Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1117

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

Archive 1110

←

Archive 1115

How can i submit a draft page?

Courtesy link: Draft:Badhangarhi temple
i have made a draft page on badhangarhi temple and i want to submit it ,how can i submit it? Yakku3 (talk) 16:07, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Yakku3: Welcome to the Teahouse. You can submit the draft for review with {{subst:submit}}, but in its current state it's almost certainly going to be declined with the references you're using. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:10, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu:then which type of references i can use because there is very lass data about this temple. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yakku3 (talk • contribs)

@Yakku3: If there are no reliable sources about this temple, then it isn't notable enough to be on Wikipedia, and no amount of writing will help. (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 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Yakku3, you can find out more about references at Wikipedia:Reliable sources. If there isn't significant coverage of the temple in reliable sources, then there shouldn't be an article written about it, because this means it is not notable. Cheers, Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 17:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Ajoku Gift Best

Ajoku gift best (talk) 17:52, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ajoku gift best: Welcome to the Teahouse. Did you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:56, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Dark mode?

Hey, its Solar again. Interested if there is a dark mode you could put on your personal CSS, which I am positive does exist. Please direct me to the code I should C&P into. Thanks! (Oo and I forgot the name of the CSS, is it 'Personal.css'? Lol) -Solarrrr... Send a message to Solar? Tappy tap tap! ⏰Time: 09:15, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@SsSsSølarRadia -75 To enable dark mode (currently it under testing), go to your preferences > Gadgets > scroll all the way down to Testing and development > tick

Dark mode: Use a light text on dark background color scheme > click Save at the bottom > refresh the page. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 09:59, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll Hmm, does this apply to all wiki skins? I went there and saw nothing of the selected feature. -Solarrrr... Send a message to Solar? Tappy tap tap! ⏰Time: 10:10, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@SsSsSølarRadia -75: Dark mode is currently supported for the following Skins: Vector, MonoBook,Modern and Minerva Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:32, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@SsSsSølarRadia -75: The skins supported are as mentioned by Victor above, to see the changes, you would need to go to either the homepage or any other articles, for some reasons the mode doesn't work on preferences. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 11:42, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@SsSsSølarRadia -75 You can also try User:MusikAnimal/nightpedia. @Paper9oll No JavaScript is loaded on the Preferences page (that is available through the gadgets or user scripts). ―Qwerfjkl talk 12:22, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl Ah I see, thanks letting me know. I can't figure out why it doesn't work for quite some time and I just ignored it 😅. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:32, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll well I guess that concludes this convo, since I like the skin Timeless instead. -Solarrrr... Send a message to Solar? Tappy tap tap! ⏰Time: 18:00, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Edits to the Palma Sola Article Reverted

The information on the Palma Sola massacre which took place in Dominican Republic, which I came across in my research, is biased and uninformed and omits key points behind the religious community which was massacred. The current entry also misrepresents the spiritual leader who founded the movement. Why were the edits reverted? Brooklynctitizen (talk) 17:31, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Brooklynctitizen: The edits were reverted here for being unsourced. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:33, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm happy to add sources. The only reason I made this edit is that I was alarmed that the two sources referenced are travel guides written by white Americans. How is this a credible source? Travel guides are not historically accurate yet this information stands though it is biased and omits key information about this movement and its leader. This is misleading for any reader. Brooklynctitizen (talk) 17:47, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Brooklynctitizen: This sort of discussion is best had on the article talk page. You will still need sources for what you wish to add, and any other sources are not vaporized just because additional ones exist. If you have further comment, please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections. 331dot (talk) 17:59, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

There is a book called Peasants and Religion: A Socioeconomic Study of Dios Olivorio and the Palma Sola Religion in the Dominican Republic that may well be an excellent source. Brooklynctitizen, Wikipedia articles are works in progress, many of them have weaknesses, and many thousands of editors work every day to improve them. You are right that travel books are mediocre sources for history, but that is their nature and has nothing to do with the race or nationality of their authors. The solution is to add better sources, summarize those sources, and improve the article until the travel books are no longer needed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:11, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

This is a new process for me so I will add final comments here. In terms of process why didn't Wikipedia simply alert me that the edits would be reverted if the sources were not added? Regarding the nationality and race of the travel authors it is absolutely relevant considering that this was an Afro-Latino resistance movement in response to the American occupation of Dominican Republic. It is neglectful to not include that Liborio was hunted and murdered by US marines. White washing history is not truthful and honest and I would think Wiki would strive for truthfulness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brooklynctitizen (talk • contribs) This is a new process for me so I will add final comments here. In terms of process why didn't Wikipedia simply alert me that the edits would be reverted if the sources were not added? Regarding the nationality and race of the travel authors it is absolutely relevant considering that this was an Afro-Latino resistance movement in response to the American occupation of Dominican Republic. It is neglectful to not include that Liborio was hunted and murdered by US marines. White washing history is not truthful and honest and I would think Wiki would strive for truthfulness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brooklynctitizen (talk • contribs)

White American authors are perfectly capable of accurately reporting on and criticizing the actions of the U.S. Marine Corps, but a diversity of reliable sources is a good thing. You are now just as much a Wikipedia editor as any of us, and are welcome to get to work on improving that article, in accordance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:32, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Every new editor finds the guidelines less than ideal. You have access to a personalized watch list in the top menu. That way, when you log in, click on your watch list and you will see a mention of the most recent edit, including reverts. General rule is reference as you go, rather than edit and add refs later. Some people compose in their Sandbox, then paste the completed (and ref'd) work when happy with it. David notMD (talk) 21:22, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Using urlencode in templates

How do you use {{urlencode:{{{1}}} }} without it encoding {{{1}}} literally? ―Qwerfjkl talk 13:54, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: I'm not exacly clear what you're asking here. {{{1}}} is automatically replaced with whatever you set as the first unnamed parameter when transcluding a page. Is this related to User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/template (just had a peek through your edit history)? If so all you need to do is provide whatever you want the {{{1}}} to be replaced with as a parameter when transcluding it, e.g. {{User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/template|foo}} produces:

Foo: (script • edit) • (doc • edit) | String Module Error: Match not found.

192.76.8.91 (talk) 20:46, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Oops, I forgot to purge the page and it was giving me a bad title error. Thanks! ―Qwerfjkl talk 20:59, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: No problem, by the way your edit link isn't working because you've got the URL in the wrong format. To generate a link to the edit form you need to either use [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title={{urlencode:{{{1}}}|WIKI}}&action=edit edit] or [[Special:Edit/{{{1}}}|edit]]. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 21:01, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, that was my next problem to solve. ―Qwerfjkl talk 21:06, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Fixed two typos in the reply by 192.76.8.91 (: --CiaPan (talk) 21:25, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Treemap upload

Hi, I am new here. I was to update treemap of Brazil exports on Economy_of_Brazil#Exports (currently it is showing 2012 treemap which is way out-of-date). Please guide me regarding this, can I just copy the license used in 2012 image and upload 2019 treemap as I am using same source (https://oec.world/en/profile/country/bra). Thank you. Droogenbroeck (talk) 01:11, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Droegenbroeck. The current diagram, Commons:File:Brazil Product Export Treemap.jpg says that it is uploaded with "Creative Commons 3.0 non-commercial license". Unfortunately a NC licence is not compatible with Commons, and I shall be raising the issue there: I fear that it will probably mean removing the diagram entirly, but I may be wrong. Looking at https://oec.world/en/resources/terms, I don't see any mention of a Creative Commons licence, though I see terms which are similar to the CC-NC licence. If I am right, then I'm afraid that you cannot use images from that site on Wikipedia (unless you can argue that they meet all of the non-free content criteria, which I doubt). --ColinFine (talk) 11:34, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

It's more complicated than that, Droegenbroeck. It appears that when these files were uploaded to Commons in 2012, their licence was questioned, and the uploader Doubleodd2 arranged that the copyright holder authorised them, though this was not recorded on that file's information page. However, my guess is that that permission would only apply to that set of images, not to any later version. I've asked about this at Commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright#Updates to File:Brazil Product Export Treemap.jpg (and pinged you there, so you should get a notification about it in Commons). I note that Doubleodd2 doesn't seem to have been active since 2012. --ColinFine (talk) 11:58, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

ColinFine Thanks, you're very helpful. One more question, there is whole category where such images were uploaded in 2017 by some bot (BMacZeroBot) what do you think of it? Are they allowed? (Commons:Category:Images_from_the_Observatory_of_Economic_Complexity). Droogenbroeck (talk) 21:37, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Working

Hi, I added Working (Terkel book) to

(and vice-versa) but it was removed due to WP:NOTAMB, is there not confusion if the reader cannot remember the author? (just a thought!) GrahamHardy (talk) 14:26, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

I'd suggest placing the hatnote For other uses, see Working. ─ The Aafī ^{^(talk)} 14:44, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi @GrahamHardy, WP:NOTAMB says that a hatnote is not needed. The idea is that "(Terkel book)" or other disambiguating terms make it clear that the disambiguation page is at another location. I.e., you wouldn't end up on "Terkel book" by accident since even Working (book) goes straight to the dab. czar 00:51, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

So is the consensus that I remove the hatnote? GrahamHardy (talk) 14:07, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I believe so, yes. czar 22:10, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

First time new article contributor

When writing about music artists what are the best practices for sourcing their music? I have a few more I would like to write about and need help making sure I source reliable sources

I should have checked the guidelines further for more informations on which sources could be used and which ones could not. When I was doing the research on Rawle Harding I did a google search and there are articles written about his music however, i assumed when it came to listing his music a link to the source would be appropriate. I realize now it is not a reliable source. I have since removed those sources and added others. Kaimake (talk) 23:52, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

obituary for a source

Can an obituary be used as a source? 73.167.238.120 (talk) 19:23, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Absolutely! As long as it is a reliable, published, source.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:43, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Actually, in many cases, the answer might be "no", but that would depend on who wrote the obituary. If it was one submitted by someone connected to the person the obituary is about, then it would likely be considered a self-published source and have very little value as a source, particularly if it were used to support a claim about some other third-party. If, on the other hand, it was something written by an independent third party published in a publication with an established record of editorial control, then perhaps it would be OK to cite. For example, if the entertainment writer at a major newspaper writes an "obituary-like" article about a movie actor who has just died, then that might have some value to Wikipedia; however, if the "obituary" is just a sort of "press release" type of thing submitted by the actor's family or the actor's representatives, then that probably has little if any value, and could only be used very restrictively if even at all. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:00, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Marchjuly, the news source I read more often than any other is the Guardian (theguardian.com). As this is pretty ambitious in its coverage and doesn't require payment or even nag intolerably for it (I happily pay anyway), it seems to be a favorite of many editors. It very commonly has long and informative (and, in ways that are seldom useful for Wikipedia, fascinating) obituaries written by friends and acquaintances of the deceased. (This is made quite clear: "As a BM colleague, I came to appreciate his achievements...", etc.) Warts and all; but, unsurprisingly, the warts aren't dwelt on. The Independent is similar. But both the Guardian and the Independent also publish obituaries by people whose publications for the respective newspapers suggest that they were chosen not because they were personally acquainted (they may not have been) but because they were/are skilled writers of obituaries in the relevant area. (See as examples the obituaries of John Glashan here and here.) I presume that these newspapers have high expectations of their obituarists, independent or otherwise, so I'm happy to cite any obituary that appears in them. -- Hoary (talk) 00:17, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I look for obituaries to find out when a person died and, if the person wasn't controversial, I believe the basic information, such as how many children the person had. But some people have been known to disown adult children, or exaggerate what they have accomplished, so you can't always trust what's in an obituary, because some people write their own, to make sure it says what they want it to say. That being said, I usually trust straight-forward obits, that tell a death date, and where a person lived and worked. Karenthewriter (talk) 23:11, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Notability from video and audio

Can a youtube video or a radio program/podcast ever be used to demonstrate the notability of an article? I think there's a guideline or essay about how Wikipedia has a bias toward digital news rather than books and newspapers, but I don't remember what it was called. TipsyElephant (talk) 02:44, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

For YouTube, only if the source (1) was produced by an outlet we would otherwise consider reliable and (2) uploaded to that outlet's verified channel. Otherwise, no.

For radio programmes/podcasts, again yes if it was produced by an outlet we would otherwise consider reliable, otherwise no. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 02:54, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Uploading of Video Game Cover Art Screenshots

Can I upload a higher-quality and more up-to-date video game cover art screenshot to a Wikipedia article about the game? This is the Wikipedia article I would like to add updated video game cover art for. As you can see on the page, the current cover art still has a "Rating Pending" ESRB label in the corner. I found a replacement image online with the correct ESRB rating (E for Everyone), and would like to upload the image to replace the existing one. With this use case in mind, I would also like to know if it still qualifies as Fair Use in a manner consistent with Wikipedia's non-free content criteria, as I saw the fact that the existing image is of a low resolution (256 × 359) mentioned on the file's page (linked in image below), and the image I found online is of a much higher resolution (1539 x 2154). From what I understand, the image I found online is a user-uploaded scan of the cover art, and can be found here. I am using the VisualEditor.

TheDoctor50 (talk) 06:16, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@TheDoctor50: Yes, you may replace the image, but I would find a version without the back cover on it. Fair use allows copyrighted images in articles only for identification purposes, which is what the image is being used for here (the full list of criteria is at WP:NFCCP; all 10 must be met). Note that the low resolution is intentional because readers only need to be able to identify the game, and should not be able to take that image for other purposes (see WP:IMAGERES). There's a bot that goes around resizing images, but that takes a while, so I always resize it myself when uploading a free use file. As for how exactly to replace the image, go to the file's description page at File:Nicktoons - Battle for Volcano Island Coverart.png, scroll to the "File history" section, and click "Upload a new version of this file". Then, go into VisualEditor on that page, edit the big template under the "Summary" header, and update the "Source" parameter to the URL where the image is hosted. A bot will delete the now-unused older version. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 06:48, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Best practice for embedded irrelevant listing inside article

Hey! Still somewhat new and nonconfident with removing content from articles (I'm want to make sure I'm not making mistakes), but I'm pretty sure that the listing on phone models at Always on Display in the history section is unnecessary. I feel like, if the models shouldn't be removed, they should at least be rewritten (e.g. Google Pixel 2 through 5; or Galaxy S7 series and later.)

The article also has other issues, but I'm not sure how to clean it the best. aaPle (talk) 06:47, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@AaPle: You may bring up your concerns at the talk page of that article and wait for other editors interested in the subject to give feedback. Or, you may be bold and make the change! If you do get reverted, follow the WP:BRD process to reach a consensus. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 07:00, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

How to get Rollbacker

King Rudra 03:14, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, King Rudra. In order to gain the rollback user right, an editor must have a good record of differentiating vandalism from other types of problematic edits. Pease read Wikipedia:Rollback for how to apply. But why would an administrator give an advanced permission to an editor who has "officially retired" posted on their user page? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:39, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Also, what's with the 'invisible' content on your User page? Suggest your Sandbox would be a better place for creating a draft. David notMD (talk) 08:51, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse editors, please have a look at some unanswered peer reviews

Hi all. Teahouse is known for its kind and gentle introduction to editing. We have a larger than usual amount of peer reviews that are lingering without any response at all, sometimes for several months. In my experience most peer reviews are from new editors or editors hoping to improve the quality of their editing. I think most reviews would benefit from the kind and helpful feedback of teahouse regulars and implore anyone who reads this to at least have a look at the list of unanswered reviews (WP:PRWAITING) and ideally respond to two or three of them. Many thanks, Tom (LT) (talk) 07:53, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Tom (LT), I've only had one experience with peer review, and it wasn't one that I enjoyed. I didn't want to clobber the editor (who no doubt had meant well) for what they had written, particularly as it had (in my opinion) damaged what I had written, but I believed that faithfulness to the facts and fairness to the biographee had to trump reticence about "ownership", or encouragement or welcome, so clobber I did. If I hadn't already been familiar with the cited material, I'd have had to spend more time looking for it and digesting it than I'd have been willing to spend. Did I go about this the wrong way? -- Hoary (talk) 08:52, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Auto confirmation

hi just wanted to find out why my account has not been auto confirmed yet? I've made over ten edits now. My account has been active over 2 weeks. So when will it get auto confirmed? will we receive any email regarding confirmation? Also, once its auto confirmed, will I be able to create a new article and publish it live overnight? thank you @vash171 Vash171 (talk) 06:17, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Vash171: You have 8 edits so far, all of which are visible on your contributions list. While you can theoretically directly create articles in mainspace once you are autoconfirmed, I strongely adivse against it, because new articles are expected to meet most of the content guidelines, in particular, they must be well-sourced, have a claim of notability, neutral and not a copyright violation. New articles who don't meet the content criteria for articles often end up in draftspace anyway, so there is nothing preventing you from creating a draft, perhaps with the Article Wizard, until you demonstrateable have the experience in how to create new articles. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:38, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Be aware that articles which bypassed Articles for Creation review are reviewed by the New Pages Patrol, which may execute a Speedy delete, kick back to draft or start an Articles for Deletion. Also, such articles are 'invisible' to Google and other search engines until either the NPP review or 90 days. David notMD (talk) 08:56, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

If topic gets stolen, then...?

If I am making a draft on a topic, but at the same time another user made an article on the same topic, my draft will get declined. But then all my work will get wasted. Is there any method to prevent it? (This happened to me few days ago, I was creating a draft on Cap Écologie but at the same time, another user created an article on the topic Cap Écologie. It didn't affect me much because my draft was short.) Excellenc1📞 10:22, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Excellenc1. You might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Ownership of content for more details, but basically we as editors don't really have any claim of ownership of the articles we create and edit in the sense that we can stop people from taking what we create and reusing it in some way (for reference, we really don't even own our user pages). Every time we hit the "Publish changes" button we are basically agreeing to allow others to do whatever they want with it as long as they comply with the terms of Wikipedia:Text of Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License; in other words, we "own" the copyright over the content we create, but are agreeing to let others reuse it for any purpose as long as they say where they got the content from. So, while I can understand how what happened might be a bit frustrating, I wouldn't consider it a case of stealing (at least not as you seem to be using the term). The only possible problem I can see with what has happened is if the other editor basically copied-and-pasted the content you created into their "article" and didn't not give proper attribution to the original source of the content. You're always free to improve the existing article if you want, and incorporate content from you draft into it if you can do so in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. You can either be WP:BOLD in making changes or you can be WP:CAUTIOUS; if another editor disagrees with your changes, then try and resolve things in accordance with WP:DISPUTERESOLUTION. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:38, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Creating Proposals

How do I?

Hi,

I am wondering how to create a new Proposal for a Wikipedia Page. There is an image that is incorrect, and the text goes incorrectly with it. May I know how to create a Proposal, please? It'sBirdy (talk) 10:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

It'sBirdy Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. By "proposal" I think you mean you want to make an edit or request an edit? It's not necessary to seek permission to make an edit; you are welcome to make it yourself if you feel comfortable doing so. If you don't feel comfortable, that's okay too, in which case you may post on the associated article talk page, describing what you wish to do. You can make it as a formal edit request(click for instructions) but that's not required. 331dot (talk) 10:42, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi It'sBirdy. If you find an error in an article and you think you can fix it in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, then you can be WP:BOLD and fix it without proposing anything. If you think something might be wrong but aren't sure or aren't sure how to fix it, you can be WP:CAUTIOUS and start a discussion about the matter on the relevant article's talk page to seek feedback from others. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:44, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I made a template in my sandbox. How do I move it to the mainspace?

I created a template on the Regional Councils of France in my sandbox. Can I/someone move it to the mainspace? Or is there any formality for making templates? Excellenc1📞 07:26, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 I think you can move it to the template namespace without any formality. ―Qwerfjkl talk 08:16, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

What is a template namespace? Will it be User:Excellenc1/Template:Regional Councils (France) or Template:Regional Councils (France)? Excellenc1📞 08:21, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

The latter. (It's the, not a, template namespace.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:36, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I have created this template. Can someone please review it (if something is to be fixed in it)? Excellenc1📞 09:24, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 I just checked it, it looked fine except for the documentation, which was at User:Excellenc1/doc, so I moved it to Template:Regional Councils (France)/doc, and fixed the transclusion from {{User:Excellenc1/doc}} to {{Documentation}}. ―Qwerfjkl talk 11:16, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Move category

A club called Sreenidi Deccan FC was given entry to I-League (a top tier football league in India). Some of the categories and subcategories of page is spelled 'Sreenidhi Deccan FC', where the letter 'h' is there in between. According the the club website and social media handles, it is wrong. So someone, please move the categories from 'Sreenidhi Deccan FC' to 'Sreenidi Deccan FC'. I cannot do it by myself because the option is not visible in here. Someone, please help me sort that out. Thank you. Ken Tony ^{Shall we discuss?} 12:17, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ken Tony: Hello Ken Tony, welcome to the teahouse. If the categories are misspelled then you'll want to list them for speedy renaming, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion#Speedy renaming and merging. In this case the relevant criteria would be WP:C2A, Typographic and spelling fixes. If 48 hours pass with no one objecting the category will be moved to the new title, and a bot will automatically fix all the category transclusions on pages. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 12:36, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

192.76.8.91 This issue comes under WP:C2D right? Ken Tony ^{Shall we discuss?} 13:44, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ken Tony: Since the article uses the same spelling that would also be a valid criteria, I would give both of them in your rationale for moving them when setting up the request. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 13:54, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ken Tony: https://www.sreenidhifc.com/ uses both "Sreenidhi Football Club" (with 'h') and "Sreenidi Deccan Football Club" (without 'h'). Although I created the categories by request, I'll let someone more knowledgeable determine what the correct name is. GoingBatty (talk) 14:12, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: I think it might be good if we select "Sreenidi Deccan Football Club" (without 'h'), because in their website, under this heading only they mentioned about their I-League entry. The same is used in all of their social media handles. AIFF (governing body of Indian football) also uses the same in their website. Ken Tony ^{Shall we discuss?} 14:46, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Issues with verification for my article

Greetings, I recently joined the Wikipedia to contribute whenever is necessary. Because I recently got my patent accepted, I thought it was worthy of mention, especially in Nigeria where Intellectual Property is hardly understood or mentioned.

I wrote about myself, in what I think was a very modest way but two reviewers said it lacked reference. As I said, Nigeria patent and design registry, though affiliated to WIPO, don't give links for accepted patents but document from the government showing patent acceptance with patent number. I have my patent document.

I would like to get a clearer reason why the article failed to pass the review and what I can do to be accepted. Thanks Mirep1404 (talk) 09:27, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Check out WP:COI and WP:CITE. - AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 10:20, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Mirep1404: Please review WP:AUTOBIO and undertsnad that a Wikipedia article might not nessearely be desireable. To add to your question, anything on Wikipedia must be verifyable, in particular when writing about living people, because we are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:21, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Mirep1404. It sounds like you might be (slightly) misunderstanding what Wikipedia is about. Perhaps if you take a look at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, you might gain a better understanding about what types of subjects are generally considered OK to try and create an article about. You probably should also take a look at Wikipedia:Autobiography and Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing for additional information. Please try and understand not being written about on Wikipedia doesn't necessarily mean you haven't already or won't someday accomplish some pretty great things; it's just means that perhaps at this time it might be too soon for an article to be written about you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:26, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Jeswills Eleke. What is mandatory is not confirmation of your accomplishments (patent), but rather that you have reached a level of notability in your field of expertise that other people have published articles about you. Also, what you submitted as refs 4-7 are not valid, as all refs must be to publication (print, web, etc.), not just statements of fact. David notMD (talk) 14:35, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Mirep1404 Wikipedia is not the only way to present information online. You might want to consider starting a personal website, or register a blog account. That way you would be able to tell those in Nigeria about patents and intellectual property, without worrying about following the strict rules of an online encyclopedia.

I hope that you will continue to contribute to Wikipedia by means of editing articles on subjects that you are familiar with, after you find good references that verify what you are adding to the articles. Congratulations on receiving a patent. Karenthewriter (talk) 18:05, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft question

My page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Siddhant_Sarang had been denied several times. This time the denied message has asked about paid or COI disclosure. But I was not paid by anyone to create or edit the page. 2405:201:A403:C8E0:9C4B:7991:96B8:F2B6 (talk) 18:43, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@2405:201:A403:C8E0:9C4B:7991:96B8:F2B6: Welcome to the Teahouse. The reason that the reviewer thinks you have a COI, even if you don't, is the use of language such as "one of a kind" and "first ever"; this sort of language has, in the past, been frequently used by paid editors. Once you remove those, I think you're in great shape. I'd recommend reading WP:WORDS to get a sense of what to watch out for. Helen(💬📖) 19:14, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

DYK help

I have been working on a DYK piece for the page The Anarchist Cookbook and it appears I made a mess of things. Can someone please lend me a hand of fixing the subpage? Etriusus (talk) 05:46, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Etriusus: Happy to help, but what exactly do you need help with? I don't understand what you mean by "subpage"; mainspace articles aren't supposed to have them. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 06:55, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: I assume Etriusus is talking about the first section of Talk:The Anarchist Cookbook, where there are DYK errors introduced. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:56, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: and @Tenryuu: I need issue with the section of DYK where it is saying that there are errors within the nomination. I.e. ""The Anarchist Cookbook" is not a valid article name; check for bad characters,"User:Etriusus" is not a valid user name; check for bad characters. Error: no articles specified". It was my error in calling it a subpage. Etriusus (talk) 18:52, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Etriusus: Hello Etriusus, welcome to the teahouse. Did you know nominations are supposed to be created on separate pages in template space, rather than on the talk page of the article. Follow the instructions at Template talk:Did you know#Instructions for nominators, which will take you through the process of creating the subpage in template space. You should just be able to copy across all the stuff you filled in on the talk page. If you need extra help you'll probably get better responses at Wikipedia talk:Did you know where there will be a lot more people familiar with the process. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 19:00, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Etriusus, I've fixed all the stuff for you. Please see Template:Did you know nominations/The Anarchist Cookbook. ─ The Aafī ^{^(talk)} 19:17, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Deleting subpages in my Sandbox

Do I have to do anything specific to delete old subpages that I had in my sandbox? TipsyElephant (talk) 19:27, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Welcome to the Teahouse! Just add {{Db-userreq}} to the top of each subpage, and an admin will delete them for you. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Article Creation

How can I add a podcast? Cotryk (talk) 19:33, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cotryk: Have a look here: {{Cite podcast}}. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:43, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cotryk: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you're looking to create a new Wikipedia article about a podcast, first read Wikipedia:Notability (web) to see if it meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If it does, then follow the instructions at Help:Your first article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:46, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Archiving my own talk page rather than deleting to clean up and declutter

Hello, I am sure it is covered somewhere, but my own talk page is getting cluttered so I have been deleting stuff to declutter. What I would ideally like to do is not delete but somehow archive the material and not delete so it still results in an uncluttered - or at least less cluttered - page please. Can anyone point me in the right direction if possible please? GRALISTAIR (talk) 14:44, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@GRALISTAIR: Welcome to the Teahouse. There are different ways you can to do, which are listed at Archiving a talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:53, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks - I have made a start GRALISTAIR (talk) 15:20, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@GRALISTAIR You appear to be doing it manually. Also you can use {{Archives}} or {{talk header}} on your talk page. ―Qwerfjkl talk 15:30, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@GRALISTAIR @Tenryuu You can also try User:Anne drew Andrew and Drew/SetupAutoArchive (a user script). ―Qwerfjkl talk 15:24, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@GRALISTAIR, I "installed" it at my talkpage in this edit: [1] If that looks ok to you, you can copy the code. You may have to wait several hours for the bot to actually archive stuff. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:33, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Come to think of it, you probably should tweak the "archive=User talk:Gråbergs Gråa Sång/Archive %(counter)d" bit. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:42, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Comment It's absurd that we expect new editors figure out how to archive their talk page. Perfect job for a bot.--S Philbrick (Talk) 18:23, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Sphilbrick There are some editors who prefer to just delete old stuff or archive it manually, so I'm not sure about a bot opting people into automatic archiving. How about creating an automatically substituted wrapper template that produces a copy of one of the bot setup templates with all the parameters filled in with some reasonable default values? Then when someone asks how to setup auto archiving for their talk page you can just tell them "just add {{Auto archive setup}} to the top of your talk page, and bots will deal with the rest". 192.76.8.91 (talk) 18:49, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I like the idea. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:21, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång But to use Lowercase sigmabot III or ClueBot III? Probably sigmabot. ―Qwerfjkl talk 19:34, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I would go for Lowecase sigmabot III, on the basis that the vast majority of users aren't going to need the extra functionality of cluebot (creating an index page and retargeting incoming links), and that cluebot has had major performance issues in the past. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 19:38, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I don't have an informed opinion on that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:39, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I keep proposing this idea, rather than carrying it out for two reasons: I don't have any bot skills, and I don't have a clue which of the various archive options is the best. I know that when I started, I didn't have a clue about how to go about it — I asked somebody probably at a helpdesk and somebody set it up for me. It's worked ever since but I don't know whether the option I have is the best option or if there something better but it works for me.

I'm fully on board with the notion that some people might prefer to do it themselves. I also wouldn't automatically set it up for every new user. Something like 90% of them never have more than a handful of edits so it would be silly to set up talk page archives for millions of uses that would never use it. My suggestion is we pick some threshold, perhaps number of edits or number of days or some combination, and then a bot could drop a message on the editors talk page that says there is a option to automatically archive the page. The editor either clicks okay or decline. If they decline they will never be bothered again but if they accept, a bot come along and sets up the archiving. They can always manually override with a different option if they choose.--S Philbrick (Talk) 20:28, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Try it out at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:40, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Logan Park High

Courtesy link: Logan Park High School
Info removed ; I made a correction and add info both on the principal and year school started important part of history that was missed - yet this has been removed despite another member verification on the principal death.

The editor is dismissing me and happy for incorrect info surley he does not have the sole right on what goes on about the school and also to delete the true history of 1974 the school opened vs the reported 1975 - my school photo is not wrong 😀 neither is memory

Disappointed in my effort to help being dismissed RiJac (talk) 22:25, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@RiJac: Hello RiJac, welcome to the teahouse.

