 edits on the English Wikipedia. Kleinpecan (talk) 01:20, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

That explains it. Thank you for informing me of that. Have a great day. BaxçeyêReş (talk) 02:10, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! You too. Kleinpecan (talk) 02:11, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Difference between Image and Thumbnail in here | Help in Adding other Information in the Infobox

Hi Wikipedians! So I am back into editing a new article Haniya Nafisa. So I was lucky that I found her image being in Wikimedia Commons already. But as of now, I would like to know the difference between Image and Thumbnail, as when I added the Image, It did not fit the Infobox. Also, I would like to add other columns in her Infobox. However, I added the Image column, but please do let me know how to add other infos. Thanks in Advance!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 04:05, 14 June 2021 (UTC) Jocelin Andrea (talk) 04:05, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Jocelin Andrea: Infoboxes are special in that you only put the image name in the | image = parameters. In your case, that's just Nafisa Haniya.jpg. For your second question, the full list of possible parameters is listed at the template's documentation at Template:Infobox musical artist (Template:Infobox singer is a redirect to that one). It's not possible to add more parameters than the ones listed there. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 04:10, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Oh and by the way: the infobox goes before the first paragraph. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 04:11, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Jocelin Andrea. Infobox templates have a field for an image and all you need to do is add the file name without any additional markup. Thumbnail is a standard way to display a standard sized image in the body of an article. If a higher resolution version is available, the reader can click on the image, access the better version, and learn about the history, licensing and provenance of the image. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:15, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your help @ ◢  Ganbaruby! , have understood that now.

Thank you for the help @Cullen³²⁸, have got that now.

Why shouldn't we have multi accounts on WP

Hello there! I have seen some people getting blocked due to dual accounts on wikipedia. What is the reason for the block and why we shouldn't have dual accounts here. Siddartha897 (talk) 08:30, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Siddartha897: There is no universal ban on multiple accounts, some uses are allowed and some aren't. See WP:SOCK for more info. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:53, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: Thanks for the info. I had a doubt on it and just now i noticed User:Heyday to you blocked for the same reason. Now i'm fine.Siddartha897 (talk) 09:11, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Siddartha897, if I may chime in, using multiple accounts simultaneously are not permitted, the reason is simple, we have a policy on editors having just one account to edit from but should they choose to operate more than one they are permitted insofar as it falls under WP:LEGITSOCK. We do not allow users to operate multiple accounts at the same time chiefly because of the potential disruptive editing or bad faith gaming it may amount to. Celestina007 (talk) 23:41, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007: Thanks for the talk. I've learnt about WP:SOCK, WP:LEGITSOCK and something new.Siddartha897 (talk) 05:17, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

A small but puzzling problem

If you look at the bottom of my page, you will see a section headed "Travel" that uses flags to show my travel experience. Entries of more than 5 flags split into lines of 5 flags, but they are not split when I preview the edit and I see no reason why they should split in that way. Can anyone explain this and show how I can avoid it? It is not a big deal, but it puzzles me. This is an example but it shows up fine here but not on my talk page:-

Days or hours:

>

Bduke (talk) 03:21, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

It also gives my sig here before the flags, but that is not what I wrote. Crazy. --Bduke (talk) 03:24, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Bduke: You're missing the ending symbol for a table |} at the end of your "Other Wikimedia activities" header. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 04:01, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

As for the "sig before the flags" thing, that's due to a typo in your table syntax. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 04:03, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. It is too easy to make these kind of mistakes and not spot them, particularly at my old age! --Bduke (talk) 05:19, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

What is the best way to find sources?

I was wondering of a good way to find sources for Wikipedia articles (specifically, about naval equipment), as I’m looking to improve some pages. Thank you! TheAnonymous1065 (talk) 01:40, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@TheAnonymous1065: Maybe ask at one of the military projects, like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 02:08, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

I am going to go on a minor rant here. When people talk about "improving Wikipedia articles", I suspect they're talking about adding content. But more content doesn't necessarily equate to a better article. We still have the concept that WP is an encyclopedia and not a collection of all the details that we're able to amass.

I think a far better improvement is to work on reviewing citations to make sure links are provided and are working. Although links are not mandated, they're highly desirable. Preferably, links should work with minimal interference (e.g. without a paywall). (While there are bots that fix many links that become broken, those bots don't necessarily do a great job.) If you get bored with that, you can look for claims that are in need of a citation.

Now why I feel this is so important, if links don't work, somebody may eventually flag the citation as a {{dead link}}, and some time later, they then replace the existing citation with a {{citation needed}} and when nobody provides a citation, then after some period of time, they delete the original claim. I'm not saying this is the way things are supposed to work, but WP takes all kinds and there are editors who will do this, and there are not enough police around to stop people from doing this. I have seen it happen.

That is my rant and recommendation. But if you want good sources, I would suggest you just look at citations from existing articles, perhaps from articles on related types of naval equipment. If the source is a book that most likely wouldn't be at your local library anyway, you should check the Internet Archive Digital Library (not the Wayback archive) and you may have a decent chance of finding it there (which of course is highly preferable since you can include the link). Good luck with your efforts at improving WP, whatever course you choose to take. Fabrickator (talk) 04:37, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, TheAnonymous1065. There is a slang term called "Googlefoo" that refers to skills in refining your online search terms so that you can extract the reliable information that you want. Start general and then narrow it down is the best brief advice that I can offer. There are specialized publications like Jane's Fighting Ships published annually since 1898 that provide basic data about military ships. There are many other such sources and most open societies have several publications covering local naval vessels, because not all information is classified. As for Fabrickator's self described rant, new editors can come to this project for any legitimate reason. I started editing in 2009 to add new content and even though I now work on many aspects of the encyclopedia, writing new content is the main reason that I am still here. I finished a new article Darnella Frazier just today, and am pleased to have written it. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:47, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

TheAnonymous1065 archive.org can be helpful. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:39, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Untitled question 2

Where was I born Shaun doop (talk) 07:50, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Shaun doop: If u really wanna be a volunteer, WP:I may help you.Siddartha897 (talk) 09:01, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Shaun doop, we are here to help, but to decide to become a productive editor, that you have to do yourself. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:07, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

User page got deleted

User page got deleted for multiple reasons under speedy deletion criteria U5,G11. Can I recreate page with same content but by avoiding reasons for which it got deleted? Smiles.ai (talk) 09:16, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Smiles.ai Your user page (which isn't article space) was a clear advertisement for your business. Furthermore, your username violates the username policy and will need to be changed immediately, please visit Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS to do so. Please also read about conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 09:19, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

New article + old one replaced by redirect

A new article Triforce (Arcade Board) has been created by Wii505. There existed an earlier article Triforce (arcade system board) on (what I presume to be) the same product. This has been replaced with a redir, most recently by Rosguill, for failing GNG. Should the two articles be somehow merged, despite the fact that the old one no longer exists in the mainspace? Or should I replace the new article also with a redir to the same target? The articles are roughly the same size and extent, but the new one is slightly better referenced, although whether the sourcing is enough to establish notability (going back to Rosguill's point), I'm not too sure. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:12, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing it would be up to you to figure out whether the topic merits an article (possibly in consultation with Rosguill and Wii505, which would best happen at one of your user talk pages or one of the article talk pages). If you decide it does, you could redirect Triforce (arcade system board) to the new article or restore the old article and do it the other way. If you decide it doesn't, trying to redirect is recommended if you find the target, as an alternative to proposing that it be deleted. So, in this case, you would redirect the new article also to wherever the old one is pointing to. Of course, redirecting an article is just a WP:BOLD action; no one has the authority to say this article should only be a redirect. So, if someone stores the article, you'd have to go to AFD anyway. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:38, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Is this draft notable?