Wikipedia articles are written based on information available in reliable published sources, memories are not usable as citations in articles. To support this claim you'll need to find some kind of published work that includes it, for example you might use a newspaper announcing the opening of the school. For this kind of simple factual information published materials from the school themselves would also be acceptable, e.g. if they have a history section on their website that mentions the date the school opened you could use that. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 22:46, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@RiJac: Welcome to the Teahouse. As you've been told on your talk page, your sources need to be verifiable, which is done through reliable sources, which are typically secondary sources. Personal recollections can't be verified. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:46, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

How to get a variety of sources in an article? Multiple passes or thorough reading?

Sometimes when I am writing about a topic, I worry that I represent one source (and the viewpoint associated with it) too much, but at the same time I don't think "completely reading" all sources before starting writing is feasibale.

Is this okay? Do people have opinion or tips on this?

For some subjects things are simpler. If you are narrowly writing about one topic in science you can look at a recent review and you will get a fairly complete summary. In humanities... it feels more complicated. It can feel like to know what to read you have to start writing.

In my head there is an evolutionary process where an article might initially be biased by one source, but through people progressively being interested in the varied literature for factual claims a variety of sources and viewpoints get added to contextualize the source. But are we happy with the bias initially? Is this how things happen in practice? And is an approach of "read towards you write" better. I have seen authors argue far more in favour of "find the best sources and summarize them" I'm unsure if this is possible. I am reminded of the concept of "inductive research strategies" where you don't know what to look for or how to do thigns until you start looking. I sometimes feeling that editing wikipedia can be like that.

It feels like there's a related idea of "using your understand of a topic in order to find sources" or "systematically looking for sources and summarizing them". The former creates bias and invites OP, the latter is "stupid" and can't search correctly. It feels like a general question of how much you should use "OR" type thinking when making editorial decisions - this isn't the same as introducing OR. You can simultaneously be scrupulous with your sourcing and referencing, while also having you understand of the topic influence your editing quite a lot.... Talpedia (talk) 20:59, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Talpedia. In my opinion, a new article should never summarize just one source because the General notabilty guideline requires significant coverage in reliable, independent sources (plural). A widely accepted essay Wikipedia:Multiple sources recommends at least three such sources. Certain topics have a plethora of sources, such as Abraham Lincoln who is the subject of about 15,000 published books. Clearly, the editors who were working on Lincoln's Wikipedia biography 20 years ago could not have read even a tiny fraction of those books, so it is necessary in a case like that to select recent books written by respected academics. But 20 years into this encyclopedia, with over 6.3 million articles, articles about all of the heavily covered topics are already written. Topics of potential new articles usually have fewer readily accessible sources. So, you should read as much as you can about the topic, reject the sources that are dubious or consist only of a passing mention of the topic, and select those that are reliable and discuss the topic in depth. The Neutral point of view requires that our articles summarize the range of points of view of the topic, so if the topic is at all controversial, you must read sources from the most prominent points of view and summarize all of them. I have written six new articles in the last six weeks, and they have had 7, 5, 4, 21, 20 and 8 references. I gather most of my references before I start writing, but often find others as I proceed. I finished an article on a more sweeping topic a couple of months ago that now has 59 references. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:16, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

All I can add is - I feel your pain GRALISTAIR (talk) 00:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

How do I create a page for someone not listed

How do I create a page for someone not listed on Wikipedia? Cadman2001 (talk) 23:25, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

WP:YOURFIRSTARTICLE TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 23:30, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cadman2001: There are a few ways to do it. However, there are a few things that you should keep in mind first. One of the major things is notability, however you should also keep in mind whether or not you have a conflict of interest with the subject you are wanting to create an article for. I'm probably forgetting a few things but if the person you are adding is in line with the above then you will want to see Your First Article, which provides some advice for creating an article. As I said before there are probably a few things I'm forgetting, and if I am other people will add on to what I've said. But I think I've at least covered some of the more important things. Hope this helps! Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 23:42, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Cadman2001. Your first and most important step, by far, is to identify multiple independent reliable sources that devote significant coverage to the person. These will become the references that will serve as the skeleton of the article, and if you cannot find such sources, it is not possible to write an acceptable Wikipedia biography. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:45, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Not by creating a promotional piece, anywhere; and not by creating a draft (even one free of promotionalism) on your user page. If you want to promote this Brian Mabry (who I notice you chummily call not Mabry but Brian), you've chosen the wrong website for the job. There are various PR websites that will let you do it, for a fee. -- Hoary (talk) 00:34, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

To be clear, remove the content from your User page. Use either your Sandbox or the WP:YFA process to create a draft. As already stated, confirm you have valid references before beginning the effort, as otherwise, guaranteed to fail. Do not quote Brian. What he says does not create notability. David notMD (talk) 00:39, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Biographies

What should be at the top of a biography. I have read some and it always seems that it should be those things that define a person's life. Some I have read have minor value and/or while true are meant to dimish the subject. Is there any guidance on this? Thank you. JMeditor101 (talk) 00:33, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

What that person is notable for. Which biography is it that concerns you, JMeditor101? -- Hoary (talk) 01:04, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Hoary!--I will give a couple example Jason Ravnsborg Attorney General of South Dakota. He has it noted how he lost the US Senate Primary in 2014, who cares? That is clearly not what defines his life. Contrast that with Tom Miller the Attorney General of Iowa, he lost his first race for AG and it is not noted at the top anywhere as I would say both don't define either man and should not be at the top. Further I have noticed there are people clearly with an agenda on Ravnsborg's page who have no legal background and seemingly want to slur him about the accident. Like what do the speeding tickets have to do with anything? he wasn't charged with speeding even. Maybe a point, but not an entire section header. Friends have tried to change or make it less partisan and more neutral and they just undo it or make it worse.

Example number 2 is Paul LePage former Governor of Maine. There are things on his page at the top that are not even sourced and clearly with a partisan slant. Now they may or may not be true, but I thought everything had to be sourced and neutral. Appreciate your thoughts.

@JMeditor101: For general guidance, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography. GoingBatty (talk) 01:20, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you--GoingBatty; I will check it out. Feel free to weigh in on what i wrote Hoary also.

Question

A few minutes ago I wrote a page about a client who is the founder of a fashion brand, some guy removed it. The reason was that there was promotional content in it, and if there was none at all. Letterwriter2021 (talk) 23:56, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Letterwriter2021: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you're writing on behalf of a client, you must disclose your paid relationship on your user page; you may use {{paid}} to do so. I also noticed that you seem to refer yourself as "we"; take this as a reminder that Wikipedia accounts are for one person and one person alone; sharing accounts is not allowed.

If you haven't, please read Your first article, as it gives details on how to write one, and go through the Articles for Creation process and make a draft. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:03, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Letterwriter2021 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You had edited your user page, which is not article space or space to draft an article, but a place to tell about yourself as a Wikipedia editor. New users cannot (and are advised not to) create new articles directly, and should use Articles for Creation. That's not why your draft was deleted- it was considered promotional because it just told about the person. Wikipedia is not for merely telling about someone. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize 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. Please see Your First Article. Successfully creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks to perform on Wikipedia; it's good to first get some experience editing existing articles, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Using the new user tutorial will help as well. 331dot (talk) 00:05, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

We as a team make a client page, that’s what I meant. Can I restore a deleted article? and another question, if I put a paid article, do I have to pay some money to wikipedia and will that article get a place on google as a paid article?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Letterwriter2021 (talk • contribs)

Letterwriter2021 Wikipedia does not charge for creating articles. Wikipedia also has no interest in helping you enhance search results for your clients; Google results are a side benefit, which might benefit you and your client, but that's not our mission. We are here to build an encyclopedia of human knowledge, not to aid in marketing efforts. There are ways to recover deleted content, but I doubt anyone will do so. 331dot (talk) 00:10, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

We are writing about a person who is already recognizable, I wonder where that tag for paid content is placed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Letterwriter2021 (talk • contribs)

Letterwriter2021 If they are already recognizable and meet the special definition of a notable person that Wikipedia has, it would be better for you to allow independent editors to take note of this person in reliable sources and choose on their own to write about them. You should also be aware that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. You may place the paid declaration on your user page. 331dot (talk) 00:19, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

What exactly is the mark for paid? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Letterwriter2021 (talk • contribs)

You may simply write a statement which says "I am being paid by (whomever is paying you) to make Wikipedia edits about (your client or clients). 331dot (talk) 00:28, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

The paid declaration goes on your User page. Also, please 'sign' your comments by typing four of ~ at the end. And stop referring to yourself as "we". You as an individual have an account. You as an individual are responsible for what is written from that account. You may be working with other people ("a team"), but the account is for one person to use. Lastly, Wikipedia has articles, not pages. Once an article is accepted, any editor can amend it as long as references support the changes. No one 'owns' articles. David notMD (talk) 01:35, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Letterwriter2021, and welcome to the Teahouse. I suspect that some of the responses above have appeared a bit hostile. The fact is that (aside from an unlikely degree of altruism), if somebody is paying you to put them on Wikipedia then they are paying you for promotion. Promotion is fine many places on the web, but it is fundamentally inconsistent with the purposes of Wikipedia. You are permitted to edit as a pair editor, provided you make the necessary declarations; but you can and should expect your work to be carefully checked to make sure it complies with Wikipedia's policies. As 331dot indicated, a Wikipedia article is not in any way for the benefit of its subject - any benefit they may derive is incidental, as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Note also 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. Any article should be based almost 100% on what such independent sources say, not on what the subject says or wants to say. And once an article is accepted, your and your client's involvement in it will be limited to suggesting changes: neither of you will have control of the content. --ColinFine (talk)

David notMD My problem is what I will call and whom. So your discussion is worth nothing. Thanks to the others for the answers. Greetings— Preceding unsigned comment added by Letterwriter2021 (talk • contribs) 12:35, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Team editing via one account can get you blocked. Wikipedia prefers "articles" over "pages" because social media treats the latter as proprietary to the person who created it. David notMD (talk) 01:56, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Question

Can I upload the Prende TV logo? ItsJustdancefan (talk) 02:10, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

You could upload it to this Wikipedia only (not to Wikipedia Commons) to illustrate an article here on Prende TV (which we do not yet have) under the Fair use criteria: however, you should not upload it to a Draft of the article, but instead wait until the article itself is accepted. See Wikipedia:Logos for more information.

An argument could be made that it is not sufficiently original to qualify for copyright protection (being merely typographic), and so is eligible for upload to Commons. I myself think otherwise (because the typography is artistically modified, not reproducible by unmodified typefaces), but I'm not an expert in this area. Other opinions welcomed. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.177.31 (talk) 02:46, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Couple questions of different topics

Hello again, I apologize for coming again, but I have a couple questions:

On the talk page of an article I made (Hanns Wolf), it says that it is a part of Wikiproject Article for Creation, does that mean anything besides the fact that the article went through the AfC process, can this have an impact on article quality reassessment or if the article was nominated for deletion?
How do I create an article directly to the mainspace?
How do I request for an article quality reassessment? (I might do this in the future with my article Hanns Wolf however, I definitely need to do more editing)
Can normal users add Wikiprojects to the talk page of articles? (Kind of bad wording, but idk how to explain)
How can I find out if an image is copyrighted or not, and if the image isn't copyrighted, how can I add it to Wikimedia Commons or to an article?

Thanks for answering! RandomEditorAAA (talk) 00:29, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi RandomEditorAAA. I'll try to answer your questions based upon my understanding of things.

The AfC banner just shows that the article was approved via the AfC process (i.e. it was created first as a draft, was submitted for review, and then eventually accepted). I don't think it means anything else. The fact that an article was created does mean that someone (i.e. an AfC reviewer) looked it over and came to the conclusion that it does meet WP:N or that there's at least a really really good chance that it would meet WP:N; it doesn't, however, mean that the article can never be nominated for deletion. AfC reviewers generally are, for the most part, expected to have a fairly good understanding of Wikipedia notability and how it's assessed; so, a draft approved via the AfC process is typiclaly not going to be one that is of really such questionable notability that it's going be tagged or otherwise nominated for deletion shortly after it's accepted. AfC reveiwers, however, are just like any other editor in that no two editors may assess things exactly the same way and different editors might feel differently about an case, particularly if it's a borderline case. So, an AfC approved draft can still be nominated for deletion.
You can first create a draft or a userspace draft and then WP:MOVE the draft to the mainspace. You can also simply create the article in the mainspace like you would create any page: first you search the title you want to create to make sure that another page with the same title doesn't already exist. If no other page exists, the page title should be indicated by a WP:REDLINK. All you need to do then is click on the red link to create the page. If you're account is not yet WP:AUTOCONFIRMED, then I don't think you'll be able to do this; moreover, even if you're account is autoconfirmed but have yet to establish yourself as someone who has created quite a number of problem-free articles (i.e. you're account isn't classified) as WP:AUTOPATTROLED), then any new articles you create will likely be reviewed by a WP:NPP member. Sometimes a NPP member comes across an article that they feel is not quite ready for the mainspace, and in such cases, they WP:DRAFTIFY the article so that it can be further improved. Once something has been added to the mainspace, it's pretty much there for anyone to edit at anytime, including to nominate or tag for deletion. Some editors immediately add content like a lead sentence to the mainspace with the intention of goign back and gradually improving it over time; unfortunately, someone else comes alongs, sees what looks like a possible draft but is something not ready for the mainspace and then draftifies it or tags/nominates it for deletion. So, I wouldn't add anything to the mainspace that is unsourced or doesn't seems to have at least a reasonable claim of notability.
If you want to request a formal reassessment, you can try WP:PR or maybe even asking on the talk pages of any WikiProjects whose scope the article falls under. You can also reassess it yourself if you feel you got a decent undestanding of WP:ASSESSMENT. My personal opinion is that you probably shouldn't really assess articles you've created or heavily improved yourself, but there's any policy or guideline that states such a thing can't be done.
Anyone can add a WikiProject banner to an article talk page; moreover, anyone can remove a WikiProject banner from a talk page. You might want to look at similar articles to see what WikiProject banners are added to them since articles similar in subject matter often fall under the same WikiProject scope.
You can find out a little more about copyright in WP:COPY#Guidelines for images and other media files and c:Commons:Licensing. I think it's basically good practice to start out with the assumption that an image is going to protected by copyright and then work from there. This is particularly true for any images you didn't create yourself. It's a lot more complicated than that for sure; so, you can always ask for opinions on a specific image either at WP:MCQ or c:COM:VPC.

-- Marchjuly (talk) 01:07, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed explanation, I am still unsure about 3. hopefully it can be answered, as WP:ASSESSMENT didn't tell me much about re-assessment, and I am not qualified to be assessing articles, let alone mine (where I will have a bias). Thanks again for your answers! - RandomEditorAAA (talk) 03:03, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Here you go

No.
Type the title of your prospective article into Wikipedia's search box. You may be told that no such article exists, and be invited to start one. If so, take up the invitation. However, I strongly advise you not to do this. Just use AFC.
Don't know, sorry.
Yes.
Assume that every image is copyrighted unless you have, and can point to, solid evidence to the contrary. An image that isn't copyrighted and that is useful for Wikipedia can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons; look there for an explanation. Once it's uploaded there, it can be used in an article.

-- Hoary (talk) 01:13, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks - RandomEditorAAA (talk) 03:03, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Editor not engaging @talk page

Hello a user was reverted, and i adressed user on talk page, user doesn't respond on talk page instead he puts the same content, but this time over 5 edits, so that i can't revert it without breaking the 3 revert rule, what to do to? Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 02:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dawit S Gondaria: You can gather the diffs of their reverts and report the user at the edit warring noticeboard. Make sure to read the top of the page carefully. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@User:Tenryuu thanks Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 03:44, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

My user page was deleted almost immediately after posting.

My question is. And i done all but five seconds of reading is that. Conflict of Interest parties to a particular topic can not Edit, or Create a page about said topic? I.e. movie directors can not edit a page about a movie they directed. A musician can not edit or create a page about themselves. Somebody else has to create these "pages"? Bmguitar89 (talk) 03:38, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bmguitar89: Welcome to Wikipedia. I can't see what was on your page, but if you are trying to create an article, use WP:YFA to learn how and there is a wizard there that will help you create a draft for review. Your user page is for things about your work on Wikipedia, not for drafting articles. RudolfRed (talk) 03:43, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

OK, I guessed wrong. There is discussion about this at User_talk:Ashleyyoursmile#Deleted_my_user_page RudolfRed (talk) 03:45, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bmguitar89: Welcome to the Teahouse. People with conflicts of interest (CoI) aren't prohibited from editing articles, but they are strongly discouraged to do so directly, as many of them are unable to write about the subject neutrally. It is strongly recommended that if this is an article in the mainspace (i.e., no prefix before the title), people that have CoIs should submit edit requests on the article's talk page. If the subject is being nurtured in draftspace, they can work on it directly, though they must disclose their CoI. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:45, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

I was in fact trying to create a page for my band. I can understand the conflict of interest aspect. I thought maybe it would be allowed to create a page, of my band, beacuse who will. Alot of local bands dont get mentioned here and they should be honestly. I think all of them should have the chance or opportunity to have a page here, since it is information. Is it possible i could create a local or unsigned band page? One that consists of all local bands anyone might know or remember. It could be categorized by Country,Then State/province. Then alphabetically. I find that there are alot of people who ask about local bands they have seen or used to listen to, but cant remember their name exactly. Atleast this could help to narrow down their choices. And would definitely pump up the artists when they see they are mentioned on wikipedia. Thank you for any help regarding my questions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmguitar89 (talk • contribs)

Short answer: No. An article on any topic must pass a notability threshold, generally described in Wikipedia:Notability. Specifically for bands, there are additional criteria; see WP:BAND. If your band doesn't meet any of those criteria, then your band cannot have an article here. Your statement "Alot of local bands don't get mentioned here and they should" is incorrect, and has been incorrect since Wikipedia began. Wikipedia isn't an indiscriminate collection of topics. We have articles on notable topics, and notability is pretty clearly defined.

If you want to try to write an article about your band, please see Wikipedia:Articles for creation for instructions, write the article in draft space or your personal sandbox, make sure it complies with WP:Golden rule at a minimum, and submit it for review. That's the only way anyone with a conflict of interest can get an article published on Wikipedia.

~Anachronist (talk) 04:07, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bmguitar89: As Anachronist said, Wikipedia isn't an indiscriminate collection of topics. If you're thinking of compiling a list of local bands, you may want to start your own project somewhere off Wikipedia. Alternative outlets has some suggestions. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:43, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I guess there is ALOT to learn about what wikipedia is. I will continue to do my research. And hopefully I can contribute properly in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmguitar89 (talk • contribs)

Published page

FYI

– Heading added by Tenryuu.

Hello sir/madam I published a page on wikipedia for myself a few months back. and have still not got approval please tell when will I get approval on my created page Regards Divyanshu Tejwani Divyanshu Tejwani (talk) 05:35, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Divyanshu Tejwani: Welcome to the Teahouse. It seems you misunderstand what Wikipedia is for: it is not a place to promote yourself. You could try some of the alternative outlets listed here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:10, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm trying to edit the article about disastrous balloon releases, but my edits keep getting reverted and now I've got a nasty message.

Please help! I'm trying to correct the misimpression given on the balloon release page, which is that these horrors are some kind of romantic or peaceful way to celebrate, when in reality they are polluting, littering, sea-turtle and other aquatic wildlife-killing, bird-entangling-and-killing, disasters. Every time I edit the page some guy named MichaelMaggs, who claims to agree with me, reverts my edits to the original puff piece on how lovely these horrifying events are. I did what he asked, which was to provide citations for every claim I made, and also added the requested reasons for the edits.

And now there's a horrible message on my talk page: Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Balloon release, you may be blocked from editing. Code Pending (talk) 00:20, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

How is it that the money-interested helium balloon industry's opinion is valid or neutral, but mine isn't? Bettt (talk) 00:34, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

You have been undone five times by four different editors. You have been pointed to WP:RGW and WP:POV. Have you read those links? You should also read WP:BRD and WP:EW. Please discuss your contested changes on the article's talk page rather than continuing to make them.Meters (talk) 00:50, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Balloon release has an Opposition section. Consider adding referenced content there, rather than deleting content from elsewhere in the article and changing the Lead. Given reverts, the Talk page of the article is a place to state your position. David notMD (talk) 00:53, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

David notMD Because the opposition part is below the part that tells everyone how wonderful these horrible events are.

Also I've never seen a reference to WP:RGW and WP:POV before. There's nothing on my talk page about it; where else would those references be? And what are those things?

I'm not trying to be troublesome, just trying to right a horrible wrong. Bettt (talk) 01:00, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bettt: Please read WP:Advocacy. Wikipedia is not to be used for righting great wrongs or environmental advocacy, no matter how worthy the cause. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 01:03, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

The link to Righting Great Wrongs, or WP:RGW, is in this edit summary by user:Jasper Deng [2]. The link to WP:POV is on your talk page as neutral point of view policy, left by user:Code Pending in this edit [3]. Meters (talk) 01:10, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

The Lead (or Lede) is supposed to summarize the gist of the article. The lead has a sentence about opposition, and that is elaborated upon - with references - in the article. Removing content that describes balloon events (releases, races) is not the way to approach this. David notMD (talk) 01:51, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Let me correct something; I misspoke. I should have said not that I'm trying to right a wrong, but to correct an incorrect assertion. The wrong I spoke of was the untruthfulness of the assertions in that lead.

The balloon industry shill who wrote that piece talks about how wonderful these things are, claiming they are peaceful or prayerful. Except those aren't facts! Nobody can prove that they are either of these things. The negative side of these events, however, which is everything that happens after the flying litter passes beyond the sight of the observers, is only mentioned way down the page, "below the fold" as it were.

I seek to remove the emotional arguments of the advertising part of the page, which - again - cannot be supported by citations, and put forth the truth about what happens after the balloons go up, for which there are many documented dreadful facts and citations to prove them.

I also put in an image from the US Fish and Wildlife Service, which the photographer offers as in the public domain, showing a strangled bird hanging from the ribbon of one such balloon. This image should share the prime time with the colorful sky full of deathly gasbags. Along with many other such images, of sea turtles and other wildlife harmed by balloon litter. Bettt (talk) 01:59, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bettt: If you have concerns about the article Balloon release, then the best place for you to raise them would be at Talk:Balloon release per Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Try to discuss your concerns in terms of relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines and keep the focus on the content being discussed, but avoid commenting on others who might be involved in the discussion or made edits you might disagree with as much as possible as explained here. Making statements such as The balloon industry shill who wrote that piece talks about how wonderful these things are, claiming they are peaceful or prayerful. and How is it that the money-interested helium balloon industry's opinion is valid or neutral, but mine isn't? aren't really conducive to fostering a constructive discussion of the subject matter, and comments directed towards individual editors like the one you made here can quickly turn a discussion into a WP:BATTLEGROUND or WP:USTHEM type of thing which is not going to help you achieve whatever you want to achieve. Try to assume good faith with respect to the others involved and don't just automatically assume that they're not here just because don't seem to agree with the changes you want to make. Wikipedia is a collaborative diting project and sometimes this means that some sort of middle ground needs to be established through discussion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:07, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

The article was created in 2008. It has always had an opposition section. Again, it has always had an opposition section. Per Marchjuly, the best place for making a case for changes is the Talk page of the article. Per my suggestion, detailed content with references and images can be added to the Opposition section. David notMD (talk) 07:43, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

How to submit changes to a protected page

A page that I would like to update is currently semi-protected, the page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_series_database Dirk Beetstra has told me that should prepare a draft called TimescaleDB but I am not clear if I should copy the page and modify the content as the draft, or create a draft containing the changes.

There are two sections I would like to change. The first is the table of Timeseries databases, to add TimescaleDB. The citations for this will include existing references [7] and [10] as per InfluxDB and will add a new citation 14

The second is to add additional citation, 14 (and possibly another one or two). The citation I would like to add is this one, proceedings from the Cray User Group 2018 where they state that they added TimescaleDB as the preferred time series database for PMDB (Power Management Database). https://cug.org/proceedings/cug2018_proceedings/includes/files/pap174s2-file2.pdf as I believe that this should provide sufficient evidence that TimescaleDB warrants inclusion on that page.

One other question: would either of these articles be considered appropriate secondary citations? https://www.dnsfilter.com/blog/why-dnsfilter-replaced-influxdb-with-timescaledb or https://labs.consol.de/development/2018/10/31/introduction-to-timescale-db.html

How should I proceed please? Lorilanc (talk) 16:43, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Lorilanc: welcome to the Teahouse, and sorry you did not get a faster response. A community discussion at Talk:Time series database#RfC on inclusion criteria decided that no individual databases should be mentioned in the article unless there is already a Wikipedia article about them. You should not copy parts of the article and edit them, rather, if (and only if) TimescaleDB meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability you can create a draft about it and submit it for review. Please make sure that you comply with Wikipedia's policies regarding confilct of interestand in particular paid editing, if they apply to you. WP:YFA has more information about creating a new draft article. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:13, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

I see that TimescaleDB has been discussed extensively on that article talk page, for several years, and in fact it seems the reason the article was protected is that TimescaleDB was repeatedly being added to the paragraphs you mention. Take a moment to read through the talk page discussions. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:19, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bonadea: Thank you for confirming. I'd read through the talk page but could not 100% follow the dialogue so hadn't picked up on the decision to require a notable page. I agree that someone has repeatedly tried to shoehorn TimescaleDB onto the page... FWIW I want to assure you that wasn't me, and I appreciate why the page was closed to edits. I have checked out the CoI policies, agree with those entirely, and will be sure to comply (I admit I was not aware of those when I made a past edit to a different company page).

Query regarding page details of an Educationist.

FYI

– Turned into a section. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:08, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I'm trying to create a wikipedia page for my grandfather, although I'm not quite sure as to why it is getting rejected. From my understanding I have mentioned references, his books, published articles, papers etc. If you could help me with identifying what is missing or how I can improve on it, it'll be really helpful. There 3-4 wikipedia pages of other people where the the works of Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya have been mentioned as well, but I'm not sure how to add those in this references list The username is - Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya (talk) 05:44, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya: Welcome to the Teahouse. I see you have started your draft at User:Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya (which is an inappropriate use of one's user page) and Draft:Bhim S. Dahiya. If you are not your grandfather, please abandon this account, as it is against Wikipedia's username policy to impersonate a real person.
To be pedantic, the draft(s) have not been rejected, but declined. Wikipedia is not interested in what your grandfather has to say, but rather what reliable sources have to say about him. If you wish to continue editing, please disclose your conflict of interest on an account with a different name. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:16, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Historic mentions of references Hi, I'm creating a page with the name Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya and it has been declined twice with the reason stated as to lack of references. But the thing is that my publications, books, articles, thesis, research papers, talks lack the availability on internet as back in the day there was more prevalence of offline ways and I don't have a track of every where my books were referred, or where my research papers are being used to teach in universities. The data available, my books, articles on google scholars(posted by others), mention of my scholarship, being an MLA, other positions held are mentioned in the references with a link to there website where it is showcased. I needed help as to what more can I do and how can I make changes so that it doesn't get declined again. Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya (talk) 08:08, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

???? This post starts by "...trying to create a wikipedia page for my grandfather..." but the comment immediately above is written in first person "...I don't have a track of every where my books were referred..." Each account must belong and be edited by only one person. Attempts at autobiography are frowned upon (see WP:AUTO) but not forbidden. David notMD (talk) 08:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Not declined twice. You put identical content in two places (User page and Draft), and each was declined once. Delete the User page content and work only on the Draft. David notMD (talk) 08:28, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to create proper refs rather than all that https stuff. David notMD (talk) 10:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya: Like David notMD, I'm a little flummoxed with this comment: is Bhim S. Dahiya you or your grandfather? Wikipedia is not a free webhost or a directory. Perhaps you're looking to create a blog or personal notebook to consolidate Dahiya's materials? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 11:36, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Need help in removing copyrighted material

Hello, I tried rephrasing but it seems like that's not enough. Can somebody help me with my Draft: https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Draft:Jolyon+Petch&oldid=&action=search&use_engine=1&use_links=1&turnitin=0 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jolyon_Petch Ainamera22 (talk) 12:37, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Need help in adding picture

Hi, how can I add pictures to an article? Meteorological Person (talk) 12:46, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Meteorological Person: Welcome to the Teahouse. You can read the pictures help page for more information, but make sure that the pictures conform to Wikipedia's image use policy. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:50, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Need guidance in amending my draft

Hi, I have a written a draft on Myc-induced synthetic lethality taking inspiration from other peoples Wikipedia drafts. I have supported my draft with a good number of references. However, My draft is rejected for the reason being that it sounds like an essay. Also, I have written the draft with a neutral point of view. I have no clue as to what fails my draft as none of the sentences are pointed to support the rejection. Hence, it is challenging to improve the draft. Could I get some guidance on this please? Thanks, Vidhula Vidhula A (talk) 14:42, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Vidhula A and welcome to the Teahouse. This draft seems to contain some of your own research and conclusions; this is not allowed, per Wikipedia:No original research. See also Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_publisher_of_original_thought. It's an interesting and very detailed draft but you shouldn't include your own research or conclusions here in articles. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 15:41, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy ping @Rubbish computer. Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:18, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for your prompt reply. The draft does not contain any of my research or conclusions. I have just made a compilation from other studies the references of which are included. Hence there is no original research involved. That's why I am confused. I am trying to edit the draft but every time the same comment comes back. Could you please specifically tell me which lines or paragraph makes it look like it's my research and conclusion and that this is an original research? At least that will help me improve. Thanks, Vidhula

Hi Vidhula A, combining different sources to reach a new conclusion is classed as original research: see WP:SYNTHESIS. I think the examples cover it nicely on that page. It's better to quote what the sources say and otherwise only come to the conclusion said sources come to. I'll go through the draft and add to this answer shortly. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 14:29, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

As an example: "The Myc family includes L-Myc, N-Myc, and C-Myc.[1][2][3][4] MYC expression is known to be highly governed by a series of mechanisms that are involved in the regulatory motifs associated with the transcription activity[5][6][7] MYC protooncogene is associated with many signal transduction pathways that are associated with growth.[8][9]"

Here, it appears that you're coming to your own conclusions. There are three statements here, and none of them are necessarily wrong, but they shouldn't be combined in such a way to come to a new conclusion. It can be frustrating, because this may be useful research, but we can't allow Wikipedians to come to their own conclusions, per WP:SYNTHESIS. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 14:35, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Article need to be published

How can I get my article published on Wikipedia? I have corrected many things Help me publish it Farahjaved (talk) 13:56, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Farahjaved. Presuming this is about Draft:Muzammil Hameed, unless there are several reliable sources such as newspaper articles or books that have been written about Muzammil Hameed, then I'm afraid there's no way to get the article accepted for publication. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:03, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Literally all your sources are website homepages. This is not acceptable; you need to link to specific articles on those domains. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 15:12, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Farahjaved, and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, like many new editors, you have plunged straight into the most difficult task there is in editing Wikipedia. This is like starting to train as a builder, and immediately trying to build a house. I always advise new editors to spend several months learning how Wikipedia works by improving some of our six million articles first (I know you've been around for a year, but you've only made a handful of edits). Please understand 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. Just as building a house starts by surveying the ground to make sure it is safe to build on, preparing the ground, and building foundations, writing a Wikipedia article starts by gathering the independent reliable sources that the article must be based on. If you write a single word of an article before finding the sources, you may be wasting your time and effort. Please study your first article and NCREATIVE. --ColinFine (talk) 15:35, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Köppen climate classification map Amhara Region

Hello, question are there Köppen climate classification maps of Ethiopian regions other smaller subdivisions somewhere in Wikipedia? Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 01:37, 19 July 2021 (UTC) Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 01:37, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dawit S Gondaria: The article at Köppen climate classification has many references that are open-access, so you could look there. Alternatively, it might be better to ask the question at the reference desk for science questions, where expert editors may be able to point you to other sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:16, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Mike Turnbull Thanks! Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 15:50, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Profile deleted

Following the comment by one of the reviewers, the article was thoroughly revised to meet the guidelines. I'm wondering if it is possible to reactive the deleted draft profile? Thaanks. Conrad Rizal (talk) 15:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Ask at WP:Requests for undeletion; timed-out drafts are usually undeleted on request without much fuss. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 15:58, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

The Wayback Machine

Is it possible to search archived web pages in the same way that a regular search engine does? I tried searching on the wayback machine for the title of an article that I know is archived on the wayback machine, but it doesn't find that specific article. When I type something in the search bar what is the wayback checking? Is it just looking at URLs that contain the words or is it checking the full webpage for relevant material? TipsyElephant (talk) 16:05, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi TipsyElephant, kindly take note that you can search for the information you want on the wayback machine using the name if and only if you remember the name if not you need to search for the link of the page which would send you directly to the page.Jwale2 (talk) 17:06, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

extra colon in an edit summary

I included an extra colon in an edit summary so now there is a grammar mistake. Is there any way the colon can be removed? Thank you! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 17:02, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi 73.167.238.120, you can't change an edit summary once it's been made. A grammatical error in an edit summary isn't much of a problem. If you want, you can add or remove a space to perform a WP:Dummy edit; this will enable you to clarify previous mistakes. I don't normally do this if I make typos in edit summaries though, unless the meaning of the edit becomes unclear. Dummy edits can also be used if you forget to include an edit summary. Thanks, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 17:22, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Removal and restoration of NATO codes from rank pages

There is an user that has been removing NATO codes from military rank articles and templates. While only NATO uses the codes, they serve as a way to know the equivalents in other militaries, and removing them from the pages here in Wikipedia only hurts and not helps.

Is there a way to restore the codes without starting an edit war?, which is what I predict the user who blatantly deleted the info will do if we restore them.

(I already asked on their talk page why they removed them, no answer yet.) Mistah B (talk) 17:11, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Nikolai.Loskov, I would wait a while longer to give the user more time to reply. Generally it's better to move content disputes to talk pages, which is what you have rightly done here. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 17:24, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft question

Courtesy link: Draft:Warchild Bezzy
Hello; please i need your help on the article am writing. I submitted it 3 months ago and it was declined but i was not given a clear reason to why it was declined. Can any revise that article and fix the errors please Kendoma (talk) 16:28, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Kendoma: Welcome to the Teahouse. You have been told at the draft that it will need to pass the criteria at WP:NSINGER. You're going to need to find reliable sources that significantly cover the subject. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Block Issues

Hi Community,A colleague of mine just got blocked and he asked me for assistant, this was the message he was sent:

Your IP address has been blocked on all wikis.

The block was made by Bsadowski1 (meta.wikimedia.org). The reason given is Open proxy.

Start of block: 20:25, 11 Kutawonsa 2021 Expiry of block: 20:25, 11 Ɔsannaa 2021 Your current IP address is 102.176.94.145. Please include all above details in any queries you make.

a quick overview on how his account can be worked or how he can get his account back on track to start editing on wikipedia would be much appreciated. Thanks, Jwale2 (talk) 16:22, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Jwale2, open proxies are frequently used for vandalism and disruption; as a result, any open proxy can be blocked for any period of time. It is easier to use a closed proxy to edit. Try using secure internet, such as most home wifi. Hope this helps, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 16:38, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

See also WP:OPENPROXY. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 16:38, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jwale2, hello there, and a warm welcome to you, The Teahouse is not a proper venue to seek for an unblock request(and even worse, if you are appealing on behalf of a friend) it is generally incompatible regarding how unblock appeals are handled on Wikipedia, Having said, your friend is most likely caught under a IP range hardblock, I’m not so sure what I can say to you, but thankfully, I do know who can help out, the sysop 331dot is an expert pertaining this sort of problems. Celestina007 (talk) 18:02, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Jwale2 Celestina007 is correct that it is usually not good to ask that another person be unblocked, because we have no way to know who is sitting at the computer, if it is the same person. That is less problematic here if it is only a proxy block, but it is still better for this other person to request unblock, they can read the unblock appeals guide for more information. 331dot (talk) 18:14, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Moving A Page

Hi Community my colleague and I worked on a wikipedia article in a user sandbox and we were trying to publish the article to the main space, we've had challenges in moving the sandbox article Ruby D-Brown/Sandbox/AJ Sarpong to AJ Sarpong to the main article space, your help with this is neede. ThanksJwale2 (talk) 13:54, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Jwale2 and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia:NBIO covers some relevant information. To publish this article, you need to show significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. WP:NENT also has some useful points for articles on entertainers. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:45, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Rubbish computer how do I go about rectifying the move or redirect issue, also the article bio in question has significant coverage, all that its needs is to ensure that a correct move is done, thanks Jwale2 (talk) 16:09, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Jwale2, sorry I didn't get this ping for some reason. The article needs to show significant coverage first, before it can be moved into article space. The standards in article space are much stricter than in draft space, and could see it deleted. Where it is currently, you have much more time to prepare it. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 17:52, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

No, Jwale2, I'm afraid it does not (have significant independent coverage). If you were to submit it for review at this point, I am certain that it would get declined; therefore moving it to mainspace without a review is a bad idea: at best it would get moved back to draft space. The problem is that every one of your sources is information from Sarpong herself or from her employers. 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. Writing an article starts with finding suitable independent sources - because if you are unable to find any, you know that the subject does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and you should give up and not spend any more time on it. If you can find those independent sources, then you can write an article - based almost entirely on what those indpendent sources say, not on what the subject says, or what you know about them. I have added a header, so that when you have added sufficient independent sources to establish notability, you can submit it for review. But doing so now would be a waste of everybody's time. --ColinFine (talk) 18:00, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy ping: @Jwale2: Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 18:15, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Moving to draftspace

Hi. How can I move an article to draftspace which is not ready to get published in mainspace. Is there any script or easy methods to do the job? Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ) 12:10, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Krishnavilasom Bhageerathan Pilla, use WP:MOVE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:15, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

That is for renaming the articles right? How can I move an article into draftspace. Do we have an option for it there? Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ) 12:19, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Krishnavilasom Bhageerathan Pilla: Moving is renaming, which includes changing the namespace a page is in. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:24, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Will come again if I find it problematic. Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ) 12:27, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

It's for renaming, yes, but also for moving pages from namespace to namespace. When you rename Article X to Draft:Article X by picking "Draft" in a drop-down menu, you move it from articlespace to draftspace. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:29, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Krishnavilasom Bhageerathan Pilla Here are some scripts: [4] [5]. ―Qwerfjkl talk 17:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thankyou for the information. Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ) 18:37, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Possible Wiki Projects

Hello, can anyone help me to add Draft:Anthon Bosch to possible Wiki projects related to sports, snowboarding, Olympics? Thanks! DyingLightquests (talk) 18:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@DyingLightquests, have you checked "Improving your odds of a speedy review" in the "Review waiting, please be patient." template at the top of the draft? Click the blue button. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:12, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång Got it. Added, thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DyingLightquests (talk • contribs)

publishing an artist Article

hi. I submit twice for publication of "Hesam Fetrati" Article. he is an Iranian Artist. I received: "Possibly notable, but still cites nonindependent sources." I cite some data, (like picture of his artworks) form his website. if I delete the nonindependent cites, would it be accepted? thanks and best regards. Sepehr san (talk) 19:15, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy Draft:Hesam Fetrati. You have paragraphs in the Lead and body of the article that are not referenced. His website should not be used as a ref (last ref). David notMD (talk) 20:28, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Mark organization as having infobox?

Hi! I made an infobox for an organization off the "Organization articles needing infoboxes" list* (American Cheese Society). Now I can't figure out how to remove "American Cheese Society" from the list of "Organization articles needing infoboxes". How do I mark American Cheese Society as having an infobox? Did I make the box so poorly that some automatic system isn't registering it as such?

also can't get the "Organization articles needing infoboxes" link to work, so it's here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Organization_articles_needing_infoboxes

I would also, of course, welcome any feedback on the infobox itself, if I messed something up.

Thanks for your help! ForHeCanCreep (talk) 21:55, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@ForHeCanCreep: On Talk:American Cheese Society, I removed |needs-infobox=Yes from {{WikiProject Organizations}}. GoingBatty (talk) 22:02, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ForHeCanCreep (talk • contribs) 22:05, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

USING WIKIPEDIA BIOGRAPHICAL MATERIAL IN MEMOIR

I AM WRITING A MEMOIR TITLED HOW TO TALK TO FAMOUS PEOPLE. MAY I USE WIKIPEDIA MATERIAL IN THIS MEMOIR? IT IS IMPORTANT FOR MY READERS TO KNOW WHO MY FAMOUS ACQUAINTANCES WERE OR ARE, AND WIKIPEDIA DOES GREAT BIOS. 2601:648:8400:6400:3CDB:5DA8:A25C:F10 (talk) 23:36, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Please do not type in all caps. Yes, you can re-use Wikipedia content, but you must attribute the content properly. Please read Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content for complete details. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:02, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

My professional baseball career

I'm omitted when searching my name Robert S. McGuire los angeles dodgers and boston red sox? 2600:1700:A020:DB80:8509:DD1A:1228:B2F8 (talk) 23:32, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Are you this Robert McGuire? If so, minor league players are not automatically considered notable. Please read WP:NBASEBALL for the notability standards for baseball players. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:11, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Review of new page

Hello, hoping you can help me understand how "unreliable sources" are defined when they are not, and how a decision can be challenged. This page is linked to original sources at the BBC, The Shaw Trust Power 100, The Royal National Institute for the Blind, and London Transport campaigns -- all original source material references to this individual.

These are leading UK media and national insitutions. It is hard to see how much credible the sources can be, and how we can demonstrate that the reviewer was incorrect, and have a second opinion please? Thank you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dr._Amy_Kavanagh Kookkee Monster (talk) 11:56, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Kookkee Monster: That decline reason (This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.) is actually overloaded, as it can mean two things (or sometimes a mixture of both):1) Some of the sources are unreliable 2) This draft has reliable sources, but we need more in order to verify everything stated. You can check at WP:RSP if there is already consensus on the reliability of a particular source. Also, please see WP:CITEHOW - So far, the draft has a bunch of external links, but no actual inline citations, which are required for articles about living or recently departed people. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:11, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Kookkee Monster, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your references may very well be reliable, but that is only one of the criteria: most sources also need to be independent of the subject (for example, the subject's own website may be cited only for very limited information, as explained at SPS). The bulk of the content of an article must be derived from sources wholly unconnected with the subject - not them, nor their associates, employers, or institutions; and nothing based on a press release or interview. Because you have not cited your sources in one of the recommended manners, it is hard for a reviewer to evaluate them; and with hundreds of reviews waiting, in a pile that can take months to sort through, reviewers have little incentive to dig into a draft which is presented in a way that makes this difficult. --ColinFine (talk) 14:39, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Actually, Draft:Dr. Amy Kavanagh has no refs, because what you did was place hyperlinks in the body of the article rather than in reference format. Also, after it was declined, you resubmitted without making improvements, hence declined a second time. David notMD (talk) 14:42, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome and all the constructive comments. After a refresher reading on how to cite rather than link, (I'd forgotten and wrongly assumed that the links created the references) I went ahead and did 14 citations, fully referenced with dates, links, titles and accessed on details. I hope they can be recovered as unfortunately someone else seems to have not merged but overwritten them. Again, thank you for the supportive comments. Kookkee Monster (talk) 17:48, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I recommend recreating the refs in your Sandbox, then pasting into article. David notMD (talk) 02:58, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Creation of page "Perth International Jazz Festival"

Hi! I created a new page titled "Perth International Jazz Festival", originally in my sandbox, then moved it into the mainspace with that title. I can find it via my sandbox (the link is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perth_International_Jazz_Festival) but it doesn't appear in search or the New Pages Feed for review. Can anyone shed any light?

Thanks for your help! Fleur0402 (talk) 01:33, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

At Perth International Jazz Festival. Appears for search on title within Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 02:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Fleur0402. When I search using the Wikipedia search box, your new article comes up instantly. If you are taking about searching on Google or other search engines, then please be aware that new articles are "no-indexed" unless created by users with the autopatrolled user right. Search engines cannot find such articles. The hidden no-index tags will be removed when a new page patroller looks it over, or when 90 days has passed. That's a very good effort as a first article. Thanks. Please add some categories. I am not knowledgeable about the technical details of the new pages feed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:57, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

It does appear in the new pages feed. You need to filter out all articles created after 2 July to find it. Kleinpecan (talk) 03:22, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Three sites with the same content

^[1]^[2]^[3], these sites have the same content, but can I use all three of them for citing a paragraph? Excellenc1📞 08:16, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, just use the best one out of all the three because citation overkill ─ The Aafī ^{^(talk)} 09:28, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, if you can figure out which one is the original and which are copies, cite the original publication. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:55, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, I agree with the advice you've been given above. However, you might also write a comment on the talk page; something like: "The reference [source₁] is currently cited for the assertion that [assertion]. If this source ever becomes unusable, note that its text is also available at [source₂] and [source₃]." -- Hoary (talk) 07:04, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

References

^ "L'exécutif - Conseil régional d'Île-de-France". web.archive.org. 2011-02-11. Retrieved 2021-07-19.
^ "Hélène GASSIN | Drupal". chairgovreg.fondation-dauphine.fr. Retrieved 2021-07-19.
^ "[NOMINATION] Hélène Gassin et Jean-Pierre Sotura sont nommés membres du collège de la Commission de régulation de l'énergie". Actu-Environnement (in French). Retrieved 2021-07-19.

Take a look at a newly created article

Changdeva Temple , I created today, I need a native speaker take a look it for grammer and tone. If something wrong you found, fix it. Huge Earth (talk) 11:26, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

It was moved to Draft:Changdeva Temple minutes after your last edit, with a comment that it is not yet of article-quality. Among other problems, the refs are all just URLs. David notMD (talk) 12:04, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I've had a look at the grammar and writing; I hope I haven't messed up the meaning of anything (do change things back if needed; I do not know the local geography and may have made mistakes in interpreting your text). I'm not going to attempt to do the references as I can't judge which are likely to be deemed reliable secondary sources. But I personally liked the article and thought it interesting and well-balanced. If you can sort out the references so they show the newspaper/site etc. from which they're derived, then maybe it will be a good addition to WP. Good luck! Elemimele (talk) 12:30, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hiii,fellow editors, I added some best references; for my edits from newspaper website's articles. I think anyone can go and verify source of information. I think you can move it to main space. If any improvement is needed, I'll try to do it and you can edit this article for its betterment.Huge Earth (talk) 13:38, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Elemimele and Elemimele: @David notMD and David notMD: someone moved Changdeva Temple Arti from main space. Will you move it to main space.

STATUS: An experienced editor/reviewer moved it to draft, several editors and the creating editor worked to improve it, and then the editor/reviewer returned it to main space. Congrats on going from creation to approved in one day. For this, and the other articles you have created, please learn how to properly reference rather than just bare URLs. David notMD (talk) 14:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Huge Earth:, just a hint from a non-teahouse-host! The easiest way to do references is to use the tool in the editor. I use the non-visual editor, so that's the only one I can describe. The top line has the Bold B, Italic I etc. icons, and at the far right end, the word "Cite". When "Cite" is selected, as it is by default, the next row says "Templates, Named references, Error check" If you click on Templates, it offers you a choice of four reference-citation styles. Pick whichever seems most suitable, and a little window will pop up with boxes where you can type all the relevant details. Fill in as many as you can (don't worry that not all boxes are relevant to all references) and the tool will do the work for you. Congratulations on getting this article accepted into main-space! Elemimele (talk) 19:27, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Huge Earth @Elemimele I also find Citoid helps. ―Qwerfjkl talk 20:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@User:Elemimele Thankyou for information sir.Huge Earth (talk) 05:21, 17 July 2021 (UTC) David notMD Hiii editor, You said that I have to use different kind of sources not just bare URL's. ok, I have some book reference, but a book don't have ISBN number anywhere on it. So can I use that book for reference without writing ISBN number. Or can't use books that doesn't have in Eng and don't have ISBN??? Huge Earth (talk) 07:21, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Huge Earth. International Standard Book Numbers have been used by book publishers worldwide since 1967, although self-published books may not have them. So, they are not expected for books published over half a century ago, but if a 21st century book lacks an ISBN, that may call the reliability of the source into question. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:49, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Hi will you address the issue with Jalgaon district article. I tried to cite district census handbook of Jalgaon from 2011. I tried to not write same {{Cite book ... line again and again, instead write just <ref="census 2011">...</ref> but I'm not able to do that.Huge Earth (talk) 04:27, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Huge Earth. Please read WP:REFNAME to better understand named references. Please note that the word "name" must appear in the proper place in the wikicoding. When re-using the reference, a slash must be used in the proper place. So, be careful with your coding. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:38, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Huge Earth, you can quite often find the missing ISBN for a book by looking it up on Amazon. It's almost always included in the Product Details section. MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:42, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@MichaelMaggs: Hiii but district government's handbooks don't have ISBN??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huge Earth (talk • contribs)

Questions about - Messaging, Articles, Users, Login

Question Number One:
Please make me correct - can I edit the source of that message I receive on my talk and add my reply message at the end of that and then publishing it?
Question Number two:
How can I submit my article page for review? On Sandbox can I create an article and draft it for the Administrator's review? Thank you for helping Question Number Three:
Can I create multiple articles once I become an autoconfirmed user by Wikipedia Community?
Question Number Three:
In case I use different internet connection (wifi,4G,office net) will the community block me?

Esmatullah Mohib (talk) 08:44, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the teahouse. In regards of your second question, yes, you may. You can also use multiple networks to connect and contribute to wikipedia. _Signed,Benjamin Borg ^(Talk) 09:13, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Esmatullah Mohib (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse.

Yes, you may reply to messages on your talk page, just as I am responding to your message here.
You may use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft article.
Yes, one you are autoconfirmed, you may create articles. However, until you gain much experience in doing so, it is recommended that you use Articles for Creation. Creating a new article is one of the most difficult tasks to perform on Wikipedia, so you want to be sure you have the basics down first before attempting to do it yourself without others looking at it. Please see Your First Article, and use the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 09:14, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
We don't know how you are accessing the internet, unless your underlying IP address is blocked for some reason unrelated to your actions, but having an account should allow you access in most cases. 331dot (talk) 09:14, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Should I make this template?

Majority of the links in this template I've made are red links. So should this template be made? Excellenc1📞 07:53, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 It looks like you have already made it! The question really ought to be "should you deploy it? And if so, where?" I see little need for a template listing trivial redlinks which are unlikely ever to be made into articles. But on the other hand, it might prompt yourself and other editors to do so. As there is already a navigation template at the bottom of the article on Departments of France which lists those Departments, I see no need to bloat the footer of that article with another template repeating the same list of names, just for the Councils of those Departments. So the logical place to deploy it would be in the eight extant articles on those Councils. But are they really necessary there, when one could simply use the existing Department template and navigate from there to the appropriate Council page? Would having two near-identical templates be a hindrance rather than a help? I actually think it might well be a hindrance, and could cause confusion. But perhaps, better still, would be to ask the question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject France and see what other users and editors of those articles feel. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:02, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: I'd look at it like this: if the redlinks could potentially become blue, go ahead, so the question is whether the individual departmental councils are notable. I have a sense that they probably are, even though the existing articles about departmental councils are not very well-sourced; this is something you could discuss over at WikiProject France. If you do reach the conclusion that the councils are notable, it might be a good idea to then start creating the articles about each council, to reduce the number of redlinks in the template. Like Nick, I don't think Departments of France needs that template, but Departmental council (France) could definitely have it, especially since the table in that article links to the articles about each department, rather than to articles about the departmental councils. In a similar vein, I think Regional_council_(France) might have the template Template:Regional Councils (France) in addition to Template:Regions of France. (The current template shouldn't be removed since Regional_council_(France) is one of the articles linked in Template:Regions of France.) --bonadea contributions talk 11:30, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Correcting error template message

Hello,

Regarding the following Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Woodward), we are seeking some guidance on what needs to be amended to remove this template message below. We do not require a reply specific to working in mobile view or with the VisualEditor.

This biography of a living person needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful. Find sources: "Roger Woodward" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (December 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

We would appreciate any help you can offer, thank you. SueMmc (talk) 08:45, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@SueMmc: welcome to the Teahouse. There are a couple of points that need clarification before going into the questions about the article. First, when you say "we", what does that refer to? Each Wikipedia user account should only ever be used by one person, and it is strictly prohibited to share accounts. Secondly, what is your connection to Roger Woodward, and to the editor User:TrishLudgate? TrishLudgate asked a similar question which was answered in some detail a few weeks ago, and you can find that discussion in the archives: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1112#deleting text. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 10:21, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bonadea: Thank you for the links. Trish Ludgate and I have both worked with Mr Woodward in the past. Trish also sought my assistance in resolving the apparent difficulty with citing sources. I have not made any edits as yet; however, if I do, they will be under my username. Trish may also make edits independent of me.SueMmc (talk) 11:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) SueMmc: the referencing style at Roger Woodward is non-standard – an awkward blend of Harvard-style and the style more usual in Wikipedia. Some of the references, e.g. the first one, are cited in support of no statement. The article could be improved by severely trimming the long lists, some of them unreferenced, that form the majority of the article. Maproom (talk) 10:24, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Maproom: Thank you for your time in providing some feedback. Would you please provide some guidance on how to best amend the referencing system in this article so it complies with acceptable standards?SueMmc (talk) 11:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I agree that "Selected works" would be of better service than a complete regurgitation of his oeurve. The reference to his complete works is sufficient for readers who want to see everything. David notMD (talk) 10:51, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: Thank you for your feedback and efforts in ensuring this page meets Wikipedia formatting criteria. As an introduction, Trish Ludgate and I have both worked with Mr Woodward in the past. Trish also sought my assistance in resolving the apparent difficulty with citing sources. I have some questions I hope you can help with regarding the edits you’ve made. I am keen to keep the extent of the work within the article, but also comply with an acceptable style. To that end, I have included some rationale for the inclusion of content that has been omitted, and I hope that we can come to some consensus so that Mr Woodward's life's work is acknowledged accurately.

Middle Years section - In this industry, the formal recognition of collaborations with conductors and orchestras is a standard component of any musician’s biographical record, yet two paragraphs were omitted in this section. While you qualify this edit as 'name-dropping', implying a casual contact, in this context it denotes a respectful and serious working relationship. If the names supplied in a narrative (with a source provided for each one) are not acceptable, is there another format that would be? Could these names potentially be listed as dot points under various headings, such as Collaborations with Conductors; Collaborations with Composers; Organisations Founded, etc?

Personal life section - Why were the names of Mr Woodward's children removed when other artists’ Wikipedia entries mention them, for example: Kovacevich, Abbado, Brendel?

Thank you again for your time and advice. I look forward to hearing from you.SueMmc (talk) 11:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Common practice is for spouses to be named, but not children (or grandchildren) unless those people are themselves subjects of Wikipedia articles. As to what belongs and does not belong in an article, Wikipedia is not supposed to be a compilation of ALL of a person's accomplishments. Articles about scientists do not list all of their journal articles. Articles about artists do not list every show they have been in. Articles about authors do not list every short story or essay, about musicians, not every performance. David notMD (talk) 11:59, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

How to create a new wikipedia page ?

This is me Jarvis (talk) 11:52, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@This is me Jarvis Start with reading WP:YFA thoroughly. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:07, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft deleted but not in logs

I had been working on a draft and was almost done when I returned to find a blank edit space, yet there was nothing in the edit logs or deletion logs. The only reason I could think of for it being deleted is that the person was not familiar with the subject and did not think he was notable since I had not added the outside links yet. Is there anyway to recover the draft or file a dispute without the logs? Jadenealphillips (talk) 11:54, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Jadenealphillips Other than your edit here, your account has no edits, deleted or otherwise, associated with it. Did you perhaps edit the draft without being logged in to your account? Without knowing the name of the draft, I can't answer that with certainty. Did you click "publish changes" to save the draft? (a common source of confusion is that "publish changes" should be interpreted to simply mean "save changes", it does not mean "publish this to the encyclopedia"). 331dot (talk) 12:11, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Wanting to publish a page for someone.

How do I publish, or request for my article to be published? I cannot see anything on my page about this? It just says draft? Thomas.k12 (talk) 13:22, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy Draft:Craig Greenberg. Not ready yet. You cannot use Wikipedia articles as references, nor his own website. You have a U Mich ref that confirms the university exists, but not that he degreed from there. All this aside, I doubt he meets WP:GNG, nor WP:BIO. David notMD (talk) 13:33, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thomas.k12 (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I will be frank, and I apologize. If you were to submit the draft for review using Articles for creation, it would be rejected quickly, as it is just a promotional piece about a political candidate. Wikipedia articles cannot be used to cite other Wikipedia articles, as Wikipedia is not a reliable source. In addition, merely seeking public office does not make someone meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable politician, so they would need to be notable for something else and meet the criteria of a notable person. Writing a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia, so you will want to learn as much as you can first, please read Your first article and use the new user tutorial?

If you are associated with this candidate's campaign, please read conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 13:38, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Thomas.k12, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that, like many beginners, you have plunged into trying to create an article without understanding how to go about it. It's like saying "I'm going to build a house", and then propping up a wall here and a window there, without building foundations or even checking whether the ground is fit to build on. 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. Not one of your references meets those criteria. If you write a single word of an article before you have found the independent references that are a non-negotiable foundation for your article, you are probably wasting your time.

My suggestions would be:

put aside the idea of creating a new article for a few months, while you gain experience and understanding by improving some of our six million existing articles.
read your first article carefully
look for sources that will satisfy WP:NPOLITICIAN (remembering that anything written or published by him or his associates or institutions, or based on interviews or press releases, don't count). If you can't find any, give up on this article.
Create a draft using the articles for creation process.

And remember that it is not "a page for" someone, but "an article about" them. It is not in any way for their benefit. --ColinFine (talk) 13:42, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thomas.k12 OK, I'll say from the get-go that I've never attempted to create an actual article here, and don't really feel any ambition to undertake it. So I wouldn't normally chime in. But here, I want to say something about at least one of your "references." You say your subject graduated from Harvard, and you put in a footnote. But that footnote, linking to the Wikipedia article on Harvard, accomplishes--in the guise of a reference--only what we usually do here with a Wikilink. You're reading an article. It says someone graduated from this or that university, and for the convenience of anybody who might want to look up that university in Wikipedia, the name of the university links to the article about it. It is coded like this: [[Harvard University]], or, if you just want to say "Harvard" in your own article, [[Harvard University|Harvard]]. It is not a reference; it does not back up your statement that your subject attended Harvard. And rendering it as a footnote (as you did) does not make it into a reference (without looking, I'd be willing to bet that the Wikipedia article on Harvard doesn't so much as mention your subject); it only disguises it as one. Uporządnicki (talk) 12:37, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I have 3rd party sources for my page

My draft page has lots of independent sources that confirm my page. Why is it not being approved? Tomasivor1 (talk) 12:28, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I believe the articles about the company written by The Independent, Business Insider & Markets Insider cover these areas listed below & grant the company notability.

Contain significant coverage addressing the subject of the article directly and in depth. Be completely independent of the article subject. Meet the standard for being a reliable source. Be a secondary source, primary and tertiary sources do not count towards establishing notability. Tomasivor1 (talk) 12:32, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Tomasivor1 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The publishers might be reliable, but the sources themselves are not. They are announcements of routine business activities, which does not establish that Cloudrovia meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. What is needed are independent reliable sources with significant, in depth coverage of the topic that goes beyond a brief mention, announcement, or the company website(which is not independent). Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 12:37, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Tomasivor1: The Business Insider and Markets Insider articles appear to be similar to each other. I hope you can provide more significant coverage for Cloudrovia besides them not hosting Parler. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 12:40, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

The draft only cites two sources. The first does not mention the subject, and the second is the subject's own web site. You'll need to do much better than that to establish that the subject is notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article. Maproom (talk) 12:48, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

IMAGE

Hi!

I was wondering whether I could use this image in a Wikipedia article on the same topic. Unfortunately, I do not know whether this is under CC, or public domain, since there appears to be no information provided about the license.

Thanks, Danglerofhell (talk) 13:28, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Danglerofhell: Hello, welcome to the teahouse.