I am creating a draft on the topic "Graphic charter of governmental communication in France" by translating its original article in French. (Click here for my draft, click here for its French article.) Is this topic notable? Excellenc1 (talk) 17:00, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1. So far, in the English draft, you haven't shown notability, with three sources. Please read WP:NOTABILITY. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 19:43, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, Looks notable to me, though I would say it would make a lot more sense to include the actual photos :) CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 19:44, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Oh, to add on, you should definitely bring over more references. The original has dozens, you have four, which will not be enough. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 19:44, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

I am in progress so I'll be tadding images and citations soon. Thank you for reviewing my article. Excellenc1 (talk) 02:54, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

• @Excellenc1 and CaptainEek: Quality trumps quantity, so four references can be enough. However, you need sources that show that the subject is "notable", which require multiple reliable sources independent of the subject (hence, non-governmental) to discuss it at length. (Side note: a subject is notable, a draft is not, but a draft that does not show the subject is notable is likely to be declined.) Of the current sources in the translated draft, the first ref (Le Point 1999) is probably too short for the "in detail" part (it is one or two paragraphs in a larger review of political news), the second (Le Monde 1999) seems good, and I cannot access the third one but based on the title I assume it is an academic talk which would be OK.

Looking at the fr article, I strongly suggest bringing in the Figaro 2020 source, too. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 08:34, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

The article is being worked on, so it seems like it has less citations, but actually I have over 40 sits which can be used to cite. Thank you Tigraan for the website.Excellenc1 (talk) 09:58, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

archeive web source

can anyone tell me how to archeived a live or dead links, also, why would we archeived any links?? ItsSkV08 (talk) 08:50, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi ItsSkV08, welcome to the teahouse. We archive links to prevent them from being dead links or, when they are already dead, we can fix them by using an older archive of the site. Links become dead when the webpage that the information is on stops functioning. We archive sites by using wayback machine or other websites like it. Justiyaya (talk) 11:16, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@ItsSkV08: See also Help:Archiving a source and WP:DEADLINK. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:12, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Untitled question

FYI

 – deleted empty ref-tags -Maresa63 ^Talk 13:15, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

 Rajeev Hazari (talk)sdghshcghgsdf~

Hello, @Rajeev Hazari:! Welcome to Wikipedia! Perhaps reading WP:TUTORIAL would be the best start. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 07:41, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Rajeev Hazari: Don't do things like this when u have no idea. If u need help go throughWP:I.Siddartha897 (talk) 09:18, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Delete subpage

Hello. I recently added a subpage to my userpage, but I now realize that it would be much simpler to just add it to my userpage, you know. But now I have that blank subpage and I don't feel like submitting it to AFD (I don't know if I can submit it to AFD), so...I don't know how to delete it. Seahawks4Life^{TALK—CONTRIBS} 13:00, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

hello Juanicolacho04 (talk) 13:05, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Uh...what? Seahawks4Life^{TALK—CONTRIBS} 13:10, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Seahawks4Life, the above post was probably just a test edit from a new user. If you want to delete a subpage in your userspace, you can tag it for speedy deletion by adding {{db-u1}} to the page and an administrator will delete it shortly. See WP:U1 for more information. Hope that helps! DanCherek (talk) 13:13, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. I looked into it, and apparently the post above made by Juanicolacho04 was probably made because they didn't understand how the Teahouse worked. All users have had problems getting used to Wikipedia, you know. Seahawks4Life^{TALK—CONTRIBS} 13:17, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Why are some articles so biased and even racist sometimes for example they refer to a group of people in general?

 Anti nationalism gang (talk) 16:06, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Anti nationalism gang: welcome to the Teahouse. It is hard to answer that kind of question when you don't give an example – in some cases it is appropriate to talk about a group of people in general terms, in many cases it is not. Maybe the article you saw had been vandalised, or inappropriate generalisations may have been added by somebody who was editing in good faith, but unless you are more specific than "some articles" it's impossible to give you an answer. --bonadea contributions talk 16:29, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Inaccurate data problems in list of most popular websites

Article about list of most popular websites has several complaints regarding it's data that are also back up by an editor here. It seems there's a debate regarding the data accuracy as well as about the fact that there's only one data source there. How do we go about adding more data sources for those lists? I see mentions of other sources, as well as some I mentioned myself, and it does make sense to add the reliable ones at least to get some balance/proportion to the page GrowTHC (talk) 14:13, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@GrowTHC: Good job engaging in discussion with other editors. It seems like there's a consensus among you three to add more data sources, so by all means, be bold and do it yourself! From personal experience, many of these lists of most popular X don't get updated as often as they should, so the community would appreciate the help. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 17:19, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: thanks! I'm not really sure how to go about it tbh, is this list manually updated? GrowTHC (talk) 07:54, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Possible page?

Hello, could this be a possible page? https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2021/06/14/21-injured-in-russian-gas-station-explosion-a74211

Or not important enough? SAMsohot (talk) 17:41, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse WP:NOTNEWS has useful information about this sort of topic. Theroadislong (talk) 17:48, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Art Catalogue Reference

Hello, I am wondering how I would be able to cite something like art catalogs because compared to something like a book, it does not have an ISBN. Would there be a resource I could use to maybe do some scan on physical copies and upload it somewhere for wikipedia to use as a reliable source? Thanks for any help! OneEyedWolf (talk) 23:40, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Mere lack of an ISBN is unimportant. But what do you mean by "art catalogs"? (Are these published, and held by libraries? What do you see when you look them up in Worldcat?) And what's their copyright status? (Are you proposing to ignore copyright niceties when uploading scans "somewhere"?) -- Hoary (talk) 23:49, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, OneEyedWolf. I assuming that you are referring to the catalog of an exhibition at an art museum. The best of them in recent years do have an ISBN number. The reliability of any such catalog depends on context. Is the museum that published the catalogue the Louvre or the Roadside Museum of Bigfoot and UFOs? Is the curator a graduate of Harvard or a drop-out from the local community college? Did independent publications report on and review the exhibition, or did they ignore it? And then there are the edge cases, which are the most interesting. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:28, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, art catalogs refer to exhibits from art museums. They range from several universities and to much more known ones like the MoMa which could add to notability. Independent publications have reported and reviewed the exhibits along with interviews with the curator. Perhaps I need to dig a little deeper in finding the sources because I could be dealing with time as a factor and I'm not too sure how far independent sources archive their information. OneEyedWolf (talk) 18:04, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Doubt: A Parable

•  Courtesy link: Doubt: A Parable

Please can Pamela Jikiemi as Mrs Muller be included in the cast breakdown for the Australian premiere of Doubt?

The Australian premiere was mounted at the Sydney Opera House by the Sydney Theatre Company on February 4, 2006. The cast included Alison Bell, Jennifer Flowers, and Christopher Garbardi, and was directed by Julian Meyrick. 77.96.195.121 (talk) 17:20, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP, do you have a reliable source that says Jikemi was in that play? ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 18:13, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Asking about reliability of a source

Is Google Scholar a reliable source? I've seen it in many pages. Is that reliable? Ken Tony ^{Shall we discuss?} 11:57, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Ken Tony, Google Scholar is a search engine, not a source. You can find relible sources there. That you find something there, does not make it a reliable source. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:05, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Mate, I didn't clearly understand what you were saying. What I found is sources that looks just like this:-

(Not the same user but) references to search engine results should be citing the specific scholarly sources instead. So this is a bad reference and should be replaced. There are many problems with this, including that Google isn't a reliable source and it can display different results to different people over different times, so it is not verifiable for whatever information it is attached to. — Bilorv (talk) 12:16, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

A cite like that is quite unhelpful. If you can find out what source was actually meant, you can improve it (perhaps it's possible to ask the editor who added it). If not you can remove text or add , it's a judgement call. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:38, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

References

If the question is whether GS can be used as a source for citation data, it can; there are other reliable sources for this also--the most widely available are Scopus and WoS, but they are behind paywalls. However, the method of preparation means that GS will usually give about double the number of citation as Scopus, because Scopus only includes references from the journals Scopus indexes, and GS casts a much wider net. (Citation figures inherently increase with time, so I always add the date accessed field.)

I can not think of any other reason one might want to use it directly as a reference. It's an index, and always gives the reference to what it's indexing. It generally even formats it, use the double-quote symbol after the reference. The "Vancouver" format usually comes closest to what a WP citation wants. If there's a free online version, there's usually a link to it on the right. (and, btw, in searching it, try all possible forms of the name). DGG ( talk ) 18:22, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

News articles quoting older news articles

I've just read a short collection of five "On This Day" facts in a news story from 2004.

Two of those facts contain earlier snippets of news stories from the same newspaper.