The image is allready uploaded to commons as File:Mars Géolocalisation.jpg, which indicates that it came from NASA. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 13:50, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Questions about notability for article

Hello. I recently wrote an article called Draft:MPB Group Limited that was rejected for sounding like an advertisement. I have since made some edits. However, I have been informed that my article (which I have not been paid for, nor do I work for MPB) doesn't reach the notability quota. Can someone explain to me why that is?

I have looked at other articles of a similar vein, and they contain similar content. To not breach OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, I wish to point out that I'm not questioning the existence of my or anyone else's articles, I'm just curious as to why those passed the set rules and mine did not, despite similar content. Wiki page on OTHERSTUFF says: "In consideration of precedent and consistency, though, identifying articles of the same nature that have been established and continue to exist on Wikipedia may provide extremely important insight into the general concept of notability, levels of notability (what's notable: international, national, regional, state, provincial?), and whether or not a level and type of article should be on Wikipedia."

If anyone could help me out, that would be wonderful.

Best Prospero1623 (talk) 14:05, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Prospero1623, I'm just going over the draft now. The Daily Express isn't a reliable source. If there are other, published articles that don't establish notability etc then they may need to be improved or taken to WP:AFD. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:20, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Link Draft:MPB Group Limited Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:21, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Per WP:NWEB, the subject needs to be notable and of historical significance. You need sources that are independent but also reliable. The Daily Express, for example, is unreliable because it is a tabloid and frequently sensationalises content. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:25, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi :@Rubbish computer:thank you for your insights. I have had some help from other user 9as well as yourself) on source classification re: notability/reliability, and I will work on separating them appropriately and seeing what is suitable. Thanks for your help, it's appreciated.

To answer another part of your question, Propspero1623, the whole point of other stuff exists is that Wikipedia contains thousands and thousands of articles which would not be accepted today, but not many of our editors are keen on spending the time going through them. If it were just a matter of nominating them for deletion, it wouldn't be so bad, but some are actually substandard articles about subjects that are actually notable, and the proper action there is to bring them up to standard (or at least move them to Draft space so that they can be brought up to standard without polluting mainspace). The upshot is: the existence of an article in English Wikipedia does not necessarily imply that anyone has ever reviewed or approved it. --ColinFine (talk) 15:11, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi :@ColinFine: thank you, that's very helpful. I'm still not entirely clear on the concept of notability, but your explanation makes sense. I have since been advised that I have almost enough sources for the subject to be considered notable. Thanks.

@Prospero1623, to yet address another part of your statement, you seem jittery, or rather, too conscious about the potential COI/UPE possibility in this article, now, whilst I do not support either, both aren’t necessarily in violation of our TOU in so far as you follow to the latter what is contained in both WP:COIDISCLOSE & WP:PAYDISCLOSE, what would invariably get you in trouble is actively or deliberately being evasive about both. Celestina007 (talk) 15:47, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi :@Celestina007: Thank you for the links.

My Wikipedia page is gone and I want it back.

I had this wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Juliano since 2014 and I got no notice why it was removed. I want to resolve this and have it back up ASAP please. 65.128.179.244 (talk) 12:40, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Juliano, dated June 2021. David notMD (talk) 12:44, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

(ec) The article(not just a "page") was deleted per the result of a deletion discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Juliano. It is up to you to monitor any articles you are interested in; the only notification requirement is for the creator to be notified(and they were, though they have not edited since 2012). Unless you have new information that the discussion did not consider, there's not much you can do. 331dot (talk) 12:46, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, anonymous user. I may be wrong, but I interpreted your question to mean that you are Juliano, and the deleted article was about you. If that is so, then, please understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a business directory or promotional site. The article in question was never "your page", it was Wikipedia's article about you, and it could be kept only if you met Wikipedia's criteria for notability - most of us do not, and Wikipedia will not have articles about us. If you can find the reliable independent published sources which talk about you in enough detail to ground an encyclopaedia article, we could have an article, but it is clear that the participants in the deletion discussion that David notMD linked to looked for such sources last month, and could not find them. --ColinFine (talk) 13:55, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine, that was indeed what came to mind as soon as I read their comments.
@65.128.179.244, unfortunately, as already mentioned to you the article wasn’t ever yours, it was an article about you written by an editor here, it appears the article didn’t meet our notability threshold and as a result, it was deleted. Furthermore your tone comes off as authoritative and I take it you are one and the same person as the subject of the deleted article, No? (I may be wrong) but if yes, did you give financial assistance to anyone to help create the article? Did you create the article yourself? In any case, an article on yourself is not necessarily a good thing. Celestina007 (talk) 16:01, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Variability of inclusion criteria according to language

I have been referred to this page by Theroadislong.

I had posted on that reviewer's Talk page the following comment and question:

On 15 July 2021, you wrote (above, in Draft: Joseph Ribas (French author)): "other countries Wikipedia have quite different inclusion criteria". It seems surprising that the criteria for publication of Wikipedia articles can vary according to the language in which they are written. This appears to mean that users of Wikipedia in one language may be viewing articles which are of a quality inferior to that of corresponding articles in other languages. Yet Wikipedia is obviously a global "brand". All articles, regardless of language, seem to have a common format and appearance, a common (globe-like) logo, and a common domain name (wikipedia.org). Users might therefore be forgiven for thinking that all articles, regardless of language, are included on the basis of common, global criteria. I don't underestimate the scale of difficulty in securing agreement on, and then enforcing, a common, global set of inclusion criteria. But shouldn't the adoption of global criteria at least be an aim? Perhaps it is. But I've searched, and I haven't yet found a statement to that effect. (None of the above is meant to imply criticism of the criteria that are used for inclusion of Wikipedia articles in English.)

Theroadislong said that I "might get a more informed response" here, at the WP:Teahouse. So any response would be appreciated. Alan Mattingly (talk) 17:15, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Alan Mattingly: Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia policies and guidelines are decided by consensus by its editors and not by the Wikimedia Foundation, who provides the software and appearance of the project. As editors tend to stick to one (or two) different languages, the overall consensus in each Wikipedia will differ. The English Wikipedia has more stringent criteria because it is the most viewed (and edited) language out of the ones available, and there's a sizeable portion of the userbase that can enforce said criteria. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:25, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu 🐲: Thanks for your swift response. I am probably out of my depth here because I know relatively little about Wikipedia, but it somehow doesn't seem right that users of Wikipedia pages which are viewed less frequently (because they are written in less-used languages) tend to be offered articles which are judged by less stringent criteria. Don't editors from different language zones confer in some way from time to time to try to make their respective consensuses consistent across the globe? - Alan Mattingly (talk)

@Alan Mattingly: This is unfortunately one of the downsides of a volunteer project. Editors may sometimes interact with other users in a more global venue on Meta, but that's a dramatically smaller proportion of users on here, who solely peruse the English Wikipedia, and none of its sister projects like Wikibooks, Wikivoyage, or even Wikisource. (Please remember to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~) so that your username and timestamp show up in the signature.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:45, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu 🐲: Fair enough. But it's to be hoped that there is at least a set of minimum global standards that editors in all languages are expected to comply with, and a process for trying to enforce those standards. (Incidentally, when I started this thread, I was told not to sign with tildes...).Alan Mattingly (talk) 06:59, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Alan Mattingly: The most likely way to do so would be to go make a proposal at Meta, but even there I don't find it likely to be accepted, editor discretion and all,
Opening questions are designed to sign on the asker's behalf; all subsequent comments are not. This is because a fair amount of newcomers don't know how to sign, and some don't leave follow-up comments. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:07, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu 🐲: Thanks. I've sent a comment to brandproject@wikimedia.org.
How about adding something like "Please sign any follow-up comments with four tildes"? - Alan Mattingly (talk) 16:49, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Few quick questions - User permission

1. How can I check, if I'm eligible or I become an autoconfirmed user or not?
2. Can I create my user page before I become the autoconfirmed user?
Esmatullah Mohib (talk) 17:07, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Esmatullah Mohib: 1) The conditions for autoconfirmed are having an acocunt for four days (96 hours) and having made at least 10 edits. I can tell from Special:Contributions/Esmatullah Mohib that you have 10 edits already, and from your user log that you created the acocunt yesterday, so are not yet 4 days registered here. You can expect to get autoconfimed on the 23th of July around 8:15 am UTC. Regarding 2), you can create your userpage at anytime you want, or you could also refrain from doing so, provided that your userpage complies with WP:UP. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:14, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Esmatullah Mohib: Hello Esmatullah Mohib, welcome to the teahouse.

The autoconfirmed user right is automatically added to your account after you've been here 4 days and made at least 10 edits, you don't need to aply for it. You can check what user rights you have at Special:UserRights or by clicking the "User rights" button at the bottom of your contributions page. At the moment you've made enough edits to qualify for the right but have only had this account for 1 1/2 days, you just need to wait a bit longer for it to be added.

You do not need to be autoconfirmed to make your own user page, it only applies to making new articles. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:22, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@192.76.8.91 and Victor Schmidt: Thank you so much for you cooperation - I need to read them all— Preceding unsigned comment added by Esmatullah Mohib (talk • contribs)

Notability Help

Hello, I read that Wikipedia is very strict about notability criteria. I would like to know if this person can have a page on here. He already has a page on German Wikipedia. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Georg_N%C3%A4der

Thanks! Centrereded (talk) 17:16, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Centrereded. Because that article has nearly 60 references, it is very likely that an English translation would be accepted. Please read Wikipedia:Translation for complete details. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:46, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

BLP problem

Eric Joyce

I am quite new to editing. I have edited a number of BLPs with care. At one, my edits keep being reversed by an unsigned user using a VPN. The user is abusive, but the main thing is that they keep inserting a clear libel and providing nonsensical references. Not sure what to do next, really. SteveCree2 (talk) 13:18, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

It looks like things are going as they should, with you making the correct decision to discuss on the talk page and another editor becoming involved. If the IP editor continues to revert over the next day or two and does not engage in discussion, then you can report them for Wikipedia:Edit warring. Also, just to avoid any confusion in the future, seeing an IP address instead of a username just means the editor isn't logged into a Wikipedia account. It has nothing to do with VPNs. -- Fyrael (talk) 14:26, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Oh, looks like you've already started something on the edit warring noticeboard. That notice you put on the Joyce talk page should go on the user's talk page though. -- Fyrael (talk) 14:28, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fyrael: Where is the discussion on WP:AN3? --David Biddulph (talk) 14:41, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't actually check the board. I made a bad assumption upon seeing their notice on the talk page. -- Fyrael (talk) 14:43, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Apologies. I've now raised the edit warring claim at the noticeboard and informed the user at their talk page. SteveCree2 (talk) 15:03, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

If you find yourself having problems with an IP address user persistently vandalising an article, and it's obvious vandalism (not a valid content-dispute), you can also request that the page be semi-protected at [6]. This is very straightforward and no-stress, but prevents IP users from editing (for the duration of the protection). Elemimele (talk) 20:21, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Question

Can I submit this draft for review? Draft:Prende TV ItsJustdancefan (talk) 20:45, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@ItsJustdancefan, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, I have replied you on my tp please do not ask multiple questions on multiple places, the answer is yes you can but it would be declined as the sources are mere announcements. Celestina007 (talk) 21:22, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello please help me publish an new article

Shabs.17 (talk) 19:05, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Shabs.17, hi and welcome to the Teahouse! Please have a look at Wikipedia:Your first article and let us know if you have any questions! Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:07, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I see you have created Draft:Zakir Hussain (politician), Draft talk:Zakir Hussain (politician), Template:Zakir Hussain konta, and Template talk:Zakir Hussain konta. Please do not create the same article in different places. Kleinpecan (talk) 19:27, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

And please note Shabs.17, that Draft:Zakir Hussain (politician) has no sources at all, and even in its one sentence is far from neutral. No Wikipedia article should describe anybody as "patriot", "congress warrior", or "working towards betterment of society" unless it is directly quoting and citing a reliable sources wholly unconnected with the subject. My advice to new editors who plunge straight into trying to create a new article is that it is like trying to build a house after one day apprenticed to a builder, or to perform a violin concerto after your first violin lesson. I advise putting the project aside for a few months while you learn the trade of editing Wikipedia by making small improvements to some of our six million existing articles. It likely that you will both have a less stressful and frustrating time that way, and that you will add much much more value to Wikipedia by doing so. --ColinFine (talk) 21:23, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

how can one add photo to wiki entry if not the creator of the page?

ABVD79 (talk) 20:14, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@ABVD79, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, your question is somewhat difficult to comprehend but are you asking if you can add an image to an article you yourself did not create? Then the answer is yes. Celestina007 (talk) 21:31, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, ABVD79, and welcome to the Teahouse. The creator of an article has no special privileges with respect to that article: in most cases, any editor (including one who has not created an account) may edit any page. However, all edits must be in accordance with Wikipedia's principles; and further, we resolve disagreements by consensus, so any editor may revert another editor's changes (anywhere) if they don't think the edits improve Wikipedia: see BRD for how this works.

In the case of images, the above still applies, but there are added complications. With certain limited exceptions, all images added to Wikipedia articles must have been freely licensed by their copyright holder; which means in particular, that most images found on the web cannot be used in Wikipedia. See image use policy for more on this. Any image that is already in Wikimedia Commons may be added to a Wikipedia article; otherwise an image must first be uploaded (normally to Commons): see the Upload wizard. --ColinFine (talk) 21:30, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine, thanks for expounding on this for them. Celestina007 (talk) 21:37, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Article declined because it doesn't meet the inline citation requirements.

Mogulaminu (talk) 20:56, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I wrote a Wikipedia article, and it was declined because it doesn't meet the minimum inline citation requirements, I have tried all I could to work on the reference, but I can't seem to get it right. I need somebody to help me. Here is the link to the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Becky_Olubukola

@Mogulaminu, welcome to the Teahouse, although of no relevance, I’m proud to say I’m Nigerian too(or at least I carry the green passport having lived here 20+ years) Ah, okay to answer your question, an article is retained on mainspace because it meets our notability threshold which is roughly ascertained by WP:GNG, Wikipedia is built on the bed rock of verifiability from reliable sources see WP:RS unfortunately if those reliable sources aren’t present then there isn’t any helping we can do as we do not create sources so until such a time the subject of your draft article possesses reliable sources that substantiate notability claims we are unable to accept the article into mainspace. If I may ask, in what capacity are you and the article's subject related? Celestina007 (talk) 21:17, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Keep this up and you are looking at an outright reject. Please see WP:COI and what Wikipedia is WP:NOT. Celestina007 (talk) 22:38, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Celestina007 Thank you for your response and I am happy to know you are a Nigerian. I actually have no ties with the subject, I read about her and her achievements in the real etate industry and she is someone who is quite notable around here, I tried to read about her on Wikipedia but noticed she has no page here. Hence, the reason I tried to create the page.

Insert Picture in Biography

Hi everyone. Im trying to complete the biography for Constanza Navarro Meza. I am having trouble completing it. Can anyof you please be so nice to me and help me complete the article about her?

I want people to find her as Constanza Navarro Meza. I would like to insert a picture of her and appear her article officially in Wikpedia and not just a sample page. Can you help me please? Gelowiki21 (talk) 21:47, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Gelowiki21, and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added a header to your sandbox (it is still a user sandbox of yours, even though you didn't use "sandbox" in its name) so tha you can submit it for review when it is ready. However, it is nowhere near ready for that, because it does not have a single cited source - these are essential for biographies of living people; and especially so when there are extraorinary claims. Please read WP:YFA and NARTIST carefully. I also suggest you read my answer to #Hello please help me publish an new article five questions above, which is very relevant to you. --ColinFine (talk) 22:01, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi ColinFine thank you for your help. What do you need from me in order to have this biography published? Please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8801:2397:BB00:F892:7E00:2228:29D6 (talk) 22:07, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Published third-party sources that corroborate the article's claims. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 22:45, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Gelowiki21 As you are the subject's father, you do have an extremely obvious Conflict of Interest. You should most definitely follow the instructions in that link to declare your COI, but also consider not trying to write an article yourself about your daughter yourself, but leave it to someone less 'involved'. It is not acceptable to attempt to use sources like Facebook, LinkedIn or Instagram, but only to rely on independent news media or properly published books/magazines which have written about here. If you can't find such sources right now there cannot be an article, and it's therefore simply WP:TOOSOON, but one day she may well become Notable in Wikipedia's eyes once those detailed and in-depth sources are available. I hope she does well in her acting and singing career, and continues to make you proud. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:32, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

You are right, thank you very much

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

Hello,

I work for a magazine and am hoping to edit Wikipedia profiles of individuals referenced in our coverage with relevant links, but I am having some trouble figuring out exactly how to express my conflict of interest as someone who works for the magazine. Do you have any advice for how specifically/where to convey this as I edit posts?

Thank you for your help! Julia.Knoerr (talk) 20:59, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Julia.Knoerr, hello there and welcome to the Teahouse to properly disclose a WP:COI please see WP:COIDISCLOSE. Celestina007 (talk) 21:09, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks so much! To disclose my role as a paid editor, which talk page would I use? Is there a way to do this for all of my posts (previously, I had created a user page and disclosed conflicts of interest, but my posts were still reverted).

@Julia.Knoerr, just because you disclose your role does not mean that your edits will not be reverted. You've appropriately disclosed your conflict, but your edits haven't been helpful, so they are getting undone. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Indeed, Julia.Knoerr, your language reveals some misunderstanding about what Wikipedia is. First, please note that Wikipedia does not contain "profiles" - not one. It contains encyclopaedia articles, which are very different. 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.

If your magazine is regarded as a reliable source - that is, it has a reputation for fact-checking and editorial control - and your writers are unconnected with the subjects in question, then it could be used as a source for citations in articles, supporting particular claims in the articles: but it would be regarded as a COI for you to add them, and you should rather make edit requests. Adding external links to articles which point to your magazine, as well as again being a COI if you do it yourself, is very likely to be inappropriate. --ColinFine (talk) 21:55, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I agree with ColinFine that Julia.Knoerr should be making talk page requests for edits, rather than editing the pages directly. That said, I don't think the approach (basically all of their article space edits have been a form of "am article in The American Prospect said ...:") is going to make any headway here, as it looks like they are here just to promote the American Prospect. Julia.Knoerr, I left you a note on your user page about how to properly declare as a paid editor (interns qualify for that category). --- Possibly ☎ 00:06, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Weird font for foreign language

Revisiting Kasuri, I note that the Japanese language words are now shown in a larger font/typeface. My perception is that although the individual words are larger, the chosen font makes them lighter in "color" (grey vs black) and more difficult to read.

Any ideas about what's going on here? I don't recall seeing other non-English words appear in this manner in other articles. Usually, articles feature a consistent font. The examples shown here for foreign words don't have this appearance. I tried using the recommended MOS:FOREIGNITALIC markup to substitute, but saw no change in the preview. Perhaps it reads differently on different devices? I've never seen this before. Thanks. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 04:44, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Tribe of Tiger. Using the desktop site on Chrome running on a fairly new Android smartphone, everything looks perfectly normal to me. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:55, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

As an example, tate-yoko gasuri in that article is {{transl|ja|tate-yoko gasuri}}, which Mediawiki converts into HTML <i lang="ja-Latn" title="Japanese-language romanization">Tate-yoko gasuri</i>. You should check what your particular browser does with lang="ja-Latn". It's also imaginable that it does something to the font where there's a "tooltip" (HTML title). -- Hoary (talk) 06:07, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I suspect I will have to learn to live with it. Cullen328, I checked my desktop computer, and it looks okay there. But, I always read/edit on an IPad, 14.6 software, using Safari as a browser. Also, I am a dummy...I have tried Hoary's suggestion, which I don't understand. Here's what I tried: {{lang="ja-Latn"|Kasuri}} {{tranl|"ja-Latn"|Kasuri}} {{tranl|ja-Latn|Kasuri}} , all are obviously wrong, because I get red Template "text". I don't understand the reference to "a "tooltip" (HTML title)", either.

I assume the {{lang}} template is preferred because it automatically detects the language, per MOS:FOREIGNITALIC? But now, I wonder if other readers on similar devices/browsers are seeing what I am seeing. Or, is my experience an anomaly? Anyway, thanks for your consideration and assistance! Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 02:29, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Tribe of Tiger, I was assuming (wrongly) that you'd be using a computer. I suspect that iOS and Android either don't let you make changes or will make such changes extraordinarily difficult. That aside, where you write "tranl", I'd written "transl". "Title" is an (X)HTML attribute (like "style" within your own signature). Most browsers interpret title text as popup messages; these are commonly called "tooltips". ("Title" is also the name of an (X)HTML tag, but that's irrelevant here.) My simple suggestion is: Use your computer (particularly as, even without reconfiguration, what it shows you does not irritate you). -- Hoary (talk) 03:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hoary, I am so very embarrassed by my tral vs. transl error! So sorry! For the past few yrs, I have been unable to use my desk computer, because of physical problems, just too painful for any length of time. I really miss it, but the Ipad has been a boon, as I can read/edit on the sofa, or in bed...no sitting. I shall deal with the irritation of one article's font! Thanks again. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 05:53, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear this, Tribe of Tiger; I'd had no idea. I know that Apple likes to keep tight control of the devices that it sells, but does it let you install alternative browsers? (My own Android toy comes with Chrome, but I instead use Firefox Focus and Ghostery.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:35, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hoary, I don't know. But I do know a tech savvy WP friend, and may ask her! Thanks for the suggestion... Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 22:39, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Tribe of Tiger, it's pretty easy to install different browsers on an iPad. Go to the app store, and download what you need from there. I've used the iOS version of Firefox for years. MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:35, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

MichaelMaggs, oh, thanks so much! My "computer knowledge" is at least two decades behind the times. How simple and wonderful! I will try this, thanks again! Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 00:29, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Copying an article into sandbox for rewriting

I want to revamp a poorly written article on a topic I'm interested in. I don't think I'll be able to make every change in a single day, so I wanted to rewrite the article in my sandbox and then copy over my changes once I'm done, in order to avoid the article being an absolute mess while it's still in article space. My question, therefore, is whether or not I am allowed to copy the entire article as it currently exists into my sandbox without violating Wikipedia's policies on copyright.

If you want to know for some reason, the article in question is Rinu. Mlb96 (talk) 22:32, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Mlb96: You're allowed to do that, but I suggest you make small changes to the live article. It would be a shame if you spent days to rewrite the whole article and your changes were reverted. GoingBatty (talk) 22:42, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm not terribly worried about that, the article has only 39 edits in about 16 months. The last edit was almost two months ago. Nobody seems to care about this article. Mlb96 (talk) 22:59, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

The article gets around 800 views per month, so clearly people DO care about it. I also recommend doing a section at at time David notMD (talk) 01:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

reopening an edit request

An edit request was not answered because there were no reliable sources. After, I provided what I believe is a reliable source. How and when will the edit request be granted? Thanks! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 23:56, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Since this is a volunteer project, people work on what they want to do, and it's hard to estimate when something will be addressed. If you would like to share the name of the page where you made the request, we'd be happy to look at it and provide some guidance. GoingBatty (talk) 01:08, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

The page is Talk:Columbine High School massacre. Besides the request referred to above, there is an additional request which has not been answered at all yet. Thank you! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 02:26, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

The {{edit semi-protected}} template is what you should use to get editors' attention. In the "# of victims killed" section, remove the |answered=yes parameter to reopen the request. In the "fix last name" section, add the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:36, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Does this article need citations?

This article has no citations, but does it need any? I did not make it, just asking. Excellenc1📞 06:46, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Absolutely. Preferably some university published books on the French political system. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:53, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm trying to figure out how to edit a page but am new & need help please

I was told this on my page by an editor: "wiki-maintenance: no mainspace categories in user pages"

could someone please assist me with this? there's a button to press "undo" but don't know what I need to do before I press that or if I should press that. thank you in advance for your help. Thomastrainor (talk) 05:11, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Thomastrainor: Welcome to Wikipedia. Can you please say where you saw that message and what page you are trying to edit? Your talk page is empty and you have made no other edits from this account that I can see. RudolfRed (talk) 05:16, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for your assistance. Here is the page I created and am trying to edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft%3AFranki_Love&type=revision&diff=1010433696&oldid=1004568415 Here are the edit notes I received: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Franki_Love&action=history I am struggling to understand what to do to make the article complete & approved. Any assistance would be appreciated. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomastrainor (talk • contribs)

@Thomastrainor: I assume you refer to this edit by Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. If so, no, you shouldn't undo that edit for now, as categories intended for mainspace articles do not belong on drafts. Victor Schmidt (talk) 05:58, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I think @Thomastrainor: is trying to edit Draft:Franki Love from the history page. You should just go to the Draft and continue there. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 06:06, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Thomastrainor: You're going to need more sources. Right now, the draft won't be approved. Being nominated for awards isn't enough. See WP:NMUSICIAN and WP:RS. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 06:30, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Thomastrainor: Changing the categories to category links on your draft is fine. Alternatively, you may wrap categories in {{draft categories}}. GoingBatty (talk) 12:29, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you to all who have given input. I have found several more sources for the article I am working on. Including, a compilation album that this artist did with a famous artist, main vocalist on a notable tv show, and other sources. I am wondering if there is anyone (such as a volunteer) on wikipedia who can help place the new information in the article to help me do this correctly? Or shall I just give it a go and will it be edited? or shall I ask for help here afterwards to have it looked over? Also, is my article in the correct place of where it needs to be right now? Lastly, the photo I placed was from a website and there is a link to purchase the photo on a photography website. Could I place it on wikipedia with a link to that photography website. Or shall I place a general photo up that I find on the internet that is not for purchase? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomastrainor (talk • contribs)

Go ahead and edit Draft:Franki Love to improve it. Pictures are a difficult subject because the copyright of the picture has to allow its use. Look at your talk page: User talk:Thomastrainor for some tutorials on how to edit. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 06:22, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Ariconte I've gone ahead and done a bit of editing. If I choose a photo and contact the person who owns it for approval, is that enough to make the photo acceptable or must I have written permission.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomastrainor (talk • contribs)

@Thomastrainor: All permission statements must be directed to WP:OTRS, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for details. Note that copyright normall resides in whoever made the photo (that means the photographer) not the mere subjet, unless transfered by a contract. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:40, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I've done a bit of editing and was wondering if someone could please tell me if they think that the draft is ready to be submitted or if I should add more sources?

Dr. John Pombe Joseph Magufuli

Discussion is now taking place on article's talk page. POV-pushing and biased content (from whatever perspective) is not accepted here. Only reliable sources and a neutral voice should be used to create Wikipedia content. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:04, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

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

There's a biased article on Wikipedia about the late President of Tanzania, Dr. John Pombe Joseph Magufuli. The article is biased with a Eurocentric world view about an African issue. I have made two edits which were repelled by one German editor and one Scandinavian editor.

I am Tanzanian. And I know there's no way a European can correctly portray an African leader and African issues. This is from the deep-seated disdain and ridicule that Europeans harbour about Africans.

How do I resolve this and make sure the late President of Tanzania, Dr. John Pombe Joseph Magufuli gets an accurate account on Wikipedia, without resorting to an editing war?

Here's the Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Magufuli AfrikaMoja (talk) 04:13, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@AfrikaMoja: Welcome to the Teahouse! Per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, your next step should be to discuss the issue on the article's talk page - Talk:John Magufuli - with other interested editors. Be sure to be civil and discuss how to improve the article. Provide reliable sources to support your suggestions. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:20, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Article has a long history of WP:POV pushing by WP:SPA editors. Likely WP:NOTHERE. Warned, and now close to being blocked. We publish info that's in reliable sources, and WP:AGF, which is absent here. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 06:43, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

One of the basic principles of Wikipedia is that any editor can edit any article, no matter their nationality or ethnicity, as long as they comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I am an American from California, and I have made major contributions to Japanese, Indian and Australian topics. Tanzanian editors are welcome to edit articles about California. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:57, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

After having had large deletions and additions to the article reverted three times, you have properly opened up a discussion on the Talk page of the article. However, at the end, you state your intent to soon again make the disputed changes. This is likely to be reverted again, and result in you temporarily being blocked. I recommend patience. I also recommend that rather than combining large deletions and large additions into one massive edit change, you approach the article incrementally, starting with smaller (referenced) additions. You may have more success that way. If an editor reverts said additions, then focused discussions can be opened at Talk. David notMD (talk) 12:31, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

REPLY FROM AfrikaMoja (to David above and anyone else who is reverting my edits on Dr. John Pombe Joseph Magufuli).

Whereas it is true that anyone can edit Wikipedia page, it would be constructive to let the experts on a topic to write about it. If I wrote about California while I am a Tanzanian and have never even been to California there are lots of deep issues, connotations, history and meanings I would miss in my account of California. So I suggest you swallow your pride and accept that as a Californian you are NOT in the best position to write about Dr. John Pombe Joseph Magufuli compared to a Tanzanian like me.

IN CASE YOU ARE ADAMANT ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:

1. Why did CHADEMA take Lowassa as their candidate in 2015, despite them CHADEMA having spent about 7 years before that badmouthing him?

2. What is the political ideology governing Tanzania?

3. Why did Tanzania allow multipartism despite only 20% of the citizen saying they want it?

4. Why did Tanzanians (including the opposition MPs in the 2010-2015 parliament) say they want a dictator to lead Tanzania?

5. Why and how was Dr. Magufuli chosen as the CCM Presidential candidate in 2015, despite not being expected at all before the race started?

6. Why are Tanzanians missing Dr. Magufuli todate, and seeing his successor as inadequate to fill his shoes?

7. Why are Tanzanians not dying of COVID-19 despite ignoring all WHO guidelines?

8. What did the Tanzanian former president Jakaya Kikwete tell Wsterners about "gay rights in Tanzania"?

Answer those questions to see how qualified you are to write about Tanzania and about Dr. John Pombe Joseph Magufuli.

FURTHERMORE I provided reliable sources, but those who are reverting my edits think that they know Tanzania and Tanzanian politics and socio-economics better than a Tanzanian, despite being in California and never ever having lived in Tanzania. Therefore if anyone locks me out for telling the correct version about Magufuli then it will be a case of Wikipedia promoting an Anti-Afrikan agenda. May be Wikipedia is NOT the free and neutral platform. May be Wikipedia is no different from the commercial news media such as BBC, Reuters, VoA, etc which are constantly promoting the "Keep the Afrikan down and denigrate him" agenda; and which the Californian editor keeps quoting thinking they have the right info about Magufuli. Their news articles are nothing but hyperboles and out of context.

Therefore the so-called "large portions of text" that I removed were not larger than 3 paragraphs. I removed them because they are irrelevant issue to profile Dr. Magufuli with. Remember that Dr. Magufuli was a Tanzanian President. He was elected by Tanzanians. Not by WHO, not by USA, not by EU, or any Western country. Tanzania is a sovereign state. That means it is free to self-determine its policies, laws, etc. Dr. John Pombe Magufuli was elected to serve Tanzania and therefore his profile should reflect Tanzanian issues.

When yo say Dr. Magufuli was spreading misinformation about COVID-19 who is judging misinformation? The global medical industry is the main driver behind WHO policies, and the global medical industry doesn't want nor understand natural medicine and herbal remedies. So do you expect WHO to go against the Western pharmaceutical industries in favour of natural remedies?

Of course not.

Who are you to say Magufuli was spreading misinformation? Who is dying of COVID-19 between Tanzanians and Westerners? That is what I believe is called "The proof is in the pudding". You may disagree with Magufuli (because you probably think Africans are stupid and ignorant), but look at the results. We Tanzanians are NOT the ones dying of COVID-19, nor have we ever locked ourselves inside our houses.

So please. Let the truth about Magufuli and the other side of COVID-19 be told. You don't have to like it, but it is the truth. Come to Tanzania and see for yourself.

Here are some of skeptical Westerners who came to see for themselves:

1. The VoA guy.

You can see his head was spinning. Because VoA is a propaganda mouthpiece of US govt, and VoA has instructions to denigrate Tanzania's responce to COVID-19 under Magufuli. But he was seeing a different reality and was having a hard time on how to report it on VoA. He even went clubbing. CLUBBING FOR GOD'S SAKE. Clubbing in Dar es Salaam, at the time when his home country Italy was dying like diseased chicken in a hen house.

(a) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLOzsbypSs4

2. The "normal citizen" from German. This guy was just a normal citizen, not sent to Tanzania for propanda purposes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuRIv1HTzwA

3. And here are a few Western vloggers:

(a) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcdeoJ824C0

(b) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tmx6jLN8F34

So my friends from California, from Scandinavia, from Germany and elsewhere outside of Tanzania who have succumbed to stories by Western propandists (VoA, BBC, DW, CNN, etc) what do you have to say against real unbiased reporting from normal poeple you see above?

Do you see how life goes on as usual in those videos? Look at the dates on those videos, what were you doing your Western countries? You were all locked up scared in your houses.

Allow me to tell the real story about COVID-19 and about Magufuli. Not the lies your are being fed by your media. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AfrikaMoja (talk • contribs)

Edits are crass, sweeping, unencyclopedic, full of personal POV and opinion.

Koncorde (talk) 20:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Allow me to tell the real story about COVID-19 and about Magufuli. Not the lies your are being fed by your media. @Koncorde: Unless your "real story" is published by reliable sources and is verifiable (bloggers are generally considered unreliable), Wikipedia has no interest in what is purported to be the truth. Please discuss this on the article's talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:49, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Not me @Tenryuu:, there is an unsigned AfrimaMoja comment above mine filled with various claims. Koncorde (talk) 00:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Koncorde: sigh, my bad. I hate it when people don't sign. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:18, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Koncorde: Truth is sometimes crass. Did you read my edits? If yes, which part is a POV and opinion? --AfrikaMoja (talk) 22:34, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

There pretty much isn't anything that isn't tainted. Reliable sources, be they Tanzanian or elsewhere, are required to support your wholesale changes that introduce what can only be described as hilarious claims lauding Magufuli, but for example this is egregious: A whopping majority of Tanzanians appreciate very very much how Dr. Magufuli led the country through the COVID-19 pandemic. Very few Tanzanians are on-board with the u-turn that his successor (Samia Suluhu) has taken on COVID-19. She is viewed as a weak leader who can be manipulated by those who do not have the best interests of Tanzania at heart Koncorde (talk) 00:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I suggest this section be closed, as extended discussions about the article are now properly taking place on the Talk page of the article. I also suggest incremental changes to the article rather than the large addition/deletion of content that has approached edit warring. To AfrikaMoja, "Allow me to tell the real story..." is a wrong approach. The current version represents more than 1,000 edits by scores of editors. Assume many of them are from Tanzania and/or know Tanzania well. I beseech you, work smaller, referenced additions first, rather than your effort to make major changes in one massive edit. David notMD (talk) 09:41, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

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

Creating a talk page

I'm a newly enrolled Wikipedia editor, although I've been a professional editor in 'real life' for many years. I want to flag an issue with the content of a section in one of the articles, so I clicked the article's red "Talk" link. As far as I know, that means there is currently no Talk page for the article, so I expected that clicking the red link ought to create a Talk page for the article. Instead, I'm prompted to create a User Talk page for me. That isn't what I want to do - my comments need to be anchored to the article, not just to my username. How do I do that? Editingfrank (talk) 23:19, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Editingfrank. There’s no record of you making any edits with this account to any Wikipedia pages other than the one you made here at the Teahouse. Did you try to create the talk page using another account? If you did, then it would be easier to help figure out what might have happened if you can give the name of the article whose talk page you want to create. — Marchjuly (talk) 23:24, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Editingfrank (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure what link you clicked, it could be the "talk" in the upper right corner which is for your user talk page as you found, but article talk page links are(if using a computer) at the top left of an article, immediately above the article. If you look at Joe Biden as an example, it should be next to the "article" tab. 331dot (talk) 23:28, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Editingfrank - I've created your talk page for you, with a welcome notice. Don't know why you got that notice but you shouldn't get it now. As for your query, You can create a new article talk page by clicking on the red link, and adding your comment with a level 2 header ==Title of section==. Mjroots (talk) 10:16, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Is there a Wikipedia article on the French anti vaccine passport protests?

Hi. I feel like the French protests against the vaccine passports is major news and probably deserves to be on the Main Page, yet I cannot find anything about it. Is anyone else aware of any mention on Wikipedia about the protests in France? BurritoQuesadilla (talk) 05:18, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

BurritoQuesadilla, I just quickly skimmed through the COVID-19 pandemic in France article, it doesn't seem to mention such protests. If you have good sources you could add it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:21, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Dodger67, regardless, the article was indefinitely autoconfirmed, so I cannot edit it to add status of the protest. Here are sources:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/19/world/france-covid-vaccine-pass-protests.html https://www.voanews.com/covid-19-pandemic/thousands-protest-against-vaccination-covid-passes-france https://thefreethoughtproject.com/french-protest-police-join/

How to not let Wikipedia become a political site

I know that Wikipedia is not fully reliable but now questions are raised if it is fully unreliable, why? And how can we make Wikipedia a neutral site and not let it become a political site which promotes parties or a site which represents its own ideas but represents facts which are neutral and sourced? Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 05:56, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

ExclusiveEditor, we do so by following the relevant rules and policies about neutrality, verifiability, due weight, reliable sources, etc. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:24, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

What If someone tells your a Sockpuppetery even though your not the user of the Sockpuppetery

What If someone tells your a Sockpuppetery even though your not the user of the Sockpuppetery;what would I do?or I'll just explain to them that I'm not. His Usurpation2 (talk) 10:23, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Usurpation2: See here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/SPI/Guidance#Defending_yourself_against_claims. You might also want to review WP:SOCK. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:45, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Update: User has subsequently been investigated and is now blocked by a CheckUser for sockpuppetry. Route of appeal is given on their talk page. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:25, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

How to get your wikipedia article 100% approved

How to get your wikipedia article 100% approved; cause all my article has been deleted;and I wanna make an article that was 100% approved in Wikipedia. Usurpation2 (talk) 10:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

There is no 100% working cooking recipe for Wikipedia articles, as non-notable topics cannot have an article here, no matter how hard you try. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:18, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

You have created articles in mainspace that were then nominated for deletion because of major flaws. I suggest you use the Articles for Creation process instead, as that will provide expert reviewer comments on your drafts. Only after you succeed in moving several articles through AfC should you consider going back to creating articles directly. David notMD (talk) 10:37, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Usurpation2: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you haven't done so already, I suggest you follow the instructions Help:Your first article (which includes the AfC process David notMD mentioned above). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 12:21, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I see that Usurpation2 has been blocked as a sock. Doug Weller talk 12:49, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Infobox YouTube personality

Not sure, if this is the right venue. Would like to ask if it is acceptable to embed/include Infobox YouTube personality inside singer/musician/actor/actress infobox? A rundown on what are included when the Infobox are embed/included into Infobox person or Infobox musical artist, the channel name + url, years active (when the channel was created), genre, subscribers, total views, and creator awards (if any). Of the information, only subscribers and total views are sourced using primary source which is basically the channel about page. Majority if not all of the articles, I have seen such inclusion, there are zero mentions in the article lead or body to show its notability. Imo, such information are trivia and catered only to certain audience and possibly violating WP:NOT as well. Hence, if it is okay to remove it under circumstances as such the article lead and body doesn't show it's notable enough for such inclusion? — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 07:41, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: Welcome to the Teahouse! If the person is well known as both a musician/actor and a YouTube personality, then it might make sense. However, if a musician's record company just posts their videos on YouTube, then the YouTube infobox isn't necessary. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 12:25, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty Hi, what if the YouTube Infobox contains the musician/actor personal YouTube channel that are not published by their record company/agency? If the person is only well known as an musician/actor and coverage for their YouTube channel is only from unreliable source and mostly from self-published source, the Infobox shouldn't be included right? — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:42, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: If the person is only well known as an musician/actor, then the Infobox YouTube personality shouldn't be included. GoingBatty (talk) 12:51, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty Understood, thanks a lot. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:04, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Music

How do I go about joining a project please? Anything and everything music :) FlowerMoon593 (talk) 13:30, 21 July 2021 (UTC) FlowerMoon593 (talk) 13:30, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Add yourself to Wikipedia:WikiProject Music/Participants, have a look around at Wikipedia:WikiProject Music, see what you'd like to do and have fun! Dutchy45 (talk) 13:57, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

2 questions regarding writing of content

I have 2 questions.

1) I am working as the operational marketing manager of the UBports Foundation. I noticed a page container what I suspect is outdated information about the UBports/Ubuntu Touch software (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_mobile_operating_systems). When asking around internally the reply was that: "Wikipedia has nearly banned contributors from our community before, they want edits to be done by a third party". Since we are an open source project and managed by a non-profit foundation, and since we happen to know the technical specs of our product best I am wondering how we can help increase the quality of information on the Wikipedia site without getting changes reverted or banned? Should we hire a third party to replace the efforts of our community members? Please advice.

2) The other question is: I am the author of approximately 12 books about open source and Linux. I am not interested in self-aggrandizing in any way but it would be nice to know at what point a person would qualify for his or hers own Wikipedia page. Jeroen Baten (talk) 14:46, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Jeroen Baten Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Regarding the first question, if you are employed by the Foundation, you are required by the Wikipedia Terms of Use to make a formal declaration of that, please see WP:PAID for more information. If you hire someone to make edits for your orgnanization, it is no different than doing it yourself; they too would need to declare as a paid editor and as they would also have a conflict of interest as you do, they would be unable to make direct edits and would be limited to edit requests(with regards to COI related edits). Please understand that Wikipedia is not interested in what an organization wants to say about its own products; a Wikipedia article summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic. If no independent sources write about your products on their own(not press releases or routine announcements or any materials put out by the organization), they would not merit inclusion in Wikipedia.

Regarding the second question, if you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable author, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources, you would merit a Wikipedia article. It is strongly advised- though not forbidden- that you not attempt to do so yourself, please see the autobiography policy. Please also understand that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 14:54, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I've placed some of this information on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 14:55, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your clear and elaborate answers. They have clarified a lot for me. Again, thanks.

After my editing a page it says that the page preview has a problem , how to sole it

KSV9 (talk) 14:47, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@KSV9: Assuming you are referring to your edit to Andhra Pradesh United Teachers Federation, you had added extra space to the very beginning of the article, which indented the whole text and renders it in a different font than normal.

Here is a similar piece of text which shows the effect. An IP user has just sorted this out for you. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:58, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@KSV9: Hello KSV9, welcome to the teahouse.

I'm assuming you're talking about Andhra Pradesh United Teachers Federation? If so the issue was that you had an extra space at the start of the paragraph - I removed the space and now it's displaying properly. Starting a paragraph with a space tells the wiki software to insert a set of pre tags, which casue the text to display as fixed width font in a box. for example:

this text has no space at the start of the line

this text has a space at start of the line

See WP:PRE for more information. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 15:01, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Reliable source

I am confused about my addiction to a page being taken down due to the citation being an "unreliable source" even though the source was from the actual website of the place the Wikipedia entry is from. Can someone explain? The wiki page- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holland_Road_Baptist_Church ScrappyArden (talk) 15:11, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Having a connexion to the subject makes a source unreliable by default. One of the things we look for when assessing a source is if they are independent of the subject. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 15:26, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Well no, WP:ABOUTSELF etc. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:31, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@ScrappyArden Afaict by the edithistory [7], you didn't provide an WP:Inline citation first. Then you did, and I reverted that because I didn't see the content supported by your link. Note also that the article is about a building, it may have stance on things like loam, but Tim Vellacott's stance is not necessarily the buildings stance. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:30, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@ScrappyArden Welcome to the Teahouse. This edit of yours referenced a source that is not available for verification at the moment. Additionally, just one mention in one sermon might be too much focus on one topic. I would prefer to see other sources writing about the church's stance on potentially controversial or unusual issues before adding such a statement. Otherwise it might just become a long list of its stances on all sorts of issues, big and small. But I would definitely want to be able to check the statement for its veracity, which is not possible whilst their webpages are not functioning properly. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:35, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. I guess it's just painful because I was offered conversion therapy there and they continue to hide their views. I just wish more people knew so that they wouldn't have to go through the abuse I did. I understand why it couldn't be added, I wish they didn't go through so many lengths to hide their views from non-members — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScrappyArden (talk • contribs)

I sympathise, ScrappyArden. But it sounds as if what you are trying to do is RIGHTGREATWRONGS, which is specifically not what Wikipedia is for. If you can find an independent reliable source about what they do, then you could add information based on that source. Ideally we require reliable published sources for everything; but for information which may be contentious (whether in favour of the subject or against them), it is even more important, and required to be independent of the subject. --ColinFine (talk) 16:10, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Dealing with Editors that have Different Personalities

Hi there,

I've been an editor on Wikipedia for quite some time - reaching my 1000th edit today! However, I very much still feel new to the whole process of being a solid editor. I just wanted to ask, what is everyone's approach to when there's a particular editor that you don't seem to collaborate as well with? This particular editor seems to somehow follow all my edits edits and either changes them consistently or undoes them. I know there is nothing wrong with this but their comments in the changelog are interpreted by me as passive-aggressive and self-righteous. APNOneTwo (talk) 15:28, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, @APNOneTwo. Without knowing the details, or how long you feel this has been going on, it's hard to say. But the simple thing to do is just to go to their talk page and ask them why they are reverting your edits. Maybe offer a few WP:DIFFS and seek some understanding from them. They should be able to explain their rationale, or you may feel they haven't justified their actions well, and could then escalate it. But we all have different personalities , and so engaging with the other person to understand why they do something is always sensible. We don't allow editors to WP:HARASS others by following them around without justification, as this simply makes them feel hounded, and they could be blocked for that. But it's quite justifiable to find an 'iffy' edit and then to go check if the person's other edits are all of the same type. Oftentimes, just by asking, one can learn one is doing something the wrong way and that there is a better way of making changes. I hope this rather vague answer is of some help. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:41, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for responding @Nick Moyes, I really appreciate your insights here. Upon looking at their contributions, they're just one of those very active editors that focus on particular pages because I am not only the one subject to their editing style and reversion. I guess it makes sense with the Olympics starting soon, the uptick of editors will no doubt be increased. I did take a look at their talk page but felt they were not approachable to communicate about any potential differences in editing opinions. For now, I am just doing what I can to improve my writing and content without too much hassle. --APNOneTwo (talk) 15:47, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@APNOneTwo: Another option per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle is to start a conversation on an article's talk page, and invite the other editor to join the conversation. Hopefully other editors will also participate and you can all come to a consensus. You can also post on a WikiProject talk page to ask others to join the article talk page conversation. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 15:47, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@APNOneTwo I don't think anyone here ever wants to put off another editor from contributing, yet oftentimes that's exactly what can happen. The medium of text is never rich with nuance or subtlety, yet that's what we have to work with. I've just had to work through another editors additions of images to a wide range of articles. I know they're editing in good faith, yet they needed a steer as to what was and wasn't OK to do. Eventually I felt it worth leaving an explanatory note on their talk page, and I do hope I haven't put them off by so doing, or made them feeling I will be stalking them forever. One really useful trait here is the willingness to apologise if one gets the 'wrong end of the stick' - it calms down so many situations. All the best, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:10, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

How can I add another translation to a page?

Faridrajaee1 (talk) 16:09, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Faridrajaee1, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you mean that you would like to create an article in a different-language edition of Wikipedia by translating an English one, please see translate us. If you mean that there is already an article in another edition of Wikipedia and you want to link them up, you pick "Languages" in the side bar, and edit the Wikidata entry. That is straightforward if the articles in the two languages cover the same scope; but it is problematic when one article in one language corresponds to two or more articles in another language. If you told us which article you are talking about (and which foreign-language article, if that exists already) it would be easier. (To make it easier to tell us, note that you can link to an article in English Wikipedia by putting its title in double square brackets, so [[Bradford]] displays as Bradford; and you can link to an article in another Wikipedia by putting the language code on the front with a colon before and after it, so [[:de:Bradford]] displays as de:Bradford, and links to the German article. Don't forget the initial colon!) --ColinFine (talk) 16:18, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Search Engine

Hello, Just wondering seems name isn't coming up when someone tries Wikipedia search engine. Is there anything we can do to be added into search engine please? Also, I tried uploading our logo into the site and the site isn't allowing me to do so, what can be done? Looking forward to hearing from you soon. Regards,

Azande Society Azandesociety (talk) 06:20, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Zande people is an article, and it has links to related articles such as Zande language and Zande literature. But there does not appear to be an article Azande Society. David notMD (talk) 10:13, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Azandesociety, you seem to have tried to create an article at User talk:Azandesociety, but that's your user talk page, not a place to create an article, and so it was deleted. Please see Help:Your first article for instructions on how to do this properly, but see also Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:56, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I need some help with copyediting

Hi there! Straight to the point: I've recently been working on these articles: Aluminé (town) and El Huecú. I need some non-pro copyediting to make them better, but not GA nominating or so. The first one may need more work, since I did a significant expansion. The second one I wrote it years ago and other users did correct it, but some expansion has been made, which means that there sure are some grammar problems and such.

It's only copyediting. The rest is okay, since I'm an experienced editor, though not a native English-speaker. Any help will be appreciate. You can write me if you got any questions. Thanx in advance!--Gunt50 (talk) 18:47, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Gunt50, I'll take a look at these now. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 18:54, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks man, much appreciated. You just need to read them and make the corrections. Both aren't that much of big articles--Gunt50 (talk) 18:58, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Gunt50, no worries, just been over them. Feel free to drop a message on my User talk if you have more articles that need copyediting; it's something I do quite a lot of. Cheers, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 19:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Want Marriage entered in Personal Life....Hub(Bassist)

I want to add my marriage status to Personal Life. I have Marriage Certificate PDF for reliable source. What do I need to do. Thank you. Leonard HUB HubbardThe Roots Lenelson7767 (talk) 18:55, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Lenelson7767, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, I take it you imply you are one and the same as Hub (bassist), if yes, please stop editing the article, you are erroneously damaging it. Secondly, a marriage certificate may not necessarily be needed. You do however need to prove your identity. We strongly discourage the discussion of very personal information on open space such as you are currently doing. Could you send an e-mail to us instead? Celestina007 (talk) 19:43, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Lenelson7767, I have repaired the damage you unknowingly caused in that article, you do however still need to prove your identity, we treat biographies of living persons with extra care, if you are indeed one and the same person of the aforementioned article you may need to confirm your identity, sending an e-mail to volunteers-vrt@wikimedia.org would be helpful. Celestina007 (talk) 19:55, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Link on articles

Hey guys so probably since March I've been changing the personnel/ musicans credit on the artical for Gorillaz Feel Good Inc and this is before I made an account so when I made an account and changed the credit for like the 100th time I got told by wikipedia to mabye add evidence so when I did I added a link that proved that I was right about my changes. I then got a messagefrom someone saying 'why didn't you just add the link to the article' and then when i checked back the article had some how got the link connected with the person I was adding. Does anyone know how this happened or how to add a link to an edit you've made so it stays there. Grlzman (talk) 21:12, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Grlzman, in this edit [ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Feel_Good_Inc.&type=revision&diff=1034716696&oldid=1034707266 ] the source was added. You can learn more about references at Help:Referencing for beginners. References go between tags that look like this

<ref></ref>

and a template is used to organize them at the bottom of the page in a reference section, such as

{{reflist}}

. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 21:19, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Signature without a question

89.196.15.83 (talk) 21:43, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP. Did you have a question about editing or using Wikipedia? Kleinpecan (talk) 21:49, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

New wikipedia page for school

How do you start a new page for a school 2601:645:0:9B90:4125:CCB2:7CBC:ACF7 (talk) 00:58, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@2601:645:0:9B90:4125:CCB2:7CBC:ACF7 hello and welcome to the Teahouse, to create articles, I’d suggest using WP:ARTICLEWIZARD, but hey before you proceed have you read WP:YFA? Believe you me you’d find it quite helpful. Celestina007 (talk) 01:01, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Article declined

My article got declined again. I made all the citations changes as it was suggested, but experienced members, but it did not work and I do not know what else I can do to fix it. Would be very grateful for any suggestions. Looks like my sources are great, but I am struggling with the citation inline or ref. Any help is much appreciated.

Thank you

Draft:Paul_Khavari Mikip1015 (talk) 21:51, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Mikip1015: Welcome to the Teahouse. You're going to want to read Nick Moyes' guide to referencing for beginners. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:03, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Paul_Khavari, hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It appears the article has been declined four times now, I don’t think it would be a good idea to resubmit any time soon. In the mean time you can do so some reading of some of our policies and guidelines. Celestina007 (talk) 00:18, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Mikip1015. One of the reviewers noticed the obvious fact that Paul Khavari is clearly notable as an endowed professor at Stanford University and as an elected member of the National Academy of Medicine. Accordingly, he easily meets Wikipedia:Notability (academics) #3 and #5, and the referencing is completely adequate. Accordingly, I have moved the draft to main space, added a reference, and added four categories. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:25, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Cullen, Thank you so much!!!

How to deal with non-malicious sockpuppetry (I think the sockmaster is just unaware of our anti-sock policies and doesn't mean to vandalise Wikipedia)

Special:Contributions/Winner753 and Special:Contributions/Winner135 seem to be the same editor as both are interested in Talking Tom & Friends (TV series) and Oddbods. Their edit timings don't overlap and their edits seem to be more "TV show fan who has no experience writing neutrally" than "Vandal who wants to take over the article". What should be done? TubeOfLightTalk Less, Smile More 02:31, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tube of Light, hello, what can be done is going to WP:SPI and report your findings. Celestina007 (talk) 02:47, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse @Tube of Light! Going by the timestamps, they are not in violation, as technically, they abandoned 753, and started editing with 153 an hour later. Only if they make another edit with 753, is it socking. To warn editors without involving admins, you have {{uw-agf-sock}}. For future reference, admins do handle appropriately less-severe cases, with consideration, like you want to. They employ warning, or they may block all the socks and leave the main account unblocked, or in case their editing is problematic, block the main account for a week or a month only. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:11, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I chose to notify him with the template, let's see how it goes. TubeOfLightTalk Less, Smile More 03:48, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Wanting to edit Siyad Barré's name to Mohamed Siad Barré

I want to edit his name since it's technically his full and accurate name, but vandalism bot stops me from it. It even mentions it in the article! Somaaliyya (talk) 08:30, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Somaaliyya Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The title of a WP-bio should be the persons WP:COMMONNAME, that is, what they are generally called in English WP:RS. Compare Nelson Mandela and Gandhi. This is sometimes different from the full name, sometimes not. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:44, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Siad Barré ―Qwerfjkl talk 08:47, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Creating a new wiki page

I have created a draft page, but there is no "Submit" button in the draft. I have tried adding {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft, but this doesn't work. How do I get my contribution published? Also, I've realized that the title of my draft is the same as another existing page, but I cannot edit the title of the page - how do I fix this? Paul.pjt28 (talk) 08:10, 22 July 2021 (UTC) Paul.pjt28 (talk) 08:10, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Paul.pjt28 Welcome to the Teahouse! Place {{subst:submit}} at the top of your draft. To change the title you need to move the page. ―Qwerfjkl talk 08:37, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

When you copied {{subst:submit}} from the help page, it also copied over some superfluous markup such as nowiki tags and links, which is why the template did not work. (By the way, you inserted it correctly when you asked this question.) If the draft gets accepted, the reviewer will likely change the title themself. But you may also make a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves, or wait until you become autoconfirmed and move the article yourself. Kleinpecan (talk) 08:48, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Bot to automatically scrape a piece of data from a website that requires a different URL each time, and insert that into a cell in a table

Does anyone know of a bot that can do this? DiamondIIIXX (talk) 07:47, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi DiamondIIIXX, what you described is deffinitelly possible. If you elaborate about what you want to do I probably would be able to give better advice. Please consider this generic advice first:

Wikipedia provides an API for Bots, but the process of obtaining credentials to use this API can be rather bureaucratic. This process exists to protect Wikipedia from bugy bots and potentially large ammount of damage (bad edits) which bugy bots can generate.
There are many tools to write a bot, see Help:Creating a bot.
You might not need to get API access. May be, you need to make a relatively small number of edits once and you don't need a bot at all.

Anton.bersh (talk) 08:18, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@DiamondIIIXX: I assume you mean to scrape Wikipedia. All Projects hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation (that includes the english Wikipedia) expose an API as https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php (in this case) which can theoretically be used by anyone. See mw:API:Main_page for its documentation, and in particular mw:API:Etiquette. If you mean how to scrape a different site, the process is actually a bit different, inherently site-dependent, and definitely not something coding newcomers should do. this stackoverflow post's first answer] has more on that one. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:51, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Anton.bersh My first post was just to see if it was possible. I'll give a more detailed description now.

Basically, I have added tables for generation values for various Australian wind farms. An example is Silverton Wind Farm, under the heading Operations. Because it is useful, generation is split up into Year Total + Jan -> Dec months. The data source, http://nemlog.com.au/ uses a format of Starting Date & Finish date, + Generator code, required as parameters for the URL, using which it creates a graphical timeline of power output for the selected generator over the specified time period. E.g. for the month of June, the generation value would be obtained by going to the following address: http://nemlog.com.au/show/unit/20210601/20210630/?k1=STWF1. STWF1 is the code for Silverton Wind Farm. and Start/finish Date is YYYYMMDD.

Then, in the generated table, on the page I just linked, I take the Sum (MWh) value, round it to the nearest MWh, and paste that into the table cell of interest. E.g. 59,790.5 -> 59,791.

This is extremely tedious already for all the wind farms I have added the table to, and as we get more wind farms in Australia it will be increasingly more difficult to maintain. So the bot would need a month selector, and wind farm code, and then somehow pastes that rounded value into the correct cell of the wind farm page operations table.

Does this make sense? DiamondIIIXX (talk) 08:45, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Victor Schmidt Pinging. I'm not scraping Wikipedia. DiamondIIIXX (talk) 09:29, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Isn't that going to rapidly approach WP:NOSTATS? - X201 (talk) 09:36, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

X201 Other wind farms across the world have their generation listed so I don't think it's too much of a problem. It also shows the seasonal nature of wind, and also grid issues impacting generation. DiamondIIIXX (talk) 10:11, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Awards

What is a Novice editor (Burba) award and can I get one? Excellenc1📞 11:35, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 Please see Service Awards. In short, service awards are awards that you can self-issue to yourself as long as you meet the requirement. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 11:43, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I did visit the article before I came to the teahouse to ask. But I didn't understand certain things. For example, Novice editor award gives the requirements as 3 months of service and 1000 edits. Does that mean I have to do 1000 edits within 3 months? Excellenc1📞 12:09, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1. No. Please see Service Awards: "Both the length of service and total number of edits must be met for each award level."--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:15, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 No. The x months of service refers to when you first joined Wikipedia (which according to logs, is on 18 April 2020 at 06:59). Hence, you only meet the months of service requirement (as of now is 1 year 3 months) but not the edit count requirement (as of now is 810+), which means you are currently eligible for Novice Editor only. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:24, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

how to remove subcategory from parent?

I am familiar with categories and categorisation, I often use wp:HotCat.
I want to remove Category:Italian television series debuts from Category:Establishments in Italy, however the hotcat shortcuts are not there at the bottom of the page and when I opened it up for editing no categories were there at all! Instead a banner says there may be a template and to see wp:FAQ/Categorization for details. Can anybody explain what I need to do or at the very least point me to the relevant part of WP:FAQ/Categorization cause I don't see it? Thank you. Dutchy45 (talk) 13:42, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

It seems likely to me that you may need a consensus for this, as the categories that cat is a part of are added through a template ({{Nationality television series debuts or endings category}}) which doesn't add them verbatim, but gets the country name from the page name and programmatically adds Category:foo-ish television series, and Category:Establishments in foo where foo is the country name extracted from the page title, as well as Category:Television series debuts by country.