One is from 1979, and the other is from 1954, both of which contain the full dates the stories were originally published.

The 1954 snippet is interesting, so if I decide to use the 2004 story as a reference, should I use the 2004 date for the entire article, or the 1954 date for the article snippet? Danstarr69 (talk) 18:43, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse, Danstarr69. In general, citations are there to help the reader verify the information. Therefore you should cite the source which you used as a reference, and if you use two articles you should cite both. Anton.bersh (talk) 18:48, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Just to clarify: it's possible to use too many sources (Citation overkill), but with just two sources you are well below the "overkill" treshold. Also, other editors can easily remove redundant citations but finding extra citations is way harder. Anton.bersh (talk) 18:51, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Anton.bersh I wouldn't be using two articles.

Like I said, it's one modern article, quoting short sections of two articles which they wrote in 1979 and 1954.

I've archived countless news stories from that local newspaper over the years, roughly 30 of which I archived today regarding "Hall of Famers" from or associated with the city, and from what I can tell the earliest news stories of theirs which are available online, are from January 1998.

Anything earlier than 1998 is only available in their own archives, or in local libraries, apart from the historical stories they've reposted or quoted just like in this one.

If the full 1954 article exists in the local archive library, how I would prove to Wikipedia that it exists I have no idea.

That's why I'm wondering if I should use the 1954 date of the original article they've quoted? Or the newer article from the same date in 2004 exactly 50 years later?

Danstarr69 (talk) 19:09, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Anton.bersh For example:

Wikipedia News - Article published 14th of June 2021

On this day in 1381 Richard II in England meets leaders of the Peasants' Revolt on Blackheath. The Tower of London is stormed by rebels who enter without resistance.

On this day in 1645 Battle of Naseby, Leicestershire: "New Model Army" under Oliver Cromwell & Thomas Fairfax beat royalists forces of English King Charles I.

On this day in 1982 Argentina surrenders to Great Britain, ending the 74-day Falklands Islands conflict. Here's a story we wrote about it on the 14th of June 1982: "Blah blah blah blah blah" etc

19:28, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Danstarr69: If everything you're trying to put into Wikipedia is in the 2004 source, use that one, but if there's any details not in the modern source, use the older source. This is only because it would make it easier for other editors to verify your information. That being said, there is no requirement that sources on Wikipedia must be online, and many articles cite physical books that you would have to find a physical copy to verify. The concept of assume good faith applies here: we believe that you are not just making this stuff up, and that you faithfully summarized the reference on Wikipedia. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 19:33, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Add Protection to an article

Hi! How can i request protection to a page. Can only a administator do it.Siddartha897 (talk) 05:26, 14 June 2021 (UTC) Siddartha897 (talk) 05:26, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Only an administrator can do it, but you can ask them to here. Leijurv (talk) 07:17, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Before requesting, you should read Wikipedia:Protection policy and be able to explain what type of protection is needed (semi/full/pending changes; temporary/indefinite) and why protection is needed according to the protection policy. For instance, vandalism by a single user can be better solved by blocking that user. A mixture of vandalism and good edits by anonymous contributors is not a case for protection—instead, volunteers need to monitor the changes and revert the bad ones while keeping any good ones. Vandalism should also be recent and significant in frequency for protection to be justified. Every page protected goes against our mission of being the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit a little bit, so it needs a good reason. — Bilorv (talk) 12:22, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Siddartha897 You could also try Twinkle. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 19:41, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Article edit request for a conflict of interest

Hello! I am a volunteer with the Brink Literacy Project and I was asked to create an article for the organization. I put in a general edit request per the COI policies but the editor that answered the request was confused about what the request was for. Is there a way that I can more clearly request the correct edit?

Talentlessbard Talentlessbard (talk) 19:53, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Talentlessbard: Thanks for disclosing your COI. The edit request template is meant for changes to existing articles. Since your draft has not be reviewed and moved into the mainspace yet, you don't have to use that template. Instead, just hit the blue "Submit the draft for review!" button inside the grey banner on top, and a reviewer will come by and check if it's up to Wikipedia's standards. Be patient, since there's a lot of drafts to review. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 20:02, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

New article.

Hi! I am new to editing in Wiki. A friend of mine, paid me to submit an article of him in Wiki. This is the only one that I'll ever write, but my attempts to get it done doesn't seem to be working... He is the founder of Prague Polo, Naveed Gill. The info of him uploaded to the draft are legit. He paid me only 20Usd to do it. Is there a quick way to upload it? Thank you for reading. Iván. Ivanzarateleonel (talk) 20:17, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Ivanzarateleonel: Thank your for disclosing that you have been paid, however, please read over WP:PAID as there si a disclosure to make, which is not negotiable. There is no fast way to "upload" articles here, as Wikipedia does not operate on deadlines, and, since most of the users here are volunteers, does not care much about any deadlines you might have. See also Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide as well as possibly WP:REALWORLD. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:26, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

The experienced reviewer Rejected Draft:Naveed Gill (more severe than Declined) because that person felt there was no potential of improving the draft for it to become an article. Basically, you failed to provide evidence to confirm notability. Either learn a LOT more about what an article should look like, and how to reference it, or give up. At best, it might just be WP:TOOSOON for Gill to be a valid article topic. I took out all the business career stuff not relevant to polo. David notMD (talk) 20:39, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

• @Ivanzarateleonel: I'd also suggest that you return your friend's money. 331dot (talk) 20:49, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Guys i need your help.

how can I improve this draft? Draft:Vikash_Kalra I find this guy a significant figure in our art world. --Abhinath Maurya (talk) 20:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC) Abhinath Maurya (talk) 20:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Abhinath Maurya: Hello, welcome to the Teahouse. When your draft was declined, the user that declined it left a few comments on your page explaining why they did so. I recommend reading those comments and applying the constructive feedback they gave you. Helen (let’s talk) 21:28, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

hi, I have found an article that seems worthy of editing?

So the following url is to a Wikipedia about America's Olympic history.

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

I absolutely treasure the service that Wikipedia provides and I consider it to be a largely well curated and cared for place.

This specific Wikipedia article seems to have a American bias.

I do not consider much to be factually incorrect about this article, but the word choice, framing of aspects of the cold war, and certain Olympic events create a perhaps misleading narrative. I am a patriotic American. I don't believe misrepresenting the story is

I know the Olympic games are gaining attention due to the upcoming games and I wanted to bring this to someone's attention.

Thank you 71.32.63.95 (talk) 22:28, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for wanting to make it better. If you have suggestions for improving an article, please start a discussion on that article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 22:40, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Once you've opened a talk page discussion, you can tag the page itself with {{POV}}. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 02:02, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Do you see in Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Images/Archive_6 whether Collage of photos are included in ban of WP:NOETHNICGALLERIES

Does this collage of pictures = File:Amharapeople.jpg fall under the WP:NOETHNICGALLERIES? It explicity says photomontage or galleries. Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#Image_galleries & Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#Collages and montages differ, except that they should be properly licensed. The collage consist of six photos which are all in the public domain. Which policy does this picture fall under? Can you use this picture?

My second question is the same as in the title, and kind of the same as the first question. Can you see in this Rfc discussion Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Images/Archive_6 whether Collage of photos are included in ban of WP:NOETHNICGALLERIES

If this is not the place to ask this question please refer me, thank you Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 05:38, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

There is discussion of this here and currently here. Some pages use group photos, like Balinese people and Thai people and Sámi people. I don't feel confident in saying that the line is drawn between group photos and collages, but I think you would be fine if you treated that as the line. The guideline consensus truly just applies to photo montages and galleries. Applying that RfC's spirit further to collages or group photos should be based on common sense judgement, not a strict or literal interpretation of the words.