You might be able to get away with removing the template (which is the entire contents of the page) and manually re-adding the relevant categories and portal links, but I'm not sure you should do that, as it may break some tracking used by others. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:03, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

In what sense is the initial broadcast of a tv show considered to be an "establishment"? I'd say it's merely an ephemeral event, unlike e.g. the opening of a new hospital or founding of an organisation. That is what I'd call an "establishment", something that gets memorialised by inscriptions in marble or brass plaques. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:18, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

My thinking exactly! Dutchy45 (talk) 12:19, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I tend to agree with that. I'm not sure what lead to the current state, and I'm afraid that many editors who frequently work in categories dislike me for occasionally scolding them over their habit of deleting usercats that are in use and their subsequent insistence on editing user and user talk pages against the wishes of the user in question. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 12:23, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

MPants at work, I don't like the removing template route. Like you said, I also feel I shouldn't do that. Do I need to go to WP:TfD to start getting this resolved? Dutchy45 (talk) 12:19, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, that might be the best way to go. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 12:28, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

How do I create an article that won

Cmoney2021 (talk) 05:39, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse, Cmoney2021. As this is your first edit from this account, I guess you should read H:YFA for advice about creating any sort of article (I confess I don't know what you mean by "that won"). However, Wikipedia editing is difficult enough without trying to go straight into article creation, so I'd advise you begin by making minor edits to existing articles in area that interest you, so you get a feel of the way things work here. Good luck. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:33, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Licensing Problem

Lets say i have a biology book, full with species' photograph. I want to take a photo from that book, and put it on commons, so i can make a wikipedia article about that species. My question : is this act is legal, especially when we talking about the licensing issue. The book is not stating anything about the photograph's license. But, i have direct contact with the publisher of that book, if i need to ask for their permission.

Should i ask for their permission first? Rtnf (talk) 11:16, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Rtnf: Welcome to the Teahouse. If the copyright holder is willing to release it for use on Wikipedia, they must also be willing to let it be used by anyone for any purpose, even commercial ones. If they're still okay with that, you're going to want to direct them to Donating copyrighted materials. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:37, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Rtnf (talk) 13:05, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Rtnf Can I just add that a publisher is not the same as an author or photographic contributor to a book. My experience is that requests like this will either be completely ignored or, given time, will be met with support if you explain the rationale for its use. Photographing a picture in a book is not the way to go, but inviting the copyright owner to upload an appropriately-sized image to Wikimedia Commons themselves is probably the easiest way, and would give the best results. It's important that you make clear an image is not just being released for use on Wikipedia, but that, whatever resolution version they choose to make available, it would be made freely available for use by anyone, even commercially.

Could I ask which taxon (scientific name, please) it is that you want to create an article about, and have you already looked for existing licenced images you can use from other sources, including Wikimedia Commons? Nick Moyes (talk) 14:01, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

"My experience is that requests like this will either be completely ignored"

No, i've contacted directly with their representative before. You can say that we're an acquaintance right now.

"Inviting the copyright owner to upload an appropriately-sized image to Wikimedia Commons themselves is probably the easiest way, and would give the best results"

Yes, the best results. But they are probably busy right now, working on their next book project, so i dont want to bother them.

"It would be made freely available for use by anyone, even commercially."

Thank you for your reminders.

"Could I ask which taxon (scientific name, please) it is that you want to create an article about"

It's not just one taxon. The book is a expedition report. They were doing an expedition to the Gandangdewata Mountain in West Sulawesi, Indonesia. They collected all the species that they could find there, then they describe it. It is including plants, mammals, frogs, birds, fish, molusk, arthropoda, worm, bacteria and microalgae. I got this book as a gift, directly from the publisher of the book (LIPI Press - Indonesian Institute of Sciences). I'm gonna verify it first, whether the species' photograph is already exist on Wikimedia Commons, or not. Rtnf (talk) 14:20, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft page improvement

Hello, I am a University student. I am not paid financially by any individual, company, organisation or business. However, I am having my internship experience at Praxis Electronic Medical Record; this internship is not paid monetarily and is for gaining insights. I am an unpaid Praxis EMR intern for two months only. I am interested in AI and medicine and thought that I could assist this technology and organization while at the same time learning about AI in a clinical setting. I saw other companies, e.g., Kareo and DrChrono, offering similar products to Praxis EMR have their Wikipedia pages published, so I tried to create one for Praxis EMR. I have tried my best to follow Wikipedia guidelines as precisely as possible to make appropriate edits and changes to the page.

Can you give me some detailed feedback about this draft page by any chance? Thank you very much. Sixarp25 (talk) 21:50, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Sixarp25, We are sorry this question has been unanswered for a while now. I think the long and short of it all, is you are strongly discouraged from editing articles in which you “close to” see WP:COI, if you insist you can read both WP:COIDISCLOSE and WP:PAID and then proceed to reading WP:GNG and WP:RS. Lastly that some articles you see on Wikipedia mirrors yours is not justification/valid reason for your article to be accepted into mainspace. Celestina007 (talk) 00:25, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, [{U|Sixarp25}}, and welcome to the Teahouse. First, note that WP:PAID says Interns are considered employees for this purpose. If they are directed or expected to edit Wikipedia as part of an internship, they must disclose. Secondly, the language you use implies that you hold an unfortunately very widespread misapprehension about Wikipedia: that a Wikipedia article is in any way for the benefit of its subject. Of course, the subjects of many articles do get some benefit from the articles, but that is not guaranteed, and is irrelevant as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Those other companies you mention do not "have their Wikipedia pages published", because the articles do not belong to them, and do not necessarily say what they would wish them to say. If you are creating an article about your company, and you come across a reliable source that discusses your company in a negative manner, then obviously as an intern you would prefer to minimise or ignore that source; but to do so would be a betrayal of Wikipedia's principles: that is what we mean by a conflict of interest. --ColinFine (talk) 10:18, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine Hello, I did not understand the standards properly before. After other experienced users pointed this COI issue out, I have included a COI disclosure. Does Wikipedia consider software review websites as reliable sources? I am unclear about this. Thank you.--Sixarp25 (talk) 14:14, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello again, Sixarp25. General questions like that usually cannot be answered: "software review websites" range from somebody's personal Wordpress site to part of a highly respected industry journal. A reliable sources is one that has a reputation for editorial control and fact checking. If you are unsure about a particular source, WP:RSN is the place to ask. (First have a look and see if it has already been rated on RSNP; and if not, search the archives of RSN to see if it has been discussed before you post the question.) --ColinFine (talk) 15:07, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Endless loop for requesting edit, need help

Hello, I've been guest posting for a little while now. Earlier I made some changes to Hurricane Emily (1993), but they were reversed by someone named User:JavaHurricane, who's inbox is locked. If you follow the buttons to request edits eventually it leads you to [8] which just loops endlessly when you press the button. Maybe I'm missing something obvious but I have no idea what to do from there. I would like to ask why for example "as a result of Emily" is needed, sometimes phrasing is just a matter of taste, but to me that really does feel like unneeded verbosity. I can't talk using edit summaries to talk either because Hurricane Emily (1993) is also locked. Any help would be appreciated. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:207D:E29F:2835:885A (talk) 14:52, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, IP user. I think you may have been caught out in the melee of vandalism on that page today, no doubt caused by idiots who have noticed it is currently featured on the Main Page and will as a result by viewed by many more people than usual. I think you either need to wait until things calm down or take your suggestions to the Talk Page, where they will be discussed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:15, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. You can start a discussion at Talk:Hurricane_Emily_(1993) to get consensus with other editors on if the wording should stay or not. RudolfRed (talk) 15:16, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Ok, will do. But for future reference is there a way to escape the endless loop. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:207D:E29F:2835:885A (talk)

Yes, you can escape the endless loop by going to Talk:Hurricane Emily (1993), click "New section", and making your request. GoingBatty (talk) 15:26, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

You've additionally been caught up in some other unrelated disruption which has led to the infinite loop. Usually it doesn't work that way, and we're working to get it fixed. In the meantime, the talk page is indeed the best place to make a request - add {{Edit semi-protected}} somewhere to your request if you have specific suggestions and want to grab some attention. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 15:33, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

My draft isn't changing status - what do I do?

I recently added a draft page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:River_Software

There was no submit for review button when I finished the page, so I had to manually add the reference in. It's been a few weeks and nothing has happened to the page, has anyone got any advice? TeamRiver (talk) 15:53, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

You need to remove the "nowiki" code which is stopping the template from displaying. Theroadislong (talk) 15:55, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Megan Thee Stallion

On Megan Thee Stallion's page, you should add Cardi B to the Associated Acts section because their song WAP is extremely successful and was all over TikTok for months--had its own dance and everything. Plus, everyone was talking about their 2021 Grammy performance. Speaking of the 2021 Grammy's, you should also add Beyoncé to Meg's Associated Acts list because their song Savage (Remix) got 3 nominations and 2 wins: Best Rap Song and Best Rap Performance. Savage (Remix) and WAP are arguably two of Megan's most popular songs so you should absolutely add Beyoncé and Cardi B to her list of Associated Acts. Thank you 2603:7000:4000:40F5:A87A:B0C2:7F22:4D92 (talk) 16:36, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Propose this on the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 16:41, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Notability

Hello! I have noticed that a user added a notability tag within the following article I heavily worked on: John Finnegan (The Bold and the Beautiful). I could not disagree with the assessment and I would like to remove the tag. I am highly confused because there are so many soap opera fictional character pages out there, who does not have half the research, sources, and references I have and there is no "notability" tag. I am highly confused about why this was added and pondering how I could remedy this issue? Can I gain some guidelines in order that I can remove the tag? As you may see, excessive research has been done using a profuse amount of secondary sources. The character's full name is John Finnegan, but he is referred to as "Finn" on the series, so the google search may vary on his name if that is the confusion (however, he is credited in closing credits as Dr. John Finnegan). The character has been on the series for a year and is already very notable within the canvas and outside of the universe of soaps opera due to the actor's popularity. The character is recognized especially due to his romantic relationship with one of soap operas ' female leads and fathering her child. Essentially, in soap opera lingo, we would say that this character is linked to a "legacy" character and has fathered a "legacy" child. This alone warrants him an article, alongside the fact that the series has cast his family members, which will make his character be part of a core family of the soap. This soap opera character is a major player and is portrayed by a contracted actor. Once again, I am just highly confused about how this article does not meet the notability criteria when there has been significant coverage of the character (the coverage is IN-DEPTH. The character's introduction as well was done when Bold and Beautiful, was the first United States scripted production to return taping during the COVID-19 restrictions, and his character (even his first airdate) was discussed in those secondary sources announcing the series' return), references are reliable, sources are all secondary, it is very independent of the subject and once again deeply presumed for reasons cited above. In essence, would you agree that the tag should be removed? — AwardShowFan123 (talk, contribs) 12:24, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Question answered at helpdesk. TSventon (talk) 17:14, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

SVG world map

How do I edit a svg file that for example highlights certain countries in certain colors, like for example File:MENA or WANA according to various definitions.svg 47.150.227.219 (talk) 17:57, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

That map can be created using the Generic Mapping Tools: https://generic-mapping-tools.org. ––FORMALDUDE^(talk) 18:44, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

How to create a new wiki page in a different language

How can I create a new wiki page in a different language, for a page that already exists. Barry da ple (talk) 19:07, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Barry da ple, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are wanting to create an article in English Wikipedia, please see Translation. If you want to translate an English article into another language for another Wikipedia, see Translate us. --ColinFine (talk) 19:10, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

how i can create new page

how as a beginner i can create a page that is accepted Abhishekgoswami21 (talk) 17:48, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Abhishekgoswami21: Check out your first article. If this about Draft:INDIA KHELO FOOTBALL, please be advised that Wikipedia is mainly interested in what people independent of the subject have written in reliable sources. You should try to use fewer buzzwords. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:02, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Abhishekgoswami21 welcome to the teahosue. A Wikipedia article must meet WP:GNG, essentially, two reliable sources independent of the subject must provide significant coverage to a subject for it to be notable. Justi yaya 18:00, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

So far, your draft has no valid references (the organization's website does not contribute to notability). David notMD (talk) 19:42, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

User:Dr._Mohammad_Eyvazi

Hello, I created this page([[ and was trying to publish an article but it has been rejected. Please help me to understand the process. I've been working on this for a few hours, watched few YouTube videos but still can't figure this out. Dr. Mohammad Eyvazi (talk) 00:32, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Dr. Mohammad Eyvazi Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You edited your user page, which is not article space or space to draft an article. As it seemed that you were using your user page as a social media style page, it was deleted. You may use your personal sandbox or Articles for Creation to draft an article. Be advised, however, that Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themeselves. We are interested in what others say about you, not what you want to say about yourself. Please review the autobiography policy. To succeed in writing a Wikipedia article about yourself(which, while not forbidden, is discouraged) you need to set aside everything you know about yourself and only write based on the content of independent reliable sources. Most people have great difficulty with that. 331dot (talk) 00:40, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much for helping me with this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nazanin Kar (talk • contribs) 00:52, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Currently at User:Dr. Mohammad Eyvazi/sandbox/Dr. Mohammad Eyvazi (محمد عیوضی), declined, not rejected. No references. David notMD (talk) 01:18, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Subsequently deleted. David notMD (talk) 20:12, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Rejected Submission for Wikipedia Page of a Business Despite Following Format of a Company in the Same Industry

I was hoping to receive feedback and a review on my submission that went further in depth than, "this reads like an advertisement." Frankly, I find that assessment unfair and inaccurate. I spent many hours compiling third-party sources that provided credible information about the company that requested this work (DiscountMugs), and followed a nearly identical format to another company already published on Wikipedia (see below).

I would appreciate greater clarification on issues that need to be addressed than the general message I received. The Bensussen Deutsch & Associates page follows a nearly identical format and tone to the one I submitted on behalf of DiscountMugs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bensussen_Deutsch_%26_Associates

Thank you for your assistance. GeorgeEisner (talk) 20:24, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi GeorgeEisner and welcome to the Teahouse. Per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, the fact that a different article follows the same standards doesn't make it acceptable in an article. I noticed that Bensussen Deutsch & Associates is also going through articles for deletion.

You said "the company that requested this work". You need to disclose if you are being paid by this company, such as on the Talk page. While paid editing isn't forbidden, it is generally discouraged. Furthermore, editing to promote a company or product is not allowed. It can be difficult to follow the rules of Wikipedia while being paid for editing. For more information see WP:SOAPBOX and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution_disclosure Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 21:12, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Rubbish computer, thank you for your feedback. Before creating the page I did add this disclaimer on my profile per the Article Wizard instructions, "This user, in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, discloses that they have been paid by Exults Digital Marketing on behalf of DiscountMugs.com for their contributions to Wikipedia."

Is this not sufficient in accordance with the paid contribution disclosure? I would also like to note that the BD&A page was not tagged for deletion until I brought it to the attention of Theroadislong, then they used it as justification for disapproval after the fact. GeorgeEisner (talk) 08:11, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, GeorgeEisner. The retailer utilizes a simplified, vertically-integrated supply chain and in-house printing services to offer personalized products in large quantities directly to customers online is pure advertising speak: in encyclopaedic terms it adds nothing whatever to the previous sentence. It is cited to a source, it is true, but, though it may be reliably published, the source is clearly not independent of the company. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 21:19, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine, I appreciate this feedback. You are much more helpful than Theroadislong. I will note that the language in question does come from an independent Google report from 2014, though I can revise the overall language to remove anything that may be misconstrued as advertising speak. If I do so, would it be possible to have someone other than Theroadislong review my page? When I asked them to provide feedback, they threw "other crap articles exist" in my face with no additional context, despite the precedent in usage section stating, ""this essay is not a standard reply that can be hurled against anyone you disagree with who has made a reference to how something is done somewhere else." GeorgeEisner (talk) 20:59, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello again, GeorgeEisner. Not only is the Google report not independent, as most of it is direct quotations from the company's staff, but it doesn't even support the statement I quoted above. What makes it so hard to write an article about something you're involved with is that it's difficult to forget every single thing you know about the subject and write only from what the sources say; but that is what is required.

As for the re-review: If you ask Theroadislong not to review the draft when you submit it, I'm sure they will happily forgo that pleasure. It might mean that your draft waits a little longer for review because you're choosing to reduce the pool of reviewers for it (and it might not). If they were a bit short with you, that might be because many volunteer editors rather resent spending our time guiding people who are being paid to wade in and try and do a job which (in most cases) they have not taken the time to learn to do properly. Writing a new article as the first thing you do is a bit like performing a concerto after your first violin lesson, or trying to build a house when you have just been taken on as a building apprentice. My standard advice to new editors is to spend a few months making small improvements to some of our six million existing articles and learning how Wikipedia works before venturing into the extremely challenging task of creating a new article. People who are being paid to create content are generally understandably reluctant to do this, so we volunteers end up having to spend time guiding them, and often trying to get them to understand that their work is pointless because the subject does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, so their house is going to fall down however they build it (I'm not saying that your company is not notable: it may be. I'm talking generally). Added to which, in the absence of a rather unbelievable degree of altruism, every paid editor is here because somebody has fundamentally misunderstood what Wikipedia is, and is here not to improve Wikipedia but to promote something. (I wasn't intending to write this rant, but I'm going to let it stand. If you found my response more helpful than Theroadislong's, I'm pleased; but we both get frustrated at the deluge of ignorant attempts at promotion, not all of them by paid editors.) --ColinFine (talk) 14:58, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Neccesary information in the article Azykh (village)

Dear all, I'd like to be sure if the information in the article is necessary. We find information about the crime act that is confirmed by Newspapers(even popualar, ahve they investigated). Pls, see first of all Wikipedia:Notability (events) § Criminal acts, "Where there are no appropriate existing articles, the criminal or victim in question should be the subject of a Wikipedia article only if one of the following applies: For victims, and those wrongly accused or wrongly convicted of crime,The victim or person wrongly convicted, consistent with Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Subjects notable only for one event, had a large role within a well-documented historic event. The historic significance is indicated by persistent coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources that devote significant attention to the individual's role.". Why schould provoking information be insert in the article? There are many crime acts during the war from both side, but Wikipedia is encyclopedic project, and this information is not encyclopedic according the a.m.rules. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Crime_victims_and_perpetrators and WP:SENSATIONAL. I've got advice i Talk Page to ask here. I think to remove such kind of info in the article.--Aydin mirza (talk) 23:13, 22 July 2021 (UTC) Aydin mirza (talk) 23:13, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Note to the editors: Just a glance at OP’s contributions will show that the user has a clear POV, and is seemingly a singe purpose account. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 23:46, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I am guessing that this is about Azykh, and whether the mention of one person being killed is a valid inclusion or not. My opinion is not. David notMD (talk) 23:53, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Can I use France reliable sources?

Can I use French reliable sources? ItsJustdancefan (talk) 23:50, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi ItsJustdancefan. Non-English sources can be used as explained in WP:NOENG, but they still are going to need to meet English Wikipedia's definition of a reliable source. You should also be competent enough in French to be able to read and understand the source for WP:RSCONTEXT reasons, but also to explain it to others who might not be able to read it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:56, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Harassment

I've been editing Wikipedia for about a year now, but there is one editor who appears out of nowhere and undoes lots of my work, especially if it's from one of the articles I've written. What can I do? Aubernas (talk) 09:32, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Here are the relevant diffs:

―Qwerfjkl talk 09:45, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Pinging @Andrewgprout. ―Qwerfjkl talk 09:47, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

The history evident in the long succession of reverts before this one 09:51, 22 July 2021 by many experienced editors of Aubernas's edits with their glaring chronological and logical errors and blatent misuse of references explains my interest and response. This user appears to have an axe to grind (that they continually try to add to the article), details that estabished history does not support. Andrewgprout (talk) 00:43, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Question

How long does it take a draft to be accepted or declined? ItsJustdancefan (talk) 22:58, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@ItsJustdancefan: It varies widely. The volunteer reviewers look at drafts in no particular order. Additionally, there are few reviewers and many drafts, so the backlog is very large. Your draft may be reviewed quickly, or it may take several months. Patience is needed. RudolfRed (talk) 23:07, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Drafts about clearly notable topics that are well-referenced, easily readable and properly formatted tend to be accepted much more quickly than those that need a lot of work. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:52, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@ItsJustdancefan, unfortunately AFC isn’t a queue where submissions are attended to in a chronological order, rather it’s more of a “pool” usually submitting via afc it may be reviewed in 3 to 6 months, don’t get me wrong, as I said earlier it’s a “pool” any AFC editor can stumble on your draft and accept it or decline the very first day you submit your article, call it luck if you may, having said some hosts here can help out in reviewing your article, could you link the draft article here so we can see if or not we can be of assistance. Celestina007 (talk) 00:11, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

There's a backlog drive going on. So, it's very likely that all drafts submitted up to the end of July will be reviewed by the end of July. Of course, the backlog will start to grow again afterwards, but the wait time should be much better at least until the end of the year. In all cases, drafts that are hardest to review are the ones reviewed last. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:09, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Adding more categories in Trapped in the closet (South Park)

Courtesy link: Trapped in the Closet (South Park)
Can you unlock the Trapped in the closet (South Park) article? I just want to put more in the article's categories Renzo487 (talk) 02:34, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Renzo487: Welcome to the Teahouse. The article is semiprotected, which means you should be able to edit it directly, since you are autoconfirmed. If you're still unable to, you can leave an edit request at the article's talk page and see if someone do it for you. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:12, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Merged/Redirect to Page about two separate entities at same location

Hi Teahouse, I've noticed the page Total House is a live wiki and includes information from a draft that was merged (170 Russell) which is a live music venue. They're both separate entities at the same location. Total House and 170 Russell live music venue are not operated by the same people. What are your suggestions in regards to creating two different wikis or edits to the Total House Page that can be done? In the lead sentence it refers to Total House as known as 170 Russell but this is incorrect. Runningmarvelman (talk) 03:03, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Runningmarvelman. Please comment at Talk:Total House, where another editor commented on this issue earlier this month. Reach out to that editor and work toward consensus. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:15, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

How to use

How to use twinkle while editing with mobile This is me Jarvis (talk) 05:52, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Jarvis, I am not sure if it's available for the mobile site, but it's available when you switch to desktop mode (link to switch is at the bottom of every page). Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:18, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Having trouble getting a page approved

I'm trying to publish a Wikipedia page for author Denise Hunter. Hunter is an author of over 40 books, many of them bestsellers. 3 of her books have been made into movies on the Hallmark channel. My initial article submission for her was not sourced properly, but after this was brought to my attention, I edited the article several times. It is currently sourced with reputable media sources: television stations WANE 15 (Ft. Wayne, IN), WTHR 13 (Indianapolis), WPTA 21 (Ft. Wayne, IN) and CBN; newspaper articles from the Journal Gazette (Ft. Wayne, IN), Sterling Journal-Advocate (Sterling, CO), Pilot News (Plymouth, IN), magazine articles in Smart Living Fort Wayne and reputable websites such as Publishers Weekly. Still my most recent submission was rejected as not showing significant coverage "in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject." I believe the citations listed below show significant coverage in published, reliable secondary sources.

I asked the above question yesterday at the Help Desk and someone went through all of the citations and basically discounted the newspaper and television mentions because they were were local/regional and somehow that meant they were connected to the subject t (they're not. As I responded there I'm including links to those media sources in order to provide corroboration for the facts asserted in the article (awards, bestseller list, Hallmark channel movies, etc.) because in earlier drafts I was told I must provide outside sources for the facts of the article. Coverage on a local, network-affiliated TV channel or local paper shouldn't be discounted simply because the person being discussed lives in the area. There's no personal connection between the author and any of these media outlets.

It feels like the decision on what is notable appears to be fairly arbitrary and subjective here. A bestselling writer of over 40 books with 3 movie adaptations is not significant enough for Wikipedia inclusion? I'm getting very frustrated and would appreciate any help you guys can offer.

Thanks in advance. Writerspace (talk) 14:28, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I took a look at Draft:Denise Hunter and although I'm not a reviewer of such articles, it doesn't surprise me that those editors who have formally looked at it have not accepted it. It is full of phrases like "Hunter states that... ". Wikipedia is not based on what people say in interviews. It is built from reliable WP:secondary sources. So not interviews but, perhaps, reviews of her books in places with good editorial control. Also, do we really need to know that as a child "she incurred more than her share of library late fees"? Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:26, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I can go through and edit the language. Some of the media interviews I'm using for a source on the Hallmark movies. If the language is made more editorial, can those interviews still be used as sources for factual statements about movie releases? Writerspace (talk) 17:12, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Content in Lead should be expanded upon in article. Create an Awards section. David notMD (talk) 17:17, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Showing notability, in this case probably via criterion #3 in WP:NAUTHOR is your key hurdle (aside from the tone, which is more easily remedied). Hence you need to focus on reliable secondary citations that show how that criterion is met. Using primary sources for simple facts is allowed but does not contribute to notability. For drafts, very often "more is less" as the reviewing editors don't want to have to wade through masses of trivia to be convinced the notability test is met. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:29, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both. Would it be appropriate to post back here for feedback after I've re-edited the page but before I resubmit for approval?Writerspace (talk) 18:27, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Writerspace, you can if you'd like, but it's possible people here will tell you just to submit it for review. :) It probably depends on who happens to see it here! Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

NOTICE

Next discussion : #This ain't real!

Dear Wikipedians abroad, This page, @https://www.flightglobal.com/reports/world-air-forces-2021/141456.article is unreliable to start with, let alone misled statistic, combination of different guesses across the internet would lead to misled articles. Clearly, PLAAF owns more than dozens of J-20 and J-16, it's fair to argue but don't even cite it down. I thereby ask for suggestion to cancel the use of such misled sources. DO NOTE THAT, I WILL BE ADDING AN UNRELIABLE SOURCES TAG ON THE PAGE, DO NOT REMOVE, IT IS UNDER A SERIES OF REFORMATION Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 09:49, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Please do not WP:SHOUT. ―Qwerfjkl talk 10:05, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Apart from that, you don't hear my voice tone. However, that's not an answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 10:08, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

It's hard to tell what you are saying..You seem to be claiming that https://www.flightglobal.com/reports/world-air-forces-2021/141456.article is unreliable, and the suddenly talk about "THE PAGE", which may or may not be a Wikipedia article. ―Qwerfjkl talk 10:15, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Pinging @Hypersonic man 11 ―Qwerfjkl talk 10:16, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

the page is unreliable, and it will make the article being misled too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 10:33, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Which Wikipedia article(s) are you referring to? David notMD (talk) 10:37, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

PLAAF Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 10:45, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Can I redo the PLAAF page base on my experience and literature source(s)?

FYI

– Moved from new topic Qwerfjkl (talk) 10:52, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I am threatened to do so seeing that @FlightGlobal's report being catastrophically unreliable and misleading. Standing on everyone's behalf, I hope everyone agree to let me do so, just a little adjust, or not. BTW, @FlightGlobal and other sources aren't official, they just predict and make guesses that are inevitably wronged.

Hope everyone is OKAY with it, "deconstruction and reconstruction" will start soon...