While I personally believe that your example File:Amharapeople.jpg is no different from the lead image of Sámi people in terms of "how much of an ethnic gallery" it is, others may disagree. Sorry I can't say anything more concrete, but the community doesn't have a strong consensus on this specific edge case currently. Leijurv (talk) 07:16, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

My reading is that yes, as written/made, that collage is what MOS:NOETHNICGALLERIES meant to prevent per "Collage of prominent Amhara people." This could perhaps be fixed by making a collage for Amhara kings/rulers or something like that (wouldn't necessarily be a good leadimage). I also don't think the MOS/policy differ, the policy is talking about any collage, the MOS about a special subset. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:29, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Leijurv & Gråbergs Gråa Sång Thank you very much for your input! Since there's no strong consensus(and a little grey and a little vague what's allowed), do you think it's worth opening a Rfc/content dispute in order to get clearity(conversation moving) whether it really applies for collages(and/or group photos)? Not just for the Amhara people page, but also other pages. I think it would be helpful and less confusing in what is and what's absolutely not allowed, if it was worded as such in clear terms in the WP:NOETHNICGALLERIES and relevant WP pages. Or do you think i should just let this go?

Another question, is this Rfc Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Images/Archive_6 outdated? Since the discussions continued here & here? How did you find/search those discussions btw? @Leijurv thanks again! Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 14:18, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Honestly, just try it. It's definitely an ambiguous case. If someone reverts it, then follow WP:BRD. If you like, you can point them back here and I'll take the blame :) I base this ambiguity on the statement that the RfC should be interpreted narrowly (The discussion I closed was specific to galleries of images of people, and did not relate to non-gallery images. If the community has ever reached a consensus about non-gallery images of people, then I'm not aware of it.) from here.

do you think it's worth opening a Rfc You can feel free to weigh in on the discussions that are currently open here on that topic. It's listed on the main list of MOS discussions here so probably not worth opening up a separate RfC, that would be a bit confusing. Leijurv (talk) 20:29, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

I rather not pass blame to anyone :). I will just indicate that there's no broadly defined consensus yet, and that there's a ongoing discussion in here. I just finished reading the entire Rfc's! I noticed two peculiarities (one of them for example is the definiton of photomontage is expanded, at least here in wikipedia to a point it's hard to distinguish from a regular collage). But i will be doing that later today. I just hope that this discussion is not going to be archived or removed anytime soon. I want to reflect on what is said here. Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 03:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia article history broken right now?

I'm getting a weird result comparing article history to the article prose; where, weirdly, the article history stops on 6 June 2021 yet the article has a (quite excellent) source citation, properly written, showing a 12 June 2021 source, that was published only two days ago.

What gives?

Here is the article history: link. Last edit shown when I look is 6 June, an edit I happened to have been the editor who made that 6 June edit.

Then, click on the article itself, search on "Burgha" (the author of the source). I see the 12 June 2021 source by Burghardt. It's a very good source, and needed in the article. But how did it get there if the article was last edited (per History page) on 6 June. And who was the editor that added it? (my original objective to learn)

How can this be? I must be doing something wrong but darn if I can figure out what it is? N2e (talk) 03:18, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@N2e: The citation is in the section "Rockets", which is an excerpt from the article Rockets by Astra, created using Template:Excerpt to automatically transude the relevant sections of that article into this one. If you check the history of that page you'll see that there was an edit there on the 13th that added that reference. 192.76.8.73 (talk) 03:29, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Wow. I didn't even now that could be done. Cool. Thanks very much for explaining it 192.76.8.73.

Now, I'm gonna get to learn what happens when I manually add that (very good) citation to the article, and the bots will now see the citation occur twice. Cheers. N2e (talk) 03:38, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Article Resubmitions

 Davesidhusydney (talk) 04:34, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Davesidhusydney, please feel free to ask a question. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:38, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Davesidhusydney, welcome to the teahouse. I'm guessing based on your edit history that you are asking about your draft article Draft:Dave Sidhu, I would advise that you discontinue the draft until you can find enough sources to prove that the draft meets WP:GNG, WP:GNG basically says that for a subject to be notable enough to justify a independent Wikipedia article, they have to have 2 reliable sources providing significant coverage to the subject. -- Justiyaya (talk) 05:13, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Thoughts regarding Hadith references in Islamic articles

Basically, hadith referencing seems to be an issue because various publishers and authenticators will use different numbering and different order of the chapters (For example, one might use Sahih Muslim xyz and another might use abc but abc will typically be a number close to xyz.) which will lead to the current references being invalid if someone uses one source instead of the other. So, while one can find the hadith by making an effort, it is very time consuming. Also, even though there are standards for hadith identification but again, because of the issue mentioned before, finding a hadith can become a hassle especially if the cited webpage where the hadith was supposed to be is now dead. However, this issue may be avoided by changing the style of the references. Basically, even though the overall hadith number may vary, the relative number typically doesn't - as in, the hadith will still have the same serial of the same chapter. Therefore, if we use the name of the chapter and the serial number of the hadith in that chapter - then the hadith will be the easiest to find even if the overall number and the order of the chapters and thus, the chapter number varies. Should/can this be implemented? - Sultan.abdullah.hindi (talk) 16:56, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Sultan.abdullah.hindi, I think you have a better chance for a decent answer at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islam. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:58, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Appreciate the tip, Gråbergs Gråa Sång. Peace. - Sultan.abdullah.hindi (talk) 06:04, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

User page question

Hello! When I created my user page a few months ago, I stumbled on these small boxes one can add to their page that say things such as "This user can contribute at an intermediate level of French" or "This user remembers using a rotary telephone." I don't remember what these are called or how to find them again. Can you help? Aredbee (talk) 05:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Aredbee Please see Wikipedia:Userboxes. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 06:08, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl Thank YOU! Aredbee (talk) 06:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hung while editing

I'm in the middle of a massive edit reformatting a ton of references in one go, and my editing window is hung. (The citation pop-up is acting like it's working but it won't close and I can't save because it won't close.) I know sometimes my browser restores edits for me when it crashes. Is there any way I can ensure that my edit is saved, or find where it might be temporarily stored? I hate to close out of the tab and potentially lose a ton of work. Thanks!! Calliopejen1 (talk) 07:11, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Calliopejen1, copy-paste, also, if it is similar to the article popups, you can just hover over it, click reset, and click reset popups! Good luck! Heart ^(talk) 07:14, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

HeartGlow30797, I'm in the visual editor and the citation popup wouldn't let me copy-paste. I couldn't close the popup. I typed in a URL that I predicted would be the equivalent of switching to source editor but that ended up losing all my work. Boo. :( Calliopejen1 (talk) 07:19, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

How do I Say?

Please Call me. KamranBhatti4013 (talk) 21:22, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@KamranBhatti4013: If you have a question about how to use or edit Wikipedia, please post it here. No one will call you. RudolfRed (talk) 21:44, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@KamranBhatti4013: Give me your number. Oh wait! Just kidding, whatever the problem is just tell here. Or else you can place {{Help me}} in your talk page(talk) so that someone can help you there. Be Bold!Siddartha897 (talk) 09:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

How do I get Pending changes reviewer rights

— Preceding unsigned comment added by N Jeevan (talk • contribs) 08:20, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. See Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes § Becoming a reviewer. Kleinpecan (talk) 08:30, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

I have read the guidelines to become a Pending changes reviewer but I'm confused how to add the request to become a Pending changes reviewer.N Jeevan(talk)

It seems you figured it out. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:04, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

A question on lists.

1. Do list articles have to be lists of Wikipedia articles, or can they be lists of offsite links to the products themselves? WhenYouWiki (A person) (Talk) 08:50, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

The first one, in general. Per WP:EL we avoid putting EL:s outside an External links section. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:06, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

hi and welcome to the Teahouse WhenYouWiki! adding onto the above, list articles preferably would be lists of wikipedia articles, or fail the notability criteria but otherwise are reliably sourced (which is likely better placed in a parent article instead of a standalone article). see WP:Stand-alone lists for more information. happy editing! ◎ | melecie | t 09:07, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

About Notable Coverage

My recent AfS has been rejected for not showing significant coverage, while the references added are of Government websites talking solely about the subject; in details. While other publications are there supporting other content of the page, top coverage added are independent in nature. Need guidance on the same. Udaysm (talk) 10:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Shyam Steel. Declined twice. David notMD (talk) 11:12, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

User talk:64.110.237.162

Hi, this message is for Hydrogen. I recently made changes to the Wikipedia entry for Brian Stock (historian) and then received a message (the number/ref code is in the subject line). I'd like to clarify that I made these changes at the request of Prof Stock. He sent me a copy of his CV and asked for these changes to be entered on his Wikipedia page. Because his CV is not online or in a published source, it cannot be referenced. I can send you his CV or a copy of the email that he sent to me if you need verification. Could you suggest a way that I could post the summary about him so that it stays? In his view the current summary is disorganized and needs to be changed. Thanks for your help, SP 64.110.237.162 (talk) 22:05, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. If you have a message for Hydrogenation, please leave it at User talk:Hydrogenation, where they'll be notified. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:08, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Unpublished content, including a CV, cannot be a reference. Verification has to be published content. David notMD (talk) 22:39, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Children and grandchildren should not be named unless they are subjects of existing articles themselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David notMD (talk • contribs) 00:41, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. I'm afraid you and Professor Stock have several misunderstandings about Wikipedia. First, that code is nothing to do with the message: it is simply the IP address from which you were editing: since you have not logged into an account (which is perfectly fine, by the way) the only way that Wikipedia has to identify you is by the IP address of the device you were editing from. Note that if you edit from a different device, or possibly even from the same one, you won't necessarily get the same IP address: they are allocated by your ISP, not by Wikipedia.

Now, as to the article Brian Stock (historian). Please understand that this article does not belong to Stock, and he does not decide what is or should be in it, though he is welcome to suggest edit requests to it (or you can do so on his behalf). But Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. Unless the information to be added has been reliably published somewhere, it will not be added in any case; and with few exceptions, all material in the article should be derived from what has been published entirely independently of him. --ColinFine (talk) 11:19, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia Manual of Style, Video Games

Hello i have a problem, on the Wikipedia Manual of Style, Video Games.. it states released as PAL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Video_games#Release_dates But as countries using PAL has already converted or in the process of converting, should something get changed here? thankyou! EzeeWiki (talk) 02:58, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, EzeeWiki, and welcome to the Teahouse. Like almost everything in Wikipedia, the contents of the MOS are subject to consensus, and may be updated or changed. If you think that your suggestion will be uncontroversial, you can just go ahead and edit the MOS page; if you think there's any chance of people disagreeing, it would be better to discuss it first on its talk page. If you start a discussion there, then it might be an idea to drop a note on WT:WikiProject Video games asking people to join the discussion. --ColinFine (talk) 11:23, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Content without sources

FYI

 – Heading added by Tenryuu.

Why can wikipedia content without sources get deleted even though it is true information? Osvaldo2007 (talk) 03:12, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Osvaldo2007: Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia requires information to be verifiable. In order to do that, editors have to draw from reliable sources. The question to ask is "how can one prove it's true information?" —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:16, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Osvaldo2007, Has a reader in Buffalo, Bandjul, or Bangkok tomorrow, next month, or next year, any way of verifying the information? If not, it is unreliable and useless, and does not belong in Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 11:30, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Why my new article not 'seen' by Google?

I had created Birendra Prasad Singh article here on wikipedia but it is not available on google search. What is the problem? it has been reviewed but no related article appear on bottom of article as well! what is the problem? Curious boy np (talk) 10:58, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

(added a section title). David notMD (talk) 11:09, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Birendra Prasad Singh. Created 14 June, bypassing the AfC process. David notMD (talk) 11:24, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Curious boy np: The article Birendra Prasad Singh you have created won't appear in the google search right now as it is a new one. Google index gives priority to those websites which are mostly visited. Generally it takes time for your new article to get views, you can check that at (https://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo/en.wikipedia.org/Birendra_Prasad_Singh). So in future you might see it. I had the same experience with Malavika Sharma earlier. Be Calm, Happy editing.Siddartha897 (talk) 11:33, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

New articles on Wikipedia are no indexed (i.e. won't appear on search engines) until either they are 90 days old, or have been reviewed by a new page patroller. This was done specifically to stop search engine optimisation. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:38, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Joseph2302: What you say is true, but the article concerned has been reviewed & is not NOINDEXed. It is waiting for Google to take action. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:26, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

New Article

Hi ! I need to know how to publish an article about new company/brand/organization. Thanks Raza Sethraza1 (talk) 14:05, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

A "new" subject may well not have achieved sufficient coverage in published reliable sources to meet Wikipedia's requirement for notability. If it does satisfy those requirements, then you'll find advice at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:10, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, Sethraza1. Because this is an encyclopaedia of 'Notable Things' (and not of every single thing that exists), we require new subjects to meet our 'Notability Criteria' which you should read about here for businesses and oprganisations. In essence, you will need three in detail and in depth sources which demonstrate that the world at large has taken note of that company. You might also wish to read this guidance on creating your first article. Finally, if you are connected in any way with the company, you must declare this on your userpage before starting work on any draft. We do not accept WP:PROMOTION, an all sources relating to a company must be independent of it and its press releases and any trade newspapers. Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick Moyes (talk • contribs)

Sources in print

Hi, if a subject has multiple articles in print media, what's the best way to create a source for it? I have the scans for each article, so I can upload them to an internet archive and link them to a manually created citation if that works. Hillster (talk) 19:37, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Hillster: See Wikipedia:Offline sources. In short, you don't have to scan it, but provide as much bibliographic data so that other editors can find the same source and verify your information. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 19:45, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

By "has" do you mean written by the subject or about the subject? Wikipedia requires refs about people to establish notability. David notMD (talk) 20:30, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Expanding on David notMD's answer, multiple articles covering the subject are wanted as secondary sources are the backbone of Wikipedia articles. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:41, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: Thank you, this was helpful.

@David notMD: The articles are about the subject. There are quite a few online references, as well. But, he has been covered extensively by print magazines. Thank you!

@Tenryuu: I understand - which is why I want to include both online and print articles about the subject. I know how to reference online sources, but was slightly confused about the best way to cite articles in print magazines/newspapers. Thank you! Hillster (talk) 22:06, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Hillster:, there is a Template:Cite news that is commonly used for newspapers / magazines that don't have an associated URL. There is no need for a citation to have an archival link, since in principle readers can verify the information in a library. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

How do I use a copyright image?

There are some images I require for my draft but they have a notice which says "This logo is the graphic representation of a registered trademark subject to trademark law". One such image is this one. It's use is restricted to French Wikipedia, within which it is restricted for articles related to the image. What do I do? I require this image. Excellenc1 (talk) 15:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Here in the English Wikipedia, the guidelines are at WP:Logos. Note that in certain cicumstances, non-free images may be used in articles, but they are not allowed in drafts. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:06, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Referencing and notability

Hi all. I'm currently trying to clear out old U-BLP templates and I'm constantly coming across a referencing problem. It's usually an academic who's published a lot of papers and is regarded as eminent in his or her field but has not been covered in reliable, third-party sources that can be found via G-searches.

I've sent some of these articles to AFD and have been told I should check more thoroughly (WP:BEFORE). I do check and translate non-English sources when possible but still these are sometimes not useful and there are only so many hours in each day. I'll sometimes get a comment saying the subject passes WP:PROF or some other obscure guideline but I can't confirm the subject's notability via G-searches. Maybe the sources are off-line but why aren't they in the articles? So should I a) use anything I can find; b) continue to send U-BLPs to AFD and put up with the brickbats; or c) give up and leave the unsourceable articles in the backlog? I don't want to waste people's time. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 03:25, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

(Also on your talk page since I read this at the before you moved the question.) Notable academics are not covered in the press the way politicians, sports people, and movie stars are. So coverage doesn't turn up in Google searches. Wikipedia:Notability (academics) spells out how we find the reliable independent in-depth coverage. To meet any of the 8 criteria means that reliable people or institutions independent of the person have assessed that person's contributions to their field and found it significant. StarryGrandma (talk) 03:39, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Baffle gab1978, please read and study Wikipedia:Notability (academics) until you understand it and accept it fully. That guideline is not at all "obscure" but instead enjoys wide consensus among experienced editors. It is every bit as valid as the General notability guideline, which does not exist as a separate page but rather as a section of Wikipedia:Notability, which makes it clear that the GNG exists alongside the special notability guidelines which have equal validity. So, please accept the consensus. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen:; so academics get a free pass on WP:BLP and WP:VERIFY, and {{Unreferenced BLP}} tags can remain on those articles indefinitely. I'll try to remember that now. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 05:25, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't think I agree with that reading of the WP:NPROF guideline, but that's me. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Baffle gab1978, what "free pass" are you talking about? They must still verifiably meet the relevant notability guideline. It is just that the community decided, a long time ago, that notability for academics is determined in different ways than for other BLPs. WP:NACADEMIC is not an easy guideline to meet. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:12, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Link Wikipedia articles between Languages