Take care, bye Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 10:41, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: People's Liberation Army Air Force added by--Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:50, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

The place to propose major changes to any article is on the article's talk page, where it can discussed by editors who work on that article.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:55, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

since there are no obstructions, let the reconstruction begin! Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 13:13, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hypersonic man 11, you ask "Can I redo the PLAAF page base on my experience and literature source(s)?" Nobody may redo any article based on their experience; therefore you may not redo the article People's Liberation Army Air Force based on your experience. Whether you may redo it based on "literature source(s)" depends on a variety of factors, such as which sources these are. If you have concerns about sources already used in that article, bring up the matter at Talk:People's Liberation Army Air Force. Give your new thread an informative title. Don't use ALL-CAPITALS: doing so is childish. Sign your comment/question by hitting the ~ character four times in a row. Click "show preview" and check that your message is lucid before clicking "Publish changes". If you're dissatisfied by the (non-) reaction, bring up the matter at WP:RS/N. -- Hoary (talk) 03:36, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

k, will not cap next time. but don't judge me on my signature, it's not important. Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 07:00, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Hypersonic man 11 I think @Hoary is complaining about your lack of a signature after your comments. ―Qwerfjkl talk 07:03, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Kindly remove incorrect information about Jehovah's Witnesses'

Kindly remove incorrect information about Jehovah's Witnesses'. I am a real Witness and noticed false information as follows, Classification Restorationist, Orientation Premillennialist[1]. This incorrect information has undermined our real intentions to spread the truth about the bible. I looked up all the definitions, and none of it is what I was taught. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses Uncrackable tree 1 (talk) 06:26, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Uncrackable tree 1 Welcome to the Teahouse. Your original research will not replace sourced content. See Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. ―Qwerfjkl talk 06:31, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Uncrackable tree 1You will see from the article that that information is taken from the Historical Dictionary of Jehovah's Witnesses. Rowman & Littlefield. 2019. p. 164. If you think that is wrong, the place to make your case it is on the talk page of the article, where interested editors can consider your reliable sources.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:36, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Question regarding page

Not sure if the page I created is ready for the submission stage or if I need additional sources before submitting it? would appreciate any input, thank you. - here's the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Franki_Love Thomastrainor (talk) 02:14, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Thomastrainor, hi and welcome to the Teahouse! there's no need for pre-review. I'd recommend just clicking submit and seeing what feedback you receive from the Articles for Creation team that reviews submissions. Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:36, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Calliopejen1 hi, thanks for your feedback! would you kindly tell me where i click submit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomastrainor (talk • contribs) 04:49, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Thomastrainor I think someone must have seen this thread and submitted it for you, because it has already been submitted. Ordinarily there is a template with a blue button (I think) marked "submit" or similar. Calliopejen1 (talk) 07:08, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Reference weakness: Some of the refs do not work, others do not mention her at all, or are only brief mentions, or appear to be derived from press releases/publicity; one is Amazon; interviews can be used but to not contribute to the requirements for notability. While waiting for a reviewer (which can happen in days, weeks), work on improving refs. David notMD (talk) 10:19, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Thomastrainor: Also please note that album titles should be italicized, while song titles should be within quotation marks. For more info, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles. GoingBatty (talk) 13:26, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Removing a template

Still a relative newbie here. I've been expanding the Rondo Hatton Classic Horror Awards, which is honestly a big deal among horror fans. It's been around since 2002, presented annually at a fantasy/horror/sci-fi convention, and it gets mentioned regularly in mostly the horror press but also big newspapers. I've put in a bunch of footnotes to cite all this. There's a tag on the article about notability. I don't want to remove anything without it being OK with everyone. I read Help:Maintenance template removal, but there's just so much there. If you were me, what would be your next step to see about removing the template? Thank you, everyone at the Teahouse, you have been very nice and very helpful when I've asked questions before. The Horror, The Horror (talk) 21:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, The Horror, The Horror. I've taken a brief look a the article as it now stands and it certainly has lots more citations, although some are not what Wikipedia considers as very reliable sources (e.g. IMDb). You could now be WP:BOLD and remove the tag but the safer approach is to go via WP:WikiProject Horror, where experienced editors of this genre hang out. I'm sure you'll be able to find someone there who will help. Thanks for making your additions. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:52, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, Mike Turnbull! I didn't know there was a Wikipedia horror group. I will go there and ask! The Horror, The Horror (talk) 14:00, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Can't create article

I am creating an article for a television series. However, it said that the article I'm looking for don't exist. What should I do with that? Thank you! Hachiko Matthaios (talk) 11:44, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Hachiko Matthaios. Are you looking for Draft:List of Innamorata episodes? It will remain in draft space until approved for entry in article space.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:07, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Are the episode descriptions your own words, or copied from somewhere? David notMD (talk) 14:02, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Biography

How do I create a biography on Wikipedia? Strubelow (talk) 14:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Strubelow: Welcome to the Teahouse! Creating an article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia. If you want to create an autobiography, please see WP:AUTO. If you want to create a biographical encyclopedia article about someone else, first see if they meet Wikipedia's inclusion criteria - called "notability". If so, you can follow the instructions at Help:Your first article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:43, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Returning to Wikipedia after a loooong break

Hello! I'm an editor who started out editing way back when I was just a kid, and I've taken quite a long hiatus since then (mostly active around 2012-2013). I'd love to get back into the swing of things, contributing to technology-related articles continuing my work in counter-vandalism. I'd like to read up on any new policies and changes since then, but frankly I'm not too sure where to turn for sources to read up on. I was hoping I could get some advice from here! Cheers. Kevin12 xd 05:00, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Well, you could browse through Wikipedia:List of policies and Wikipedia:List of guidelines and drill down into anything of interest or new to you. Frankly, there's too much for any one person to remember. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:03, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Sounds good, I'll poke around there! Kevin12 xd 05:53, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Kevin12xd: Another bit of advice would be to put this Teahouse page and the Help desk page on your watchlist. I've learned an amazing amount just by seeing what others have found difficult and I'm now even able to give advice on occasions without embarrassing myself. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:51, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Kevin12xd, in case no one else has said it, welcome back, and we are glad you made if safely through your extended break. If there is any way we can help or assist further than what my fellower editors have expressed here then please let us know. Happy editing! --ARose Wolf 16:57, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

How to submit article for GA status and need hand to fix references issue

I want submit Changdeva Temple, Jalgaon district GA. Huge Earth (talk) 06:13, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Huge Earth. As that article is tagged as part of Wikipedia's Project hinduism, you should read WP:WikiProject Hinduism/Assessment and then either follow the instructions stated there, or decide that the article is not yet ready for upgrading from its current "Start" assessment. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:27, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I agree that going from Start to GA nom is a stretch. David notMD (talk) 15:42, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Jalgaon district article has ref problem. I am new here, don't have experience to fix such issue. If you can fix it. It will be better.Huge Earth (talk) 17:11, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Huge Earth: I see that several other editors have now fixed the problems. You may not be aware that you can thank them by going to the "View history" tab of the article and then clicking on the "thank" link to the right of each individual edit: the options are "undo" and "thank" so make sure you don't accidentally undo any of their good work! Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:18, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Global warming impact on sub Saharan Africa

What needs to be done to serve our fauna and flora in sub Saharan Africa? Xtra Zed (talk) 17:27, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Xtra Zed Hello! The Teahouse is for asking questions about editing WP, but you can try asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:35, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

British and American English differences

The English spelling/vocabulary differences between British and American English: When coming across drafts that are based in Europe or drafts containing British-related content, should I still change the spelling/vocabulary to American English? For example: "recognise" to "recognize" or "labour" to "labor" Cookiethepug (talk) 17:26, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Cookiethepug. The short answer is "no". The longer answer is at WP:ENGVAR. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:29, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cookiethepug You should not, see WP:ENGVAR. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:31, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cookiethepug: Welcome to the teahouse! As mentioned the relevant policy here is WP:ENGVAR. The general guideline is that articles with strong ties to a specific region should be written in the dialect of English associated with the subject (e.g. articles about British people should be written in British English, articles about Indian geography should be written in Indian English, articles about Canadian sports teams should be written in Canadian English etc). For articles on generic topics with no strong national connection the editor who writes the first version gets to decide what version of English to use (along with other formatting choices, like which citation style), which all subsequent editors should follow without changing. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:47, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Addition to entry for Paul McCartney (musician)

Hello! I would like to add the following to the Creative Outlets section of Paul McCartney (musician)'s page:

In November of 2021, McCartney will publish (with Paul Muldoon) The Lyrics: 1956 to the Present, a 960-page chronicle exploring the stories behind 154 of McCartney's songs.

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

Thank you! Rampagenumbers (talk) 16:48, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I added a version of that. More, or separate article, can be added when there's more sources. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:23, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Rampagenumbers: Thanks for your suggestion. In the future, you can suggest your addition on the article's talk page (e.g. Talk:Paul McCartney). Also, we don't include external links in the body of an article, per Wikipedia:External links. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Special sortkeys for categories

So I was looking at Category:People with post-traumatic stress disorder. It contains some specific names such as Sydney Aiella, which links to the the relevant mass shooting. However, that article does not have the visible category of people with PTSD. Maybe it's hidden?

So I found on the 2011 Seal Beach shooting article, it states the perpetrator was diagnosed with PTSD, and I wanted to add his name to the category. However, after looking through the Categorization help pages, I have been unsuccessful.

So what markup would need to be used, and where must it be placed? Kirby777 (talk) 02:50, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Kirby777, the page Sydney Aiello redirects to Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, and the category is placed on the redirect page at Sydney Aiello. Similarly, the category Category:People with post-traumatic stress disorder should be removed from 2011 Seal Beach shooting and added to Scott Evans Dekraai. When you click on Scott Evans Dekraai, it takes you to 2011 Seal Beach shooting but you'll see a note in small print at the top indicating you were redirected. Click on the link in that note to get back to the redirect page Scott Evans Dekraai, then click edit to add the category. Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:35, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Calliopejen1, wow, thank you. I had no idea redirects had their own pages. Kirby777 (talk) 19:48, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

WP:SYNTH and WP:INTEGRITY

I can't seem to figure this one out in the help pages (also there is a lot to read there haha). In WP:INTEGRITY the examples "The sun is pretty big.[source 1]" and "The sun is pretty big.[source 1] The sun is also quite hot.[source 2]" are given. But what about the case of "The sun is pretty big and is also quite hot.[source 1][source 2]"? Does this fall under WP:SYNTH, or is the form okay to use sometimes? I'm guessing if yes, then not with like 6 sources for one sentence. I was only thinking of 2 or 3. Undead Shambles 🧟‍♀️ (talk) 07:18, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Undead Shambles, hello and welcome to the Teahouse! IMO your second example is ok, I have been known to write like that myself. But "The sun is pretty big.[source 1] The sun is also quite hot.[source 2]" is not wrong, and it can be argued that the placement of the cites can be helpful to a reader, and you shouldn't write a long paragraph and put all the cites at the end of it. On number of cites, see WP:OVERCITE, but context matters, controversial stuff can need quite a lot of refs. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:52, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång, ok thank you! Undead Shambles 🧟‍♀️ (talk) 22:07, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm rather surprised those shining examples are used, as "pretty big" and "quite hot" are rather a long way from WP:TONE.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:10, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Also, while the sun is "pretty big" from the perspective of a planet, is it considered "pretty big" among other suns? David notMD (talk) 10:49, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

"A virus is what we doctors call "very very small"." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:55, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Undead Shambles: Per MOS:REFPUNC, The sun is pretty big[1] and quite hot.[2] is also acceptable, as the citations follow right after what information they give. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:52, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Thanks! I think I will try out using that form more, for clarity. Undead Shambles 🧟‍♀️ (talk) 22:07, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Question about adding information to existing Wikipedia pages

I am new to editing Wikipedia pages. I've gone in to a few pages and added quotes, citations, photos, and links. These are all subjects, musicians, that I know intimately, follow, and have a strong working knowledge of. Someone named DanCherek just went in and deleted almost everything I added saying "please don't copy and paste numerous lengthy quotes into articles, per Wikipedia:Overquoting..."

I'm a professional journalist, writer, and publicist who has been working in and with the music industry for 15 years. I have a working knowledge of the subjects in the Wikipedia pages I'm editing. I'm adding descriptive content and adding good informative information to the Wikipedia page. But someone can just come in and delete perfectly good information that's legal to use, free of copyright issue?

I'm not trying to argue, but this seems a little silly.

The quotes and information I added to the pages only helps further the description of the artist, which was lacking before. These are musicians, and I'm adding press quotes from sources. It's all informative and furthers the description of the artist. I cite the article and list the source. I'm not stealing any copyrighted information. Showing the publication the quote only helps.

So if musician has been putting out albums for over 20 years, I can't put quotes from several publications that describe those releases? I can't put a quote from a review or preview of a concert? This is all informative, and adds value to the Wikipedia page, which is lacking.

Can someone help me get these quotes restored into the pages I edited?

Here is my response to Dan-

"Hey Dan,

Don't mean to argue with you, but in my opinion, the quotes I added were not that lengthy. The articles, quotes, photos, and citations I'm adding are all informative, and aid in describing the subject of the Wikipedia page. The information I quoted was in fact summarized and boiled down. You just removed a bunch of concise descriptions that describe the artist and add information about the artist. They were quoted from articles, and the publications were all cited and listed. These are from articles that have already been published, and I'm citing the article, so yes they are copyrighted, but I'm not stealing the information. I'm listing it, and it adds value and deeper understanding of the artist. Can you please put the page back as I edited it? Thanks. GordsAndMore GordsAndMore (talk) 18:07, 23 July 2021 (UTC)" GordsAndMore (talk) 18:30, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, GordsAndMore. Including short quotes in articles can be appropriate, but if this addition you made is representative of what you've been doing, then I agree with it being reverted. Those sorts of epigraph quotes don't fit Wikipedia's style. For an example of how to incorporate quotes into a music article, see Wish You Were Here (Pink Floyd album)#Critical reception. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:36, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi GordsAndMore! I'll respond here rather than on your talk page to centralize discussion. As I said, I appreciate your contributions and I apologize for causing you distress. In addition to what Cordless Larry mentions above, there's generally not a need to paste several paragraphs from a news article, like here from Rolling Stone, because readers can easily click on the source and access the original text. I would say that a quote of that length is in excess of what the non-free content criteria reasonably permit. Instead, it's best to summarize information in original prose and then provide a citation to the original source. Hope that makes sense. DanCherek (talk) 18:43, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Hey thanks for response. In my opinion the quotes add information and description that was lacking. They show the artist has been reviewed by major media sources, KEXP, and The Seattle Times. I know this artist and his work well. I've followed him for years. Reverting the article to the way it was leaves it lacking information.

Dan advised me to "summarize" in my own words, but the point of adding a quote, is to show the quote verbatim. And show where the quote is from. These quotes are from writers and and editors who say it better than I could anyway. I want to use their exact words.

But Wikipedia doesn't allow people to do this? GordsAndMore (talk) 18:45, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Quotes are allowed, GordsAndMore, but they should be introduced and contextualised; see, for instance, how they're done in that article I suggested as an example. They also shouldn't appear right at the start of an article - see WP:LEDE. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:50, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I've personally found Wikipedia:Copyediting reception sections to be a really helpful guide on how to write a reception section that integrates quotes and original text. I think the quotes that you have compiled would be a great start for writing such a section, which would be an improvement over just listing quotes one after another, so please don't feel like your previous work (which is viewable from the page history) has gone to waste. Best, DanCherek (talk) 18:52, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks again for responses. I guess I'm confused. The point of putting a quote is to not summarize it in my own language. The point is to use the exact language in the quote, and list the source, and link to the article if possible. I'm not going overboard with my length, I don't think. I'm using one or two sentence quotes, in bullet point format. It's easy and quick to read. It's not confusing, and it adds great description. I found the Pink Floyd article Cordless Larry cited to be way too long and jumbled.

So, is it possible to add a new section or sub heading of "Press", and list the quotes in bullet point there?

And if I want to use a block quote, because I think it adds great information and is descriptive, I'll limit that to one short paragraph. But it seems that will get pulled down.

Also, I've contacted a couple of the artists and writers myself, and asked if I could make the specific changes that I made. And they said, "Please." He said please add the links and the quotes to the articles I put in. But they've been taken down.

It would seem like Wikipedia would not want people to just come in someone's page and "summarize" information with their own language. If there's a quote, that's great, it seems like the quote would better left to stand on its own. Listing and citing the source.

For the block quotes I used, I contacted the writer and asked if I could use it. They said, "Of course." These are from articles that have already been published. I'm citing and linking to them. There is no copyright issue.GordsAndMore (talk) 19:14, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

GordsAndMore Hello. If you are in communication with the subjects of your edits, that would be a conflict of interest. Edits are typically made without any involvement from the subject. What the others have told you is correct and I urge you to heed their advice. Quotes are fine when done properly, but Wikipedia primarily exists to summarize what independent reliable sources state. 331dot (talk) 19:20, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Conflict of interest? I contacted sources to verify information to make sure it was correct. The information that was on the page was in 1 case wrong, and in other cases was missing information. I'm not trying to argue with anyone here. I've done nothing wrong, good lord. I'm trying to simply add information to these pages. GordsAndMore (talk) 19:34, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

As a professional journalist, I presume you're familiar with style guides, GordsAndMore? You can read Wikipedia's at WP:MOS. What you're trying to add doesn't really fit that. Wish You Were Here (Pink Floyd album) is a featured article, which means it's considered one of the best on Wikipedia; if you don't like or want to write in that style or to that structure, then perhaps Wikipedia isn't the best outlet for your writing. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:21, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

You seem to mean a WP:QUOTEFARM, that's not generally wanted. About "It would seem like Wikipedia would not want people to just come in someone's page and "summarize" information with their own language." All articles are Wikipedia's. What we don't want is an article subject editing the WP-article about them/their works however they want, see WP:Conflict of interest. They are, however, welcome to suggest changes/refs on talkpages. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:25, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I think that part of the issue here is that you're just having some teething issues making the transition from journalistic/publicist style writing to encyclopaedic style writing. Generally we wouldn't include a list of quotes from various publications in an article, what we would do is create a "Critical reception" section which contains an overview of how the album/recording was received, and that may include small quotations to illustrate specific points. E.g. "Album X was positively received by critics, with particular praise for A, B, and C. <include sources here> Writing in "example publication" example journalist wrote that the <insert musical feature> was <insert quote from review> <insert source> ...". Rather than providing a WP:QUOTEFARM of snippets to decorate the article they're all tied together in a way that provides an overview of how the music was received by both contemporary and recent critics, with specific quotes being chosen to illustrate specific points. It's not easy to make the transition to a completely different style of writing, it's something a lot of editors struggle with. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 19:34, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I am familiar with style guides. All I was saying was I prefer a bullet point style list of quotes. Instead of mashing it all up together into one longer paragraph that's a little hard to read. Not trying to argue with you. I've never edited Wikipedia pages before. Seems like it shouldn't be that big of a deal to add simple bullet point list of one or two sentence quotes. I will study the guide.GordsAndMore (talk) 19:34, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for all responses. Appreciate the help. GordsAndMore (talk) 19:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

GordsAndMore You said that "I've contacted a couple of the artists and writers myself, and asked if I could make the specific changes that I made. And they said, "Please." That counts as a conflict of interest. I'm not trying to hassle you, I just want to help you avoid problems. As I said, edits here are typically made without any involvement from the subject. They cannot grant or deny permission to use publicly available information on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 19:58, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Is there someone who can help me properly make the following additions? Thanks :

- Pillar Point has a song that CNN uses for theme music on the Anderson Cooper Full Circle show. The song "Echoes" off the 2013 self-titled album.

- The Pillar Point live band has included Lena Simon, Trent Moorman, and Terence Ankeny. KEXP featured performances in 2016 and in 2013.

- Graig Markel makes a line of effect pedals in Seattle called Recovery Effects and Devices. (Cite) GordsAndMore (talk) 20:51, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi GordsAndMore. Generally, the article talk page is a good place to ask for help with things like the above. You can make a formal edit request or you can simply post a message at Talk:Pillar Point (band) and basically post the same thing you posted above. Since there seem to multiple editors currently monitoring the page, you'll probably get a relatively quick response. As for the COI stuff, you might want to at least read through Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure even if you don't believe you have a conflict of interest with respect to the band or its members just to familiarize yourself with some things about Wikipedia that you might not know. Even though Wikipedia doesn't expressly prohibit COI editing, it does highly discourage it because it can sometimes lead to other problems that can take lots of time and effort to try and sort out. Undisclosed paid editing is something, however, that is expressly prohibited and is one way in which an editor can find themselves being blocked. Please understand I'm not accusing you of doing anything inappropriate, but even an apparrent COI can lead to to other editors (mistakenly) assuming the worst case scenario. So, it can be best to slow down a bit and try to address any concerns being raised by others and maybe err on the side of caution until things get sorted out.

Finally, I've got a question about File:Pillar Point Scott.jpg that you uploaded to Commons. You've uploaded this under a claim of "own work" which on Commons means that you took the photo yourself. It's a pretty high quality photo that seems to have been taken as part of some photo shoot. If you did take this photo, then thank you for uploading it; however, I'm assuming that when you uploaded it that you were aware of c:Commons:Licensing, c:Commons:Consent and c:Commons:License revocation and agree to what's written on those pages. By uploading your photo as you did, you're basically agreeing to allow anyone anywhere in the world to download the photo from Commons at anytime and use for any purpose (including commercial and derivative use) as long as the comply with the terms of the license you chose. Any non-copyright related restrictions you might want to put in place with respect to the photo's reuse aren't a concern of Commons and you're the person who's going to have to try and resolve things if you think others are inappropriately using your photo. It is because of this type of thing, that you need to be copyright holder of a photo if you want to upload it to Commons like you did, and therefore it might be a good idea for you to follow the instructions in c:Commons:Wikimedia OTRS release generator to make sure there can be no doubt about that you took the photo. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:46, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Marchjuly. Thank you for your response. I am most definitely not being paid by anyone to do anything here. No one had any idea I'm doing any of this. I reached out to people to verify information. Because I didn't want to add information that wasn't fact checked. I guess it is a habit from my journalism work. The artist I called, makes effect pedals. It is an important facet and evolution of his knowledge and work and skill. His Wikipedia page made no mention of it. I just wanted to check it out with him, the source. There is an article from The Seattle Times about it that I link to. My only intention was to help his Wikipedia page and make it a fuller representation of who this artist is and what they do. The reason I edited these Wikipedia pages is that I have knowledge of these artists. When I see Wikipedia pages that are not up to date or lacking in information, my only aim is to make them current, or update them with more information or details. I have no monetary or nefarious motives. I will check out the COI stuff you pointed me to, thanks. I will not reach out to anyone about editing Wikipedia pages from now on.

And yes. I took the photo I uploaded to the Pillar Point page. I am fine with people downloading it for whatever, as is the subject. I will check out the OTRS release generator, thanks.GordsAndMore (talk) 23:53, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

THE MOST IMPORTANT PAGE AT WIKIPEDIA - HELP!!!!!!!!!!!

I run the largest network of websites covering climate and infrastructure, science, education, K-12, politics and Tech classes for kids on Earth - over 200 domains spanning 30,000 pages I've personally authored over the past 22 years. Naturally, I thank Wikipedia for a lot of the content I've added. You do a fine job indeed.

One of the sites I run is the main website for the most influential "Teen" of our time and Time Magazine's 2019 Person of the Year - Greta Thunberg - specifically, www.GretaThunberg.org and www.GretaThunberg.com and a specific link that's rather bad/sad news for your day is www.GretaThunberg.org/?classes which explains in rather gory details of physics, oceanography, chemistry and geology "All life including humans will be extinct in well under a decade, perhaps just a few years." ... a gut-wrenching revelation indeed.

It is a premise and "prediction" only contested by scientists who deny the NASA and NOAA graphs on that page which have TREND LINES - a basic math tool any 12 year old child can use to predict the future through extrapolation - i.e. following a trend line off the graph to predict where it will be in 1, 5, 10 or 100 years.

Tis true many scientists will argue with that "prediction" and also true if they overlay graphs creating a quadratic equation they'll find FEEDBACK LOOPS, such as rising methane emissions, loss of albedo, ocean acidification which is killing coral reefs and plankton, thereby reducing ocean oxygen production, the ongoing disaster in the Amazon and other rain forests, further reducing oxygen production and a host of over 50 similar TREND LINES, when overlayed the graph produced shows we're toast unless we take drastic, rapid, immediate action.

To accomplish that people need to be educated and with Wikipedia being a top source for reliable information it's important to have a section on the CLIMATE PAGE titled: BEST CASE and WORST CASE which starts with the scientific tool of a CONE OF POSSIBILITIES. When predicting the future, i.e. where a hurricane will strike land, scientists use this tool to predict "the odds of this outcome or that outcome" and then back up their prediction with current evidence and past events, as well as math models supporting why a curve on a graph (or line on a map in our hurricane example) is supported by the math. I spent 40 years developing these "MATH TOOLS" for hospitals, utilities, heads of state, the United Nations and for NASA scientists and it's not hard to do when you take a simple approach.

The CURRENT methods for analyzing the past and present state of the climate, as well as PREDICTIONS, such as those made by the IPCC generally fails to take into account this OVERLAPPING QUADRATIC EQUATION OF FEEDBACKS which enhance or suppress other trend lines. I would suggest given the drastic - terminal - nature of the consequences of a failure to analyze both BEST CASE AND WORST CASE outcomes, Wikipedia might contribute to the solution by including this CONE OF POSSIBILITIES section or name it BEST CASE AND WORST CASE, and then include in the worst case section scientists who agree with my predictions - there are quite a few - and more moderate scientists - the majority - who refuse to state the worst case situation - and then of course the scientists who deny there's much of a problem.

Allow these scientists to provide their data - graphs and real time measurements - and discussions - a fat page indeed for the most important issue humanity has ever faced.

I would be happy to help either build this section or look at edits as they come in, but the link I provided above at Greta's website is a starting point for you - kind reader - so you'll recognize "Time's Up" and all life including humans is about to go extinct unless we improve our response to this crisis, accelerate the roll out of solutions, throw everything including the kitchen sink at dodging the extinction bullet and refuse to allow anyone to suppress IDEAS which can assist humanity on this journey to extinction or salvation, as the case may be.

If you read this far - congratulations - you're aware things are unfolding "faster than previously expected", which is the most common statement among scientists who do NOT believe we're about to go extinct. That FACT should be a warning sign to everyone; that scientists monitoring this crisis are caught off-guard again and again every week, month and year for well over a decade now. This EVIDENCE of their failure to predict the SPEED of this unfolding event suggests what I propose here is both valid and critical to our survival.

I again suggest Wikipedia is an ideal platform for saving our species and millions of other lifeforms on Earth today and (ahem) suggest if you fail or shirk from both your wonderful opportunity to provide this BOOST or ASSIST or if through some internal office discussion you decide it's too touchy, controversial or otherwise beyond your capabilities then you will prove a THEORY I have that 99.99% of humans lack the intellect to deal with a planetary crisis and therefore our odds we will go extinct, whether in 5, 10, 50 or 1000 years is near-certain.

Prove my theory wrong - pa....leeez - and create a wonderfully rich dialogue where scientists and writers, biologists, oceanographers, geologists, physicists and others can share ideas, transform erroneous conclusions based on faulty or incomplete data sets, and together, create the tool that pulls us out of this nose dive.

Or don't...and see how that turns out.

My email is owlnationlegal@gmail.com - write if you want to get this project flying...and we need it to fly. Shuffling along at this point will prove fatal "sooner than previously predicted". Sorry to be the messenger. 172.58.92.243 (talk) 18:03, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a "slow project"; as a tertiary source, it mostly consolidates information from reliable secondary sources, which takes time to build.
Allow these scientists to provide their data - graphs and real time measurements - and discussions - a fat page indeed for the most important issue humanity has ever faced.
This isn't the place for discussions about global issues, and raw data isn't useful here unless it's been mentioned in something like a literary review.

I would also add that your... persuasive approach is very off-putting, especially when you blatantly antagonise people who don't (or haven't) subscribe to your views. I'm not particularly inclined to help if I haven't heard about TREND LINES - a basic math tool any 12 year old child can use to predict the future through extrapolation - i.e. following a trend line off the graph to predict where it will be in 1, 5, 10 or 100 years.

pa....leeez isn't endearing, and Or don't...and see how that turns out. sounds threatening.

Your proposal sounds like it would be better suited for a promotional venue, which Wikipedia is not. Have you considered social media like Instagram or Facebook? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:21, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse. I'm afraid that what you propose falls afoul of several of Wikipedia's core content policies, namely that Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought and that Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. If you want your theories to be included in the article on climate change you will need to get them published in reliable, secondary sources (like peer reviewed scientific journals or textbooks), at which point they can be added to the article. See WP:SCHOLARSHIP for the types of academic sources that are preferred when writing articles. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 18:35, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Adding to the above, you may want to consider Wikipedia:Directory of alternative outlets. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:11, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

To be succinct, right idea, wrong place. David notMD (talk) 00:06, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion even though everything nuetral

Hi there! Would LOVE some guidance. I read through how to write a good, neutral article. I wrote the piece about a colleague with just the facts. And yet, I it still got taken down bc it "reads more like an advertisement." Short of removing facts (books he's published, places he's performed etc), I don't know what to remove to make it seem less advertising. This guy is a super awesome, talented colleague and has certainly accomplished enough (and then some) that people search for him on the internet. PLease help!! I want to follow the rules and I want to be successful in publishing about him. Thank YOUUUUU! Iedit4life (talk) 05:18, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Bryonn Bain Maproom (talk) 07:07, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Find more that is written ABOUT him; documenting what he has written/performed is useful, but does not establish notability in the Wikipedia sense of the word. David notMD (talk) 10:07, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I had to look up what W considers notable too, Iedit4life. Short version (if I'm reading this right), we need significant coverage from reliable sources, preferably second sources (like someone reporting on the original work), that are independent from the source. So I guess TLDR, your friend can have an article after they've had some reviews or news articles from something other than close friends. If you have sources like that, try focusing on those? // [NomadicVoxel] [_talk\^ctbs] 20:30, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I can take a look. I think part of the problem was that first reviewers looked at the summary and saw what seemed to be a promotion of a recent work (Lyrics from Lockdown), which didn't reference secondary sources (i.e., didn't show that it had received a lot of media attention.) My impression is that he is well-known as an author/playwright and performer (Voza Rivers called his works "excellent"^[1]) and that he's been interviewed and quoted pretty extensively about his political/policy area of expertise thanks to his notability as an author.^[2]^[3] Basically, to pass scrutiny, the article needs to be written from the perspective of "what do secondary sources say about this person" and not "what works has this person created/where have they performed". Those television appearances might work better as sources than as works. Michaeltyu (talk) 00:08, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

I just changed a reference to the specific policy agenda in my statement above to avoid sidetracking the conversation. Michaeltyu (talk) 00:19, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

References

^ Bailey, A. Peter (8 Feb 2014). "Black History Month: African-American playwrights examine life, act by act". New York Daily News. Retrieved 23 July 2021.
^ "Obama election shook old assumptions, wasn't the end of racial barriers in America". MSNBC.com. Retrieved 2021-07-23.
^ "Does there need to be a 'fight for black men?'". MSNBC.com. Retrieved 2021-07-23.

Flight 3

Hi, I have created some Category:Flight number disambiguation pages and was going to do the same with Flight 3, but the page already exists, what should I do? GrahamHardy (talk) 23:47, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@GrahamHardy: Welcome to the Teahouse! If the comic is the primary topic, you could create Flight 3 (disambiguation). Otherwise, you could also change Flight 3 to make it a disambiguation page with a link to Flight (comics) or List of volumes of Flight, change the WikiProject on Talk:Flight 3, and change the link on Dave Roman to [[Flight (comics)|Flight 3]] or [[List of volumes of Flight|Flight 3]]. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:41, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Jose Hurtado (UX/UI Designer)

Looking for some help or advices to proceed with this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jose_Hurtado Joselhurtado (talk) 20:10, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Joselhurtado: and welcome to the Teahouse. On Wikipedia we require independent secondary sources to verify any information contained in an article. Wikipedia can not source itself to create notability for a particular subject. I would recommend you look at WP:AUTOBIO. --ARose Wolf 20:15, 23 July 2021 (UTC) --20:30, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Joselhurtado In no particular order: Start with reading WP:BASIC. If you don't have the sources demanded there, write about something else. If WP:COI applies to you, follow the guidance there. You sourced the sentence "Jose Hurtado (born August 30th 1980) is a Venezuelan graphic designer, visual artist, and art director based in Miami, Florida." to WP:s Miami article. A, WP can't be used as a source on WP, and B, the source doesn't support the content, which is the point of a source. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:20, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Joselhurtado, what both ARoseWolf and Gråbergs Gråa Sång have said to you is accurate, what i would like to add is, an article about yourself on Wikipedia although intriguing is not necessarily a good thing. Read WP:FAMOUS, the reason is you become open to both the positives and the negatives as this collaborative project maintains a WP:BALANCE(the article would not be “yours” and anyone would be able to edit it), We are always here and are happy to answer more questions if you have any. Celestina007 (talk) 20:27, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Joselhurtado, it seems that candy products that Hurtado helped promote and market , won industry backscratching awards at two candy makers conventions. Is that it? I cannot find his name in those links. I am sorry, but what is required are several reliable independent sources that devote significant coverage to Hurtado as a person. Things like where he was born, where he was educated, his career trajectory, his unique contributions, and so on. Are you this person? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:54, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Creating a New Page

Courtesy link: User:Carol Chenkin/sandbox

Hello,

I created an article in my sandbox and then clicked publish. Will this automatically create the page? How will I know once the page is under review / being approved?