The page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_(mathematics) does not link the German version of Metric, which is this page https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Metrik_(Mathematik)&redirect=no, ie. it redirects to https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrischer_Raum, because the article is included in that one. How do I link to this article correctly? Or could anyone more experienced please link it? TheFibonacciEffect (talk) 14:19, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, TheFibonacciEffect, and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a tricky one, because interlanguage links are now normally done through Wikidata, but there's a problem when the articles in the different languages have different scope (this is known as the "Bonnie and Clyde problem"). What I have done is to add an old-fashioned local link (not using Wikidata) to de:Metrik (Mathematik). I considered linking to de:Metrische Raum directly, but decided that if I link to the redirect then if at some point the redirect is developed into a stand-alone article, it will be pointing to the right place.  Done --ColinFine (talk) 16:36, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

ColinFine Thank you very much, it was bothering me the whole semester :D TheFibonacciEffect (talk) 16:48, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Error in uploading photo in Wikipedia.

In page (SadGranth Sahib) , when i started uploading photo, after filling the categories when I clicked (save) , it shows me an error written as (An automatic filter has identified this edit as potentially...) . Please help me how could I upload an image and to deal with the error. Baba Thanos (talk) 16:51, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Baba Thanos, and welcome to the Tahouse. The filter log says "Refspam detection", which I think means that your edit included a link to a site which has been barred as being spam. How were you uploading the picture? And where is it from? (if it is the source of the picture that is the "refspam", then you won't be able to post the link here either, but you could tell us in words.) --ColinFine (talk) 17:31, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Meh. Book covers are protected by copyright in 99% of the cases, which means they can only be uploaded locally, using our upload wizard, under fair use. @ColinFine: The image attempts can be found in the commonswiki abuse log, its one of their more common filters Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:32, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

How to choose good sources

How can you find good sources that are reliable? I don't know how to find out is a source is reliable and you can't use wikipedia sources. Raaganjali (talk) 15:18, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Puppies are so cute. Like many issues like this, if you type WP: followed by the item you want advice on into the search box you should find something useful. So WP:reliable sources is a starting point. There is a shortcut to a list of well-established sources at WP:RSPS. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:30, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Puppies are so cute: If you can't find it over at WP:RSPS, you can go to the reliable sources noticeboard and see if someone has asked there before. If they haven't, you can start a new discussion so that other editors can chime in. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Brand New - Wanting to check before writing

It was suggested that I check here for notability before I bother to write an article. My article would be on Theodora Cope Stanwell-Fletcher (1906-2000). She was an American naturalist and nature writer. Her first book, Driftwood Valley, won the 1948 John Burroughs Medal. She is also listed on a list of missing pages.

For main sources for the article, I would be using:
--Marcia Meyers Bonta, “Theodora Cope Stanwell-Fletcher”, (1996) In Elder, J. (ed.) American nature writers. Charles Scribner's Sons. Volume 2. pp 847-860.
--Information from the family archives: Woodbourne Orchards and family of Francis R. Cope Jr. (HC.MC.1230) Quaker and Special Collections, Haverford College, Haverford, PA.
--Cambridge Guide to Women's Writing in English, 1999, 9780511074110
--Chose, Lauri. Uncharted Arctic Wilderness: Rediscovering the Literary Works of Lois Crisler, Margaret Murie, and Theodora Stanwell-Fletcher, 2007. (Dissertation)

Please let me know whether I should continue down this path, or instead just enjoy a re-read of her work. Thank you. StickOrSnake (talk) 19:05, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@StickOrSnake: I'd say that the Bonta chapter and the Cambridge Guide are certainly reliable sources that go a long way toward establishing Stanwell-Fletcher's notability. The archives at Haverford College, insofar as they are unpublished documents, are unusable, since the sources cited in an article must be published works. The dissertation (assuming that it's for a completed Ph.D.) is a bit problematic—see the third bulleted item at WP:SCHOLARSHIP—but might be usable for facts unlikely to be challenged; more importantly, it should cite sources dealing with Stanwell-Fletcher that you yourself could investigate and cite. If you can find one or two more published reliable sources, your article would almost certainly not be deletable for lacking evidence of notability. Deor (talk) 19:46, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Need help to post

Hi I thought I was adding a short bit of information, but I don't see it anywhere. I am not good with this sort of stuff. I do want what I tried to publish to be published but I don't understand how to do this. If anyone can help me, please advise. It will be very much appreciated. Whiteline22 (talk) 18:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Whiteline22: Your edit to Sparks (band) was reverted by another editor, with the edit summary "Reverted good faith edits by Whiteline22: needs a citation". When you add factual information to an article, you must cite a reliable published source that supports the addition. Deor (talk) 19:06, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

I am the reliable source. I don't know how to do this. Please help. What exactly do I need to type? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whiteline22 (talk • contribs) 19:42, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

You presumably didn't read what User:Deor said. He said that you needed a "reliable published source"; follow the link provided. Your personal knowledge, if unpublished, is of no use to Wikipedia. - David Biddulph (talk) 19:55, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Whiteline22: You are not a reliable source for the purposes of Wikipedia, since we cannot know who you are and whatever you personally know is considered original research. Only published sources can be cited for facts in articles. Deor (talk) 20:00, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Odd response to edit...odd page...not sure what to do

Hi, I edited Patrick Treacy. Someone with an IP then undid my edit in a way that didn't made grammatical sense and which took out some of the verbatim account from the reference I had included. So, I reverted, which I thought was the right thing to do (but maybe it wasn't: maybe I should just have edited the grammar problem). Then someone with a different IP undid my reversion and made an unusual (and almost entirely wrong) allegation against me: it is here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Patrick_Treacy&action=history. I don't want to get into a fight, so I'm happy to leave it (and, to be clear the edit I originally added is still there and in its shortened format it's fine). But the nature of the allegation against me (aside from being wrong) is concerning to me and also makes clear that the person who is doing the editing seems to have a peculiar degree of knowledge about the subject of the article, the history of the page and his adversaries...! I then saw there was a strong sockpuppet history and recurring edits, more recently almost always from IPs and always adding more material to the article that bolsters the reputation of the subject. When an editor tried to fix it three years ago after some obvious sockpuppetry, "someone" made exactly the same accusation of malice in quite similar terms, before the material was largely put back in. So, I wonder about the page as whole (see the talk page) and wonder if someone more experienced than I am had any thoughts or could do something. Fermanaghabu (talk) 18:44, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Don't worry, you seem to be in the clear. It looks like User:CodeTalker already got to it and reverted it back to your version, which seems fine to me from a brief look at the source you cited. (I'm not an expert on the reliability of echolive.ie, though I notice no red flags.) It's fairly common on articles such as these for conflicts of interest and motivated editing to crop up. --Anon423 (talk) 21:01, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Fermanaghabu: I've also gone ahead and removed a bit of the puffery in the article. Wikipedia, as you may know, is intended to have a Neutral point of view and in particular MOS:PUFFERY should be reined in to just state the facts, which may include various awards and laudatory statements attributed to public sources. You're right to have described the page as odd – it still reads with a somewhat promotional tone. As long as you're familiar with the Wikipedia:Five pillars and the policies and guidelines that follow, I encourage you to fight back against the spammers, advertisers, and promoters in service of building an encyclopedia. Let us know if you have any other questions. --Anon423 (talk)

Trying to transfer account

I got a new email account recently, and I kinda want to transfer my wikipedia account to that email. (I'm The great Jay btw) Is it possible? And if so, how can I do it? 68.83.1.253 (talk) 21:13, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

If you still have access to your account, you can log in and then under preferences (Special:Preferences) you can set your email address. If you don't have access to your account or your old email, then you will need to create a new Wikipedia account. RudolfRed (talk) 21:33, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

68.83.1.253 Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Log in to your account and go to this page (your preferences). Scroll down until you see something that looks like this (not very close but the text sould be the same) in your preferences under the "User profile" section:

Click the button and the rest should be explained by the software. --littleb2009 (^she/_her) (talk • contribs) 21:35, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

German Music Wikiproject and German Teahouse

Hello,

Can anyone help me find the Wikiproject for Music and German Musician or something? I am trying to get help for my Draft. Also, is there a help section on German Wikipedia where I can ask the admins to help me? I believe Weiss is notable. He has won a significant International German Award and published many books and Spatial audio arts, he is a pioneer in sound-branding. Has done a Europe Tour too. Now he is not a singer, and it's getting difficult to prove his notability as a musician. WP:ARTIST: "The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Peter_Philippe_Weiss https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Philippe_Weiss

Thanks! Jiskofor (talk) 21:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Jiskofor: The German Wikipedia "Teahouse" is at [11]. It is not clear why you want a German admin to help with your English draft. RudolfRed (talk) 21:27, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Jiskofor: Additionally, for English Wikipedia, you can go here to look for projects such as music etc Wikipedia:WikiProject#Finding_a_project. The equivilant German page is [12] RudolfRed (talk) 21:31, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

(I think Jiskofor doesn't mean "admin", a really small set of volunteers who have technical abilities but no additional powers over article content, but instead is trying to say "experienced editor".) The German Wikipedia is an entirely different community to ours, and have different standards as to what they consider "notable" enough to have an article. If you ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians then you might get some help. If I was reviewing the draft, my eyes would glaze over—the review process is really backlogged so reviewers have very little time to assess very complicated things. It helps if you can highlight the three best sources or the biggest claims to notability, for instance in a comment at the top of the page (like some of the reviewers have left). — Bilorv (talk) 21:35, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Jiskofor. Do you mean German Wikipdedia's versions of these pages or do you mean German-language versions of these English Wikipedia pages? I don't think there are official German versions of English Wikipedia pages per se, but there might be some German translations of English Wikipedia pages that can be found on German Wikipedia. Generally, one way to try and find these is to go to left side bar and look for "German" (or "Deutsch") under "Languages". The "Languages" contains links to corresponding pages on other language Wikipedia. In some cases, the links might not be very accurate, but they're probably OK for major Wikipedia policy or guideline pages. The German Wikipedia page for its Teahouse equivalent appears to be de:Wikipedia:Fragen von Neulingen and the German Wikipedia equivalent for Wikipedia:WikiProject music appears to be de:Wikipedia:Redaktion Musik. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:33, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Renaming a page

Hi, I am an employee of Espinosa Cigars. We have a wiki page that someone must have created years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EO_Premium_601_Serie

I have been updating it but I would like to change the name of the page, we are no longer EO Premium 601 Serie. Is there anyway I can do that?

v/r Hector Alfonso HJA1966 (talk) 14:45, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Per the explanation left on your Talk page, you must first declare your paid relationship with Espinosa on your User page. Second, as paid, you are not allowed to edit the article directly. For this and other reasons, all of your edits were reverted. Instead, you must create a section on the Talk page of the article, describe specific changes you want (as in replace ____ with ____), provide references for those changes, and then submit a request, so that a non-connected editor can decide to implement or not. Start with just the name change - with ref(s) confirming the name change - so that an editor can more the article to the new name. Learn how to do refs properly, because what you tried (all reverted) was wrong. David notMD (talk) 14:55, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Actually User:HJA1966, you can edit the page, but it is strongly advised not to, as your edits will likely be reverted, as mentioned above. Sungodtemple (talk) 15:52, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@HJA1966: The article (not Wiki page) was about a brand of cigars, not the company. I changed the name of the company in the lead but that's all that was necessary for now, since there's no indication the brand name changed also. Without looking too much into it, it appears the company may be more deserving of an article than the since renamed brand, but I haven't done an in-depth sourcing search yet. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:49, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Need help from experienced editors

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lujaina_Mohsin_Darwish

Please contribute to the Requested Edits on the above page. GONvsKillua (talk) 21:37, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@GONvsKillua: I put in the newer infobox but there are too many awards. You should pick maybe the most notable 4-5, along with their sources. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:00, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

I have responded in detail on the article's talk page. Number 57 22:05, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Anons blindly changing mentions of Macedonia(n) to North Macedonia(n)

I was reading Ezgjan Alioski and saw in his Personal life section that he spoke 'North Macedonian'. After checking Macedonian language, I saw that the language however wasn't renamed. Just the country name. So I changed it to just Macedonian and an IP changed it again. And since it's an IP I could check where it's from and I wasn't surprised. Anyhow, I don't feel like starting a revert war, so I wanted to notify anyone who could deal with it. Teysz Kamieński _(talk) 12:21, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Looks like another anon reverted it again. So the page is fine now. Teysz Kamieński _(talk) 12:26, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Teysz Kamieński: Disputes such as these are unfortunately common. I'm not an expert, and you may already know of these options, but other avenues for coming to an agreement are the talk pages, such as of Ezgjan and the Macedonian language, and maybe relevant wikiprojects such as Wikipedia:WikiProject North Macedonia. (You might also try leaving messages on the user talk pages of people who might know more, such as the listed members of Wikiproject North Macedonia, though it might be difficult to get a reply.) Knowing this to be a persistent international dispute, I tried searching for "WP:Macedonia" and found Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia), which outlines current Wikipedia consensus. There's a mention of a WP:1RR (one-revert rule) restriction on contentious edits regarding North Macedonian naming, and I am not an expert in such matters but I would assume the reasonable place for escalation to be Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring, or for persistent disruptive editing from anonymous editors, Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. If such problems arise again I hope this is useful. --Anon423 (talk) 22:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

A problem in editing

Look i want to to add a birth date to the births of October the 10th, like it's an emergency even if you want to remove it, remove it after a day or two so just keep it, why you keep removing it? I need that Youuung goth (talk) 21:58, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Youuung goth Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Date articles only include those with existing articles. What is the nature of the emergency? 331dot (talk) 22:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Youuung goth: (edit conflict) see the note on the page October 10: "Please do not add yourself or people without Wikipedia articles to this list." If your friend does not have an article, you cannot list her there. Do not engage in an edit war. RudolfRed (talk) 22:06, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Youuung goth. Maybe the person whose name you're trying to add to that article is someone you know? Maybe you're trying to do something nice for them? Maybe you don't know them, but you're trying to add the name for some other reason? Whatever your answers are to those questions, you need to understand Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not because unlike social media sites, online forums, etc., Wikipedia is generally not a place to give someone a shoutout per WP:Namechecking, even if you only want the information to be visible for a day or two. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:37, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

New To Wiki and need help for inclusion on Wikipedia!!

I've been up working on a new article, yay! I will publish my first article, are there any experienced editor(s) willing to review it for possible inclusion in Wikipedia? Waveg0ddd (talk) 17:51, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Waveg0ddd: Welcome to the Teahouse. I suggest putting it through the Articles for Creation process, where you submit your article as a draft and reviewers will take a look at it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:01, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Waveg0ddd:(edit conflict) I have removed the boldface formatting from your above post, its both unnesesary and might come over as agressive. As for your article, I was unable to locate it. Therefore, I would suggest that you make a draft on Wikipedia's servers for now and come back when you feel like we should have a look. Keep in mind though, not all Teahouse respondees are interested in reviwining drafts, and using the Teahouse in an effort to get something quickly to the main encyclopedia usally does not work (Wikipedia does not operate on deadlines, so we have plenty of time). Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Please read the advice at WP:Your first article. If you submit a draft for AFC review, it will be reviewed (probably within 3 months or so). - David Biddulph (talk) 18:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: User:Waveg0ddd/sandbox appears to be the draft in question. David notMD (talk) 23:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia Experts

Dear Friends, As I am working through several issues to have my page published, I have received emails from individuals indicating that they are Wikipedia experts and can help me through the Wikipedia system. While I am not inclined to take advantage of these offers, I find the Wikipedia learning curve to be quite steep. For example, James York (www.WikipediaSubmissions.com) has emailed to offer a free consultancy on my article. Do you see any problem if I contact him for assistance? Or, is there someone else that you could recommend? Thank you so much for your response. Frank S. Weaver (talk) 18:45, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Frank S. Weaver Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not endorse or advocate for paid editing services, though it is permitted as long as the editor declares that they are being paid and who is paying them. Paid editors- despite what they claim- can make no guarantees(such as writing an article that will not be deleted). If you choose to avail yourself of such services, that is up to you, but I would strongly advise you to not hand over one penny until you see the end result.