Thanks! Carol Chenkin (talk) 19:53, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Carol Chenkin: Hello, Welcome to the teahouse!

The "Publish" button on Wikipedia really means "save". Your page is currently located in your sandbox User:Carol Chenkin/sandbox, to submit it for review click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page, at which point an experienced editor will look at the article and decide if it's ready to be moved to the main encyclopaedia.

As it stands your article would be instantly rejected, unfortunately, because it is a biography of a living person that is completely unsourced. Any material in a biography must be referenced to a reliable source, see referencing for beginners for guidance. In addition the sourcing in the article must show that Max Schachter meets Wikipedia's definition of a notable person, i.e. that several reliable sources independent of the subject have chosen to write about them. Your first article gives some good guidance on how to write a successful page. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 20:01, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Carol Chenkin: In addition, if you have relationship with Schachter or are being paid to create an article for him, you need to disclose that on your user page (see WP:DISCLOSECOI). Your user page is for information about your Wikipedia activities, not for an article draft (see WP:USERPAGE). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:02, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Carol Chenkin Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you want to submit the draft, click the blue "Submit your draft for review!" button, then "publish" again (I think). However, your draft will not be accepted in it's current form. I recommend WP:BLP on what is demanded from a WP-article about a living person, and WP:TUTORIAL on how to add inline citations, which are essential. If you can't source it, don't add it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:05, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome Carol, your draft lacks notability and verifiability, Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 03:23, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Page recently deleted

Hi, I want to create a neutral, non-promotional page for Thomas Schumann Capital. I left an edit request on the talk page. Is there anything else I can do? Russell5495 (talk) 19:44, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Russell5495 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Edit requests are for existing articles, not drafts. You may create a draft article just as you did the first time, but you will need to change your approach. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Wikipedia has no interest in what a company wants to say about itself, only in what others completely unconnected with the company have chosen on their own to say about it, so no press releases, announcements of routine business activities, brief mentions, interviews, or other primary sources. In order for you to succeed in writing about your company, you need to set aside everything you know about it and all materials put out by the company, and only write based on the content of independent sources. Most people in your position have great difficulty with that. Please see Your first article. 331dot (talk) 19:52, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Russell5495: Welcome to the Teahouse! Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, especially when you have a conflict of interest (that you kindly disclosed on your user page). You can also use Wikipedia:Requested articles to request that someone without a conflict of interest create the article. However, there is no guarantee that anyone will ever create the article. GoingBatty (talk) 19:55, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Russell5495 You can write a new draft, and when you think it's ready, submit it for review. If WP:COI/WP:PAID applies to you, please follow the guidance there. These links may be of help: WP:NORG, WP:YFA and WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:57, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Make a draft for a thorough review first to prevent writing a lacklustre article... Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 03:24, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Can i now submit my draft for review?

I have added the sources on my draft about badhangarhi temple can i now submit it , before submitting can anyone check my draft that it will be get accepted or rejected by Wikipedia? Yakku3 (talk) 14:09, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Badhangarhi temple GoingBatty (talk) 15:53, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Yakku3: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can add {{subst:AfC draft}} to the top of your draft to get the template you'll need to submit it. I'll make some suggestions at your draft. GoingBatty (talk) 15:57, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Yakku3: You followed GoingBatty's advice but added "nowiki" tags so that the draft was not actually submitted. I've removed them so it is now awaiting review. Good luck . Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:07, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: when you fix broken submit templates, please make sure that you specify the user param, like so: {{subst:submit|user=username}}. Otherwise the substitution will record you as the person who submitted the draft for review, which means that you will get the accept/decline/reject message and not whoever attempted to submit it (so Yakku3 in this case), which is not the intended effect. I have fixed this particular instance, but in future try to keep this in mind. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:15, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Apologies, Victor Schmidt, sometimes my attempts to be helpful backfire on me! Next time I'll just guide the user how to do this themselves.... Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:18, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: soory brother you got scolded because of me:( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yakku3 (talk • contribs) 17:44, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Yakku3: No problem. We all make mistakes and can't learn much unless we do and someone politely points out how to avoid making the same error in future. In that spirit, I would comment that your "ping" of me here didn't work, since you forgot on this occasion to sign your new posting with the four keyboard tildes, ~~~~, which you need to do routinely on all Talk Pages. Here at the Teahouse the software will usually add your signature automatically if you forget but most Talk pages don't work like that and only by signing do the pings or mentions get activated. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:08, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Mike Turnbull yes we learn with our faults, i am a beginner in wiki so i don't have any idea about ~~~~

(Said in a scolding tone ;-) When following advice about what to do, Yakku3, you need to remove the "nowiki" tags added by your tutor to each side of the actual text you need to use. The response you just made still didn't work correctly because you signed with the nowiki tags in place at each end of the four tildes. That had the effect of displaying them literally in the text rather than invoking the magic bit of programming that adds signatures. That was the same mistake that led to the submission of your draft not working yesterday. Try again to ping me! Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:41, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: sorry but what is tutor , there is any viedio from which i can learn all these <Yakku3>Yakku3 (talk) 17:55, 23 July 2021 (UTC)</Yakku3>

See Tutoring, Yakku3. That ping worked fine! There may be YouTube videos on how to edit Wikipedia but in my opinion the best way to learn is just to do as you have been since you created an account: edit a lot of existing articles and occasionally create new ones. Keep an eye on the Teahouse to see what common items come up: that will familiarise you to the policies and you'll soon gain experience. Ask on my Talk page if you have any more questions and I'll try to answer there. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:39, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: thanks for giving me information about these things Yakku3 (talk) 05:04, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Page creation protected to sysops

Hello, a page I was to create has been protected to be created by Admins only. I checked the reason and found that since 2014 (when the page was protected) the subject didn't meet notability criteria, but it does in my opinion. Where can I request the protection be removed? Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 18:03, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Lightbluerain: Hello, Welcome to the teahouse! Requests for unprotecting a page should be made in the "Current requests for reduction in protection level" section of Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. If the page was protected due to repeated recreation despite lack of notability it is generally recommended that you have a draft of the article prepared, with sourcing that shows that the subject now qualifies for a Wikipedia article. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 18:14, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 18:16, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I'll say that a little differently from the IP, Lightbluerain. My general advice to all editors on creating articles is "Unless you are confident that you can write something in one go that is good enough to be accepted as an article, use the articles for creation process". If the subject you want to write about has been ed, you will need to convince the editors who argued for deletion (several times) that the sources now exist; so I strongly advise you to use AFC to create a draft. This will have the additional bonus that you don't have to worry about the salting: when a reviewer accepts your draft, they will handle moving it to the right title. --ColinFine (talk) 23:00, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 06:36, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Chokerian

i wrote a page named chokerian.the page is no go to publish why? Rai Haseeb Nasir (talk) 05:02, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Chokerian ─ The Aafī ^{^(talk)} 05:05, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Rai Haseeb Nasir: Welcome to the Teahouse. There are absolutely no references, which are crucial for an article. It has a long way to go before it can even be considered passable. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:15, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

You cannot use wording such as most beautiful and popular, as those are your opinions. David notMD (talk) 11:00, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Can I?

Can I use a single account for contributing and logging in, in all wiki startups? Does Wiki softwares like Schoolwiki have this feature? VNHRISHIKESH (talk) 06:49, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@VNHRISHIKESH: Welcome to the Teahouse. Your account is globally linked to all other Wikimedia projects, such as the other language Wikipedias, Metawiki, and Commons. Keep in mind that there are non-Wikimedia wikis like FANDOM, which are out of Wikimedia's purview and your account. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:04, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@VNHRISHIKESH: See Wikimedia Foundation#Wikimedia projects for a longer list. Schoolwiki is not a Wikimedia project so your account doesn't work there. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:06, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you!

Really appreciate you getting in touch! Still a bit uncertain with the formatting/code I need to use but gradually getting to grips with it. Great to know I have a place to go to ask any questions down the line. Leyton2021 (talk) 16:14, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Leyton2021: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you have any specific questions about the formatting/code you're using, feel free to ask here and we'll be happy to help you. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:17, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, really appreciate it— Preceding unsigned comment added by Leyton2021 (talk • contribs) 16:18, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Leyton2021: Hello Leyton2021! If you're just learning wiki mark-up the Cheat sheet (Help:Cheatsheet) is really useful to keep open - it shows most of the common formatting you'll come across in articles and talk pages. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:55, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Perfect, thank you!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Leyton2021 (talk • contribs) 12:04, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

image copyright

i have found https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Myra_Landau.jpg suitable to transfer to commons wiki. however, most of the images contain fair usage ( something similar i did not remember correctly). my main query: is this image acceptable on en wikipedia? Agyaanapan (talk) 18:11, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Agyaanapan. When that image was uploaded to the English Wikipedia in 2005 and used in the article Myra Landau, she was still alive (she died in 2018). Under current WP:FAIRUSE rules for images, we would not allow images of living people to be uploaded here under these terms. However, as you note, this particular image seems to be correctly licenced so that it could be moved to Commons and you would be helping the project if you were to do so now. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:30, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

hello Mike Turnbull successfully imported file to commons wiki. -Agyaanapan (talk) 00:48, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi again, Agyaanapan. Thanks. The article in English still seems to use the original version, not the copy now on Commons: perhaps you have to delete the old file for that to happen (since the file name in the infobox is the same)? One advantage of having the image on Commons is that it can now be used on the Welsh- and Arabic-language versions of her biography. I confess that I'm not familiar enough with those languages to make those additions but perhaps someone will read this thread and do it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:20, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

hi Mike Turnbull, the file seems to be tagged for deletion with diff commit. it says "Files that have been tagged with this template may be deleted after satisfying conditions of CSD F8. " i hope everything is right now. -Agyaanapan (talk) 12:37, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

This ain't real!

Previous discussion : #*NOTICE*

As I said, @FlightGlobal 2021 report are fake, either guesses or low-rate intelligence publishes, how can China only have 5 intelligence plane of 1970s era when JSDAF intercepted dozens of Y-9s. Let alone misleading statistic, they missed a lot of models and someone call @FOX still want to challenge me with the unreliable sources. The point is, the source is unreliable, and how in the world the numbers with both the article of PLAAF and J-20 (numbers built @j-20) (statistic) is different. FOX threaten to ban me but c'mon people, this is a clearly biased report.

@PAGE: PLAAF Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 03:09, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

when j-20 in plaaf page have a number of 19, and others rose above and beyond.... am I in a different realm? Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 03:18, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Hypersonic man 11: Welcome to the Teahouse! The appropriate place for content discussions is on the article talk page, as you have been doing on Talk:People's Liberation Army Air Force. I suggest you provide reliable sources during your talk page discussions. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:39, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

I did when I edit until FOX threatened to ban me. Besides, there aren't any reliable sources and the concealing policy within PLA made me wrote Unknown and number disclosed. Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 09:55, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Hypersonic man 11 FOX 52 did no such thing. They merely warned you about removing what they believed to be reliable sources (whether the sources are truly reliable is beside the point). The warning is simply a warning, not a threat. Furthermore, it made no mention of a ban, but rather a block, which is far less serious than a ban. - ZLEA _T\^C 13:12, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

vandalism on Tereza de Arriaga?

i have found words "HELIOBURGOS, BIOHÉLIOS, BIOBURGOS" i am unable to find english equivalents for words. what is the quickest way to find who and when a particular word and sentence is added? in these kind of situations, what is the best course of action? or what are the steps required to find information? Agyaanapan (talk) 03:22, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Agyaanapan: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you're using Chrome or Firefox, you can install the Who Wrote That? extension on your browser to find out who wrote certain content. There's more information provided at the link I gave. In any case, I added a {{tone}} maintenance tag to it, as the writing is unencyclopedic. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:14, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Agyaanapan, there are no direct English equivalents to these three words because they are inventions in Portugese by the Portugese-speaking subject of the article, relating to her art. Their meanings in this context are explained (with citations to sources) at some length in the same paragraph that they are first used – I see no problem with this, though I agree with Tenryuu that the article needs some copyediting work. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.27.141 (talk) 14:49, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

article keeps being declined saying musician isn't meeting 'notability for musicians'

Courtesy link: Draft:Kay Nine Tha Boss

I have been writing and rewriting this article on Kay nine Tha Boss,but it keeps being declined iwth this message: This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Any and ALL help would be appreciated. I've cited several puclished articles on him with in the write up. See below:

Article content

Brandon Clarence Lillard (born June 25, 1986), better known by his stage name Kay Nine Tha Boss is an American rapper from Santa Ana.Emerging from the West Coast Hip Hop scene in the mid-2000's, Kay Nine independently released his debut album "Reality Check" in 2010.

Music Career:

Touted as "being one of today's most well seasoned artists^[1]" by Sha be Allah of The Source, Kay Nine overcame struggles early on in life such as incarceration and went onto collaborate with many artists including ^[2] : Mozzy, Suga Free, Compton AD, TeeFlii, Arsonal Da Rebel, Ice-T, Kokane, Jayo Felony; and to perform with artists such as^[3]: Snoop Dogg, Chris Brown, Ice Cube, Nipsey Hussle, E-40, and Too Short.

Kay Nine Tha Boss released his debut album, “Reality Check”^[4] in 2010. He followed up with the album “Tha Backstreets” in the Fall of 2011^[5]. His summer hit “On the Set”, was released in 2013^[6]. Kay Nine then went on to b a featured artist in the XXL Freshman 2015 magazine^[7].

Kay Nine signed his first distribution deal in may of 2019 with Spice 1 and under his label Thug Word Music Group/Sony The Orchard. Under that label Kay nine released his first single "No Cap featuring Q Bosilini, followed by “King Me” Feat. Spice 1, “Lil Bihh" Feat. X-Raided, “Nothin” Feat. Mozzy & Frost4Eva^[8].

Kay Nine released his latest album “Clarity” Jan. 5th, 2021.

References

DeeMoney32 (talk) 15:43, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi DeeMoney32 and welcome to the Teahouse. Statements like the opening sentence aren't the sort of tone that is used in Wikipedia articles; Wikipedia is not to be used to advertise or promote anyone: see Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion (or use the shortcut WP:PROMOTION). As for notability, the subject of the article must be given significant coverage in reliable sources. Wikipedia: Notability (music) is helpful concerning this. The current sources wouldn't be considered reliable. Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Some_types_of_sources has some good examples of reliable sources; they are sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. A reliable source could be something like BBC News or CNN talking about this person, for example. I think news sources would be well-suited to this type of article but they need to be reliable. Thanks, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 16:38, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Should this table be added?

There is a table of 183 members of the regional council in this article, whose translation I am creating. It has a proper citation, but my concern is should I add it? Because I don't think a list of over 100 ministers is of any use. Excellenc1📞 15:42, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Excellenc1, I would just include the number of councillors in each party. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 16:41, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Editing

How can I add images/videos to wikimedia? Jessica J 2009 (talk) 16:42, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jessica J 2009: can you tell us more about what type of images/videos you want to upload? We can only use copyrighted materials in very limited cases, and images are copyrighted by default in most countries. Freely licensed images can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, and non-free images are only permitted on Wikipedia directly (not Commons) if they meet the very stringent non-free content criteria. See Wikipedia:Uploading images for more. — Bilorv (talk) 16:45, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Article was declined, how can I improve it?

Hello kind souls! I've submitted this article for creation: Draft:Melvin Poh I believe it was written neutrally and the subject has notoriety with a lot of verifiable sources available online. Yet it was declined, can anyone please guide me specifically as to how I can make it better and acceptable? What are some of the key areas holding it back? I am new this, truly appreciate any guidance. Joontingyewling (talk) 09:03, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Joontingyewling Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. A Wikipedia article is not for just telling about a person and what they do. It must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person(not "notoriety" which can have a negative connotation). Many of the sources you offer seem to be about his business, not him personally. Others seem to be press release type stories or routine coverage, none of these things establish notability. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 09:08, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the response! Sorry my English isn't the best. I meant to mean notability*. In that case, do you suggest I remove some of the sources? Or shorten the overall article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joontingyewling (talk • contribs) 09:23, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Joontingyewling I would concentrate on finding the three independent reliable sources with the most significant coverage of this man personally(not simply his businesses), and summarize what those sources say. Again, we don't just want to know what they do, but why others say it is significant. Wikipedia much prefers fewer sources of high quality, rather than many sources of low quality. 331dot (talk) 09:30, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

331dot, I really really appreciate your input. That makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the suggestion. In regards to high quality sources vs low quality sources, could you kindly let me know which. I read the Wiki guide. I would have thought these suffice. I am rather confused because since this person is a notable entrepreneur from my country(Malaysia), and many of the sources I used are notable ones in my country, news/media coverage; which sources would you suggest are the low quality ones? Since he is not an academic, so I can't cite journals or other academic type sources. I am sorry if I sound stupid, this is very new to me. I thought I did a good job previously haha. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joontingyewling (talk • contribs) 09:36, 24 July 2021 (UTC):We are here to help. I am stepping away for a bit, but there are many knowledgeable people here to help who can answer. 331dot (talk) 09:42, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Hoping to get more input from others :) I am doing my best. Made some edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joontingyewling (talk • contribs) 11:48, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

One guide to what's needed is that there should be significant coverage of the person in sources that have good editorial control. Common ones are listed at WP:RSPS. So, Forbes (your reference #1) would be excellent, except that the linked URL just mentions him and confirms he is one of the people they recognised. Now, it may be that the printed Forbes magazine issued around the same time gave much more detailed coverage: if so you need to cite that exact source. It doesn't matter that this may be behind a paywall, as long as (in principle) readers can verify what Forbes' article said. Likewise, many of your other citations just repeat the same fact (that Forbes put him on a list), so this doesn't add to WP:Notability in Wikipedia's rather specific sense. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:19, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

PS. @Joontingyewling: Actually I see that your Draft has just been accepted, so well done! However, I think my comments are still valid and you should try to expand what was said about why Poh is a person we should be interested in, giving full citations. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:27, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Mike, I appreciate the feedback. Will definitely take your feedback into account. :) I plan to contribute more to Wikipedia, these are great lessons for me to scale the learning ropes! Appreciate it guys. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joontingyewling (talk • contribs) 13:34, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Melvin Poh approved as article. David notMD (talk) 17:13, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Is there a better way to save all citations of an article to archive.org?

Is there a better way to save/caputure all links or citations of an article to " http://web.archive.org/ " so that in future if the webpage got deleted or moved we could have a backup? Also I want to know what should I add in edit summary if I fix a broken citation by replacing it with archive.org's link? Is there a term for it?

Thank You!Eevee01 (talk) 18:50, 24 July 2021 (UTC) Eevee01 (talk) 18:50, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Uploading OGG files

Dear Friends, I am unable to upload an OGG file which has the pronunciation of the name of the person who is the subject of the Wikipedia entry that I am modifying currently. The help file on media upload is of circa 2012. Can you please let me know where I might have gone wrong. Jksuresh (talk) 16:53, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Jksuresh. Please read Help:Sound file markup. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:06, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Reversions on Nigeria

Good day Everyone,

I made some contributions today to my country page Nigeria^[1] on the religion section with proper citations from ^[2] after some hours HJ_Mitchell^[3] revert it back to the obsolete information. I want to know exactly why he reverts the information. I am a Nigerian I want to know why he should update my country page with outdated information. Cooklabel (talk) 23:37, 24 July 2021 (UTC) Cooklabel (talk) 23:37, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

I suggest that you ask user:HJ_Mitchell on that user's talk page, or on the article's talk page. Pinging user properly. Meters (talk) 23:43, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

It appears that the edit was actually undone by user:Gheghji, who gave a reason in the edit summary. Meters (talk) 23:45, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

References

^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigeria
^ https://countrymeters.info/en/Nigeria
^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User: HJ_Mitchell

Question regarding a secondary source for a BLP

Hello - Can an article found on the online publishing platform, Medium, be used as a secondary source for a BLP? Alwayslp (talk) 00:07, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Alwayslp: Welcome to the Teahouse. Please find something else aside from Medium, as it is not considered reliable due to it being considered a self-published source. Guidance from the link also says Medium should never be used as a secondary source for living persons. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:49, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your quick reply. I understand and will not use it. Cheers, Alwayslp (talk) 00:52, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

links to government webpages...

good morning.. i do not know about all the rest of them (at this moment, i didnt look) , but on wiki page for : ENGLAND, and GREAT BRITAIN, ALONG RIGHT SIDE, you list facts/president/prime minister,etc... well, at bottom of THAT COLUMN is usually the countries websites, or business website, (if its a business wiki page).. where did they go? russian one is gone too, i just checked..

i come here often to get the companies REAL OFFICIAL WEBSITE, and the countries official websites .. that was HALF the reason i use your service just to find the REAL OFFICIAL WEBSITE AND,....

INFORMATION SHOULD ONLY BE REMOVED IF: IT IS PROVEN TO BE FALSE.... otherwise, YOU ARE NO LONGER AN ENCYCLOPEDIA people come here to find as much info they can on a subject. if you allow people to remove/hide information, then you.... ARE JUST ONE MORE P.O.S. LYING MSM NEWS OUTLET, AND WILL BE REPLACED SHORTLY BY,....YANDEX..

DO NOT STOOP TO THEIR LEVELS AND BECOME BIASED EITHER do you know what RESPECTABLE means? according to wikipedia, it is a tv show, and a song, or social status... SORRY, BUT RESPECTABLE MEANS, TRUTHFUL AND TRUSTWORTHY its no wonder you are going DOWNHILL

ALSO,... W.T.F. is this supposed to mean?: "ADD FOUR TILDES IN FOLLOWUP COMMENTS" at the beginning? end? 73.230.155.182 (talk) 18:49, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Can you give an example of an article you are talking about missing a link? For example United_States_Congress and Parliament_of_the_United_Kingdom both have links to the official websites. RudolfRed (talk) 18:59, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

If you're looking for the official websites, why don't you just Google them? They're usually the first hit on most search engines. Kindly stop using all caps as it can be construed as shouting. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:03, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello 73.230.155.182. I'm not going to get into all the details of a complicated setup, which is described in the articles if you want to know more, but I have to tell you that England does not have its own government, and Great Britain is not even a country. What you may be looking for is the United Kingdom. The official government website is listed at the end of the article in the "External links" section, which is where external links usually go. The placement of links is the same for the Russia article. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:05, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

If you are logged into your Wikipedia account adding four tildes will automatically sign your posts with your Wiki user name. When you are editing there should be a rectangle at the bottom of the page, with various editing helps, including "Sign your posts on talk pages:(four tildes shown)." Click on those tildes and your work will be signed. Karenthewriter (talk) 22:59, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

If you do not have an account, then your 'signing' shows up as a number automatically, referred to as an IP address. David notMD (talk) 01:09, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Dan Newhouse Edit

Courtesy link: Dan Newhouse

I was looking at the page for Dan Newhouse and I noticed that near the top of the page it says "Newhouse was one of ten Republicans who voted to impeach Donald Trump during Trump's second impeachment." This is true, but I feel like this is giving him too much credit for working against Trump as he is a self-identified Trump supporter and signed an amicus brief in support of Texas v. Pennsylvania, a lawsuit contesting the 2020 election results. All of this is included in the page but it seems unfair that the impeachment vote gets to be alone near the top of the page while all of the pro-trump stuff is near the bottom.

Because I've never edited something on Wikipedia before, I'm not sure how to go about editing this or if it should even be edited at all. On one hand, I can see how mentioning his impeachment vote alone near the top of the page could make sense as it was significant. But on the other hand, I don't like the idea that someone could glance at the page and assume he was an anti-trump Republican.

My idea to edit this is to just remove the line mentioning his vote because it repeats itself at the bottom of the page next to the pro-trump stuff. I'm just looking for some advice or just a second opinion because I'm not quite sure. Schbloppy (talk) 01:14, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Schbloppy: Welcome to the Teahouse! The best place to discuss the content of an individual article is the article's talk page. You can post on Talk:Dan Newhouse to discuss your suggestions with other editors. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:39, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Template removal

I believe I have addressed the citation issues for the last article that I edited. I would like assistance in removing it or help in further addressing the file so it can be removed. I've read the instructions, but I'm still not clear on how to go about removal. Assistance please? Deadlinedd (talk) 20:17, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Deadlinedd: Welcome to the Teahouse! I'm presuming you're referring to Glenn Davis (American actor). I suggest using {{cite web}} for your inline citations and named references for those sources you use more than once. There are still many links in the "News" and "External links" sections that can be converted into inline citations. The reference at the bottom of the page doesn't seem to mention Davis, so I don't understand what value it brings to the article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:10, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

I fixed two references, then named those, so that now appears as multiple uses of the same ref (lettering abcd...). Other refs need fixing. Also deleted all the News content. If some of that useful, can be recovered and converted to referenced content. Ditto the plethora of External links David notMD (talk) 01:54, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Removed the 2018 refs needed tag. David notMD (talk) 02:07, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the information, David. I will work on converting those links into inline citations. Deadlinedd (talk) 02:55, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Need admin to create page for "Mach-Hommy"

I was told to create a draft for the page "Mach-Hommy", albeit sparse, it was removed by an admin. Now both the main page and the talk page are admin-locked, any reason the article shouldn't exist? Learningtakessteps (talk) 21:50, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Learningtakessteps: According to Draft:Mach-Hommy it was deleted because it was abandoned, meaning not edited for more than six months. If you have genuine interest in continuing to work on it, you can request it be undeleted at WP:REFUND. After the draft is approved, you can ask an admin to move it to main space as an article. RudolfRed (talk) 21:55, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Learningtakessteps. As an administrator, I can view deleted drafts. That draft was entirely unreferenced, which is like a mammal without bones. An acceptable Wikipedia article summarizes what reliable, independent sources say about the topic. To write a Wikipedia article, find those sources first, and then summarize them in a neutral, non-promotional way. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:32, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

[1] "L'exécutif - Conseil régional d'Île-de-France". web.archive.org. 2011-02-11. Retrieved 2021-07-19.

[2] "Hélène GASSIN | Drupal". chairgovreg.fondation-dauphine.fr. Retrieved 2021-07-19.

[3] "[NOMINATION] Hélène Gassin et Jean-Pierre Sotura sont nommés membres du collège de la Commission de régulation de l'énergie". Actu-Environnement (in French). Retrieved 2021-07-19.

[4] Bailey, A. Peter (8 Feb 2014). "Black History Month: African-American playwrights examine life, act by act". New York Daily News. Retrieved 23 July 2021.

[5] "Obama election shook old assumptions, wasn't the end of racial barriers in America". MSNBC.com. Retrieved 2021-07-23.

[6] "Does there need to be a 'fight for black men?'". MSNBC.com. Retrieved 2021-07-23.

[7] ttps://thesource.com/2020/09/03/cas-kay-nine-tha-boss-proves-perseverance-is-key/

[8] ttps://rawsidehiphop.com/beneath-the-surface-kay-nine-tha-boss/

[9] ttps://thesource.com/2020/09/03/cas-kay-nine-tha-boss-proves-perseverance-is-key/

[10] ttps://www.kulturevulturez.com/kay-nine-tha-boss/

[11] ttps://thesource.com/2020/09/03/cas-kay-nine-tha-boss-proves-perseverance-is-key/

[12] ttps://rawsidehiphop.com/beneath-the-surface-kay-nine-tha-boss/

[13] ttps://thesource.com/2020/09/03/cas-kay-nine-tha-boss-proves-perseverance-is-key/

[14] ttps://thesource.com/2020/09/03/cas-kay-nine-tha-boss-proves-perseverance-is-key/

[15] ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigeria

[16] ttps://countrymeters.info/en/Nigeria

[17] ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User: HJ_Mitchell

[1]

[2]

[3]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[1]

[2]

[3]

v t e Departmental Councils of France
Metropolitan	01 Ain 02 Aisne 03 Aillier 04 Alpes-de-Haute-Provence 05 Hautes-Alpes 06 Alpes-Maritimes 07 Ardèche 08 Ardennes 09 Ariège 10 Aube 11 Aude 12 Aveyron 13 Bouches-du-Rhône 14 Calvados 15 Cantal 16 Charente 17 Charente-Maritime 18 Cher 19 Corrèze 21 Côte-d'Or 22 Côtes-d'Armor 23 Creuse 24 Dorodgne 25 Doubs 26 Drôme 27 Eure 28 Eure-et-Loir 29 Finistère 30 Gard 31 Haute-Garonne 32 Gers 33 Gironde 34 Hérault 35 Ille-et-Vilaine 36 Indre 37 Indre-et-Loire 38 Isère 39 Jura 40 Landes 41 Loir-et-Cher 42 Loire 43 Haute-Loire 44 Loire-Atlantique 45 Loiret 46 Lot 47 Lot-et-Garonne 48 Lozère 49 Maine-et-Loire 50 Manche 51 Marne 52 Haute-Marne 53 Mayenne 54 Meurthe-et-Moselle 55 Meure 56 Morbihan 57 Moselle 58 Nièvre 59 Nord 60 Oise 61 Isère 62 Pas-de-Calais 63 Puy-de-Dôme 64 Pyrénées-Atlantiques 65 Hautes-Pyrénées 66 Pyrénées-Orientales 67 Bas-Rhin 68 Haut-Rhin 69D Rhône 70 Haute-Saône 71 Saône-et-Loire 72 Sarthe 73 Savoie 74 Haute-Savoie 76 Seine-Maritime 77 Seine-et-Marne 78 Yvelines 79 Deux-Sèvres 80 Somme 81 Tarn 82 Tarn-et-Garonne 83 Var 84 Vaucluse 85 Vendée 86 Vienne 87 Haute-Vienne 88 Vosges 89 Yonne 90 Territoire de Belfort 91 Essonne 92 Hauts-de-Seine 93 Seine-Saint-Denis 94 Val-de-Marne 95 Val-d'Oise
Overseas	971 Guadeloupe 972 Martinique (territorial collectivity) 973 French Guiana (territorial collectivity) 974 Réunion 976 Mayotte
Special	20 Corsica (single territorial collectivity) 69M Lyon (collectivity with special status) 75 Paris (collectivity with special status)
Former	975 Saint Pierre and Miquelon (Overseas collectivity) 2A Corse-du-Sud 2B Haute-Corse