It is true that creating a Wikipedia article is challenging. I'm assuming you want to see a Wikipedia article created about yourself. Typically, articles are created by independent editors who take note of a subject in independent reliable sources and choose on their own to write about it. Trying to force the issue has varying degrees of success. Wikipedia's sole interest is in summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Any other goal, such as improving your internet presence or enhancing search results for you, are side benefits, not our primary goal. Please see why a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 19:08, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

WikipediaSubmissions.com seems consist of one page of poorly written copy, which the owner evidently hasn't even spellchecked. Clearly a scam.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:44, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia is written and maintained by volunteers. Anyone who tells you they can assure a certain outcome (e.g. creation of a page) is lying. I would strongly advise against paying anyone to edit Wikipedia on your behalf or give any assistance. It harms our community significantly and you are not guaranteed to get a result that you are happy with (for instance, we may include unflattering information about a subject that the paid editor chose to omit; or we may decide to delete the article after the paid editor has walked away with your money). — Bilorv (talk) 21:25, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Appears you have been working on Draft:Stephen Fichter since mid-November. You have denied a paid connection on your Talk, but I will ask again if you have any type of personal connection to Fichter. That would need to be declared as a conflict of interest on your User page. The declining reviewer gave some guidance. I am not Catholic, but I get no sense from the Draft that Fichter has accomplished anything extraordinary within the Church, and so may not meet Wikipedia's idea of notability. David notMD (talk) 23:10, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Romanising an article title

Romanising an article title Right now I'm writing an article about a fish, but the only common name appears to be in the Cyrillic alphabet. I know that article titles must be Romanised, and I read through the help pages for Romanising, but they were not helpful because this name was in the Turkish language and there was no tutorial for it. The name is Kızılırmak toothcarp. Should I Romanise the name, or simply title the article after the scientific name? Helen (let’s talk) 23:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC) 

User:HelenDegenerate - I am not the expert, but my opinion is that if there is no common name that is written in the Roman alphabet, then the scientific name is most nearly common Roman name, and scientific names are of course always written in the Roman alphabet because they are either Latin or Latinized. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:17, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

What happens if i use a image from flickr

Hi, Can i use images from flickr? What happens if i use from flickr? Will i get that copyright message? Someone also blocked me from wikipedia commons! Will i ever get unblocked again? When will i get unblocked? Please help🥺 Badassboy 63637 (talk) 15:07, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Commons is a separate project, so if you want to discuss a Commons block, you need to do it there, not here. Your Commons user talk page gives you a link to the block log there which tells you the duration of your current block. I see that this is your second block for the same reason; if you were to offend again your next block could be expected to be longer, and perhaps indefinite. You can use images from Flickr only if the copyright has been released; if you can't see evidence that it has been released, don't use it. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:23, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Badassboy 63637: regarding your commons block, please familarisize yourself with COM:L and the other policies regarding image uplaods. A couple notes (without having loooked at the deleted images, I can't see them):

• Most every image you find on the internet is copyrighted, see also COM:NETCOPYVIO
• If an image does not carry any copyright information, it is assumed to be copyrighted
• Taking a screenshot, or picturing sth. with a camera, does not give you the copyright of the original image, but rather creates a Derivate work.

Your current block is set to expire on the 29th June. Please use the two weeks until that to familarisize yourself with the upload policies, and use the Upload Wizard. If you are unsure wether we can use an image, please ask. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:45, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

In addition to these answers, you need to make sure in future to ask for clarification as soon as you are given a warning that you do not understand, rather than carrying on the same behaviour. These warnings are being sent by real people like you who must have some reason for giving them. It is rude to ignore a person trying to communicate you and insist on doing the same thing repeatedly. I would recommend that you do not make any further attempts to upload images, as it's a very tricky process and it's very important for legal reasons that we get it right. As Victor Schmidt says, the default situation is that an image is copyrighted and cannot be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons or used on Wikipedia. — Bilorv (talk) 17:44, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Badassboy 63637, Flickr is one of the few photo hosting websites that allows users to license their photos in various different ways. Several of these licenses are compatible with the standards at Wikimedia Commons. Read Wikipedia:Upload/Flickr very carefully. Images with the Flikr licenses highlighted in green are OK for uploading to Commons but do not upload any Flikr images that lack a proper license. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:37, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

How does Wikipedia influence Google rankings (and does it matter)?

I hope that this isn't a stupid question from an experienced editor. Is there an explanatory essay that tells how Wikipedia articles and titles influence Google search results, and why it should matter to entities of marginal notability, such as entertainers, businessmen, corporations, etc? That is, how (without opening any cans of beans) is Wikipedia being used and misused for Search Engine Optimization (and what can reviewers and admins do to maintain the integrity of Wikipedia)? Robert McClenon (talk) 00:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Robert McClenon. This is not a stupid question. It is well known that a well-written Wikipedia article about a discrete topic will usually show up as #1 in Google's search results, unless the article has a hidden noindex tag. All articles created by less experienced editors are noindexed until reviewed by a new page patroller, or until 90 days passes. If the article is created by an experienced editor with the autopatrolled user right (which includes all administators), then Google will index the new article rapidly, sometimes within minutes. I have seen an article I have just added to main space show up as the #1 Google search result within three minutes. There are complications though. For example, for ambiguous topics such as several notable people sharing the same or similar names, and another complication is when the Wikipedia article lacks an image and Google's algorithms will sometimes extract a description of Jack Smith A from Wikipedia and insert a photo of different Jack Smith B from some other website into its Google Knowledge Graph which is kind of like an infobox created by a bot not human editors. The bottom line is that your marginally notable "entertainers, businessmen, corporations" will get a genuine boost in their online visibility if there is an acceptable Wikipedia article about them that "sticks". Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:14, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, I'm not aware of anything so specific, but there are essays about SEO efforts on Wikipedia, dealing with these Wikibombing attempts, and a generic reference about what pages are indexed. – Anon423 (talk) 01:16, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Logo/Copyright Question

Hello! I'm currently working on a draft Draft:Photograph magazine, and am trying to include a logo image, but am a bit confused by copyrights and definitely don't want to infringe on anything. The logo itself is just text, and on Wikipedia:Logos is states that a logo of just typeface is uncopyrightable, so I'm wondering what sort of approval process it may require. Thank you so much!! nutellab Nutellab (talk) 19:21, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Nutellab: I took a look at the magazine's website and can confirm that it's public domain because it's just a typeface. To answer your question, since the magazine is in the United States, Wikimedia Commons will take them. Just put {{Pd-textlogo}} in the file discription, similar to these logos: Sony, FedEx, Calvin Klein. However, your article is still a draft, so I'd worry about completing the prose of that article and having it approved through Articles for Creation before dealing with the logo, since if the draft is not approved, your logo is useless anyways. Having a logo in the draft will not improve your draft's chances of approval. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 19:37, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Nutellab, note Wikipedia style: not "Notable Featured Artists/Contributors" but instead "Notable featured artists/contributors"; though actually I'd have "Notable contributors", as contribution of photographs is contribution and "featured" is pretty meaningless. And where did they contribute? Specify at least one issue of the magazine for each of these notables. -- Hoary (talk) 02:26, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

◢  Ganbaruby!  Thank you so much! Will make that clarification, but of course content takes precedence.

Hoary Gotcha, will make that change, good point. It's all still in progress, thank you for your help!

move the page from the Sandbox to Wiki

Hello, I am ready to move the page i created from my sandbox to Wiki , but can not find this this option on my Wiki screen . Thank you for your help. Elzaratyr (talk) 03:02, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hey Elzaratyr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Are you referring to this article? If so, it might need a little more work before its ready for inclusion on Wikipedia - I'd recommend taking a look at the article wizard, which not only will help you write your first article, but will also let you create a draft which another editor can review and move for you. Good luck! - TNT ^😺 03:08, 16 June 2021 (UTC)